Philippe Lam's page

**** Venture-Agent, France—Paris 400 posts (406 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 49 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Derklord wrote:
Diachronos wrote:
I'm not looking to optimize to Powergamer/PFS levels.
"PFS levels" is equal to "powergamer elvels"? I thought PFS was pretty easy?

What some players do isn't depicting accurately what PFS requires. It's mix that can require good quality, but also can be friendly enough that there's a low base requirement.

And still opposing "Power gaming" and "RP" nowadays ? It's on a stormwind level. These are merely two sides of the same coin.

Grand Lodge

Just in case of I'd add a masterwork backpack, Muscle of the Society and or/muleback cord. Even at 10 it might be difficult. Some concepts will attract encumbrance checking more than not (hey wizards)

At 10 strength without anything else, a normal chain shirt would already put the character in a dangerous position at the start

Ant Haul would solve a lot of problems, but I don't know if the class has access to it or not (I'd gamble no). If the backpack isn't a bag of holding or else, storing a polearm is dubious, and several of them, even more so. Outside strictly the encumbrance, magda and secret already covered it. I'm thinking if I need to say something else, but I don't think so yet.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

What struck me when I played that one was how impactful it was of not being good-aligned. I remind the chaotic good aasimar fighter getting sent out of space and the neutral good life oracle not faring much better. Felt very lucky playing a lawful neutral swashbuckler. Really felt having a big touch AC saved my life (having uncanny dodge too).

Luckily we skipped the optional encounter, because I would say this would have put us in a much harder position.

I'll GM these in a not-so-distant future. I tried to offer these a couple of weeks ago but it didn't happen. But either as a GM or as a player, same response : yikes party balance. We missed an arcane spellcaster, and that contributed to make things more difficult. The other group was slightly more unstable on physical abilities but had a much better divine/arcane spellcasting which helped them deal with things quicker (they played in 14-15, but if they had similar levels than us, they would still have been faster)

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TomGR3 wrote:
If having the scenarios on unlimited replays would result in a large loss of players what about a limited replay time? For instance one weekend in the month make everything repeatable for different characters? Or the month a scenario is released make it re-playable for a limited time with different characters? Either way you would expand options for players to explore and enjoy different roles. The first way would help out small groups with new and veteran players. The second would spice things up for veterans who want to try new combinations. These are just the first few ideas upon reading this, because I personally prefer being able to replay and using different classes a lot.

The one-time replay giveaway and the GM stars are sufficient for that purpose. The damage dealt to early AL by unlimited replay was telling, and even opening a permanent limited amount would be harmful for PFS.

As it stands, it's good as it is.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

Given your character is a paladin, saving throws might be just fine with less effort. That would allow for more budget on the other defences and/or boosting the offence. I might have some idaes (but it's as you see fit and you might have something else in mind) :

- Spending PP (and some coins) to retrain the HP

- Amulet of natural armor (or any AC boost outside ring of protection, this one is usually covered by smite unless you still want a ring against everybody) -> if minimizing damage suffered is the focus

- Blood-Boiling Pills : even if bleeding worse is riskier, at these levels there's the need to act ASAP as who goes first don't always win, but can help dictate the game

- Boosting the weapon straight to +5 in case of possibly encountering non-evil creatures (so smite's not working) or boots of speed (mmmh, more damage or extra attack ?)

Nothing else that immediately comes into mind, others already covered the rest

Grand Lodge

MrCharisma wrote:

I feel like telling Slim Jim that he's wrong for liking this smacks a little of BADWRONGFUN! It's not one i'm likely to pick, but prefer to play with a reach weapon and Combat Reflexes then losing the ability to charge isn't that big a deal.

I still don't think it's a good archetype, but just because I can't see something doesn't mean it's not there.

It exists, but the problem is there's not overselling it and sugarcoating the disadvantages. It can be fine, but not within the wished concept.

Grand Lodge

@Slim Jim : The archetype is directly going contrary to what the Barbarian is good at, like what Derklord is saying.

For a defence-focused character, I would select Armored Hulk or Invulnerable Rager above it, even Mad Dog wouldn't be worse.

