Seoni

Shadows_Of_Fall's page

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber. 92 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

To create a different aged dragon, do you essentially build a new monster? In Pathfinder it gave different stats for different age categories, and IIRC most modifications were just done through templates (usually).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'll give it another look tomorrow once I get my tablet charged up and can bring it to work to read stuff in my down time. I'll probably have a few more specific thoughts about stuff but in the meantime it's nice to see some positivity around here. You would think Paizo just murdered tabletop gaming based on some of the threads/posts.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tithron wrote:
Glad to see more thoughtful and positive threads. I agree that there needs to be some serious formating and rebalancing updates in some areas. But I love the core game engine.

Exactly. The bones of this system are amazing IMO. I like the basics of just about everything. It's just a number of balance/number tweaks and formatting stuff so far. And even for the formatting after reading/skimming through the book a couple of times it isn't even that bad.

I feel like A LOT of people are comparing 2e to 1e especially in numbers and overreacting before we even see how it all works in play, and then acting like this is the final product. I'm genuinely excited and have high hopes for the final product. I think it's gonna be something really special, a blend of PF, 4e and 5e; taking some of the best parts of all three and offering us something amazing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So before I begin with my thoughts I will say that I tend to play more 5e nowadays so I may be biased. I'll also point out that the entire system changed so the whole "omfg nerfed" and number related stuff can't be judged fairly until the game is actually PLAY tested and not read-tested. Anywho...

All the terminology and cross referencing: I think this issue is mostly to do with this being a played book and a new system and formatting. I hope (and believe) that in the full release we'll get a better layout and format with less flipping around and everything will be clearer. Yes it's annoying right now but it's not a deal breaker and it's not like, for the most part, mechanics need to change to address most of this. That said the terminology on some stuff needs to be cleaned up a little.

Action economy: Personally I'm really liking this system. It's easy to grasp and provides a lot of room for flexibility. Seems solid.

Character creation: I like the process here as well and the race+class+background provides an interesting approach to stats, which I'm really digging so far.

Ancestries: I miss calling them races but that's not that important. I like the setup even if the feats are somewhat underwhelming in a lot of cases. I think there needs to be some fine-tuning here. As for the Half-Elf and Half-Orc issue, I think it's a cool twist to be a modifier for humans. It opens up a lot of room for options potentially but again needs some tuning.

Background: I'd like to see more and more skill feats/skills tied to each one. Not a big change to implement and, given that this is a played version, I can see that being addressed or changed.

Classes: Oh boy. This is a mixed bag for me. Without playing everything I can't really say whether I like the way it works or not. There's some potential balance and utility problems throughout based on a few read-throughs but there's also a lot of cool stuff. I really love the idea and set up of class feats. Some may need to be moved around and tweaked or changed but that's a given for any playtest. I've seen a lot of complaints about how basic a lot of them are but this is the ground floor basic ass 101 level of class mechanics and abilities here. Ultimately it comes across to me as a cool build your class type thing where you choose the abilities and moves you want your character to have. A very cool idea with a lot of potential that, with some tweaking, I think would work VERY well.

Some stand outs for me though:
Alchemist makes for an interesting base class but I'd like the ability to make it more/less healer based or bomb based or mutagen based. That said their reliance on resonance is a huge issue here. I wanna see Alchemist kept as a core class and it's an awesome idea, but I feel it has 3 identities, none of which are translated well and it just isn't working as it stands now.

Barbarian - Love the totems and, while 3 on 1 off seems a little weird (get angry for a bit then a second of tired then go again?) it's a good way to make sure rage gets used more and fulfills some of the class fantasy. Using class mechanics more is almost always more fun. Also did I mention that I really like the totems? I really like the totems.

Bard - I haven't had a chance to look through Bard as much as I would like and have some mixed feelings on what I've sat down with. At least in theory I like the ideas and themes of the muses, with the scholar, performer and ADD master of skills.

Cleric - Another class I haven't been able to really read through and focus on (it's been a very busy couple of days). I like the channel versatility tho.

