Riuken's page

Greetings all! Been awhile since I've been on the boards, but I wanted to stop by and share the modification to the mythic system that I've created. It aims to simplify mythic characters, tone down the more outrageous numbers, and focus only on the coolest stuff about being mythic. I just finished running a 15 month E6 game using these rules and was quite pleased. I hope someone else will enjoy it as much as me and my players did.

Google drive link: Simple Mythic

I've been trying to find a way to define what I think of as a "reasonable" attribute array using the point-buy system. I think I've got it figured out, and it looks nice in an excel table, but I'm worried it's too complicated to actually use without the spreadsheet.

highest attribute maximum of 17
highest attribute minimum of 15
lowest attribute maximum of 10
lowest attribute minimum of 8
maximum of 1 attribute less than 10
maximum of 2 attributes less than 11
maximum of 1 attribute greater than 16
no more than 2 of the same value
at least 3 positive modifiers
if highest attribute is a 17, use 21 point buy
if highest attribute is a 16, use 23 point buy
if highest attribute is a 15, use 25 point buy

This is all pre-racial. I would normally just give 3 arrays (shown below), but I feel the point-buy with restrictions could give more variety than the arrays. Is it just too hard to navigate?

17, 14, 12, 12, 11, 8
16, 15, 14, 12, 10, 9
15, 15, 14, 14, 11, 10

This thread got me thinking: how bad of a Player Character can be made? Many folks on these forums are used to optimizing a good character, but let's see what happens when we put that towards making a bad character.

A few baselines:
1) Create the character for 12th level.
2) Use 20pt buy for stats.
3) No NPC classes.
4) Paizo content only.
5) The character will have wealth for a 12th level PC, but does not need to have spent it on anything useful. Cursed items cannot be purchased or crafted.
6) No lingering effects/debuffs/stat damage.
7) Other than a general combat strategy (attack with 2 melee weapons, throw rocks, etc.), the character will be assumed to be played at least somewhat competently. The combat strategy must be theoretically capable of winning an encounter; they can't just stand in a corner and cast mending on a rock the whole fight.
8) Above all, the decisions for the character can be bad, but should not be outright and immediately harmful. They may attempt to poison a weapon without poison use, but they won't drink it.

Characters should be measured based on:
Offense (attacks and spell DCs)
Defense (AC, saves, HP, etc.)
Out-of-combat contribution (skills and utility spells)

Ideally, the character should be lacking in all 3.

So it might be early for this, but I really want to start throwing around ideas for what we might see for the first AP in Starfinder.

I would personally like if it started with an exploration/colonization game of a recently discovered world. Something with different factions each having their own reasons for interest, and the PCs are caught in the middle. This one planet is the focus, but others are also visited to track down leads and gather support. Great chance to showcase a fair bit of the setting, without overblowing the scope right away.

What would other folks like to see? Can we get another as iconic to the system and setting as Rise of the Runelords?

Document can be found here: Google Docs

This is a simple system which replaces the standard class system in the Pathfinder game. For each campaign, the DM sets the class points available (typically 30), then each player constructs a custom class for their character using the point buy system. Each option is broken out to be purchased separately to help players make the exact character they envision. Most class abilities are still purchased as a thematic "package" to minimize min-max abuse.

Please note that if you were to reconstruct existing classes with this system they would have very different point values. I have not attempted to force the system to pretend the classes are equal (see Race Builder), but have instead accepted that some classes and options are, as a whole, better than others. If using the standard 30 point build, some classes will be quite improved, while others may not be build-able in their entirety.

I'd love to hear any feedback people may have, but would especially appreciate a playtest. It would be fun to hear what sort of characters your players make with this system.

I've been rolling around the idea of making a character who primarily uses lightning (electricity damage). I know the "standard magus build" does this with shocking grasp, but I'm looking for something a bit more caster/blaster. The only blaster build I've seen that is offered as good uses fire spells. And no, fireball changed to lightning ball doesn't fly for me. I want legit lightning bolts that hurt like hundreds of megajoules of energy! Is there a good way to do this, or am I just SoL for blasting with anything but fire? I'm open to multiclass and PrCs, but I'd prefer for the options to be in the Paizo "core line" of books (core, APG, UM, UC, ARG, ACG, etc).