I want the features of the Dreadnought, I would go Child of Acavna and Amanzen instead.

Grand Lodge

WagnerSika wrote:
Hell Knight Signifier in Hells Rebels? I am not very familiar with that AP but rebelling against the State does not sound like something the Hell Knights would approve of.

Ultimately, Hellknights are loyal to the concept of law as a whole, not specifically to a country or an individual. They view any chaotic act as crap in nature, but there's justifying Kintargo could use another kind of governance. If an order decides to attack the empire, they would still be fine with their own code even if the majority would disagree. They don't especially like much the queen creating a shadow order of Hellknights without approval of their leadership, either (the Glyph).

What Lelomenia theorizes makes me think something : what the OP wants is not impossible, but it's difficult because it requires a serious amount of coins and character crafting. Wanting it to be simple at the same time is a (very) long shot.

Grand Lodge

If it was a vanilla magus, I'd say fine with metamagic items or feats. Eldritch Scion ? Nope because of the raising time casting. But I'd splash arcane mark if the archetype has access to level 0 spells (there's not using resources, but still doing some TWF)

Grand Lodge

Sorcerers have a limited choice, but there's the possibility of trading some of the previous spell selections every couple of levels. There's also items to open a larger choice of spells, though this is in later games.

But changing ability scores of prepared spellcasters from intelligence to charisma is hardly possible bar houserule or obscure 3pp I don't know. There's currently no need to fully focus on charisma. One can get away with only 14 and still be decent, ranks, skill focus and a way to make it a class skill is enough.

Grand Lodge

I might go Dex Whip because although it starts slower given the lack of buffs, it's ultimately not as MAD so it's easier to build throught the process. There's slightly less potential on maneuver, attacks and damage than the warpriest but not by a lot (thanks weapon training).

If the player can accept not dedicating any feat to maneuvers, these can be given to Advanced Armor Training, which opens the opportunity to grab 1 skill point/level to one skill (Intimidate, Climb, etc I don't have the full list), it mitigates the problem of only having a base 2/level.

I don't think it's mandatory, but given the concept I'd say having a good initiative bonus isn't a bad thing, either.

Grand Lodge

A good bluff bonus is needed in case of trying to maintain the plausiability of the pretense because it won't only involve the mechanical appearance, also how the character will portray it.

Grand Lodge

The wakizashi would only be 1 damage lower than the katana for an almost identical feature. I don't think it is worth paying an effortless lace, unless in later games when it amounts to cost not that much compared to overall budget.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

I played these inside 5-hour slots (that's what I usually have during conventions), but I'd say doing these inside 4 hours is quite a stretch. You could attempt part 1 like that, but probably not part 2 like CigarPete already replied. The setup of the fights is as such they can be long unless characters have rocket-like power or can deal with the base debuff.

For each of the two parts we finished barely on time. I'd say it fits better outside a convention, or inside extra-long slots

Grand Lodge

The guides recommending that spell aren't wrong in basis because it's always useful to some extent either in an offence or a defence way, targets will be aplenty.

There's a problem though, the increasing number of opponents who can just not care about the spell, making it hindering more than contributing.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

I might akin this to the Spire Magus which is elf-only for example. I don't think race-related classes/archetypes are something where this prerequisite can be bypassed.

Grand Lodge

Stealth is great as a toolbox/opportunity/secondary ability. There will always be an opportunity to use the skill to gain an advantage adventure-wise and during early levels.

Using it as a main tactic is though not the best way to move forward. There will be lesser and lesser opportunities to get the proper setup and when if that takes too big of a part of a character, it ends up being much more crippling when this is negated. This will happen more and more often the higher level the session is.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Philippe Lam wrote:
When I played it, the fight was hard but doable. The problem lots of players have with that is probably being forced to fight under unfavourable conditions. Not every fight should be made fair anyway. That forces players to be creative, and it's not a bad thing.

Stop that.

Being insultingly passive aggressive is still being insulting. You are calling people uncreative for having a problem with conditions. Alright.

Back. It. Up.