Druid - Ouch. No. Bad. I mean the super limited timing on animal form? This IS a straight up nerf regardless of how the new system works. Druids are iconic shapeshifters and now you can do it VERY few times a day for a minute at a time. Between those two restrictions what's the damn point? I'm still unsure about animal companions and j ist minions in general but at least the 1 action to command your animal to use 2 might be decent action economy and the work together benefits are cool and unique. But Druid seems to need some love in a bad way.

Fighter - I really like this. Class feats work VERY well here IMO. It feels very right. Also the enhancement/open/press abilities or terms or whatever are super cool IMO. Honestly this might be the best version of a fighter I've seen. It might be too early to day that but damn I'm actually hyped for this.

Monk - Similar to fighter. I like the set up at least and the feats essentially equating to abilities works well here.

Paladin - Not much to say right now

Ranger - Same as above

Rogue - Haven't looked through as well as others but looks good. I've been spoiled a little by how sneak attack works in 5e and how much easier it is but that isn't a big deal really.

Sorcerer - Really loving how bloodlines work. Really really awesome IMO.

Wizard - Not much to say at present

Skills: Cool that skills are now broken down by action. Not cool that recalling knowledge takes an action. Again some of it needs some tweaking but I like it overall.

Feats: Some good some bad. Battle Medic bolstering isn't a great move IMO but we'll see.

Equipment: Denting - Ehh. Cool idea, missed execution? Full Plate - Just worse than 1/2 plate now? Weapon Traits - Uhh that's a lot of stuff. It's cool in theory but I'll wait to see it in practice.

Magic and Magic Items - I haven't looked over this much due to the sheer amount of content. Also, it doesn't mean as much since there's a limit to what one can glean outside of actual play and practice. I like the idea of the four types of magic tho. And I'm just not getting into magic items right now. I will say I'm cautious about resonance. We'll see how it works out but I'm not entirely sold on the idea so far.

Archetypes and Multiclassing - So I REALLY like these. In theory. It's a VERY cool way to do prestige classes. For Archetypes...it's very much not the same as 1e. It doesn't modify a class which...I mean like I said with Alchemist, I miss it there. In other classes the way feats work means it's already kinda worked in. The pirate is whatever and Cavalier is cool but I'd like the see what else Paizo has got. Multiclassing...I mean...it's a very awesome idea and potential way to do it but I don't think the balance is quite there yet. On the one hand the half X and half Y is totally missing as an option and the X with a splash of Y is too weak to warrant it. It needs some work and balance.

All told I'm very excited to try 2.0 and see the final product. It has some issues to work out, sure, but most things do. The systems themselves though seem fantastic and, with work, I can see 2e far surpassing 1e after some changes. I know there's a lot of knee jerk reactions and frustration with some parts and A LOT of comparing to 1e, especially with magic and numbers, but I feel like that might change once people start actually playing and getting used to things. And I'm sure any other problems will mostly be ironed out before release. Overall quite happy with 2e!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I just frame these and hang them on my wall :D


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Meant to say Occultist


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

You think an Archer Medium is the way to go? Or should someone mix in melee or more casting focus? Battle Host a worthy trade?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

That could work. His spirit is bound to him through hatred even as he tries to revive her. When he succeeds he finds he had fallen in live with her and the loss of the closeness and bond makes hm a fractured mind of despair.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

How would this work? One of my character ideas is (some undecided stuff)
Thief who killed an innocent woman in a robbery gone bad
Corrupt guard ordered to kill an innocent woman to cover a crime up
Mercenary who killed a young woman by accident in crossfire
Executioner ordered to put falsely accused woman to death
Regardless of choice character is jailed/punishes self before bonding with her spirit as a Spiritualist. His goal is to revive her to atone (and adventure in the name of good in the meantime to build funds).

Assuming he succeeds at his goal how would that work? As a slight aside what emotional focus would be a good fit given her innocence and unjust death across all options?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So I take it that Medium is more basic but is capable of greater specialization but is limited to that 1 extremely focused role with a number of penalties. The occultist meanwhile has more baseline utility and can change roles more easily but to a far lesser degree (and no rogue/cleric coverage)?

