Samrin's page

I decided to play a Druid instead. Another class I've never played.

Just throwing this out there, but it's pretty messed up for someone to look for optimization guides for a class that's nearly impossible NOT to munchkin.

It's people like you that are the reason most GMs ban this class.

Nice assumptions there. It's a pretty complex class overall, as I almost never play a caster. It's a group of 7, and everyone else is very well optimized.

We're allowed to play anything on the SRD, and I wanted to play a summoner since it's a little out of my comfort zone, but didn't want the pet taking up extra actions to slow the game down in the large group, hence the synthesist.

I was simply looking for some guidance with it. The FAQ and guides posted help a lot, so thank you to those that actually helped.

Playing one for the first time, and looking for some general advice. Is there a guide posted? I found the summoner guide, but can't find one specifically for the synthesist.

What races are allowed?

Anything beyond the crb is discretion. Non Paizo is an automatic no

Considering how unbalanced it is compared to the party and how bloodthirsty the GM is, it's gonna be a big problem. Someone has died every encounter, either pc or npc traveling with us. The npcs are pretty strong too.

I'm just gonna go with wizard and see what happens. I'm not sure I'm going to be happy in this game long enough for it to matter. Thanks again everyone.

Yeah, you should ask the DM or something about getting a reroll if everyone else is markedly better than a 15 point buy.

He'll allow it, but I'd have to take some pretty severe hindrances to the character.

Just an fyi, the group consists of my slayer, a synthesist summoner, a cleric/paladin, and a fighter/rogue, with some random npcs now and then. Considering how strong the enemies have been, I'm really worried about getting destroyed with this character.

Everyone is definitely rocking far better. Even my slayer is far better. This character is extremely weak stat wide compared to every other PC. Everyone else has greater than the equivalent of a 25pt buy.

I was originally planning on a Saurian shaman with this character, but the stats would make it terrible. I'm very put off of druid with this character. Oracle might work. Our only source of healing is a cleric1/paladin2. We had an nuc cleric with us, but he died in the last fight. The game has a very GM vs PC's vibe and it's putting me off. I've been gaming with these guys for almost 10 years thougfh, and I'll feel bad if I leave. It's his first time gm'ing in a long time.

I loathe rolling stats. If this was a primary character, I'd be very unhappy with these. My main is a slayer and I rolled quite well for him. Yeah, though, I'm not sure how long I'll last in this game. Just needed some advice on what to do with this.

Anything on the srd from paizo is allowed, but non crb stuff has to be looked at first.

So I'm making a secondary character for my group. We rolled stats, something I hate, but this is just a secondary character to fill in a gap. I was thinking wizard given the SAD of the class, and this array only really allows for that. Could anyone help me make a wizard or some kind of effective healer with these?

In no particular order: 10, 10, 9, 12, 13, 16. Not the worst ever, but still pretty bad. Oh, we're level 3.

Not a good one. It actually sucks lol. I'm doing Stygian Slayer anyway.

Samrin wrote:

The lion shaman interests me the most, but the Saurian seems to get all of the goodies and then some. Plus a much wider range of animals to choose from. Definitely going Druid. We're at level 3, so I won't get wild shape for 3 more levels. :(

You still get wild shape at level 4, it just advances differently at 6.

They don't get it at all until 6. This was clarified in an faq post.

Ninja builds will help with the Slayer?

Actually, after talking to my group last night, I've decided on the Stygian Slayer. I like Ranger, but not a fan of it having spells, and it gives me the Rogue stuff I like. Any tips?

The lion shaman interests me the most, but the Saurian seems to get all of the goodies and then some. Plus a much wider range of animals to choose from. Definitely going Druid. We're at level 3, so I won't get wild shape for 3 more levels. :(

I've done ranger to death. Druid has always interested me, so I think I'm gonna go that route. Vivisectionist looks awesome, but we have a rogue and I really want to avoid toe stepping considering the rogue is already pretty weak. The summoner and paladin are being played by the same person. Not worried as much about toe stepping there.

