I used open office and it was fine.
Search Posts
I downloaded it and commented on it in your other thread, I like the spreadsheet, and I don't like many of the values in it. I will fiddle with the spreadsheet and see what I can come up with.
Unfortunatly I will not be filling it in myself, with over 1100 entries even if i spend an average of only 5 seconds on each one deciding a score and filling it in, the whole thing will take over an hour and a half. I might just fiddle with the scores in the spreadsheet over the next couple of days and get back to you. If i get to somewhere i like with it I will send you a PM. Good luck with it anyway.
I think the rating system should be 0-3 or 0-10, with 0-3 giving 0=no healing, 1=can do some healing, mostly weak or out of combat, 2=multiple healing options including good in combat options, 3=great healer, would be useful to the party even if the healing just just about all they brought. However thats workable in a 0-5 system too, life oracle and healing focused cleric are easy 5 each, any positive energy cleric is 4, paladins and other clerics are 3, druids etc are 2, anybody else with minimal healing are 1, no healing=0. IMO a healing focused cleric is as good if not a better healer than an oracle of life. Above anything else I look forward to seeing the results of this poll.
It might be worth streamlining the spreadsheet a bit, this advice might be a bit late as your survey is out already. I would roll utility crafting and magical utility into one tab. For example of the reason why; Ranged Rogue (one of the worst class/specs in the game) gets an overall rating of 26.67 largely due to 20 points from out of combat score, Traps:5 Scouting:5 Utility:5 Face:5, what utility does a Rogue bring that is not dealing with traps, scouting and stealth or face duties? because if its only a lot of skill points that score it Utility:5 then why does Witch an Int class that will have tons of skills only get Utility:1? In the above example you score a Ranged Rogue as more valuable than any Bard, any Alchemist, any Paladin, all bar one Sorcerer build, any Fighter etc. Also you scored nobody as 5 for buffing, why? surely your scale should range from no ability to do something at 0 to the ability to assume that role in the party in a very effective way at 5? Same goes for debuffing one witch spec has a 5, but no other spec or class even manages a 4? If its just that you dont value the role as important then adjust the weighting in your spreadsheet, dont say nobody can do it well. What I would do if i were re-designing the spreadsheet is I would imput all the info from your survey to get what classes can bring to the party. Then I would check that Wizard, Summoner, Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid and Witch were all at the top as befits the tier 1 and tier 2 status of those classes. If the they were not at the top then i would look to see what was wrong with the weightings in my spreadsheet and correct it as required to have a true representation of class power. I know that the purpose of your spreadsheet is to find a balanced party, It should still do that even when reletive character power is more in line with where it should be. At the moment somebody might pick a Rogue to start then your spreadsheet would tell them to pick master summoner, then life oracle then hexcrafter magus. Now I really really like master summoner and hexcrafter magus, life oracle is a bit meh and obviously I think rogues suck a bit, but I am not sure I think that is an optimized party. If I pick God Wizard as my first class, it pretty much tells me to still pick up a magus a life oracle and a rogue, WTF? rogue, magus and life oracle over-valued a little i think. If I pick a Fighter to start......you guessed it Master Summoner, Rogue, Life Oracle, I think a non uniform role weighting would result in a more diverse selection of complimentary party members baced on what is allready in your party. Another option would be to not have scores at all, and just have a colour guide(same colours you have now but with the numbers hidden) that way if i have a Rogue a Fighter and a Wizard, the chart would recomend any druid, any cleric, any witch or life oracle without sugesting as it does now, that life oracle is the best choice. Anyway, if any of this is useful to you great, if not just ignore me. Cheers, Steve.
Sensten, this is really cool, but your ratings are strange. I think I get where you are coming from with putting in so many low scores. If you are trying to simulate action economy, then it stands to reason that if some class is mostly doing X then it wont have much time for Y so even though it is ok at Y you give it a 0 out of 5? Example: you have ranged Paladin as 0 melee ability? even though they will for certain have a decent Str, various melee buff spells, and all martial weapons available. I can only assume this is because you feel they would never want to melee. You should make it very clear what way you want to go with this or will get a big spread back from your survey. Also summoner melee:2? tank:0???, have a word with yourself. Try 4 or 5 Anyway just my thoughts.