This thread got me thinking about my own homebrew setting, specifically how to run a game in it. I have a lot of setting details: a recent war, the capture of all magic by one person, several nations with vastly different cultures, and ancient kingdoms and ruins. Up until reading that thread my plan was to just drop the players into the world with a few hooks of things they might do, but now I'm wondering if setting and some quest hooks aren't good enough to generate interest. Specifically, can I expect the players to find their own quests when the setting isn't 100% developed, or should I plan an "adventure path" style plot for them to follow? Is having a defined story easier to sell to players in a homebrew setting than giving them a sandbox and telling them to play in it?

I've been working on this grand idea of reducing the 6 stats down to 4. Partially because it helps fix the SAD vs. MAD issue, but mostly because I think I can mostly eliminate dump stats by making every stat important to every character, at least to some degree.

For those "TL;DR" people, the base concept is that constitution gets rolled into strength, wisdom gets rolled into int, to hit lives in dexterity, will saves come from charisma, and charisma grants a fancy new 1/day ability.

Expanded below:
Strength: Adds bonus damage to melee and thrown attacks (and composite bows built for it), adds its modifier to fortitude saves, gives bonus hit points equal to the modifier times hit dice, adds its modifier to CMB and CMD, determines carrying capacity, and applies to the skills [climb, intimidate, ride, swim]. Anything that would apply to constitution applies to strength instead, and anything not mentioned that is based on constitution is based on strength instead.

Dexterity: Adds its modifier to all rolls to hit, adds its modifier to AC, adds it's modifier to reflex saves, adds its modifier to CMD, and applies to the skills [acrobatics, escape artist, fly, slight of hand, stealth].

Intelligence: Used for all prepared casting (except paladins), adds its modifier to skill points gained each level, adds its modifier to initiative bonus, grants bonus languages at character creation equal to its modifier, and applies to all skills not listed for another stat (over half). Anything that would apply to wisdom applies to intelligence instead, and anything not mentioned that is based on wisdom is based on intelligence instead.

Charisma: Used for all spontaneous casting, adds its modifier to will saves, and applies to the skills [bluff, diplomacy, disguise, handle animal, perform, sense motive, use magic device]. Once per day a character may add his or her charisma modifier to any d20 roll. He or she must declare the use of this ability before the roll is made.

Thoughts? Comments? The charisma 1/day ability specifically is a completely new mechanic, so it may be underpowered, overpowered, or unnecessary.
+50 XP if you playtest this and post results!

If I get a large bastard sword (with proficiency) and enchant it with impact I get 3d8 weapon damage dice. If I were enlarged or otherwise had my size increased, what would the new damage dice be?

Without using consumables, spellcasting, or permanent castings, how can I increase the damage dice from 3d8? Is there an x/day item of enlarge person or righteous might (not a custom item)?

I have a fighter I'm playing in a game who is largely based around a combination of whirlwind attack, lunge, a bardiche, and armor spikes to be able to make a single attack at his highest base attack bonus against all creatures within 15 ft. (potentially 25 ft. if enlarged). I've seen that TWF with a 2handed weapon and armor spikes is out, but is using them both in whirlwind attack out as well? A few points:

1) Technically, I'd be gaining extra attacks on adjacent enemies I couldn't normally target with the reach weapon (my weapon of choice).
2) Whirlwind attack specifically calls out "each opponent within reach", which sounds like it falls within the realm of "possibility to make an attack of opportunity". It has been stated that attacks of opportunity can be made with both a reach weapon and armor spikes.
3) Though not any part of RAW, and maybe not even RAI, whirlwind attack is a very difficult feat to get that isn't even all that stellar. I don't feel like being able to attack everything within 10 ft. (with some at much lower damage) is remotely game-breaking. The extra reach of lunge is already paid for in the loss of AC. I only bring this up because I don't think I'd ever consider getting whirlwind attack if I couldn't use it beyond 5 ft. without another feat, magic, or a special race. The prereqs are just too steep.

Relevant feats for reference:

Thoughts, debates, 2cp's, official answers, and FAQs are all welcomed!

I'm looking into building a character with as many different classes as is reasonable. When I say reasonable, I mean I expect the character to still perform well in a group without being obviously weaker. So far this is what I have worked out (classes in no particular order):

Barbarian (core) 2: haven't picked a rage power
Fighter (weapon master) 3: weapon of choice is a falchion, haven't picked bonus feats
Monk (martial artist) 2: haven't picked bonus feats
Ranger (core) 2: the eventual gain of smite evil makes favored enemy either undead or evil outsider (can be something else depending on campaign), haven't picked combat style
Samurai (sword saint) 1: order of the dragon
Inquisitor (spellbreaker) 2: travel domain, haven't picked spells known
Chevalier (PRC) 3: skills used to qualify can be taken during either ranger or inquisitor levels

Alignment must be either NG or CG, thinking NG (to cast lawful inquisitor spells). Race will likely be human, without any alternate racial traits.

