Search Posts
no, it is indeed the Animal Compagnon of the sorcerer. Sure I told him it's gonna be hard, but at least he can use it instead of 2 horses.
For NPC, I will probably let my player get the initiative with the main 4. But for the others I will add some NPC created by my player. I got some ''Player killer'' history behind me (one of my player created character in Rise of the Runelord...) so they gave my some back up character that I will add in the caravan as NPC. I still need to read the following books after the first to see which NPC is useful or can be replaced. Thanks for the rest, I will look into Lute and the other NPC to do more fore shadow!
I will DM a Jade Regent run with my player in a month and I would like to get some advice. We did before Rise of the Runelord, but Sandpoint was destroyed and all the major character for Jade Regent were killed... So I took the decision to start over. The group isn't that min-maxer, and for now it would go as follow: Human Cavalier
15 pts buy, max starting gold. Is there anything that I should know apart that caravan encounter are boring?
True, but, again, it's in real life. In fantasy/ litterature/ popular culture, it's not the case.The curved edge of a katana is good for draw cuts (to cause more bleeding), not chopping through metal armor; against lightly armored (padded cloth, if anything) conscript troops, it was a lot more effective. Unlike some other curved swords, the katana does not act to concentrate the force of the blow to any large degree over a straight-edged sword; the curve is too gradual for that and the balance isn't far enough forward (to add momentum to the swing). I would change it if I was angry about the actual rule for the Katana, but I'm not. True, I make it easier to get dex to damage for a lot of weapon, including the Katana, but it's all. I'm quite happy with the actual rules.
The curved edge of a katana is good for draw cuts (to cause more bleeding), not chopping through metal armor; against lightly armored (padded cloth, if anything) conscript troops, it was a lot more effective. Unlike some other curved swords, the katana does not act to concentrate the force of the blow to any large degree over a straight-edged sword; the curve is too gradual for that and the balance isn't far enough forward (to add momentum to the swing). True, but, again, it's in real life. In fantasy/ litterature/ popular culture, it's not the case.
Did you notice how none of those examples are from Pathfinder? And your point is? I could say that the Dwarf from Pathfinder are, in fact, from Tolkien, that the Elf are also (with minor change) from Tolkien... Edit: and don't forget: Pathfinder is a set of rule, Golarion is the setting. Pathfinder should not give you ''example'', it sould give you rule set to create character.
Some cavalry sabres are very nice and more durable than the katana.I think I've actually seen a movie with that theme, very weird one distopic world with super samurai vs genetically engineered mutants (who deformed to use something as a weapon e.g. armour piercing pens) that ended with the main female lead becoming one and having a katana hand or something. Contained interspersed "adds" for various content including a seppuku kit (used by two teenage girls as it was the cool thing) and katanas. Well, the ''art'' of doing Katana stopped to develop in 1600, while the cavalry sabre was still in use in battle until the XX century.
Some people seem to miss the point of the modeling of weapon in Pathfinder: it's to make possible some typical character, not to relfect reality. Does an archer can shoot 1 arrow per second at 35 feets in real life? No, but we had some archer in litterature that could do it (Legolas, I'm looking at you). Can you reload a crossbow/ a musket in a few seconds? No. Heck, can you fight with a double-flail? Lol no. It's the same thing with the Katana: was it a great weapon? No. But a lot of character out there use it with style, be it Morpheus who cut a car in 2, Blade, Kill Bill or anything straight from Japan. In that case, the goal of the rule set for the Katana is not realism, but to reflect how it is use in media to let player do it. And in media, it's a type of bastard sword that can cut anything.
only problem is, the Falcata exists, and at 1d8, 19-20/x3 BEFORE Improved Critical/Keen, it's actually better than the Katana; so, if given the choice between them why wouldn't you take the Falcata instead? If you build your character to crit, be it because of critical feats or because of the magus spellstrike, I do prefer to get the 10% chances (with keen) that the Katana will give over the Falcata. Ans you get it for free with some class (Samurai, Ninja...) so i don't fin it quite underwhelming.