Sitting at your computer, having read/played the scenario, give me a creative solution that actually works . Every. Single. proposed "creative" solution here is either not accessible to new characters, probably wouldn't work (smoke bombs), definitely wouldn't work (run and dive prone breaks action economy rules)

The word wasn't meant as insulting. You're overdoing this for a single word, really ?

Moving half-speed and using stealth, jet-packing, running, nothing offers guarantee anyway.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

When I played it, the fight was hard but doable. The problem lots of players have with that is probably being forced to fight under unfavourable conditions. Not every fight should be made fair anyway. That forces players to be creative, and it's not a bad thing. At worst, it's not that impossible to mitigate the problem by using the terrain.

You put it at higher levels, wouldn't be that problematic. Part of it is also putting that kind of encounter in a 1-4.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

medtec28 wrote:

I just would like to add to more points to my above ideas

1) Everything I have said is based on things I have seen work elsewhere, so telling me that they are impossible, as GM Lamplighter, states is patently false.

2) To paraphrase a popular Broadway show “ You don’t have a plan, you just hate mine.” Counseling patience implies that you think the status quo is good, I and many others feel it is not. If you don’t like my ideas, why not share your own thoughts on how to improve things instead of suggesting that my ideas will not work.

On the opposite, it is only fair to say your ideas are also a risk and what you say on 1), the same idea can't be applief the same way from company A to company B. The mere fact a no small amount of users there are far more cautious should temper blind optimism. Someone can't offer a guarantee, nobody can expect decisions to be quick. Due process is to be respected.

I know on another company where the same mindset would be met with open disdain, on the contrary. Previous attempts to hasten things there hasn't been met with an overwhelming success.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

Bob Jonquet wrote:
We need to demonstrate some patience. The OP development team busted their ass to released nearly double the normal rate of scenarios leading up to Gen Con and now they are down a team member with Jon moving on to the Starfinder team. We have a new game system, a new set of Guide rules covering OP, a newly added product to the monthly schedule (quest). This all combines to strain the production vs hours in a day. There is plenty of content just in the CRB to tie us over for a few months at least while the team attacks the production schedule until a new member can be added to fill the vacancy.

The problem is that you can't avoid some being (way too) impatient and can't accept that slower burning things for a bit is the safer route after a hectic start.

Grand Lodge

Lots of players are PG, but others aren't. There's market for everything bar something wholly scandalous as per IRL laws or 50 percent +1 players disagreeing about it.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

1 person marked this as a favorite.
medtec28 wrote:

If campaign leadership were truly embracing of their role as a marketing tool, they would want to release the AR updates as close to street date as possible, if the delay is 6 months, then other things are higher priority to them.

If we want “voting with your wallet” to create culture change here, and I certainly do,...

I would warn against unreasonable expectations. Allowing or banning things isn't a decision to be taken lightly. Rushing could way ten times worse and hurtful than intended. I also expect them on not commenting why, because it only invites endless debates.

PFS isn't their main product, so higher priorities ain't surprising. Unless 50 percent +1 people do the same walkaway as you, them keeping their own agenda is their safer bet. A company can't have the same mindset as the player, and vice-versa. Things are bound to make people unhappy during the process.

Not dismissing the concern because it's something that concerned me too at times, but it's clearly the bad way to do it.

Grand Lodge

Cavall wrote:

To the OP to sum up, sure get TWF.

Dont invest in the whole feat tree unless you've got some major ways to stack flank bonuses.

And Rogues are fun. They are even more fun with a group willing to get you into position

Enjoy.

Just don't expect them always accomodating you, otherwise you'll be possibly disappointed. " Why I should get free hitted just to help the rogue. It's more than that. " You might get more respect and effort from teammates if you can show you can attempt to setup sneaks on your own, or that you don't require them that much effort (cf having Gang Up)

The sneak will not always get through, either. There's then the need to heighten the base damage if possible.

Grand Lodge

Either as a GM or as a player, there's the " don't be a jerk " not-so-informal rule about any contentious situation. One may be right that badly said, it's still a bad argument.

