Renvale999's page

Pathfinder Campaign; Kingmaker

Characters:

Drow Rogue Female, never been to the surface so everything is very new and weird to her

Male Elf wizard who has taken her under his wing and is very patient in explaining everything to her

Human cleric of Erastil who is a bit of a sarcastic ass, but good-hearted

The Scene

The players come up to old Bokken's place. The reclusive hermit informs the PC's that some local bandits have ran off with his some of his sheep.

Drow rogue: What are sheep?

Elf Wizard: Its a herd animal, small, has a coat of wool that is used for cloth making. We also eat them for food.

Human Cleric: Farmers use them when they get lonely (sexual innuendo intended)

Drow rogue: So farmers eat and shave them when they're lonely?

Whole table busted out laughing for several minutes.

Awesome, thanks guys and gals, much appreciated.

So we just started the Kingmaker AP, and my players are loving it.

Slight problem; one of the players(and hence her character) is leaving for three weeks, in which we will continue to game.

The character going to be gone is a drow rogue, female. Kesten's men have taking a shining to her (since she's exotic).

What I'm thinking is having Kesten employ her to help him clear his name regarding the scandal that put him at Oleg's (my idea is that he was framed by the Surtova's). She could gather evidence, spy on folks and such at Restov. This will all happen in solo sessions once she gets back to catch up with the group regarding xp and such.

My question to the gods of the forum is whether or not this will affect the game going forward, especially during the kingdom building stage. I've read everything I can on what happens after Stolen Lands (the second AP is in the mail on its way here) and from everything I've read, Kesten plays as big or as little part in the events as the players want him too.

Any help would be appreciated.

There is a good possibility that I will be starting a new campaign this Saturday, and one of my players wants to play a Scout from the Complete Adventurer.

I know PF generally converts easily over from 3.5, but I want to make sure, given the new wealth of feats and such in PF that I'm not headed for a train wreck with a broken character.

If you guys have tried one, or know somebody who has, and know of stuff that is broken or doesn't work, please let me know.

Any help would be appreciated.

The Loot-Keeper: He does the accounting for you when you have to figure out how much money everyone got, by checking and splitting the loot... fairly, most of the time.

My role-player is our loot wh*re...and she's the female of the group lol, totally inappropriate but she's goodhearted about it. And she's the only one I trust with loot. We lost a character the other day my optimizer and quiet guy couldn't loot the dead's players corpse fast enough lol.

So, I too often see threads started to gripe and complain about bad players or bad situations. I've decided to start my own trend and talk about those player qualities (and our own players) who make the hearts of us GM's sing with gleeful song! Or at least don't annoy the crap out of us too bad.

My Group.

1. The Rules Lawyer: He knows the rules better then I do most of time. Good thing; when I make a call about a rule, he tells "Cool man, you're call, let's move on".

2. The Optimizer: His characters destroy suns and shatter worlds. Good thing; When he makes something completely broke, he looks at it and says "Whoa, totally broken. Dude, lemme kill this guy so I make something not as stupidly broke as this d-bag."

3. The Role-Player: She'll spend an hour of game time roleplaying out a 2 minute conversation. Good thing; If I say "Hey, I need a plot devise and someone I can screw over to get my story across" she's the first to raise her hand :).

4. The Quiet Guy: He's content to sit back and let others do the talking. Good thing; He's the first to reign in off-topic conversation and get the game moving if a really cool video game comes up.

So give us your compliments to your players, or talk about a player that was just awesomesauce that you gamed with once. This is meant to be positive.

This came up tonight, where a devil (bearded) summoned another bearded devil. My player, the oracle, promptly cast Protection from Evil, assuming it would work against the new bearded devil (the one that was summoned) as it is a "summoned creature", therefore couldn't approach her and such. I ruled that it worked as she interpreted just to speed up the game (she was in a bad mood because she was failing at healing the infernal wounds lol).

Did I make the right call?