I guess I need to decide on race too

That's my biggest issue with druid is feat choice

I'll be joining a group this Sunday, and I haven't played anything anything 3.x related in years, never mind Pathfinder. The game is already in progress and is apparently based around being stranded on an island.

The party makeup, afaik, is Paladin/cleric, rogue, summoner, and bard. I'm not sure what I want to play. I'm not a fan of arcane classes. the ones that have grabbed my interest so far are the Stygian Slayer and Saurian Shaman. Trying to find build guides for both, but not having much luck (either can't find it very outdated). Or does anyone have another suggestion?

I generally lean towards rogue types, but we already have one and I'm not a big fan of what I see in the PF rogue. I also think that all Paizo material on the srd is available. Other stuff will be case by case. The game is at level 3.

Ok, how does this stat array look using the point buy mentioned above? 14 20 14 12 12 14

Ninja can be fun!

Yeah, but are they effective mechanically? I don't want to end up playing sidekick or red shirt to the other group members.

Why won't it let me edit my posts?

I'm just wondering if the Ninja would really bad that bad, or if I should go with the Ranger and just take a trait for disable device?

I think the biggest problem I'm having is that it's only a 3 person party so far. It's hard to fill gaps when so many gaps are open. I'm trying to find us 2 more players.

Eh, I decided to go Ranger. Keeping it fairly simple. I just took a trait that adds disable device so I can perform some rogue-ish duties. I don't like what the Urban Ranger gives up.

Now the only thing is... switch hitter, melee, or archery?

Can the Inquisitor do what I'm looking for? Stealthy assassin type and melee skirmisher?

What about the Inquisitor? How are they? If they're anything like the 4e Avenger, I'm sold. :P

You're forgetting that Alchemists are Intelligence based, so you're likely to have a similar number of skills as a Ranger.

Yes, but they won't have the class skills.

Samrin wrote:

So, I will be completely overshadowed by playing a martial artist monk in this group? This is hard, lol.

Not necessarily--don't underestimate the ability for the other players to suck.

Wizards are one of the most powerful classes in 3rd edition, but I've seen tons of dumbasses play wizards and make them appear terrible.

If your group is full of optimizers, yeah, your monk is going to be a joke. If your group is fairly typical, you can optimize such that you'll contribute fine.

Yeah, I don't want to have to rely on other players holding back in order to feel like I'm contributing.

Is there a melee class that fits my concept that doesn't rely on spells? The ranger is fine. I don't mind spells as a supplemental feature. I just loathe relying completely on daily resources.

What about the urban ranger? Can it fill the rogue's shoes a bit? I was looking at the vivisectionist, but I would like to have a few more skills.

So, I will be completely overshadowed by playing a martial artist monk in this group? This is hard, lol.

Is the monk any good? By everything I've seen and read, it appears to be the most underpowered class in PF.

Samrin wrote:

That's my biggest issue here. No class should be one of the "weaker" classes. It's the reason I've been worried about going back to 3.x. Is there any class you could suggest that doesn't require a ton of book keeping but fits my concept?

This is 3rd edition--book keeping is part of the game.

Don't pretend there aren't "weaker" classes in every edition of D&D, though. It's part of the game. Not a part I like, but part of it. The lead developer of 3rd edition has specifically stated some choices are intentionally weaker (while still appearing strong) as a sort of Easter egg for those who know the rules better.

Vivisectionist is unquestionably the best class with Sneak Attack, but they're pseudo spellcasters, too.

The best class with the least book keeping that can be roguish is probably a Ranger. You can be melee or ranged (including using a two-handed weapon) and don't need to flank all the time to be useful. Plenty of stealth, many of the same skills and features (evasion, camouflage, etc.), and Favored Enemy can be your "I'm good at killing X" feature. Even Favored Terrain can be like casing the area before a hit.

Rangers have spells, which may annoy you, but you can trade that for "eh" traps or pretty decent Skirmisher abilities. Or, and I think this is the better option, just pick your favorite spell and memorize it over and over (like Lead Blades or something) and be happy you can use wands. As much as I hate preparing spells and like the Skirmish abilities, it's hard to turn down Instant Enemy and Terrain Bond.