Alchemist does not work because Spell Combat calls out the need to have a free hand and a light or one handed weapon in the other hand, titan mauler text tells you to treat your two handed weapon as a one handed weapon, so does phalanx soldier, but then it also has the text "while wielding a shield" and if you cast a spell you loose the AC from the buckler because you are not wielding it as a shield and so the polearm stops being a one handed weapon and spell combat fails? I guess it depends on your view of RAW/RAI The way I see RAW only titan mauler works for this and phalanx soldier and alchemist do not. The way I see RAI probably titan mauler should not work for this either. As for the Rage not working with spells thing, why not have Rage as a backup for if you run out of spells? or to use on Mooks so you can NOVA the Big Bad with all your shocking power? It's just an extra tool in the toolbox. Anyway food for thought, when i made a test mock up of a titan mauler magus i thought much like Darkflame, ooh but i loose some spellpower blah blah, better with a pure magus, but then take that a step further and i would be better with a Wizard so sometimes its better to just do the best you can with the idea you have rather than comparing it to other ideas.
Darkflame I get it that you like the Schimitar (so do I) but you are talking about a level 6 magus with 20str and 18int, puting your level 4 stat bump into str meant for a 20 point buy you would have had to start with 19 8 8 18 8 7 as your stats? or maybe you are talking about some crazy point buy or mega lucky roll to make your point. But I would have thought that reach would be useful to a glass cannon melee that with your stats is looking like having thirty something HP and what 14AC? Also is that free action put your hand on a weapon then get spell combat, spell strike and 2 handed str bonus legit? fair play if it is. I am not even 100% sure the titan mauler thing will work, Jotungrip tells us that your 2 handed weapon counts as a one handed weapon for purposes of power attack and str bonus and the like. Spell combat requires a one handed or light weapon in one hand. I am not sure if one qualifies me for the other.
Also, am I right in thinking that you could then use light armour and still get Int to AC as you would gain light armour prof from Barb, you would have a small amount of ASF for your somantic spells but probably worth it? As for Lunge its kinda late entry for a Magus? level 9? also you have to activate it, so will miss a lot of attacks of opertunity on first rounds maybe? I guess you could go a medium sized Tiefling (or elf/human/halfwhatever)and then do the same thing + enlarge person for 20 feat of reach, or add lunge as well as using this setup for even more reach. Even if its not quite as optimal as the thousands of Scimitar Magus Characters running arround, I like the option of when DM asks if you want to cast a spell, you say, na, I am just gonna activate Rage and cleave some fools two handed.
I have been thinking about an idea recently. If you take a small sized Tiefling Barbarian (Titan Mauler archetype) to level 2, then swap class to Magus (Kensai archetype) you could be weilding a Fauchard 1 handed at level 3. Traits would be Wayang Spellhunter (Shocking Grasp) and Magical Knack (Magus) This gives; +4HP net after loosing 2 favoured class bonus HP and gaining 6HP from Barb levels.
Sound good? Or total madness?
All good ideas, sorry psion, will not be over the net this time. I really like the clockwork golem eidolon idea, will ask my alchemist player if she likes the sound of that too.
ub3r, 2 initiatives per round would work ok from a balance point of view but i would worry about them doing silly things like moving in and attacking then moving away and hiding. So the BBEG would be chasing shadows. I think i will lace the AP with extra consumables though, i might even make drinking a potion to be a swift action so that they can stretch a single initiative turn further. Thanks for the advice, food for thought.
Sic, Good advice, I think i am starting to come up with a plan; 1, Decent stat array as it will help them at low level and matter less as the game goes on. 2, Gestalt but maybe just a caster + fighter each, gives a feat every level (thanks to fighter) high BAB and damage (thanks again fighter) but they still get the flavour they want from maybe an alchemist and a druid. Also not any harder to play. 3, Have some NPCs tag along to help with extra actions in combat, and easy to have them come and go or change to suit what they need. 4, Hero points to avoid unlucky TPK. Hopefully this will keep it fun and challenging all the way through. Thanks for the advice everybody.
ub3r, I almost like that plan, my worry is that early on half the threat just wont seem like much of a threat, and later on, a half hp wizard is kinda just as dangerous as a full hp wizard. I might go with a mix of your option 1 and 3 though, make them crazy powerful but only 2 of them early on, then as they meet NPCs along the way, maybe get 1 or 2 of the ones they like to tag along as required.
I would love to hear from anybody that has run Rise of the Rune Lords for 2 or 3 players, how did it go? any lessons learned? Anyway thanks for the imput.
Sic, I will ask them if they like the idea of Gestalt, my only worry is that maybe it gets a little complicated for newish players. One of the reasons i thought of adding pets/companions/familiars was to increase actions without really requiring the same level of extra management or options as having to run multiple characters each.
Kolo, I will see if the Ranger player would like to play a summoner instead. I kinda see what you are saying about the stat array, but i figured even a 15point buy lets players max a primary stat. all a higher point buy does is reduce MAD problems and provide better saves/hp/etc. Ille, I will check out Roll20.net, but this game will be face to face so that is one for the future.