Renvale999 wrote:

Disagree with you on the whole AC's being lower then CMD...in my experience they are always, always lower, by a lot. Current fighter is level 5 and has an AC of 24 (+1 Full Plate, +1 Dex, Heavy Steel Shield and Shield Focus) and his CMD is only 20 (10+5 Base Attack, 18 Strength +4 and +1 Dex) and all my other players are the same, their AC is higher. I find that CMD's are stupid easy to hit, especially if you're a fighter. So yeah, he can spend a round sundering a weapon, but if he even if doesn't break it, it gains a -2 to hit, and now they have to hit his 24 AC at a -2, effectively nerfing that particular NPC.

Bottomline, as a fighter, you're going to succeed on your CMB check most the time due to your high BAB and strength, and since CMD's are so low all the time.

Don't forget a lot of things that add to AC also add to CMD. "A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD." Most creatures aren't wearing +10 armor or getting +3 shield bonus either and instead of size subtracting from AC larger creatures get bonuses to their CMD.

Let's take some random creatures from the B2: (AC/CMD)
Protean, Keketar: 32/48
Scylla: 31/47
Qlippoth, Augnagar: 29/36
Nereid: 25/37
Lurker in the Light: 18/18
Nightshade, Nightcrawler: 33/47
Gryph: 13/13
Giant, Marsh: 21/31
Daemon, Thanadaemon: 27/34
Blindheim: 16/16
Agathion, Leonal: 27/36
Urdefhan: 16/18

Out of a dozen completely random monsters 1/4 of them have the same ac and cmd. And notice none of them have higher ac than cmd. I randomly chose pages. Now, its possible that's a fluke of Bestiary 2, but its what I had open for another thread, so that's what I used. YBMV.

So, if your experience is that AC is always higher than CMD, I suggest you take another look. In MY experience its the opposite.

In the last campaign I played in my fighter had the highest AC in the party at 33, yet had an easily higher CMD of 40 something. CMD scales...

I give you that, it may just be an early problem that changes as you get into higher levels. I apologize if I came across as an arrogant statement, not my intention.

Renvale999 wrote:

Disagree with you on the whole AC's being lower then CMD...in my experience they are always, always lower, by a lot. Current fighter is level 5 and has an AC of 24 (+1 Full Plate, +1 Dex, Heavy Steel Shield and Shield Focus) and his CMD is only 20 (10+5 Base Attack, 18 Strength +4 and +1 Dex)

I don't know that I'd use a character that has sunk basically everything into AC (at too great a cost in damage-dealing ability, IMHO, but I know others will feel differently) as the counterpoint to that argument.

Now I'm going to have to look at the ACs/CMDs of the players in the game I'm running...

The party has a high-damage dealing rogue, so the fighter is basically trying to build an unhittable meat shield. He also has the Stand Still feat so that NPC's can't go past him unless they use acrobatics (which, unless they are a rogue, they won't usually) so it forces NPC's to attack him. Smart build, in my opinion.

But we're getting off-topic and I apologize. I'm not trying to be a whiny b*stard and say my player is OP, because he's not, I have no trouble pummeling him into the ground on several occasions, but I think that his improved sunder ability negates a certain TYPE of NPC, which I don't think players should have an ability that negates an entire genre of NPC's.

in my group one of the characters was playing a fighter that was a disarm specialist. and while it could be a pain in the butt, he also found himself at the mercy of alot of fights. At mid level it will feel REALLY powerful but as you escalate higher, the effect wont be AS pronounced. besides, there is a great way to ensure that a low CMD fighter cant successfully sunder anything for a while... bugbears who get angry about their morningstar being busted are likely to grapple and bite.

Which is all fine and dandy, except the fighter has a high CMB bonus and a bugbear's CMD is a paltry 16, which my current fighter can hit on a 7 or better on the D20 roll, and get out of the grapple almost every time.

Renvale999 wrote:

I think their attitude scared me a bit more then the actual game mechanic. I don't run GM vs Group games. I don't really see the point. I don't want to get into an escalating war with my players of who can be more nefarious then the other person.

Then don't. If you're running a pre-made adventure, just run it as it's written. If you're making up everything, just give them the same variety you would for any other group. (Which should include an occasional fight that their tactics a great against, and an occasional fight that poses a particular challenge for them.)

If the players would rather beat encounters based on character build rather than having tough fights, who cares?