So, if you're going to take a level in Bloodrager (which is a solid idea for any SWD) I also strongly recommend the Mad Magic feat. I agree, it's on my plan. But I though Iron Will was more important for now (with my poor will), and after that extra hex will be needed.But I should get Mad Magcic quite soon.
That's neat. What were you going to do about the spell failure on your witch spells from the chain shirt? In short term: nothing. Once I got enough level to make mage armor usefull I will probably go naked... well, armorless. As soon as I get to level 3 however, I will abuse of fortune + cackle, using almost all my action in combat.
I will add Soothsayer to my list (probably my 5th hex, just after healing and scar). I will maybe change the bloodline to fey for my familiar, but I want to keep sage : I want to RP a Thrush who is the head of my character ;)
Also, don't you have darkvision, or did the traits replace that for low light vision? Forest walker trade it for a bonus on climb, and it fitted more with my backstory. For the summon monster 1, you got a point there. I will look for an other spell.
For a house game in Golarion, I am planing to play a Bloodrager/ Scarred Witch Doctor Half-Orc. The game start at level 2, with 25 pts builds and 1000 gp. My concept is quite simple: some kind of ''african sorcerer'' from the Katapesh, some kind of ''child raised in the wild'' by a Thrush. The trait were given by my DM, and he let me change the ''mask'' of the witch doctor to keep the familiar (I got it at level 1 from the bloodrager). The goal is to be quite tanky (my team got a Dervish Magus, a Sandman Bard, a Arcanist/ Oracle) and to support my team (using at level 3 Fortune + Cackle+ hex vulnerability) Bloodrager 1/ Scarred witch Doctor 1
Familiar : Trush (Sage)
So, any comment or advice on this build?
True, the dice is for something in this quest (one of my player got for nickname ''lucky number 4'' for some reason...). But they got a good experience of those game (2 of them played D&D since 20 years ago, each week.). And I am probably an evil DM (in many area, the monster will go to the sound of fighting, instead of waiting in their room...)
I fail to see how this campaign is ''easy''. I let my player create 25 pts character, with all the books open... and still, 11 character died in the process (one TPK, one almost TPK). For now, I am the DM of a 5 man team: -A Conjuration Wizard Human(quite optimized, with a human cleric as follower)
And still, thei're not havin a ''easy ride'' for now.
Well, I don't see how the use of Hex Vulnerability to support your allies is bad... Per RAW, it is possible. Per RAI, maybe it's not, but what does it change? I mean, it will just make martial class more powerfull, and they need it when they have wizard in their team...
The game defines what a monk is. Changing or expanding that definition is a houserule. Just like changing or expanding the definition of any game term is a houserule.My position is very basic, the game defines exactly what a monk is. If you do something else it is a houserule.What "rule" is being changed? None, thus it's not a houserule. The only houserule here is you making up rules that don't exist. Well, it's hilarious because you don't do the difference between ''nature and nurture''. The race is what nature gives you, so it can't really be changed. The class, on the other hand, is what you get from experience. Let say you were raise in a monastery, but really bad for all the meditation thing, and only good in the martial art: sould you be a brawler or a fighter instead of a monk? Yeah, sure! Or you are the son of a samurai, followed the classi training but didn't really care about the law and the fidelity, and followd more the way of the sword? Could you play a fighter who is, in society, a samurai? Yeah! In fact, it's not the class that you have, but how your character is seen in society that deciede what you are. I did play a a game where the Drud was called a ''witch'' by anyone, and the Alchemis was called a ''rogue''... You seems to give too much importance to the class background, and to see the world as something really classified, were there is nothing that go ''partially out of the box'', but it's not the case.