Why would you take one over the other?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

That's true, and their options are insane. One character can do so much to fit where needed but at the same time gets both fun flaws to role play and good balance drawbacks. Some of the taboo options are gonna be killer (in both senses of the word). I had just meant that since the Archmage only gives one fifth and one sixth level spell, I had trouble considering them as progressing to 6 level casters.

I'm almost always group DM so I have a character backlog too large to count. This book isn't helping! We have the obligatory Kitsune Kami medium, at least five different Kineticists, the obligatory charismatic vampire blood kineticist, the focused relic and broad dancer mediums, the dashing Dhampir who charges into adventure, disgusted with his form only to realize upon death the joys of life and possess his own body, the wannabe Swashbuckler duelist who uses his psychic powers to achieve his dreams, the filthy commoner-looking Mesmerist who hides his intentions and identity from everyone even the party didn't know his true goals or loyalty and much much more.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Given that Archmage gives more spells per day but not spells known, wouldn't it be more accurate to say they can cast *some* fifth and sixth level spells than that they become sixth level casters?

Could be reader error on my post, but it sounds a little misleading. That said though this preview left me so excited and the Medium delivered. Hell this book gave me at least 15 new character ideas and do far I'm loving every page!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Thanks for the feedback. That monk build and other ideas greatly helped me flesh the BBEG out. And since it was mentioned: Dread Vampire is an improved vampire from the utterly incredible advanced bestiary, a mythical 3rd party tome used frequently by Paizo themselves for their APs.

So ultimately I think I'll go Mythic Dread Vampire. There's a little overlap (dread already gets rid of or reduces most weaknesses and sunlight now just deals damage each round) but that can somewhat easily be ignored or gotten around (dread gives magic flight at half speed so I can use the mythic flight and claws as manifestations of his true power).

To describe him a little as a character, he's a Strigoi (in PF all vampires are descended from a race known as the Strigoi) who secretly guided and ruled much of ancient Osirion and founded their obsession with undeath. He was also a prominent member of the Whispering Way before that. He's a rival to Tar Baphon in might. In ancient times he was defeated and his remains, followers and necropolis disappeared. In truth powerful magic transported it to below the mountains of the frozen north.

The basic plot is survivors of his cult manage to sacrifice a hero above his ashes and revive him. He immediately spreads his influence and the PCs get involved at the edge where they end up working with vampire slayers after discovering an Ustalav vampire plot.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Working in advance on this. I disabled 3 of my fingers so I'm bored out of my mind and starting work on my next campaign.

That said I have a party of six, maybe seven, so it's a safe bet they'll have most bases covered.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Inspiration comes from equal parts penny dreadful and skyrocket DLC. I want something monstrous and powerful and ancient. An elder evil in the world. The focus is more on his inherent strength, not discipline. I want him to be hulking and intimidating and to not need weapons. His vampire traits fall somewhat secondary to that (if that makes sense).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So a very serious work injury has left me out of work for 2 months. Having mostly caught up on my TV and book backlog (and being unable to game due to severed nerves/tendons until healed) I decided to start work on my next campaign (current one only has about 3 months left and is basically done on my part).

So my BBEG is essentially an ancient Strigoi or as close as one can come. I have his appearance and theme down (grey skin, a "sharper" Voldemort face, ancient tattoos and crimson robes with gold jewelry) and his class (qiqong monk to really drive his overwhelming strength and powers home. Question is: how should I Vamp him up? I plan to use mythic mostly as a post 20 thing, and want to try to keep its inclusion.

The main options I was considering are: Mythic Dread Vamp, Mythic Nosferatu or just plain Mythic. But would mythic work well enough for dread or a Nosferatu? There's clearly a few issues and some overlap. I was also perhaps considering Nosferatu/Dread with a mythic path if there would be too many issues with mythic vamp. Overall just looking for done feedback with the best or smoothest way to make this big old baddie.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Thanks everyone. As for my post about DMing, I was more asking about whether or not good "technical" DMing involves looking at characters and balancing on that basis. Like customizing encounters and such, looking at what players can and can't do and taking that into account. Things like that.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

So our group ran into some big problems recently when our DM gave us level 9 and 6 mythic tiers and we never saw enemies using mythic against us. He then decided to remove it which, on top of previous issues, has set off a chain reaction of mini debates and various issues and complaints. And amongst those issues are some genuine questions. And so here I am seeking answers (if people don't mind) and looking to discuss some of the issues.

