Purple Overkill's page

Casters: Arcanist/Magaambyan > Wizard/Diabolist > Psychic

Melee: Barbarian (AM B..) > Paladin > Fighter/Grey Maiden o. Hellknight

Ranged: Paladin > Ranger > Fighter

Support: Cleric/Angelfire > Occultist > Skald

Some years back, a group of players contacted me, saying they were interested in trying PF and that Kingmaker sounds good.

So I do the regular session zero thing, explaining how this is a cooperative game, monitoring the shared character building, and so on, starts out really promising.

The first session starts.... and all five players have their character move in total opposite directions, from running back to Brevoy, to haggling with Oleg to wanting to scout the nearby woods all alone.

So starts the slow TPK:

- The Monk (I´m so fast and stealthy!) gets one-shot outside by the bandits.
- The Ranger (I´m a perfect woodsman and hunter) gets eaten by a Worg.
- The Rogue (Stealthy trap-handler!) enters the Mite lair alone and botches Perception for the traps.
- The Cavalier (Courtly manners are my thing!)... well, I lose interest in what that character does because his travel destination is more than 2 months away.
- The Barbarian gets into insulting and attacking Oleg & Co. and won´t cease that, ending up killed by the NPC in self-defense.

Turns out the whole group was made up out of VtM players and were used to their characters always acting solo and power-tripping around in their corner of the world. Their gm got fed up and left the group...

"Noir World". It´s always 4pm, it rains, life is s#~+ty. The catch: There´s only one DMPC, all you´ve got to do as a player is taking turns in being the Voice from the Off and comment on what´s going on.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to play a character with high Int and Wis who is still Chaotic Neutral?

It's easy (VERY easy) to play a CN character who's silly, crazy, psychotic, shortsighted, fractured, fanatical, impetuous, or otherwise mentally impaired... but is there a personality that can be thoughtful and insightful, and yet still manage to be Chaotic Neutral?

In the first place, it´s very easy to play in a very disruptive manner and than blame it on just playing your alignment, in this case CN, support this with citing known disruptive character traits and declare all your action as "your character just being so". Bis this doesn´t have anything to do with CN.

CN is about individuality, personal freedom, the insight that personal growth can only be achieved by not being hampered by conformity and the "greater good" is served best by having each and every person decide on what his personal form of "good" actually should be.

Being fickle and erratic can happen when a flash of insight strikes you and you need to act now, debate later, but the same insight also should tell you to let others in on the knowledge and action, else you _do_ look a bit like a madman.

So I´d agree: Sherlock and House are good examples, Deadpool not so very much.

@DarkAviator:

You seem to mix-up how character creation works, therefore you´re coming to the wrong conclusion.

The first step, determining ability scores before adding race, can work with a lot of options to get there, from 3d6 to 4d6dl and PB or using an array.
In this step, no method should be able to create better or worse results than any other, setting the boundary rules to 3 and 18 (for this step).
After that basic step and beginning with adding racial modifiers, those two numbers cease to play a role in the game.

@Waifu:

You over-complicate things.

Basically, you have two sets of rules that work independent and don´t touch or modify each other: The rules for the individual weapon and the rules for Weapon Groups.

The rules for the individual weapon are very specific on what that weapon is, while the rules for weapon groups are very specific on what boni go there.

Don´t give too much weight to how a weapon group is named. It makes no difference if it´s called "Light Blades", "Heavy Blades" or "A" and "B" as this is only an indicator for how certain class features should interact with the specific weapon if appropriate.

The Raven Black wrote:

The clarification that Evil spell meant Evil act was necessary

Once it was given, it was pretty obvious that people would clamor for a guideline

By its very nature a guideline cannot satisfy everyone

TBH I believe there would not be such an uproar about this if Infernal Healing was not on the Wizard list and allowed in PFS. That Evil PCs are banned in PFS made things even worse

Can't speak for anyone else, but infernal healing doesn't even enter into it for me. I'm more concerned with summoning, personally. And, again, the ping pong morality.

The interesting point with a setting where objective morality is a thing and can always be measured and checked is why you would actually use tools (in the broadest sense) that you know will do spiritual harm to you?