The game don't define what a monk is, neither a samurai or a ninja: it gives you some class that may represent the majority of them bu nothing more. Monk, Samurai, Ninja, Oracle and the likes are also social status, and not all of them will be of the ''good class''. Let's say Samurai: it's basically an oriental knight, and you become a Samurai by the right of birth. What would explain that a men, officialy a samurai, decided to train like a fighter, a ranger or, even, that he as been touch by the divine and is in fact a paladin? Nothing. It's only adapting your character to fit it's backstory, and in no way it is a housrule.
I do not agree on the Guns-Samurai comparison. The Samurai are, in fact, just the name of some character mechanics. It don't really have anything with the setting, as long as you change the Weapon Expertise. But guns... It change the world. Not only do you need some kind of technological level, but it will change also the way to do war. True, it can work if you play the card of ''the Gunslinger comes from ''Venise'', and the game is in ''Scandinavia'', but it means that finding bullets and gun's gonna be a pain in the ass.
I did see anu of it, but Scared Witch Doctor? You will be able to work your way in melee (Main stat con...), being an arcane caster and a good healer (healing hex +hex vulnerability). Take one level of Barbarian/ Bloodrager and have fun!
One its opens up the option way earlier then the chance of having a +2 weapon and with thé feat and any real lack of prequistes it seems like there would never be à reason to play str builds anymore. With a dex build and this feat you get better top end ac, high mobility due to lighter armour, less check pentiltes, higher inti, and better reflex saves. All becuase you use one feat to completly rewrite the rules. If the prequistes were stiffer maybe it would be more balanced This. The main difference between those build is the ''flavor'', not really the power. Sure, it makes some class less MAD, but the difference is not that important (a dex build fighter, cavalier or ranger will still need a decent amount of strengh just to carry their armor at low level). The only class who get great improvement from this kind of feat are the Rogue, the Ninja, the Monk... all class that are far from the top tier. Oh yeah, you could do some caster good in close (hue hue, look at a scarred with doctor based on Dex!)but, if those build are good at low level, they will return to ''master of pew pew'' at higher level.
With the new Hex Vulnerability, I must say that the Scarred Witch Doctor is one of the best support/ healer, all that while being a pretty good tank. I mean: you can do Fortune and Healing Hex more then one time on your allies with Hex Vulnerability, giving you quite the support capacity.
I will excuse myself, but Vital Strike is quite bad as feat. Unless you have some character who can't full attack (gunner without being a Gunslinger, for example), it's not really good. For that, I simply decided to make it applicable everytime you only attack one time per round (Charge, spring attack, etc...).
Yes, but no. A Kensai/ Monk with Dervish Dancing will need Dex>Int>Con>Wis>Str>Cha. He don't need that much Wisdom: a +1 is quite enough to get a little bit of armor, great save and, with master of many style, some great feat (Crane Style is, even nerfed, a good feat for suvivability). Or an other build quite funny: Sensei/ Kensai. You may go with Wis=Int>Str>Con>Dex>Cha. You then get Inspire Courage to boost your damage and your attack, great save, good AC... So I don't think it's that MAD as you think. Sur it's not a Scarred Witch Doctor, but it quite playable and can be quite good.
Since it's a Goblin (and probably kind of twisted), give it the name of his mother/ dad or any significant person in is life.
It's not common, but it may happen. And no, it's more usefull than a normal bardic song in those condition: even if you get silenced/blinded/ kill, the effect still continue and I do think that you may give different performance to each membre (like inspire greatness to the caster, inspire courage to the fighter...) And no, it is 3 ac: you still get 2 armors (silken ceremonial and belly warmer) for +1, so if you don't count shield you are only 3 ac behind a normal bard (which is not that hard for a ranger character). Finally, true you can get scribe scroll as a feat. But Bard are quite feat starved at low level, so a ''free feat'' is not really bad in my opinion.