1) Our DM the in mythic "as is" out of the box and never looked at what we choose leading to the broken balancing. This has been the biggest issue. I argue that good balanced DMing requires knowing what your players are doing, making calls if needed (one players takes issue that not everything has errata and that the DM needs to decide and says that that's broken) and adjusting the campaign accordingly. Easier encounters I play to the parties strengths and I use their weaknesses for harder encounters. Our DM throws "minions" with barely 20 hp max at us in waves along with some tank enemies and some damage plus an elite or boss enemy. I like to use a combination of monsters and adding class levels to humanoids to tailor enemies rather than make simple mass produced throwaway filler enemies. He has also been giving us 1 encounter a day so we nova spells and mythic, then he (and another player) say mythic is too OP because we wreck everything. Both also say we would be wrecked if he used full mythic against us.

Is running things out of the box bad DMing? Should he be expected to keep the party in check and work on tailoring combat? What is, in essence, good DMing on a more logistic level? What *should* a DM do to balance things?

2) Is 3.X more balanced? PF is undeniably more interesting IMO but I'm wondering which had better balance, and why?

3) Having never played rogue and only rarely used it for NPCs, what's so bad about it? Why is it often called "the worst class"?

4) What are the balance issues with Barb, Monk and Summoner?

5) Should players always optimize? When shouldn't they and how far should they take it? All the way to min/max?

6) How should a DM balance if one player takes bad options and sucks and another takes the best and wrecks face? I suggested talking to them, helping optimize the weak one, tailor combat for/against them (not to "get wrecked" of face roll levels, which one idiot refuses to understand) and help tailor the situations they find themselves in to be helpful. I also suggested possible respecs.

Lastly, mythic. Same guy being difficult asked if I thought it was balanced. I answered that I didn't. The next question was: is it the DMs jib to fix it? I would think yes, if he wants to use it. It isn't that hard to roughly balance abilities IMO. A few rulings and moving where things are in the tiers and it's much better. I also think you need to do a little extra work when cresting encounters, putting more effort into individual monsters and the enemy groups/composition and their action economy and usage of mythic.

Anyone have any thoughts or answers on any of this?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I feel you're still missing the point. No it has nothing to do with mythic. You are correct. I am not saying it does. I am using it to say he likes to go overly big. Blow up the world, throw a demigod at us, massive AC and massive damage big boom explosion exciting. And that, beyond any doubt, can translate into combat and challenge.

All I've been saying with that is that it's an example of how he often leans toward over the top in all fields. Nothing to do with mythic rules, no. Just an example of his...let's say style. Over the top. Now since this is going in circles where you keep stating it has nothing to do with mythic (restating that implies you've missed my point if you feel the need to say it again)...

I expect I'll live with things as they are until it ends whenever that may be. The DM just helped respec the fighter into a tank who can AoO and control over 40 feet or something. And by respec I mean gave the fighter a new character the DM himself made. I facepalm'd so hard there's brain on my walls.

I've suggested moving towards more encounters per day, more dungeons or dungeon-like settings (something several of us ha email wanted) and that, mythic or no, encounters>bosses (something I like to try to do as well). He seems to have decided today though that removing mythic is the best bet. If he can't balance it and it helps, whatever I guess. His call. At worst it's still PF with a couple friends and coworkers so there's still fun in that.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I wasn't calling it a poor power I listed it amongst several other powers I took, generally not the "broken as all get out" powers I took.

As far as the scale, I can't tell if you're just being difficult or not understanding the correlation I'm implying. His sense of scale is off the charts. Period. In campaign scale AND in power. Yes, scale matters. If we're fighting demigods at level 9 then he is CLEARLY overpowering us. Do you understand what I'm getting at? Campaign scale, overdone. Enemies, overdone with 8 attacks with 2 to 3 being a kill on hit. Loot and mythic, overdone. It's all tied together/related. Yes you could destroy half the universe in e6 but it hardly fits the scale of power if this is something the players are actively involved in.