Perfect balance can not be achieved in a game with options, no. However, 3.x's Ivory Tower design (which is what you refer to) is hard to get around. I only have 5 days to decide what to play, and I don't want to end up being the gimp of the group.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

A large tiger with the "giant" template applied is still an animal.

Wildshape says you can change into an animal.

At level 8 (level 6 for a lion shaman) you can change into a "huge animal".

A lion (or tiger) with the giant template is a "huge animal".

I don't see the problem.

Wild Shape mimics the Beast Shape line of spells, which are polymorph effects.

"Unless otherwise noted, polymorph spells cannot be used to change into specific individuals. Although many of the fine details can be controlled, your appearance is always that of a generic member of that creature's type. Polymorph spells cannot be used to assume the form of a creature with a template or an advanced version of a creature." (emphasis mine)

Fastmover wrote:

So reading this, a L9 Wolf Shaman with the feat Powerful Shape can only be a large Dire Wolf that is considered huge?

There are no huge canines, so yes, you could only be Large. And that feat only lets you count as Huge for "CMB, CMD, carrying capacity, and any size-based special attacks you use or that are used against you," so it doesn't buff your stats or natural weapon damage in any way.

Again, if you want to wild shape, don't be a X Shaman unless you like dinosaurs (the Saurian shaman is the only one not gimped since wild shape is only barely penalized at higher levels but they still get all the summoning goodness).

Samrin wrote:

Maybe I should change this to a help me with my Ninja build. :) Same creation rules.

Try the Ninja Guide or the "Classic Ninja" Build. Note, however, that while Ninja are definitely better than Rogues, I still think they're one of the weaker classes in Pathfinder. And it bugs me that there's no "extra ninja trick" feat.

That's my biggest issue here. No class should be one of the "weaker" classes. It's the reason I've been worried about going back to 3.x. Is there any class you could suggest that doesn't require a ton of book keeping but fits my concept?

Maybe I should change this to a help me with my Ninja build. :) Same creation rules.

I see a lot of suggestions for multiclassing. I basically loathe MC'ing in 3.x (too huge of an opportunity cost). I don't think I'll be doing it...at all. I may go with a PrC at some point, but not unless I can finish the character as that. If I can't play a class for 20 levels, it isn't worth playing to me.

There's also the Vivisectionist. They have an assassin feel about them, and they're the biggest reason Rogues in Pathfinder are essentially obsolete.

Eh, the alchemist doesn't interest me much, either.

I think I might just end up going Ninja.

I'm desperate here, lol. It has been 5 years since I played a 3.5 game, and I'm spoiled by the character builder. :P

Samrin wrote:

Eh, reading through it, this class might be way too complicated for what I'm wanting anyway. It looks like a bookkeeping nightmare.

Well what are you looking for? We can probably offer suggestions...

Generally? I like Rogue type characters. Specifically, assassins. PF doesn't offer much. The Ninja is kinda cool, but I hate managing daily resources (one of the main draws to 4e for me was encounter based resources). The regular rogue looks pretty underpowered. The monk is a mess. I'm really not sure what will fit.

Basically, all Paizo PF (no 3rd party or 3.5) is allowed except races. Core rulebook races only. Anything goes after that.

I wish he allowed 3.5 material. The Swordsage is pretty much exactly what I would want.

Eh, reading through it, this class might be way too complicated for what I'm wanting anyway. It looks like a bookkeeping nightmare.

mplindustries wrote:

Well, I think you nailed it: the shamans are best for summoning, not for wild shaping. Summoning is strong, but I find it tedious and it slows the game down.

Losing Wild Shape until level 6 and then basically having no further benefit to Wild Shape from Druid levels is pretty disappointing, both mechanically and thematically. The upside, at least, is you can use the Shapeshifting Hunter feat to just switch entirely to Ranger levels...

Wildshaping into lion form at a +2 to the druid level should not be under-estimated mpl. Every druid I've ever played had a single wild shape form they took for combat, so getting that +2 is a huge benefit that is offset by a -2 to wildshape form for non-feline shapes, but my druid almost always uses non-feline shapes for scouting anyway, so it has been a very minor cost for a huge gain in her primary form.