Tea Ceremony takes nothing: it's just a different way to give the buff, that can be usefull in some situation (before a gladiator pit, before negociation, before infiltration...). And I don't see why you can't make the tea for all your team at the same time, then go rampaging a dungeon for 10 minutes. For the rest: the armor proficiency just take 3 to her AC (so don't play a front line bard and you will be okay), andd you get to be a god caster with craft scroll so no, it's not as bad as it looks.
A White Haired Witch/Ninja would make for an excellent Geisha. Imagine her infiltrating a castle where the lord has commanded that no weapons be brought into his presence. I don't really see it as a geisha: it's more like a ninja using the Geisha cover to enter a castle.
It's kind of hard to make it work at low level, true. But it is possible with, like you said, racial traits or a one level dip in Gunslinger, Zen Archer, Fighter or Ranger. Or you could even go less martial with only a crossbow, since by mid-level you should cast quite a few spell with your scroll. It's not an easy archetype to build, but it's not that bad, and it's far from beiing the worse one out (I'm looking at you, True Primitive)
Sure, they loose some armor... wich mean 3 ac less than a normal bard only. Not great if you want to fight in close combat, but not that bad either.It's a much larger AC deficient then you are thinking. Chain shirt gives 4 armor AC plus enhancement and normally bards can use shields as well for 1 or 2 shield AC plus enhancement. Compared to a bard with a heavy shield and chain shirt, the Geisha is down 6 AC to start and in the long run that deficient can grow to up to 11 AC (or 16 if the Geisha doesn't invest in +5 Bracers of Armor). Sure, there is the shield. But without a shield the Geisha still get a Haramaki or a silken ceremonial armor, for +1. And, since the Geisha will probably go for the ranged bard, the shield difference is not that important in my opinion (and even without a shield, Bard can max Use Magic Device quite easily to use a wand of shield)
Well, does the Geisha Bard really suck that much? Sure, they loose some armor... wich mean 3 ac less than a normal bard only. Not great if you want to fight in close combat, but not that bad either. They loose their ''know it all'' aspect, but become really great at social skills (half-level to a performance). They loose the bard weapon, but get one of the monk (wich contain some good weapon). And, they get an alternative bard performance that can be really usefull in some situation and one craft feat. Sure, you can probably make a normal bard stronger, but he will not be that stronger, and a Geisha will still be quite usefull in quest.
Paladin: as said before, the tankiest one. Great save, self healing, many immunities help for the lack of damage outside of the smite. One down side that I didn't see in the previous message: a limited RP. You can't do what you want as a paladin, and it can make some situation quite difficult (Negociating with a devil to get throught? What a joke!) Barbarian: probably the strongest one, if you get the good build. It get rage power for every situation, will do huge damage, is quite tanky... The only flaw is that, at low level, he don't get enough rage power to be really everywhere. Monk: here I must disagree with some. When you build a monk, you must choose to go for divine level of AC or minimal damage. The Monk is not a damage dealer, even when you try your best to make one. But if you want a tank, he is quite awesome. And don't forget the ''RP'' factor: the monk will keep it's ''jaws'' even in situation without armor and weapon, be it in jail or in a dance hall. Fighter: sure, the lackluster one. In fight he is quite good, but not enough better than the other to forget it's lack outside of it. For the save, unless you play a dwarf, your gonna get a bad time (dwarf fighter can get really great save). But, fighter are still usefull form mutliclassing point. They don't have limitation like the other class, and let you get many feat quite fast. For the other, all has beed said I think.
I am playing one, with one level of Gunslinger (mysterious stranger) and I really like that character. Sure, you can't go in front like the normal bard, but if you stay on the ''ranged/ caster'' character it's not that bad. And the tea ceremony, even if it's underpowered (we house ruled it as 10 minutes per 2 level), can be usefull (I'm level 3 geisha, and I used it when we had some negociation with a Daimio). And the trade for versatile is not that bad: sure you loose on knowledge, but you gain a lot in diplomacy. So no, I do think it's a viable archetype. Not a great archetype, and sure Tea Ceremony would need a boost, but it has some good point to work on.