Obviously it's possible regardless of "power scale", I was simply using his sense of campaign scale to impart a sense of how far he takes plot, encounters (usually single encounter against a boss or two) and power.

Is that clearer?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I feel you're slightly missing a couple of points. Blowing up the world has A LOT to do with the issues at play. Namely the sense of campaign and power scale. I included it to give an idea of what sort of power we're up against. The other day we fought 3 enemies. This is at level 6. One had 150 hp, one had 200 and one had 300. One could snipe any area around him (even around corners) with a nearly one or two shot kill fireball. One could land 3 attacks and average over a hundred damage. One was basically the living god of vital strike with AC so high only one party member could hit consistently. I'm trying to point out that the DM has no sense of scale. Does campaign scale=balance? No, of course not. Is a DM prone to destroying most of reality before level 10 probably prone to going overboard on power, in conjunction with the scale of the campaign, yeah. Do you get what I mean?

As far as "no" after the fact, I'm sorry I didn't go into specifics. In fact I could have sworn I mentioned that I address these issues with players. I don't just go "no, get rid of it". I say something more along the lines of "hey, in that last session you were XYZ while the party was ABC." I work for a solution instead of flat denying with a blanket NO. No can mean a lot of things, ranging from "it's broken in practice/with your build" to "you're pulling ahead of the party in terms of *insert whatever*". Which happens given that I've only been DMing for a few years (been playing for 10+ tho). I can't always see what might be an issue or address it before it becomes one.

In our current campaign I try to build characters that synergize and contribute to the group. Our Barbarian is there to kill and the Fighter is there to never die. Those are literally their characters. The Wizard is more of a group player but the DM helped him pick spells which leads to him occasionally setting up nearly insta-kill combos/builds.

I truly think the issue lies more with the players here. Or rather than removing mythic won't fix anything.

He also only runs 1 scenario/fight per session. As in there are NO dungeons. Every "segment" is one fight. Or, at most, 3 smaller fights and one BIG fight, all over the course of an in-game week.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

If only. The more I post the more I realize why I never really missed his campaigns (only him) the 3 or 4 years we didn't live remotely close or keep in touch. There's no way to say that though. He can be a little bit of a control freak/hold a grudge over these types of things. Ah well. It also sucks that the other "usual DM" is...shall we say...certainly an odd character and isn't up for running a campaign for any of us save 1 member of our group. So any chance of being a player is looking grim as of late TT_TT.

Actually after talking to the group players they seem excited for the first of three campaigns I have planned (all in 5e as it's relatively new to us and I like the scale and it's easier for our newer players to learn (we started with 3 new players, 2 of them quit within the first 5 sessions and the last has fun but is a little lost)). Hello floating super dungeon in the sky (disclaimer: in love with floating islands/skyships of the alchemical and magical (or even better hybrid) variety).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Bardamu wrote:
Shadows_Of_Fall wrote:
At level 6 or 7 a failed will save ended the universe.
Wonder what will happen at 20th.

Genuinely afraid to find out. At present the DM seems like he is planning to cut mythic entirely because one player (who is not enjoying the campaign and has no faith in the DM) would rather get rid of mythic if it meant even 1% more balance. He isn't totally alone, as I kind of agree with him. The scale is whack, the DM only cares about using 2 gods because he can't be bothered to learn about the others, half of reality is destroyed, every patron we had on our side is dead or doesn't care, our kingdom was functionally destroyed and, being the king of player I am, I had full goals and backstory for my MULTIPLE characters (we all got a character at level 1 and then another new one at mythic rank 1, 3, 6 and 9).

One of my characters was a Tiefling Warpriest of Cayden Cailean. Saved from a life of crime by her ex-fiance, the basically evil-yet-still-good zealots of Sarenrae killed him for his lack of faith. My warpriest took up his cause somewhat and runs taverns and inns helping out adventurers and using them as small information gathering centers. Her entire backstory and future goals etc were all destroyed. Same with my other characters. I mean I gave them detailed personalities and goals and flaws etc. Aaallllllll gone.