(20 pt buy)
Str 20
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 8
Wis 12
Cha 7

I'm not really sure about skills, but I want perception at max ranks. I need diplomacy and knowledge (local) with one rank each for the prestige class. Feats are up in the air, as they depend largely on what order the classes are taken in and what bonus feats are chosen. I'll probably want power attack, raging vitality, extra rage, and extra rage power.

As for the remaining class levels (5), I'm thinking some Dragon Disciple, but that requires either a race change (for a SLA), or a level of bard or sorcerer. I'm trying to keep BAB close to full progression as much as possible.

So, thoughts?

Simple question that I can't find an answer to on my own. When a class grants proficiency with shields, does that include the use of them as martial weapons or just as armor? If so, are shield spikes included?

The treesinger druid archetype can only wildshape into plant shapes, and I was wondering what people think are the best forms for plant shapes I, II, and III? Also, what shape for levels 4-7, since your form doesn't get constrict or poison?

For a homebrew game I'm running I've got a standard bard (casts buffs and enchantments, has lots of skills, uses bardic performance) and a cleric who's also an evangelist. The cleric seems disappointed that there is a bard in the group (he thought the other player was playing a ranger) and that the bard severely reduces the value of the cleric's ability to use bardic performance. I'm looking for a way to quell this dissatisfaction quickly and fairly. I have some ideas:

1) Allow the cleric to rebuild, so long as he remains a cleric. Not really preferred as I'd like him to continue with his evangelist idea.

2) Allow the two performances to stack to some extent. I'm thinking for inspire courage (the important one to him) the bonus to damage could stack while the bonus to attack wouldn't.

3) Change his inspire courage to give a bonus to something else. AC, DR, saves, speed, or whatever. Not sure what I'd do but it'd have to scale somehow like standard inspire courage does. He's an Ulfen warchanter (let him replace oratory with sing) so something that fits the theme of inspiring the war tribes of the north.

4) Leave it as it is. Other players have suggested that having 2 characters capable of using bardic performance would be a benefit, as they could take turns using performance and casting (only matters for early levels when it's still a standard action). It also provides a larger uses/day pool (also less important later). I worry that the other players were playing up the usefulness to make the cleric's player feel better.

The player is not the entitlement type, nor has he said anything explicitly expressing his feelings. He is a great player and I want to help him have an enjoyable game.

There are certain things experienced players do, especially when experienced with a certain class. What examples of this do you see in your games? My examples:

1) Clerics/wizards leaving spell slots open after preparing at the beginning of the day so that a necessary spell can be prepared later.

2) Fighters retraining their fighter feats. It allows for taking short term benefit feats early and replacing later, or just replacing earlier feats to get multiple feats you want that just became available.

3) Melee characters with multiple backup weapons. By that I mean reach weapons, range weapons, a few daggers, a shield (even if built to 2-hand), nets, etc.

Any others?

Contingency. I love this spell, mostly because I get the feeling there are countless of uses for it that are nothing short of amazing. I'm wondering what amazing things this spell can be used for. Past experiences and speculative possibilities are both appreciated!

I've been thinking of a way to make a fighter that I'd like to play. I build alot of "optimized" fighters, but 90% of the fun is done before the first game session, and I tire quickly of the character. As I understand it, the only feat needed for 2-hand damage is power attack, and this has me thinking that there is plenty of space for maneuvers. My damage will be a bit lower, but nothing unbearable. The general idea is to take power attack at level one and pick up 4-6 maneuvers before level 6 when greater/quick maneuver feats show up. Any spare feat slots will be filled with appropriate damage feats, but I want as many maneuvers as possible.

What maneuvers should be focused on, which feats taken, and what weapon used? What races would be good, and why? Is there a particular fighter archetype that would be good? If someone wants to make a full build that would be extra cool. You are, of course, free to tell me this idea is stupid, assuming you can provide supporting evidence, but the idea interests me all the same. This is intended to be 100% fighter, but a good argument for a splash/multiclass is welcome.