Many people say Dervish Dance and Magus are broken because Dex-to-Dmg (not necessarily in this thread but it is common topic on the boards). Others state that Dex-to-Dmg is not broken because only Magus and Dervish Dance can take advantage of it. There is a massive disconnect going on between these two ideas.Balance argument is defeated by the existance of dex to damage, if dex to damage was broken every fighter and barbarian would be using dervish dance and this is not true.Not completely defeated. Dervish Dance can't let you fight with 2 weapons, or use a 2 handed weapon (elven blade). So sure, the gap in power is here, and only some class (like the Magus) can exploit it. Yes, the Magus with Dervish Dancer is strong. Is it because of the dex to damage? Part of it, mostly because it let him do some damage without his spell (because, well, +4 or +5 to damage is not that important on a shoking grasp build). But the main reason is, in my opinion, the AC. He will get a sky high AC. Why? Because he got good magic defense to help, and those magic defense don't block his dex bonus. A fighter, paladin, ranger or monk will not get those magic defense. The good dex will just be blocked at some point by the armor. They will not get an AC really better than a standard strengh build (except maybe for the ranger and the monk): they will only get a better mobility, initiative, touch AC and Reflex, all of it being not that important in comparison to the loss (less damage, less flat footed).
Balance argument is defeated by the existance of dex to damage, if dex to damage was broken every fighter and barbarian would be using dervish dance and this is not true. Not completely defeated. Dervish Dance can't let you fight with 2 weapons, or use a 2 handed weapon (elven blade). So sure, the gap in power is here, and only some class (like the Magus) can exploit it.
I don't agree here. Sure balance is important, but the most important part of a game la Pathfinder is ''am I able to do X Idea''? We're not talking about a jedi character, but a dex based character, something any story got (be it Legolas with his 2 knifes, Dartagnan or even Zhao Yun from Legend of the 3 kingdoms). And now, it's not possible, except if you go Magus or Swatchbukler. And I found it quite bad for ''concept'' creation. Will it be broken? I doubt it. Initiative is not that important for a melee (in fact, you like when you start with a pesky goblin in your face), Dex will not be a great advantage in AC at low level (heavy armor and medium armor will do the job) and it should do less damage than the classic strengh build (nobody here talk to give the 1.5X Dex to two-handed damages). Also, dex to damage should help what? Magus? They already got it with Dervish Dancer. Rogue and Ninja? Well, they would be closer to being good... Fighter? The number one MAD class, giving it the option to drop Strengh to 11 is not that ''awsome''. No, it would not be ''too good for the game''. For 2 feats you could do almost the damage of a strengh build with 0 feat... Add power attack and weapon focus and the Stregn build stay a little bit in front of the Dex build. But just a little bit.
Iron muscle: Your muscle are as tick as hide and provide you with more protection.Prerequisites: Strengh: 20, toughness Effect: you may add your strengh modifier to your Natural armor. Is it good? Sure. But with that the ''Conan the barbarian with no armor'' or the ''Zaraki Kenpachi-try-to-hit-me'' idea could be pretty awsome.
Well the problem wasn't that it made the character too good, and in the rogue/ninja case 'too good' isn't a bad thing, but it was too good for the class. In the sense that it became a mandatory feat which steered people into narrow builds. Basically all the rogues and ninjas in my games (haven't seen it on an alchemist or slayer yet) have TWF, Weapon Finesse, the mentioned feat and wield wakizashis or some other light weapon with a good crit range. I'm more concerned that I killed variety than made rogues too powerful. I see your point, but Pathfinder did made that with many class: the ''dervish dancer-shocking grasp magus, the musket master with a musket, the superstitious/ pouncing barbarian... Sure, it kill a little bit the ''versatility'' by giving them a ''good build'' to fight alonside barbarian and paladin. In my opinion, there should be more feat like this one for rogue and ninja to make them more competitive.