Because it makes the game very easy for them. And when players start steamrolling encounters, they get a sense of "We are awesome, nothing can hurt us" so then you tailor an encounter or two to prey on their weakeness's and said players get upset because they feel you're only doing it because they kicked your ass earlier....as I said, it gets into a GM vs Group thing which I'm trying to avoid.

@Renvale999:

Would you be as concerned if your player said that he'd focus on Disarm or/and Steal maneuvers? That achieves much the same effect and does not really scare anybody either, or does it?

It is perfectly viable for him to focus on Sunder - but CMDs tend to be higher than ACs and even when sundering successfully items aren't necessarily destroyed in one hit. A round he spends sundering is a round he does not spend in killing.

Disagree with you on the whole AC's being lower then CMD...in my experience they are always, always lower, by a lot. Current fighter is level 5 and has an AC of 24 (+1 Full Plate, +1 Dex, Heavy Steel Shield and Shield Focus) and his CMD is only 20 (10+5 Base Attack, 18 Strength +4 and +1 Dex) and all my other players are the same, their AC is higher. I find that CMD's are stupid easy to hit, especially if you're a fighter. So yeah, he can spend a round sundering a weapon, but if he even if doesn't break it, it gains a -2 to hit, and now they have to hit his 24 AC at a -2, effectively nerfing that particular NPC.

Bottomline, as a fighter, you're going to succeed on your CMB check most the time due to your high BAB and strength, and since CMD's are so low all the time.

He won't get the feat for a while, but like I said, I think their attitude scared me a bit more then the actual game mechanic. I don't run GM vs Group games. I don't really see the point. I don't want to get into an escalating war with my players of who can be more nefarious then the other person.

Not sure if this is where I'm supposed to post this, but I have a dilemma.

One of my players, the fighter, plans on taking Improved Sunder. At first, I wasn't concerned, but after I mentioned that sundering is going to hurt there treasure/loot (the normal reason most players don't sunder), my player/s just shrugged their shoulders and said they didn't care. They rather nerf the encounter by sundering all the bad-guys weapons, and thus essentially remove any difficulty from melee weapon attackers, then worry about treasure.

Not sure how I feel about this. I know I can throw things that don't use weapons, or spellcasters, but I feel I agree with them. By sundering weapons, my melee attackers are essentially no longer relevant.

Anybody have this problem, or am I worrying for nothing?

When I actually get to play (which is rare) I always get stuck playing the healer, especially in 3.X (haven't played PF, currently running our first foray into PF).

At first, I hated always playing the priest. After a while, it became tolerable, and after that it became my favorite. My current players sigh heavily when they realize that the end boss of a dungeon/encounter is a cleric.

I've gotten awesomesauce at playing clerics. Give me three rounds to buff and I'll be a godd*mn walking tank. I can heal through any amount of damage, no matter what level, timing my heals. I'm damn good now at playing clerics, and I generally have no desire to play any other class.

Sure, getting stuck into a role sucks, but sometimes you find out that that role is what you're best at, and there is nobody in your group who can play it better.

Idk, my two cents.

I've tried to do the whole, "Set up the world, a few encounters and then let the PC's do whatever they want" and it always turns out to be a bunch of bored players sitting around looking at each other waiting for one or the other to figure something out or come up with a plot hook.

I think there is such a thing as too much freedom. Especially when the players are not half as knowledgeable about the world you're using (The lack of player knowledge when it comes to published campaigns is disturbing, but that's a whole other conversation).

Personally, I come up with plot hooks, and throw them at the PC's, most of the time they realize this is the story for the night and jump on it. They always complete it in their own way. I try desperately not to railroad, and my players always do things I least expect and force me to roll with it. Like turning a bunch of goblin prisoners they found in a dungeon that were only put there for information, and making said goblins into a band of archers loyal to the crown (true story, happened last Saturday).

I think if I was going to do an open-ended game, it would have to be like a drow-city game, with the players working for or being part of a lower house on the rise. And before they show up to the first session, telling them they needed 5 or so plot-hooks/ideas of their own that I can flesh out and run at a later date.