Really not a big fan of this turn of events and, at the same time, I see no out but to stick with things until they reach their own natural mangled end.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I usually make the call after the ability is taken in practice. It's hard to see if it will be too OP before the fact, and the players certainly don't like the idea without seeing it for themselves. But most of my players have gotten used to it and I like to think I'm diplomatic about it, always trying to find a solution everyone is okay with. Not only that I *usually* include some degree of a downtime system so I allow, for example, the tower shield fighter to train against the Barbarian, allowing them to rebuild slightly for less armor and more damage on the fighters side and vice versa for the barbarian. In general it's not a problem if it's not a problem. You know? Unless someone is sticking out or fading into obscurity, unless someone is wrecking encounters or forcing me to start power gaming enemies, it's all good. And even then just tweaking a group of enemies works. One has high AC and another is a sniper Wizard to cover the Barbarian and Fighter. That way things aren't over the top but also reasonable against the...more "focused" characters.

Overall it all works out, in large part probably thanks to my campaign scale. 1-5 is local and encompasses guards and retired soldiers in towns. 6-10 covers the kingdom or region and includes head priests and commanders and such. 11-15 usually covers several kingdoms or regions or, in smaller scale, begins dealing more with outsiders and powerful cultists or what have you. It's the first time the scale gets big ? And thus the start of mythic). 16-20+ is the big guns. While 11-15 might travel to other planes or have semi-extraplanar dungeons, this comes into full swing here and the campaign often deals with high power plots across the world. Though not all of my campaigns hit that scale, nor do they need to. But I like to allow builds to come together.

Back to the issue that is the current campaign, I kinda had a feeling it would be a mess when I was told the setting and we were conducting full on raids at levels 1 and 2. Hell we attacked a camp and the NPCs ended up doing 70% of the work. By level 3 we were solving extra planar mysteries and directly engaged with head cultists. At level 6 or 7 a failed will save ended the universe. The only planes left are water, earth, wind, Astral and material. The only God left is Sarenrae and our enemy is a primordial dragon of pure time who created all of reality (the CR 20-25 time dragons were fun when the DM destroyed our kingdom and killed off or crippled half our characters then gave us at at penalties in exchange for curing our injuries with undead grafts). So...I've been lobbying for a lower scale for awhile.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

You're talking to a guy who does a combination of loot requests, letting PCs buy loot, random loot tables and hand picked loot to ensure balance. Mythic is awarded 1 tier per 2 levels going from 10 to 20 then another 5 as post-20 progress. I deny combinations and abilities even after they're chosen if I feel they affect balance. I give monster races and others class levels to achieve mixed dungeons and dangerous group encounters. I'm all for low scale and balanced. Heck that's one of the things I love about 5e.

As far as my DMs goals, I continue to suggest balancing the party while he continues to try to balance enemies and, to a lesser extent, mythic to a normal game to avoid min/maxing. I think that's just plain stupid but I try not to be rude. IMO the problem is campaign scale and player build choices. One of our...worse players made a complaint. He builds very simply and doesn't ever have a goal or anything. He just picks something anything and builds it. He's also afraid of losing his character so he often builds some for of any which is never even targeted because it never deals damage. He complained about combat being too extreme as far as AC and damage goes. DM in turn blamed mythic. He said mirror dodge negates challenge and that mythic is breaking too many things. I tried to point out multiple enemies negates mirror dodge and that using anything ND simple veto for several stronger abilities or rulings solves any other big issues. I argued that changing the approach to building encounters mixed with party changes to lower our AC and damage (it was basically sitting at 100+ damage and/or 50 damage and 40 AC at level 9) and move away from min/max'd builds, items and stats. I suggested we move away from stacking anything big time and that we should cut down on optimizing builds every time and going insane on certain fest chains or easily abused combos.