I have tried and failed to rustle up some extra players for running Rise of the Rune Lords anniversary edition. So I will be running it for only two players. I want to run the AP as published, so I am looking for ways to boost my two players so they are up for the challenge. Some of my suggestions could seem a little overpowered but please think about if they are more or less powerful than having a group of four characters. For example Gestalt is not good enough to make up the difference. What about Gestalt + max hp every level + a stupid high point buy? Maybe that's getting close. I think they want to play an Alchemist and a Ranger, based on this, and the fact that I do not want to have to modify the AP at all, can you help me choose a set of house rules that will give my players a good chance of success but still provide them with a challenge. Below are some of the things I am considering, feel free to add your own. Max HP at every level An 18 17 16 15 14 13 or similar stat array Double or Unlimited use of special abilities such as bombs/spells Ability to use any wand found without UMD Wands function like staffs with regards to caster level/save DC Ranger gets a druid powered animal companion from level 1, Alchemist gets a familiar? Allow Leadership feat (I would not want this to be the only option but I can see the benefit) Hero points Extra feats Higher level, both starting and throughout AP Higher WBL Anything else? What do you guys think would be a decent way to handle this. We are dead against multiple characters each or DM PC. We also do not want to use Mythic rules. My players are both quite inexperienced at pathfinder but have role-played before. Thanks for any advice.
In fact this might work out better than a level 20 rogue, lol.
could just take rogue and bard then or something, still have +16 BAB and so max attacks, 2nd level cleric spells to get a few buffs going and it would be fine.
Honestly i think a character with 20 differant classes will be at best unhinged and probably full blown schizophrenic, so alignment problems can mostly be handwaved or explained in the same way that having 20 classes is explained.
I'm considering a 20th level NPC with 20 different classes, 1 level in each, and how he would most effectively work. I would go classes with +1 BAB at level 1 and probably just Str baced 2 hander build with heavy armour because its simple and you will be burning some feats to qulify for all the prestige classes. I am sure it would work out a bit more powerful than a level 20 warior, better saves etc. Something like:
I went for second level cleric spells and 2 cleric domain abilities at the end rather than another +2 BAB. I would go human for race, because the spare feat will help out a lot. There will be a better order to take the classes for them to flow better. Last 3 have to be the same if you want the cleric spellcasting dip.
I don't think the issue is railroading, tbh i think a certain amount of railraoding is required, you need it for story, you need it to make the CR system work, you really need it if running APs. The issue is how to avoid players complaining about it, and that can be done by either running a story that they like and want to play in, or it can be done by providing the illusion of choice. It comes down to either the GM or the players or both need to be a little more creative or a little more on the same page as far as the story you want to be involved in. To pick an example from the OP: Eidolon not there, well maybe a villager sugests how usefull it would be in they had some hounds to track the gnolls, Boom! summon 1d4+1 dogs with your SLA because your eidolon is not there, sudenly that character is the boss, feels like a hero, gets the job done and loves his class a little more.
I think your players will mostly only feel like they are being railroaded if they expect and want the game to go in one direction and then you make it go in another direction with no choice in the matter. I would just ask them at the end of each game night what they expect from next time you play, then try to blend your story with what they want to do. Also be prepared to let them turn down a mission, only for it to be completed by another group who get some kind of huge reward and or recognition for completing the task. If you are gonna do this, make sure that they are given more than one opertunity to get involved themselves.
And if so can he dip a level of fighter or take heavier armor prof feats, so as to flurry in full plate? And if so can he take the close weapon group at lvl 6 and flurry with a heavy shield weilded 2 handed in full plate while still keeping the shield AC via improved shield bash? Thoughts?
In fact the more i think about it you would not even need to do fire damage to the body and the head, by RAW if you cut off his head, even a point of fire damage to his little finger would mean he is dead, his body is dead, his head is dead. Where is the leathal to non leathal thing coming from? In fact now that i think about it, Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation. So if you have no access to fire or acid, a simple rag down the throat, or even a dagger stuck in the throat would be enough to cause suffocation. If you are reduced below 0HP and have no friends to help you and the combat is over, then you are dead, regen or not, your enemy is going to kill you one way or another.
You dont have to kill him with fire or acid or vorpal weapon, you just have to reduce him to a HP total that would kill a creature without regeneration (-con HP) then inflict any amount of fire damage, ie press a blazing torch against him and inflict 1HP fire damage. That switches of his regeneration ability for 1 round and he dies from having -con HP. There is no coming back from that with regen, better call a cleric.