Ringtail wrote:

Renvale999 wrote:

Moorluck wrote:

When I was 13 or 14, and very new to running a game, I ran an (not so) epic battle against a Titan and his minions..... and neglected to give them their turns in combat. :/

I've done this...not with the entire group of monsters, but forgetting to give an NPC his turn. Luckily I have a masochistic PC who always reminds me if I skip a bad guy :).

That still happens to me all of the time, at least until recently, since I've gotten into the habit of actually writing down the initiative order (used to just count down every round). I'll have several NPC's on the board and there is a good chance one or two of them misses their turn. And I too have a player who will remind me, "the fire elemental didn't attack," or something similar. He is also good at reminding me when I'm forgetting an NPC's Blur or Stoneskin, much to the rest of the party's dislike.

I need a player like that. My combats might be more interesting if I had that. Forgetting buff spells is my biggest problem, so I have taken to simply assuming that the enemies in question would use them just before combat, if there's a chance of them knowing the PCs were coming. Works out better that way.

The player that checks me is the same guy who is a bit of a rules lawyer. But he's not a d*ck about it, he simply points out what the actual rule states, then lets me make my own call regarding my interpretation. I expect him to show up every week and let me know what rule we misinterpreted last session :). But again, he's not a d*ck about it.

I have a huge issue with players who feel the need to tell me that I can't change a rule because its the rule and unchangeable. Now, if I change the rule mid-game with no warning, sure. But you gotta give the GM a little bit of leeway to interpret things to fit his campaign.

I would agree with that to a point. Most girl gamers I know including myself on average seem to get more invested in our characters. I don't know any that goes as far as the girl you described. But I know plenty including me that will get a little depressed if their PC dies and won't start making a new PC until next game.

Most guys I know seem to take it in stride a lot better. But then I am not sure if that is them just acting macho or how they really feel.

Just like I know guys that when they get hurt act like it didn't hurt when I know it did. :)

I think it also depends on the game. We had two really good white wolf games going back in the day. I lost a character due to a huge drama/personal issue with one of the other characters and when he decided to leave the group, the person I was fighting with, killed my character and his wife to ensure super secret stuff I knew about the city wouldn't fall into enemy hands. Needless to say, I was already upset over having to lose the character, but then to have him killed and betrayed by my archenemy was about all I could take (2 year campaign, just to give you an idea of how long I played him). Needless to say, I didn't start another character for a few weeks.

And as a side note; the character and player I was having issue with was a female and wife of the Storyteller lol.

When I was 13 or 14, and very new to running a game, I ran an (not so) epic battle against a Titan and his minions..... and neglected to give them their turns in combat. :/

I've done this...not with the entire group of monsters, but forgetting to give an NPC his turn. Luckily I have a masochistic PC who always reminds me if I skip a bad guy :).

The only thing I've noticed over the years with girl gamers is that they tend to be far more attached to their characters. I literally had to write up a way for a character to stay in game if he/she died (by sacrificing hit points permanently in order to stabilize at -9) in order to make sure my female player could 'keep' her character if she died, otherwise she would stop playing that game. She believes that you put far too much effort into making a character and to lose him/her to something as random as dice rolls is wrong.

The guys in the campaign, however, have no issue with character death. But said female gamer above even gets upset if I come close to killing the guys characters.

It might just be a playstyle issue. I can imagine that there are guys out there who are like said female gamer above, and girls like my guy players. But just in my experience, 9/10 girls I've played with don't handle character death well.

Again, I haven't met every girl gamer out there, but just an observation.

There is a fine line between preparing and OVER-preparing though. Trying to find that balance for what works for you & your group can take some trial and effort.

This

I had planned encounter with a gypsy camp, with all sorts of little cool encounters and npc interaction with the PC's.

The PC's were bored out of their skulls and wanted to push forward. Okaaay, I thought. We get to random town X, and they literally spend two hours chatting up the locals and have a barter session with a local paper maker.

I've learned in my campaign notes to just have:

1. PC's run into gypsies

That's it, anymore and I'm going to run into problems lol :).