As it stands our DM doesn't seem to have an answer or any idea how to balance things (or maybe he's just not experienced enough with PF/mythic or just isn't that type of DM (every 3.X campaign ended with us at level 15 in level 20 gear killing demigods and changing world's and history)). One of the reasons I turned to you all for advice/suggestions. I'm not sure of the answer and I've never personally run into this problem in any of my campaigns or campaigns I've played in. Since no one ever tried to break or maximize or stack anything beyond a reasonable amount (I've never let it get there), I've never pushed mythic to the limits. Thus it's my understanding that, left to run wild, there's no way to properly balance mythic once it's allowed freely. My current DM is running up against this problem and seems to feel this way. Though he feels it's all mythic period and is leaning towards removing it whilst I think it just needs to be trimmed/guided/maintained to work.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

A little background before I jump into the main point: I've been in several mythic campaigns, all by different DMs, which reached anywhere from mythic 1 only to mythic 6 or 7. There've been hiccups with how strong mythic makes players or how strong the bosses need to be, but never anything major. In general no players min/maxed or anything of that nature. For example I always liked Sanctum, Eldritch Flight and Enduring Armor. No one ever took things like Mirror Dodge or looked to mythic up their strongest spells.

That said the group I'm in now is...shall we say...very min/max-y. Our DM currently has us at level 9 mythic 6, fighting custom colossal monsters that can kill us in 1 or 2 turns. Our last humanoid opponent was a dual wielding whip master who, in 1 or 2 turns, could pin and tie up opponents to take them out (he also threatened 10 or 15 feet). One member of the party is a tank with nearly 40 ac. Another is a Barbarian who (I don't remember how) goes Large and starts dishing about 100 damage on average. Both have mirror dodge as well.

The tank was dealing no damage but surviving and the Barbarian kept coming close to dying so both have raised issues with mythic unbalancing things. We're due to have a group discussion on whether or not we remove mythic. Personally I believe that anyone who wants to min/max and make the campaign rocket tag can do so without mythic, just not quite as easily. However I want to see what others think on balancing mythic and/or somehow fixing the campaigns balance before I sit down and present my thoughts. I'm the only other one at the table who has DMd and always tend toward the level 1-5 local, 6-10 regional etc scale rather than "level 6 fighting angels". That is to say I prefer to keep things somewhat lower key and try to avoid anything becoming min/max'd to begin with. So I'm not quite sure how to approach the issue (and yes, before anyone asks, our DM is looking for possible solutions or thoughts by players).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I assume he doubled up on the dragons spell list and power, but I don't know for sure. I'm assuming he wanted stupidly epic powerful dragon mage. Talos the epic god-tier red dragon actually went from CE to NE and is currently transitioning to TN (though it's partly in an apathetic sense).

My character was originally a CE red dragon named Elucifer who was distantly related. I began serving Talos and later fell in love with a human, which would be where scary dragon man comes to an end. A friend suggested using the hourglass thing from Artifacts and Legends so, as it stands right now, he stole it and used it to truly be with the human he fell for (and because he was a little tired of being a powerful dragon who was once evil and still has people trying to kill him).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

In the campaign my DM is running there's a nearly all powerful (Ancient Red Wyrm w/ 20 Sorc levels) dragon who can naturally take a human form. In addition to this at each mythic ability tier (1, 3, 6 and 9) we get another character. It's odd but basically our group has poor regular attendance so we have missions each week and we can choose which character to use and the rest are off doing whatever (scouting, depending the base, getting more money/materials etc).

So for my last character I was thinking of having a red dragon who chose to become a human. Our DM has said he would allow it but he would like if there was an actual way to pull it off. If there isn't an actual way he would prefer I play a half-dragon or full dragon (which I have zero interest in. I just want the flavor of having been a dragon in the past and being the ancestor of a draconic-bloodrager party member).

So I'm turning to the forums. I can't seem to find any way to become human nor can I find any way to take human form for more than a couple of minutes (if I were to be a full dragon).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Cool but I'm surprised it wasn't a male Elf. As it stands I thought that was the 1 sex race combo we were missing, unless the Alchemist is supposed to be a full blooded elf?
Damiel is indeed a full Elf. And looks it. We have no race/gender combos missing.

Male Half-Orc?

EDIT: Oh derp the Warpriest. For some reason I was picturing the Bloodrager as both...well...the Bloodrager and the Warpriest.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Here's a question: does wandering spirit affect your spirit animal?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mudfoot wrote:

Not only redheaded, but properly dressed too. So I can have a big picture of her without the wife complaining.

Still got weird feet, though. I think Wayne's parents were killed by heels or something.