If you are planning on cutting his head of with HP damage from a bladed weapon, it would only happen when you have reduced him to -con HP with the final blow landing from a called shot to the neck. ??Or some critical hit deck shenanigans?? Then, if you hit the body with 1hp fire or acid damage it would die, if you hit the head with 1hp fire or acid damage it would die. If the head and body are not killed then each will continue to regenerate for 1 hour. Also my personal interpritation is that as soon as one part (head or body has regenerated enough to be at a HP score higher than 0 and regains consciousness then the other part dies regardless of no acid/fire.
Or go an Empyreal bloodline sorcerer, then as you are rocking a 20wis at level 1 you will have +19 bonus to everything and don't have to take rubbish scent feats, and have +5 to will saves as an added bonus.
would the HD added not be "undead HD" or "skeleton HD" rather than "human HD" and so you would not get human bonus on them anyway?
As far as actual advice..... I would roleplay the opertunity for the players to sell their souls to a devil/demon for an amazing amount of wealth/power/whatever(maybe more powerful demonic companions) as you clearly think the players are evil baced on the action they have done. Then have the players be double crossed/meet an untimely demise and loose souls to said evil outsider. This is very confrontational but imo no more so than you are playing your game atm so i asume you should be cool with this. Hopefully the players will learn to play more to your idea of "in character" or "good roleplaying" as a reult of this and you can have a more fun game with the next set of guys they roll up. I would probably ban companions or familiars from now on though as NOBODY at your table seems able to play them without serious issues. Also i would probably houserule the alignment system to not exist, that way you wont have to worry about them having CG or LN written on a sheet making you think they are playing your game wrong.
use a large shield 2 handed with all that for 6d6, vital strike for 12d6 plus all the goodness of 2 handed power attacks. loving it.
This! Paladins are Heroes, Archers are sidekicks, simple as that. If you want to play an archer then please please please go Inquisitor, otherwise you will be another one of these people who play mechanically rather than thematically, and thereby give Paladins a bad name.
I like the idea of the "minion" designation, but 1hp is far too trivial in my opinion as the game scales in level. At low level, sure 1hp is just fine, but at higher level it is just not an obstacle at all. I think when a level 10 Barbarian swings that massive chopper at a mook, it does not really matter if it has 1 or 10 or 20 or maybe even 30hp, if the swing connects the zombie is dead......erm again
sorry if this has been answered officialy, but thinking about the (imo) very clear RAI on this one i would just change the RAW to something like: While fused with his eidolon, this new fused being is not restricted from the use of any of the summoners abilities and gear except in any circumstances where the eidolon lacks the limbs or apendages to use said gear or abilities. then you can use the standard magic item rules for gear sizes and usage to see what the "fused being" can use. ie: When an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn't be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items. so all magic items should be fine, worn on the personage of the eidolon while fused (and therefore sunderable etc) and then there is: Armor and weapons that are found at random have a 30% chance of being small (01–30), a 60% chance of being Medium (31–90), and a 10% chance of being any other size (91–100) so all weapons stay the same size, ie a gnome summoner has a small magical longsword, so a large eidolon while fused can use it as long as he has arms with hands at the end of them, but its still only a small longsword (not a large one) as for non magic equipment, i would say RAI is that you either fuse with it inside, and so its not usealbe, because reaching inside oneself is stupid and impossible. or you drop it first and then pick it up with your eidolon (if you have hands etc). Any other interpritation of the rules is imo blatent power gaming and trying to get round clear RAI by way of having slightly vague RAW. However so many posts tells me Paizo should just get some clear errata up so people can play with the rules provided rather than trying to squeeze extra mileage out of an already powerful Archetype.