Renvale999 wrote:

I fake a call from work and leave my two buddies to deal with telling dumb and dumber that their play style doesn't fit with ours. My buddies, of course call me later and yell at me for leaving them with the cat in the bag so to speak. I proceed to tell them that I'm really a saint but I just display chaotic evil behavior to avoid the evil gods coming after me. :)

While their turning up with CE characters to an Exalted game was a d*ck move, so was this - your friends got d*cked by the two new guys and by you, I'm not surprised they yelled.

Looking back, of course it was a d*ck move. My friends still give me crap about it even today. Of course, they've done far worse.

Back in the day, 2005 or so, me and a couple buddies were hurting for more players. I put an add up at a gaming store to look for more gamers. We get two guys, who seem solid. I had just picked up the Book of Exalted Deeds and me and my buddies decided it would be cool to play an exalted game.

The new guys show up to the first session, after being emailed and told that its going to be a good game, heroic even, with two Chaotic Evil characters. Of course I confront them on this, saying the game is about uber-goodness. I get told that the characters are actually saints but display chaotic evil behavior to avoid being targeted by the evil gods of Faerun.

Sigh...

I fake a call from work and leave my two buddies to deal with telling dumb and dumber that their play style doesn't fit with ours. My buddies, of course call me later and yell at me for leaving them with the cat in the bag so to speak. I proceed to tell them that I'm really a saint but I just display chaotic evil behavior to avoid the evil gods coming after me. :)

I was looking for this as well. I have both the GMG and the NPC guide, but nothing in there goes above CR 14. It would be nice to have some high level NPC's, maybe one of each class and one of each prestige class. Just a suggestion Paizo :)

Thanks for all the advice, although I did go with my gut and hand out what I intended too. Both spellcasters took utility spells and the sword was really well made (-20% to enchant it) and the rogue is a skill nut anyway so he was happy with his skills (and he got a magic item early for joining the Harpers, Faerun semi-secret organization for those unfamiliar with).

Bottom line, they enjoyed the little diversion. Although I am definitely going to take a lot of the advice here to heart.

Another question I had, if anyone is interested in helping with. The fighter decided to join the Purple Knights of Cormyr, which, according to 3.X is a prestige class. Since the prestige class was not anywhere near his character concept, I let him become a Purple Knight and told him if he ever decided he wanted authority within the organization, he could start taking levels in the Purple Knight prestige class. As of right now, he's basically the young King's personal problem solver. Do you guys think that was the right call?

Does this make sense? Or do I need to elaborate more?

Renvale999 wrote:

The GM has the right to change any rule he wants, anytime he wants...that's the perk of being GM. If the players don't like it, then don't show up. If they all don't show up, then the game ends, and that GM will realize that his play style doesn't fit with his players.

You can definitely pull your GM aside and disagree with him on a rule call, but you, as a player, have no say if the GM decides to keep the rule change he decided to make. In the end its his decision, not yours, as the player.

That's a big load of BS. That's not a perk, that's abuse.

Games have to have a set of agreed upon rules simply to function. Otherwise, it's not a game at all, it becomes something in between "cowboys and Indians" and "GM story hour."

A game cannot possibly function if the players don't know the rules as a result of the referee changing them all the time, mid-game, on a whim. If someone was insane enough to attempt it, I have to ask, why did the group in question spend hundreds of dollars on the rulebooks in the first place, if not to play the game under the established rules therein?

You are right about one thing though: such a GM won't be a GM for very long.

You can't abuse imagination. That's what roleplaying is. No one is forcing those players to show up. No one is forcing the GM to run the game, its a choice.

Now, I agree with you about changing the rules mid-game, to a point. If the GM changes a rule, saying that when you roll a 1 on an attack roll, you have to say, make a reflex save in order to keep your weapon, and calls that rule in the middle of a game, on one player's roll (and hasn't used it before), then doesn't do it for another player, that's just an idiot running the game. But, if the GM tells his players, hey, this is how I handle fumbles beforehand, its his call. And, if decides, say three sessions in, he doesn't like that rule, he can change it. That's a GM's right. He's putting the hours of work into preparing the game, its his world, his rules, no matter how many times/ways he changes them. Again, if you don't like, don't show up. But don't tell a GM what can and can't do if your the player. Sorry, you don't have that right.