Oh yeah, there is one problem; I allowed a feat that lets you do sneak attack damage when you crit. It became THE feat for ninjas and rogues which isn't terribly awful power-wise but it currently feels like I locked all rogues, ninjas, vivisectionists and slayers into crit fisher builds making me rethink the feat. and... where they ubber? I mean, sure they can become crit fisher (just like barbarian tend to be pouncing monster), but if it just made them a little bit better I don't see a problem here.
If I follow your idea, which is not bad: how would it be to get dex to damage when you crit? It would not be as ubber as the ''always dex'', but it would make dex build more powerfull and flavorfull.
Just to know: if you got more than one critical in pummeling, will you multiply it more time? Or is the second critical jus ignore because the attack is already a critical?
well, if you read it that way, you get +6 DR (no other class abilites goes near that) and 12 resist to one element. The bonus just don't seems to fit in Pathfinder ''mathematics'' IMO.I am with Rynjin on this one. The text could let the 2 options, but one (2 DR per Rage power) is clearly overpowered. I can't see any reason for that to be ''the good option'', and since the text is ambiguous I will go with the other.It is a 5 rage power investment i dont know if it is clearly overpowered and i dont know if i would take it over pounce. But i know it is not a contender if one read the rules like i do and it is only energy resistance you get.(thet is why we decided to go with the other reading in my group) It's quite worst than Dragon Style: it only work on fighting defensively/ total defense, you exchange your AC bonus for that and it don't give you elemental resistance.
I am with Rynjin on this one. The text could let the 2 options, but one (2 DR per Rage power) is clearly overpowered. I can't see any reason for that to be ''the good option'', and since the text is ambiguous I will go with the other.It is a 5 rage power investment i dont know if it is clearly overpowered and i dont know if i would take it over pounce. But i know it is not a contender if one read the rules like i do and it is only energy resistance you get.(thet is why we decided to go with the other reading in my group) well, if you read it that way, you get +6 DR (no other class abilites goes near that) and 12 resist to one element. The bonus just don't seems to fit in Pathfinder ''mathematics'' IMO.
I am with Rynjin on this one. The text could let the 2 options, but one (2 DR per Rage power) is clearly overpowered. I can't see any reason for that to be ''the good option'', and since the text is ambiguous I will go with the other.
The vanilla monk don't have option to fight at range because... he don't have any option. The only option you have are some feat: nothing like the rage power. The vanillat barbarian can fly, but at that point it's more an vanilla ice cream with chocolate syrup than a real vanilla barbarian. If you want to be fair, you need to let the monk play his archetype... and when you do that you get a scorching ray master quite easily. And they do get alternate movement: abundant step
As someone who took the Academea Graduate feat this is not the case. I just walk around exhausted. It depends of your level with that feat. My option wold get a save of 12 for a first level spell at level 1 (so, you get it on 8 easily). Academea Graduate give you a save of 16 (good luck).
Pretty good idea. Something like: all caster must suceed a will save of 10+ 2xspell level. If it fail, the spell happen but the caster is fatigue. If it fail by more than 5, the spell fail.That way, no more SAD caster class and they will be less happy to use spell for utility, giving back some glory to the skills.
c) Is there something obvious I am missing in terms of the awesomeness of the bastard sword? The Flavor? I always choos the weapon for other reason than ''this weapon is better than that weapon''. If I want to play John Snow, here we go with a long bow and a bastard sword. Is it better than a long sword or a 2 handed sword? No. But it have a different flavor.
sure, it would cost 250 gp, or you can wait 2 level and take it naturally (boon companion is not that important IMO)
Problem with this is that Animal Ally requires 4th level, which means taking it at level 5, and then boon companion at level 7. Unless there's someway of gaining a regular bonus feat at fourth level. Most bonus feats are list specific or jut combat feats. I missed that. Well, you could always retrain your first level feat for Boon companion at level 5 to get a full AC at 5 (a little later but well).
|