Grand Lodge

That Crazy Alchemist wrote:
Crossblooded has become a bit of a dirty word on these forums, so you're going to get a ton of people who will act like it's the worst possible choice you could ever make as a sorcerer.

Just reacting to that point, there's that, and another slice of the players would sling mud to the archetype for other reasons*

But on the basis on that, what the OP wants wouldn't be exceptional, but serviceable enough.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

I would say, let time make its course, rather than pushing the " we're not bad " agenda. The goal is very commendable, but it's not needed.

Grand Lodge

rorek55 wrote:
ignoring the clearly disciplined, trained, deadly fighter about to smash your face in with a huge hammer/axe/sword to worry about the prancing pixie rogue?

Burden is on the rogue on not proving to be an ideal target, not on the opponents to accomodate the player. The easier target is close enough ? Gloves off unless the tankier one has means to physically block the incoming threat. There's always the risk that the player will be disallowed to play the character's game and the only way to mitigate that is to pay a lot of resources like Derklord is saying. But it will always be at the expense of the base rogue game because the base class doesn't have a big starting chassis.

Grand Lodge

Responses to rorek :

1) The d8 Hit Dice is a weakness when the class is a melee with low base defences. Heightening them without multi-classing ? Very difficult.

2) Other classes aren't as exposed as the rogue who requires much more work to raise these saving throws like 1). 14 con and praying for the best only goes so far.

3) Rogue has close to no options to buff the will save, maybe a single rogue trick, and even then it's not permanent (and no guarantee to pass through the sneak attack to activate it). Other classes start with better overall resilience making these better to swallow.

4) 1,5x dex to damage is a good thing, but the base damage will not be wholly superior to many of the other classes, and it might be on the contrary worse. Debilitating injury is by no means guaranteed either because of various immunities or simply being slower and then the opponents already acted. Base effects are more foolproof than any situationals.

5) Having this level of initiative bonus is made at the expense of the overall ability (Iron Will and Intomitable Faith ???) and it's also no guarantees.

Any intelligent opponent might ignore the big armored pole to attack the slightly less resilient rogue. It is not especially only evil. Even good NPCs might. I hit easier targets than hitting the harder ones for a matter of pride, as a GM and as a player. On the contrary, not doing so would be what is odd. In that case your expectations about that are wrong. You like the rogue, others hate these, but personal POVs don't enter into account there.

What can be noted is that not every player will accomodate the rogue to get the sneak attack. More often than not, if the player doesn't show an ability to set favourable placing alone, why others would help. Only then if despite best efforts it is not possible, then others will try. Playing on strengths is always better, but if disabled due to low resilience, is to no avail. I see very few rogues compared to similarly built slayers, inquisitors and co that it doesn't come from nowhere. Even Unchained the class is still glassy.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

I asked the question in England, the response I received is that no, it's not being considered, and probably won't be.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

I quitted AL because it was way too relaxed on the rules at the time. So in comparison I find how PFS1/PFS2/SFS handle it is a way lesser evil. Wizards of the Coast probably tightened things up so I'll give it another go later, just not now (because of my Magic the Gathering commitments)

Allowing several replays of a same scenario in Paizo Organized Play would akin to sending up a nuclear bomb, and I'm not exaggerating much.

Grand Lodge

Specifically about max carry capacity, I would say getting muleback cords and masterwork backpack and adding the Burdenless ability to the breastplate. For the saving throws just in case, there's the rings of resistance now

Grand Lodge

Quixote wrote:
Captain America doesn't claim to have an ability that somehow converts his shield's defensive enhancements info offensive ones due to him being "really good at using shields."

Shield Master is nowhere near as powerful as other options. It merely raises "budget". Without involving crafting, comparing similar playing styles, the Arcane Duelist Bard or the base Magus class (and Bladebound archetype in particular) are far worse in the freebie scale.

Grand Lodge

Cevah wrote:

The reach cleric mitigates this quite a bit. When they provide flanking, their partner is rarely also reach. Thus the enemy needs to 5' step to attack them. Give that the flanker is usually more dangerous, they are less likely to attack you.