There is an unwritten agreement between GM and Players.

The players do not quibble over every ruling, and the GM does not change the rules midgame.
This agreement has been broken. Sorry, but that ship has sailed, burned, and then sank offshore.

The GM has the right to change any rule he wants, anytime he wants...that's the perk of being GM. If the players don't like it, then don't show up. If they all don't show up, then the game ends, and that GM will realize that his play style doesn't fit with his players.

You can definitely pull your GM aside and disagree with him on a rule call, but you, as a player, have no say if the GM decides to keep the rule change he decided to make. In the end its his decision, not yours, as the player.

I know I sound really confrontational, and I apologize for that, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I've learned to respect a GM's purview. If the OP is honestly that upset...either start your own game, or don't play the GM's.

I'm with See, personally. But I'm also with the other folk who say this is a personal, not a game issue. When my group games (I'm the regular DM), what I say goes, regardless of the rules. You don't like it? Don't show up, period. Now, am I going to be completely closed off to suggestions, absolutely not. But they're just suggestions, and at the end of the day, its my game world, therefore stuff happens the way I say it does.

But when someone else runs, I treat them with the same respect. They want to change a rule on the fly? Sure, go ahead, your world bro. You want to ban a class, alright, your call man. I can question him, bring him forum posts to explain why I disagree with him, but at the end of the day, its his call.

So, my current group consists of an oracle, sorcerer, fighter and rogue...in today's gaming session, they are going to run into a group of gypsy's who take them in. I was thinking that if they do a good job roleplaying with them, that I would hand out some extra stuff/abilities. Nothing game breaking.

Oracle=Additional Spell Known
Sorcerer=Additional Spell Known
Fighter=Cold Iron Masterwork Longsword
Rogue=a few skill bumps, just +1 to 2 or 3 skills

I've been skimpy on treasure so far, so I was thinking that this sort of reward would help out a bit. Please don't berate me on the treasure thing...its just how the story has been going.

Anyway, any thoughts would be appreciated.

I have a player who plans on taking both of these traits with his halfling(the Swift as Shadows is a racial thing, the Stealthy Sniper is a talent thing). Since both of these reduce the stealth penalty of sniping by -10, do they stack and reduce the penalty down to 0?

Any help would be appreciated.

You could play core Pathfinder set in the Dragon Age world. Call half-orcs qunari. All casters are sorcerers and can learn cleric spells. No divine casters. Done.

A couple of suggestions.

Use regular orcs as Qunari

I agree with the casters. The other classes are really just specializations from the fighter/rogue/sorcerer, so personally, I would say you have to be at least level 7 before taking any other class other then fighter/rogue/sorcerer. Maybe draw up a quick and dirty enchanting system, or simply say that certain weapons you pick up can only have so many enchantments on them, so max +3 (or three glyph slots) for on weapon or armor. And base the number of enchantments you can have on a certain weapon or armor based on the material its made out of.

So Darkwood is max +3

Mithril +4

Adamantine +5 and so on.

As far as monsters goes...just take the darkspawn and convert them on a one for one basis to regular demons/devils from the bestairy, so make genlocks, the annoying archer ones, as dretches, same stats, just give them a bow...make hurlocks a bearded devil, but take away some of the abilities that don't make sense, and maybe slap on the young template to reduce CR and damage.

Idk, this is all quick and dirty and off the top of my head. Hope it helps. Kinda makes me want to work on this a bit lol :)

Personally I'm with the team players on this thread. My groups usually spends more time figuring out ways to gimp my monsters using wizard/fighter tactics then spending time figuring out who can beat who on a one on one fight.

A typical boss encounter is the fighter running around slashing minions apart, the rogues gives supporting fire and stabity-stabs any monsters dumb enough to let themselves be flanked...while the cleric keeps them up and the wizard finds the BBEG and blows him to smithereens.

Then the whole party goes back to the tavern/stronghold, drinks some ale, ravishes some wenches and call it a good day that everyone survived :D.