A (Technology Level) 6 Though I like there to be low tech areas and the odd bit of higher tech is ok if its well fluffed. B (Action/Violence) 4 This one is not an ideal question, I like conflict in my games, but conflict does not have to be violence. Fighting in courtroom or dungeon are just as viable but vast amounts of non-conflict social interaction is best left to downtime. C (Setting) Urban + all others 30/70 I would never play a game that was only a dungeon crawl or set just in the wilderness, whether you adventure to protect civilization or just to get phat lewt to spend in town, you still need the town part for it to work. D (Starting level) 1, 2 or 3 Leveling up is nice, and it is more signifigant at lower levels, so i would not like to start higher than 3 without a very very good reason. I do feel that some stories call for a group of heroes and that sometimes makes more sense if they are a little bit tougher to begin with. E (End Level) 10-16 Depends on the game, d20 is most fun 1-12 imo, but if a game is fun why stop playing. F (Leveling Speed) 2-3 weeks at the fastest I just do leveling at natural breaks in the action, so if the levels are coming thick and fast then i push through downtime to make it seem more believable. G (Linear vs Sandbox) Reality 2-3 Illusion 7-8 Lets face it, all RPG's give the illusion of being a sandbox, I GM in the camp of you can go left or right at the junction but either way takes you to the same place (over simplified) and I like to play in games like that too. I dont want my GM sitting in silence trying to think up a new adventure because we did not look down when walking past a clue, but i don't want a NPC party leader taking us by the hand and making all our decisions for us. TLDR I want to play the story that has been prepared, but to feel like my choices matter. H (Morality) 2-3 If you want to play a game with shades of grey everywhere then d20 is the wrong system. I only put it as high as 2-3 because i like the odd surprise, and the door to be open to some nice roleplaying, but honestly a paladin can't function in a game anywhere from 4-10 and to be honest in a combat heavy game i don't want to be thinking about children left fatherless and whatnot. **As a side note, this question and question B are linked imo, you need them both low or both high for a good game, and in d20 you need them both low** I (High/low Fantasy) 10 Again this is less about personal preferance and more about the system, Pathfinder is a 10, so thats what you are stuck with if you are playing Pathfinder. J (Genre) Adventure Encompassing whatever other genres fit into the story. K (Seriousness) 3 overall and up to 9 in play I don't want summoners having eidolons that look like 20foot high fluffy bunnies with horible pointy teeth and smothering fluffy tail attacks, i dont want players who use a giant dildo as a weapon, i dont want character names like "Bash Yerheadin" so overall more of the gritty side, but at the table, in play, if something is fun and makes people happy then why are we all here? ofc I am ok with it. Just be carefull not to make silly things perminant fixtures or the game looses all gravity. L (Adult Content) 7 Fine the guys head goes flying off, but you are not cleaning brain particles out of your beard.
M (difficulty) Reality 3 Illusion 8 See my answer to G, if my party get defeated, i want them captured and planning a daring escape, not rolling new characters. stuped players, or disregard for obvios danger will get people killed dead if they push it though. N (level of detail) 4 I like it when players and GMs flesh out details as a team effort. I am happy with an inn being poorly lit and foul smelling without needing to know that there are 4 tables with 3 chairs at them, 5 tables with 2 chars at them and how many people are sitting at each and what race they are and what they have on, and what weapons they have, if i need to know i will ask. O (character backgrounds etc) 3 I allways tie all the characters together with a background story and try to think about characters motivation, but when the story is going, they are writing a new chapter of thier personal saga and i don't need to have the characters mums turning up to make it into a personal tale.
Thanks for all the tips. I dont think paladins are weak, not so sure with rogues, its just I have read casters can maginalise melee at higher levels, I think it might be more a wiz problem though so sorry if I caused offence or confusion. As for the monk sorc, because emperial sorc uses wis for casting the monk splash gives five to ten ac plus five to ten cmd as well as flurry with bow, precise shot without having to take point blank is nice for low level, monk also gives good saves and the ability to threaten and flank unarmed, with trait magical knack its not a caster level drop. The sorc is less powerful than a pure sorc in spells but it really fits her char concept. The no uc is because I dont have it, I could buy the pdf though if it would really help the rogue. Thanks
I am about to start running a Pathfinder game (Core+APG+UM) for the first time. I will have 3 players, my wife and 2 friends. My style as a gm is usually to tailor the game to the players backgrounds and strengths while still making the game feel like a challenge. I have played or GMd over 20 differant roleplaying systems but have the greatest experiance with Warhammer fantasy roleplay and storyteller games, so i have some d20 related questions. Players so far are: 1. Human Paladin (planning on staying pure)
My main questions are arround balance and relative power, I like all my players to feel like they are all a usefull part of the team. Will Sword and shield be a good route for Paladin? should he think about and archtype? Does having 1 level of monk bring the Sorc back into relative power balance with the imo weaker classes of the Pala and Rogue? while still providing enough benefits (AC CMD low level archery) to not just be a straight up nerf? What should my Rogue player do, any good archtypes? he wants to play a trap finder D&D thief type guy, maybe a small race like a halfling? what should i give the other players not playing Aasimar to compensate for the stronger race of that 1 player, i was thinking another floating +2 to any stat I was planning 25 point build as i only have 3 players, any other thoughs on party make-up, will the pala and sorc be able to cover healing later on? is CR-1 still a good level adjustment for this group for encounters? etc TLDR. Help a new (to pathfinder) GM out with some tips for running with 3 players, pala, sorc, rogue. Thanks guys, and go easy on a first time poster. Steve |