My experience has been much better than eating a bunch of attacks to the face. So much so that I will sometimes provoke an AoO just to get into position. Of course, it helps that I have a decent AC.

/cevah

When it works, it's very useful. Just that it's very situational so that's why I never created a reach version. I play either melee or overly passive ones so reacting only if required. I prefer to do the support job between fights, not during.

The higher levelled the session is, and lesser is the possibility to provide flanking. It's also more difficult to set it up when the party has to storm the castle rather than waiting the opponents to arrive, and there's more chances the enemy won't need to move into a bad position, but the group instead, which is the opposite of the wanted effect.

Having decent defences is not enough to deflect attention, either. Probably depends on the personal experiences, I play lots of sessions under uncomfortable ingame conditions, so plan A doesn't always work so there's the compulsion of a strong plan B.

Grand Lodge

Skeld wrote:

I just thought of another piece of advice that might help:

Don't get hung up on the rules because they really aren't important.
-Skeld

Adapting my mindset on whether it's a home game or Organized Play. The former can't be applied point-blank on the latter because it's the safest way to get disappointed.

Grand Lodge

I would say ranged - a support-based cleric getting more bad exposure going melee would mean more attacks to the face. It's possible to manage it if the character has lots of HP, but it's not always the case. Second-line support will be vital the higher level the adventure is, lots of times the flank and/or the sneak will be denied anyway during the process.

For a melee version, I might care slightly less about having fewer spell slots and domains, so I could go Crusader archetype to give myself the extra feats needed to do spellcasting and fighting at a good level.

I often tell myself a good round for a divine caster support is one where the character isn't required to play. I feel fine if I can sip a coffee instead. Feeling the urge to act isn't always good. In any case, having a decent to high AC is a requisite to not getting trampled too often : " A good cleric is a dead cleric. "

Grand Lodge

I might fancy alternating encounters to accomodate the characters, with others to make opponents partly impervious to the character style.

It's a good tactic to see whether there's a valid plan B, or if the character is an OTP. In the latter case, the player might be in a world of pain ...

Grand Lodge

Two-Weapon Fighting is doable for a rogue, just not as early as a full-BAB character could so for a couple of levels I'd suggest it is a safer bet to stick to a single weapon, especially being provided flank is no guarantee and teamwork being denied by opposite setup.

If required, the character has to be self-reliant.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

The group we had for the scenario. We were playing 17-18 with 4-player adjustment. No hard mode like in part 1 because the archer felt unsafe doing so (understandably, as hit points and armor class weren't great) :

Me as a Swashbuckler 15/Vigilante 1/Bloodrager 1
Life oracle 16
Fighter (archer) 16
Fighter (TWF with shield) 16
Paladin 4/Rogue 12

I will speak only about the mechanical aspects since I already wrote on the plot on the "What did you choose" topic. We convinced the excsinder archon to guard the remaining documents without much difficulty given the life oracle and myself had a pretty good diplomacy bonus. The dominate on Janira was quickly dispelled, and we suffered quite a bit of damage against the undeath pillars, but otherwise it was fine.

The fight against Zurnzal and his acolytes wasn't difficult. They all hit hard but otherwise don't have a big resilience. He tried to get the death attack on the life oracle and it initially succeeded, but using the reroll and it failed at the end (we didn't know about the possible negotiation tactic). I was at 5ft. from him at the moment of his attempt so when it was my turn, I did the 5ft. and I attacked five times getting past his orc ferocity. He has a decent number of HP but the AC clearly wasn't on par (I did roll nicely though so it helped). The alchemists were taken out in short order thereafter.

Against the variant nightcrawler, we spent some resources because the archer got heavily hurt. Not a long fight but it's clearly designed to waste resources.

First fight against Vahlo :
Not being able to see invisibility or sensing him in another way brought some scare in the start. I had to blindly try to locate him hoping I could pinpoint the location. So I went first, where he was probably located. This is where being Lawful Neutral saved my character because he didn't get smited. That gave time for the others to organize and arrive proper. The archer was an aasimar so when the smite arrived on her, she got quickly smoked (although not dead). The paladin/rogue then took a big dent, which was made worse given she was a tiefling (although high AC prevented some of the worst hits). The Life oracle wasn't empty yet but Heal/Mass Heals were flying all over the place. It lasted a number of rounds I do not remember. We finally defeated him once.