To me the biggest issue with lion shaman is the same as any archetype, and that is that you lose certain abilities to gain the archetype abilities and sometimes you lose more than you gain. Losing "venom immunity" and "a thousand faces" is a pretty big deal actually. But it's up to the player to decide if that's enough of a reason to not take an archetype.

Those seem pretty useless compared to early access to pounce. :)

I'm not even dead set on playing a Druid, but I wanted to play something different than what I'm used to, but still remaining in my playstyle. I have a week to create a character.

I generally lean towards rogue-ish characters. So, I wanted to focus on cats due to the stealth and scouting aspects of it. I want to focus on melee, but not completely neglect casting.

Basically, I want it to fit sort of a rogue playstyle (not skillmonkey, but stealth, ambush, etc.).

I'm new to PF (been playing 4e for the last 4 years), but I did play 3.5 throughout its entirety. I'm starting in a new campaign next weekend, and I was thinking of playing a Lion Shaman Druid. The rest of the group, so far, is a summoner, and a bone oracle.

We are allowed a 36 point buy (I know right?!). All Paizo material is allowed, but races are restricted to the core rulebook only. No 3.5 stuff.

Can anyone push me in the right direction for an optimal build? We'll be starting at level 1.

Cosmo wrote:

I'm currently playing a ranger in our game and really enjoying the heck outta my character.

I got a lot of use out of Treantmonk's Ranger Guide. My suggestion is to read that guide, and pay special attention to the section on the "Switch Hitter". That sounds like what you are looking for. This guide only covers the Core, but you should be able to extrapolate from there to find goodies in the other books.

+ 1

Treat's guide is great. I recommend the switch hitter you rock at archery but can still go toe to toe.

Related question.

Is there a more up to date guide? I love his stuff, but it is very outdated now.

If your looking towards monk quiggong is a very good option to give up some chafe abilities and pick up some decent spells. Barkskin is great.

I'm of the opinion that any archtype which replaces stunning fist is a trap option since stunning fist interacts so well with medusa's wrath. But if your not going for maximum optimisation and want to make a hungry ghost monk for character purposes its not terrible by any means.

Is there an updated monk guide floating around anywhere? Treantmonk's is good, but pretty far behind now. It is lacking archetypes and the style feats.

Also, is Weapon Finesse viable for a monk? I never see anyone using it to reduce MAD.

I also have absolutely no interest in multiclassing. That was one of the huge turnoffs of that druid build. I hate giving up all of my class abilities for one level just to gain one class feature of something else. So, I'd like to avoid that as much as possible.

Well. My friend who is an avid Druid fan decided to go Druid. I hate only having daily resource management, so I was having trouble getting excited about it.

I've decided to go with a Monk instead. I know they're relatively weak, but the Qinggong Monk looks like a lot of fun. I was going go also go with the Hungry Ghost monk, but I was wondering if it is a trap option. The conditions for regaining ki/hp are highly situational, at best. Dropping an enemy to 0 will happen more often than crits will, but still. Master of Many Styles also looks interesting to pair with Qinggong, but giving up Flurry seems pretty huge.

The ability to get a new feat at every level, or more, seems like it could pretty easily bring this in line.

Hmm, I like the build. However, the shaman archetypes really do pigeon hole you. If I decide to use wild shape for anything non cat based, I'm kinda screwed (-2 level). I'm not sure I want to specialize that hardcore.

Ahh, and what about the smite problem?

I thought once you took an archetype, you had to take the whole thing?

In any case, I don't think I'll spend all of my skill points on feats. However, it's nice to know that they're there when I want to pick something up. I also need those ranks for planar wild shape. Also, you recommend 8cha, but the smite ability is cha dependent.

Hmm... Can you possibly PM me a level breakdown of the build? Or post it here, doesn't matter. Just wondering if you're spending any skill points on feats or just letting it flow as normal. I do like skills, too. Not having to give them up isn't a bad thing.

Also, how long till it becomes actually useful? I mean, even once i get wildshape, it's only once per day.