Alright, so, I'm doing the unthinkable this coming up Saturday, and running a Pathfinder game completely off the cuff, relying heavily on Gamemaster's Guide NPC's and taking monsters directly from the Beastiary...I'm usually a big planner (statting out things in detail), but my PC's want an open ended game were they choose where to go and I react to them.

Now, I have the NPC guide as well, so level 1-10 is basically covered, but I'm wondering if there is a respository of higher level Pathfinder NPC's anywhere? I know, I shouldn't even being worry about this, but I'm a planner lol.

Anyone know of a place online or a product that's easily adapted to Pathfinder rules?

Honestly, I would be more worried about the Wizard than the Oracle.

The guy playing the wizard is solid. If he makes something broken, he'll call himself on it and change what needs to be changed. I know wizards can get powerful, but I'm pretty good about making challenging encounters regardless of level.

So, next Saturday, my group and I are starting a new Pathfinder game (yay, been trying to convince them to play for months now). Right now we have a halfling rogue, dwarf fighter and elven wizard, fairly standard stuff. The only question mark I have is that my roommate is playing an Oracle. She's not the type to make something broken on purpose, but I was just wondering if there is any broken stuff with that class that I need to worry about? Like a Revelation/Feat or Revelation/Spell combo that is really broken or some such.

Thanks in advance guys.

A lot of it, as well, is trusting your players. I've had groups where it was me vs them mentality, which absolutely sucked. But the group I have now, if some ability is completely broken or a class build makes the character totally unkillable, destroy everything, I just tell my player that things need to change to keep things balanced. They give me some crap about being a bad GM with a smile on their face, then start either fixing the character or rolling something new.

As I said, trusting your players. Works well.

Aid another: no-standard action

bull rush: no - standard action or charge

disarm: Yes- in place of a melee attack.

grapple: No, standard action

overrun: No, As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge

sunder: Yes, in place of a melee attack.

trip: Yes, in place of a melee attack.

Allowing trip to be used instead of an AoO is very, very bad. If said character had improved trip, he simply keeps tripping the poor bastard and every time he gets up, he gets nailed by an attack of AoO if anyone else is around.

The attack of opportunity is resolved before the event that caused it: So Bob attempts to get up, Trippy the chain fighter hits him, but since he's already on the ground he can't trip him (with a +4 bonus). Then Bob gets up.

See, this is why I like you guys already, smart people on the forums :)

Check the description of each one to be sure. Some of the various combat maneuvers aren't available; I'm not sure about grapple off the top of my head, for example. Bull rush can involve a good deal of movement, so that one is (I believe, don't have the book handy) not an option. Disarm and sunder should be options, same with trip, etc.

Allowing trip to be used instead of an AoO is very, very bad. If said character had improved trip, he simply keeps tripping the poor bastard and every time he gets up, he gets nailed by an attack of AoO if anyone else is around.

I had a character with Improved Trip, I would just run straight for the boss (if he was medium sized) and keep him on the ground till the rest of the party killed his minions and got to me...GM finally told me Improved Trip no longer existed lol.

I did the whole attacking him with other birds/animals...the problem was he was like a 14th-15th level character, and birds only do 1D4 damage...he would just take the damage and keep casting spells. And I tried grappling...he would just shift to human form (breaking the grapple), fall out of the tree, take like 2D6 falling damage (whoop de do dah) and then shift back to being a bird. Although Stabbity brought up a good point with the stealth...sounds like this combo doesn't work as well.

Thanks guys

Okay, so I just picked up the Pathfinder books, most of them anyway, and I love, love, love some of the changes that they made. But my problem is that didn't fix wildshape

So here's a problem I had in 3.5

A buddy made a druid and leveled till he got Diminutive wildshape. He had natural spell at this point. He would then proceed to change into a bird (robin usually) and then hide someplace (+12 size bonus, he had stealthy, 18 dex, so a bonus of +18). Outdoors he would hid in a tree. Now, once he started taking levels in Sorcerer, he would sit up in the tree and pelt enemies with spells.

We never really figured out how to deal with it. He argued that unless the enemy was a spellcaster, they wouldn't know where the spells were coming from. And even then, with all the cover concealment, it made it nigh impossible to see him.

Any thoughts on how Pathfinder fixes this or just fixes in general?