So for a game I'm planning I have a side adventure involving dragons. I won't go into specifics, but as part of setting it up I've decided that dragons reproduce only while polymorphed into humanoids. The pregnant dragon is locked from polymorphing until the child is born, since my head hurts thinking about pregnant creatures polymorphing.

So the real issue is this: when the child is born, what is it? It's parents are both dragons, but were biologically both humanoids at the child's conception. Can two creatures capable of polymporphing spawn any creature they want this way? Does the child instantly revert to its parents' true race? Is it born polymorphed but can naturally polymorph back? Just looking to bounce thoughts off of people.

Note: Please don't discuss pregnant creatures polymorphing. The issues with self only spells and pregnant creatures is something I don't want to deal with. If you must discuss it, make your own thread.

I guess I'm looking to be sold on pathfinder society organized play. What are the advantages over getting 3-5 other people together and just running a game? How do the scenarios stack up against modules, APs, and homebrews? Are the limitations on PFS play that noticeable? I understand that my beloved crafter wizard has no place here, but are there any other common builds that don't work/aren't allowed? Why always levels 1-12?
Any input is appreciated, as I have a minimal understanding of society play.

This item is pretty straightforward, having a permanent hallow effect centered on it so long as it is displayed appropriately. The layers of "functions as [spell] except" are pretty deep, but the thing that gives me trouble is this: can I add deathward to the hallow effect if I craft this item, as if the spell had been cast? If so, does the deathward effect become permanent as part of the item or have to be refreshed in a year? If it has to be refreshed what is the cost? I'm using deathward as the example since it seems the most useful, but the question applies to any spell that can be added to hallow.

So I'm playing in Slumbering Tsar, and when I first went to make a character I thought, "if this is going to be deadly, I'll be indestructible!" Obviously this is silly, but I built the character just the same. I was looking to have high HP, AC, and saves, along with any other defensive abilities that looked exceptionally useful. This led to all sorts of silliness...

Using the maenad race from psionics unleashed (which allows for lawful barbarians) I constructed a barbarian 5/ monk (master of many styles) 2/ paladin (oath of vengeance) 13. The game starts at level 7, but this build really doesn't hit its "sweet spot" until 9 (with divine grace).

So far:

This build fights with an unarmed primary attack and a shield in the off-hand, and it wears mithral breastplate. In the trial run it did a great job of surviving, but damage was pathetic. Spirit totem wisps were great when we weren't fighting undead, but they couldn't carry the job. Don't have a complete build to post, but looking for ways to increase the damage some (doesn't need to be exceptional) without losing the durability.

I'm going to be running a homebrew game where the PCs command a ship and have various naval, coastal, and island adventures (similar to Skull & Shackles). I'm trying to put more emphasis on Law vs. Chaos than is typical, and the first session should show some of that. The PCs start out on a merchant ship that has been off course for days, and through some role play and skill checks, they can learn of a mutiny being planned by some of the crew members. The issue is that the group is mixed law/chaos, which has similar issues to mixed good/evil for most games. Generally I expect the lawful characters to support the captain, and the chaotic ones to join the mutineers.

How do I handle this? Can I assume the PLAYERS will force the characters to be a "group", or is PvP an inevitability? If they do fight each other, must the losing side reroll, or can the characters become a group, even after the tensions of the first session? Is there a way to encourage the PCs to make a decision as a whole apart from OOC, "hey guys, you should reach one decision, no PvP?"

Any and all advice is appreciated, as I am excited to run this game and don't want it to die due to inter-character aggression.

I've seen a few martial vs. caster discussions that seem to conclude that the issue with martial characters is their lack of usefulness outside of combat. As skills are generally the most universal way to be a useful individual in society, it would seem that an easy fix would be to give martial characters more skill points. Doing this in a mechanically balanced and thematically appropriate way is difficult, though I have a suggestion that I would like reviewed.

"Skill Ranks per Level: # + Int modifier" would be replaced with
"Skill Ranks per Level: # + any single ability modifier, see below"

The see below would read, "Skill Ranks gained due to a high ability modifier may only be spent on skills with the same Key Ability as the one chosen to gain extra skill ranks. Bonus Skill Ranks not spent at a level are lost."

This preserves high skill characters, and keeps each class' general skill set about the same. A fighter with a dexterity of 16 is not going to be able to take 5 Knowledge skills. I'd like to know what you all think of this: does it sound reasonable and are there any classes this is especially unfair to? If some of you could try this out in a game and give feedback I'd be thrilled!