Honestly, martials should be readily able to get pounce :P

Might surprise you, but I actually disagree (and I´m all in favor of martial classes).

Dαedαlus wrote:

ryric wrote:

While d20pfsrd is sometimes a useful reference, if you decide to use things from it without owning the actual books -effectively "stealing" the material- and therefore mess up your game due to lack of context, I have a hard time being terribly sympathetic. If you're unwilling to buy the book, use at your own risk.

It's not always 'unwilling.' Most people just can't afford to buy all 400+ books that Paizo has put out for Pathfinder. As a broke college student myself, I have to heavily rely on sites like the Golarion Wiki, D20PFSRD, and the Archives of Nethys for my world info and rules. I just can't shell out the thousands needed to buy even the PDFs for everything.

I would also contest the use of the term "stealing," but it's really not important.

Considering you can make a perfectly capable character using only the PRD, I think "unwilling" is the correct word. You're choosing to use an option that you don't want to buy. I understand some people are in situations where they would rather buy food and rent than game books. That doesn't mean you aren't taking for free the fruits of another's work.

Again, I get why people do this. I just have little sympathy when using your free source blows up your face.

Drop the "stealing" thing and a bit of the attitude.

PF is bound to the OGL, therefore the pure mechanical parts have to be open to the public.

The only annoying part is that "non-customers" feel entitled to explain as loud or louder than the actual customers.

Hm... Can´t remember which book it is in, but there´s a forced reincarnation spell. Could be an interim solution until you have the money for wish?

Purple Overkill wrote:

Doing veeeery slow work on a low fantasy version of "Traveller", based on the MGP version, intended to play in late middle ages germany. Finished the careers and equipment section, stuck at working at the three "magic" systems I want to use (Alchemy, Miracles, Astronomy).

Progress is so slow because I meet the group I playtest and develop this with maybe once every 3 months.

I hope and kind of assume you're a fan of the 1632-verse started by David Weber? I'd love to see what you've got if you're ready for a critic/fan!

{I keep editing to try to make my invitation clear. I hope I've finally succeeded!}

Sorry to disappoint you.

I used to read Honor Harrington, but until now I didn't´t really now Weber also wrote different things.

For me, it has a different background. Early 90s, the owner of a LFGS made a mock-up of "Wanderer" and put it on display. Saw it, fell in love and was totally disappointed that I couldn't´t buy it, me being totally hooked up on "Darklands" at the time.
Some years ago, I was visiting a flea market with some friends and happened upon an unopened "Darklands" again, bought it and was immediately reminded of "Wanderer".

Now, the funny thing is, I started a post on my local rag board about this topic and guess which guy answered?

So that got me started actually working on it.

Now I could share some parts with you, but I´ve gotta ask first before I start transcribing it from hand-written notes to google docs: Do you speak german?

While it looks intimidating at first, I think that the Inquisitor class is both, extremely solid as well as very newbie friendly. It packs a punch, it has solid options that you bring to bear when you´re concentrating, but it still works fine when not. Extra points for the Hexenhammer archetype covering "dark and moodie".

How many years canonically has it been since Rise of the Runelords? At some point, someone has probably snagged that spell from the party that hypothetically resolved that adventure. The secret is, more than likely, out by now on Golarion. The only thing stopping a PC from taking it is a GM.

So far? It´s year one after RotRL, CotCT and Serpent Skull (the later one assumed on the involved NPC having had an "after" treatment in Inner Sea Intrigue). It´s still at the point of some factions wanting to mount an expedition towards Xin-Shalast. Assumptions based on available books. If PFS plays it differently, that I don´t know.

Doing veeeery slow work on a low fantasy version of "Traveller", based on the MGP version, intended to play in late middle ages germany. Finished the careers and equipment section, stuck at working at the three "magic" systems I want to use (Alchemy, Miracles, Astronomy).
Progress is so slow because I meet the group I playtest and develop this with maybe once every 3 months.