I'll say that not having to face the astradaemons due to the adjustment helped a lot. With them as meatshields and decent harassers, it could have turned out worse. There's a small problem of having single-enemy encounters, that it's easier than having a slightly diminished (wouldn't have minded the sickened condition) but still having the minions.

Second fight against Vahlo :
Everybody got back up, and the fact that Vahlo wasn't invisible anymore made things quicker. But we were distracted by the Pathfinder ghosts so we couldn't put him away that quick. Some character got their wisdom lowered, compounded with the aura of cowardice, that was, yikes. It was more brutal than the first encore because it was more direct. I was afraid the life oracle had nothing left, she probably had little more than a couple of level 5 slots. Moderate fortification on the armor and very high AC against good-aligned characters didn't help.

The scenario has a good lore and is a nice story conclusion to PF1. Just that mechanically, a more balanced group could possible stomp on the scenario if not hard mode. The other table played on 14-15 hard mode because they were only 4 players, but banishments and other niceties made their life much easier.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When I played it three days ago at Geneva GardenCon with the character Degel - 117194-11 - Grand Lodge faction :

Spoiler:
Initially in part 1, we were incensed by Torch's final affronts and we were three characters willing to kill him (one of us was a Shadow Lodge member). Vahlo didn't need to convince us much about it, despite one of the players being a fan of Torch.

As the plot grows on, learning why Elysyia helped Torch started to give me a doubt. So sprinting back to Skyreach after wrecking Mediogalti earlier, we managed to stabilize the interior of the lodge good enough. Then the case of Vahlo. Having followed the orders of a graveknight was sickening. After finishing him, we had a tense but decent speech with Torch. After he explained everything, we ultimately decided to let him go, but with a caveat : as a penance for all his faults, he will have to retire on vacation in the location of the Ruins of Azlant settings. Some Pathfinder colleagues need help in the colony, especially he will have the opportunity to open a bath-house.

The decision about the Ten : Three of us decided to take the opportunity to become one of them. One didn't and stayed as an advisor because of not being sure of the transparency in the future.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with Eliza Petulengro staying in 2E as an Unmasked, better transparency (but also maybe risk) is why Eando Kline came back, no ?

Grand Lodge

baggageboy wrote:
pfsrd for Unhindering Shield, emphasis added wrote:
Benefit(s): You still gain a buckler’s bonus to AC even if you use your shield hand for some other purpose. When you wield a buckler, your shield hand is considered free for the purposes of casting spells, wielding weapons, and using any other abilities that require you to have a free hand or interact with your shield, such as the swashbuckler’s precise strike deed or the Weapon Finesse feat.
The way I read that is it's free for wielding weapons. So you can two weapon fight while benefiting or fight with a two handed weapon just fine. Both of which you can do already, you would just lose the benefit of the buckler and take attack penalties. This feat overwrites that.

https://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Unhindering%20Shield

The feat is banned from PFS in its entirety because of its text.

Grand Lodge

Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Philippe Lam wrote:
Possible reasoning for the Shield Brace nerf : They wanted to avoid the " I fight two-handed and I still have a shield " as best as possible, so the only known avenue would be (at least for me) is being an alchemist with the Vestigial Arm.

Polymorph spells.

Starting with Alter Self you can pick up 4+ hands. Monstrous Physique adds in some pretty substantial bonuses and special abilities if you follow that path. Mostly only works for STR based magus and melee wizards, but can be quite powerful.

I made the assumption based on a zero-buff situation because fights can happen everywhere and minutes/level spells won't cover every situation unless taking the risk to spend several of these. Illusion spells are great to try pushing the group to waste lots of resources.

Magda Luckbender wrote:


Also I have a strong bias towards lower level (6 and under) Pathfinder play. Reach tactics are very strong at 1st level but becomes a rounding error by 12th level. So if high level play is your thing maybe don't bother with reach tactics.