The Raven Black wrote:

UnArcaneElection wrote:

To support the concept of the overwhelming majority of Undead being Evil, it would probably be good to change the rules so that most Undead have a real need to feed (eating flesh or blood for most corporeal Undead, and Energy Drain or Ability Damage/Drain for most incorporeal Undead, although with specific exceptions in both cases; either way, the instictual preference of prey choice is strongly towards sentient beings). If they don't feed, they won't completely starve outright, but they can't heal, and their activities are extremely curtailed, while their hunger becomes maddening even as they find themselves forced to sleep to conserve energy; if they can feed sufficiently, they don't need to sleep. Intelligent Undead are often terrified of the prospect of being forced into sleep (to rebuild their energy very slowly by the trickle of energy that comes from their Negative Energy Plane connection) for long periods and being unable to defend themselves effectively (and if they have managed to build up a bit of reserve energy, when awoken they may not be able to resist their hunger, and do something that gets themselves killed even when they know better). This by itself doesn't absolutely guarantee that Undead will be Evil, but it provides an extremely strong push in that direction.

Though this kind of system is interesting, I do not feel it is necessary

There is no such system for Evil outsiders yet nobody has a problem with them being Evil, with even less variation than undead

Why do so many people hate that undead are mostly Evil in PFRPG while they have no problem with almost always Evil outsiders ?

Why does it matter so much ?

People want undead characters but gms have used the "they're evil" to deny them.

For some its a chance to take a few kicks at the alignment system. They usually trot out the alignment is descriptive not prescriptive lines.

It´s getting really boring when people want to play monsters for the cool powers, at the same time not play them as monsters.

1) Remove the 1-20 classes, replace them by 3 tiers of 7 level classes, each with a distinct capstone. That also means that concepts like the "pure martial" only work on the lowest tier and have to be phased out later on.

2) More class or class-combo oriented feats, possible game-style defining combos. (Let´s face it, the whole Magus could have been a feat chain, for example)

3) Removing Full Attacks and either start scaling weapon damage and AC or remove scaling from spells.

4) Make ABP and Scaling items the standard method

5) Scrap task enabler feats and keep that strictly to skills, also making skill unlocks an automatic choice every 5 ranks without needing to enable them first.

If really every aspect concerning a creature had to be fully realized as part of the stat block, the basics Bestiary alone would be the size of the Encyclopedia Britannica, without adding any real worth by doing so. Things trying to model real world objects or being based on our myths simply carry instructions based on understanding what it is. You ignore that, it´s not that thing anymore.
A Ghoul is an eater of the dead. You ignore that, it´s anything but a Ghoul.

Dasrak wrote:

In the case of Blood Money, most people ignore the most important part about this spell: there is only one copy of it in existence and it's in the possession of the Runelord of Greed, Karzoug. It was intended to serve as a reward for completing the entire Rise of the Runelords AP, and if you're just giving this spell away to any 1st level Wizard then you're misusing it.

Good to know.

I don't read lore. Like, any of it.

I own zero galorion books at all.

I like the system. I don't touch the lore.

It´s already been mentioned, but with PF, the actual source is important and something to be checked out.

That´s not so much because of the lore, but because the level of Quality Assurance seems to be different for the individual product lines.
New rules to show up as part of an AP will most likely be there to flash out an NPC or important enemy, like the Juju Oracle mystery.
Stuff that came up in Monster Codex/Villain Codex can be used for players characters, sure, but was written to showcase some enemy builds and enhance their style. See the famously overpowered Orc bloodline for this.

That´s a bit of a problem when using the d20pfsrd site, as they used to "flex off" the fluff, so it is harder to see which quality category we talk about and if it´s intended to be used by players or gms.

So it´s a good stance to not automatically green-light stuff just because it´s Paizo.

Hah! Fun game, yes.

As basics, I´d make it an Hexploration game, using the Wilderness Exploration rules from Ultimate Campaign/Kingmaker.

It´s a naval game, so I´d use the ships and naval combat rules from Skulls & Shackles.

You´re dealing with a lot of different factions and can build up a reputation, so Faction Guide and Influence rules from Ultimate Intrigue is in, also covering interaction with NPC.