** spoiler omitted **...

I get the idea, but as I often play 12+ content, can't ofc have the same reasoning. Reach tactics work very well when the party can wait the opponents, not when currently has to storm a castle. For proper battlefield control, there's the need to currently be able to force the opponent into focusing on the character. But it works less and less at higher levels.

I teamed with reach characters from time to time, they pull a lot of weight. Depends a lot on personal experiences, but I often felt it was more rewarding to be proactive rather than doing the waiting game, meaning showing the player will pester the NPCs until the point they have no choice but to pay attention.

@baggageboy : Unhindering Shield follows a similar logic to Shield Brace so that outside of spells or class features, no two-handling with shield.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

That kind of mindset is perfect for a home game (either AP/homebrew/PFS) as there's no pressure to currently "win" hence the experience is more enjoyable. But in a convention it's a lot more difficult, even worse for a special because the setup makes it hard to keep the same mindset (I certainly have a hard time to, or even can't).

That reminds me that I need to not overthink it when I'll play it next week in England, healthier like that (If I start to feel too competitive, drinking a coffee).

Grand Lodge

Targutai Minyatur wrote:


Elf wizard transmutation (opossed schools illusion and enchantment)
Str 10 (Dont want to dum str cause i fear str drain creatures)
Dex 17(+1 enchantment transmutation school)
Con 14
Int 18
Cha 7

I calculate the point buy :

12 to 16 dex (not counting the +1 from the school) :
(12 to 13, 1 point - 13 to 14, 1 - 14 to 15, 1 - 15 to 16, 2) - 5 points spent

It's an elf so starting penalty to con :
8 to 14 :
(8 to 9, 1 point - 9 to 10, 1 - 10 to 11, 1 - 11 to 12, 2 - 12 to 13, 2 - 13 to 14, 3) - 10 points spent

12 to 18 int
(12 to 13, 1 point - 13 to 14, 1 - 14 to 15, 1 - 15 to 16, 2 - 16 to 17, 2 - 17 to 18, 3) - 10 points spent

10 to 7 cha :
(10 to 9, +1 point - 9 to 8, +1 - 8 to 7, +2) - +4 points in total

Depends on the wisdom then as it's not written. For a home game, that wouldn't make a huge different but for PFS, thre's a strict limit on 20-point buy, calculating a 21 so your array exceeds a little bit and you have to rebalance the ability scores.

Grand Lodge

Grabbing as many will save bonuses as needed much earlier than level 15, because chances aren't small that otherwise, you won't be able to play your game due to constant debuffing/ability damage/etc. It's good to play on strengths, but not without covering weaknesses at the same time.

In that aspect that's why the 10 starting wisdom is a difficult look to me as the class has no ways to buff it properly. Also, 12 con and no Toughness, it's doable but the lack of HP will clearly hurt.

Outside of my own mindset though, how you project the character sounds pretty logic.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

Not directly about the topic but might impact in the later run : Is there a planning about more rule/mechanics/etc content or not yet ?

Worried also about the starting number of scenarios right after Gencon as I feel a start in a new system should have a stronger cadre, but if it's not possible, no problems. I'll still test a fair amount of that.

Grand Lodge

Possible reasoning for the Shield Brace nerf : They wanted to avoid the " I fight two-handed and I still have a shield " as best as possible, so the only known avenue would be (at least for me) is being an alchemist with the Vestigial Arm.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

They never errated since, so they kept (and keep as for now) that rule. It still makes sense because in a timeline standpoint, would it be possible to go far far away for another set of duties when the Decemvirate could be completely wiped out in a couple of days (or even hours) ?

Even if in effect, it is true that could be mechanically relaxed, but I think not without a cost (like the All for Immortality trilogy where a no show can negatively effect the quest)

Grand Lodge

Like I say as a player or a GM, " Never split the party " *eyes rolling*

Grand Lodge

A clear answer and/or official response will probably never come given their current schedule, so Table Variation (capital letters on purpose) is the only plausible response that can be given, unless there's somewhere a Paizo staffer who gave inpt.

1 to 50 of 400 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>