No need to talk about Sanity and Corruption, that´s a must after you´ve just eaten your last crew member. So Ultimate Horror.

Last element: A Harrow Deck.

Three very weak characters I had at the table:

The first was someone trying to play a God Wizard. Player new to PF, hit the boards, was directed to the usual guides and builds and showed up at the table with a cookie cutter build.
But with only slight knowledge of the rules and no actual grasp on why BFC can be powerful, it was just.... sad.

Second was a girl pestering me to allow the half-fiend template, green-light assassin for her, on and on she went. Ended up with a Rogue/Assassin STR 8/Dex 24 flying over the battlefield and trying to shoot stuff with a longbow, dealing d8-1 dmg, no SA, never.
Later found out that she was so inspired by a picture she found somewhere, that she was hell-bent on creating that. A bit understandable, still pathetic.

Last was a guy who tried some near-TO build. Really long build, many components, a lot of dipping and all that. But we started at level one and his build was packed so tight to get where he wanted it, stuff never really fit, like starting with Wiz1 and power attack, and so on. It was a sad sight and killing that character had more the feeling of putting an end to the suffering.

Talk about the Fighter being "effective" or not is always funny, as people throw in things light "flight" or "plane shift" and never explain how their actual game looks like, but keep it on a purely theoretical level, with weighting "class features" higher than "itemancy".

Me, I use PF only to play APs and that´s it. My comparison point is: Does a Fighter well in Giantslayer as published and not modified by me? And it does.

and remembering what options are in what book is a PITA... heck, remembering all the options is a pain. Just recently I got reminded of an alchemist spell from the APG that I'd totally forgotten about, even though the APG was about all that was available back when I played my alchemist character.

Unnecessary. Most of the time, you deal with blocks of options that you know will work on a broad selection of builds and most of the time have a very high synergy. So "Archery", "Summoning" and so on. When new books come out, you check if something worthwhile for one of those blocks come up and make a note about it

Secret Wizard wrote:

Marauder has full DR 11/-

I can only come up with 6 max at 11th level, where are you getting the other 5 DR?

Good question, especially since Armored Juggernaut calls out to not stack with anything but DR based on armor special material (ie. adamantine).

I think "System Mastery" has some interlocking component parts to it.

Player Skill: Actually know what you´re good/bad at, what´s fun for you and what bores you. It´s not the best thing to just grab a guide and pick the most powerful ready-made build and expect it to work right for you. For example, if you don´t have a basic understanding of tactics (or they bore you), you should probably avoid going for a God Wizard.

Gauging Probabilities: Next step is to simply look at how the actual rules of the game interact. It´s curious how often that basic step gets overlooked. For example, when saving throws scale upwards, your spell DC should scale upwards at least at the same rate.

Optimization: Too often used in terms of raw power/breaking the game. At its core, it´s more about being able to ask the right question, make sense of the answer(s) and know where and how to look for the components you seek. Examples´d be: "Is a Dwarf Ranger a good choice for Giantslayer?", "How can I have fun roleplaying a dwarf?" to "How can I insta-kill a Dragon?".

The two aspects come together when you know that you have to make choices, but you also know that choices are not equal. Again, this doesn´t have to be about raw power, but rather about knowing what you can do and what you want to do. It begins by knowing why a Wave Rider with a shark mount can be a good choice for Skulls & Shackles but falls flat in Crimson Throne, even if on paper (or in a guide), you should do a bazillion damage.

Having access to a huge amount of material only become a bit more important once you actually know "how to ask the right questions", ie. meaning what you´re actually looking for, as it helps you sorting through all the options pretty fast, then.

As a side-note: The early APs had the iconic pregens in their front- and back cover. Each "build" had an in-build flaw. It´s also part of system mastery to find that flaw, explain why it´s a flaw and propose a tactic to work around that flaw.

@Bard-Sader:

Talking about objective morality is hard because we´re used to justify our actions and compare them to existing laws, which often don´t really have to do with morality.

Killing an evil creature doesn´t make it a good act, without the overall intention to stop an evil creature.

Intention and outcome have to mesh. A devil fighting demons is not "good" and not doing an "act of good".

Same with your cult.