I think he just plays too much Fire Emblem: Awakening. But hey, after that Lucina/My Unit reveal I think a lot of people picked the game up again.

And for the record, I love the art (and character) even if she does have weird heel-less feet.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Primal Surge (Su):
At 8th level, once per day as a swift action, a primal companion hunter can touch her animal companion and grant it one evolution that costs up to 4 evolution points. The companion must meet the prerequisites of the selected evolution. Unlike the evolutions from primal transformation, this evolution is not set; it can be changed each time the hunter uses this ability. Using primal surge activates the primal transformation ability on the companion if it isn’t already active. This effect lasts until the hunter ends the primal transformation. This does not allow a companion to exceed its maximum number of natural attacks.

This ability can grant only one evolution at a time, even if the chosen evolution could be selected multiple times.

This ability can grant an evolution that allows additional evolution points to be spent to upgrade that evolution (such as damage reduction or f light), and any points left over can be spent on such upgrades. This ability cannot be used to grant an upgrade to an evolution that the companion already possesses. This ability replaces second animal focus.

To clear up the confusion huge (for an eidolon) would require you to get the large (4 point) evolution and then spend an additional 2 points (for a total of 6). The Hunter ability allows you to select 1 evolution that either costs (and/or can be upgraded for a total of) 4 or fewer points.

The reason I listed the wolf/lion evolution and not the bear one is because his would automatically be to make him large sized (because I want a large bear, and Paizo doesn't seem to like grizzlies).

That said con poison for the wolf/lion isn't a bad idea.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The exact nature of the evolution is it can be any ONE evolution costing up to 4 points. So you could use the large evolution (4) but not the huge evolution (4+2). You could use fly (2) or supernatural fly (2+2).

That's just for the permanent evolution. The level per day is as a normal Eidolon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Verzen wrote:
Quote:

There's a bloodrager archetype than can cast touch spells as a swift action if they can get their skin to make contact with their targets by giving them real big hugs, slaps or tickles.

No joke.

And this sealed the trolling suspicion. Well played. ;)

No, but really: Blood Conduit. 5th level "Spell Conduit (Su).

Amulet of the Blooded:
Each different type of amulet of the blooded grants its wearer powers from one sorcerer bloodline, but makes him vulnerable to attacks and effects that target creatures with the appropriate bloodline (such as a blood-hunting weapon). If a creature that already has the associated bloodline wears the amulet, the wearer does not gain the abilities listed below; instead, the effective level of his bloodline powers increases by 2. This effect does not stack with other abilities that increase the effective level of bloodline powers.

I will say though that it doesn't give all of the abilities/the full version. More like a watered down sample.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

There's a Hunter archetype called Primal Companion Hunter from the ACG (I mentioned it was an ACG class archetype at the beginning of my post). It swaps out a few things for A) the ability to make your companion into an Eidolon for Hunter minutes per day (more or less) and then B) give your companion a permanent 4 (or less) point evolution that you can change day to day. I REALLY like it. Like, ohmigod one of the best anythings ever.

But even if it's in the ACG, the question doesn't require the ACG to answer (barring the how does that work aspect). It's really more about Large Bear vs Wolf (with a potential 4 point or less evo) vs Lion (with a potential 4 point or less evo). The evolution is derived from the APG+UM Eidolon evolutions so functionally nothing new there either.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

...that I'll be applying the permanent 4 (or less) point evolution from the Hunter archetype? I've played most classes several times but never played a Druid(/Hunter) or a Cavalier before. Druid has just never been top of my list and the staircases, rock walls to be climbed and often narrow dungeon crawls have killed any/every mount idea I ever had.

I've only ever had 2 "animal companions". One was a wolf companion for my ranger who died very quickly given my DMs penchant for difficult encounters and the rangers lower leveled pet. The other pet was a riding gecko who I never brought into the dungeons. Aside from that I've played several summoners but I daresay there's a large divide between companions and Eidolons.

My point is, I don't have much (or functionally any) experience with animal companions so I'm at a loss for my Hunters companion. I really like the primal archetype and that free 4 point evolution can be a huge help. I was thinking:
Bear with Large
Wolf with anything
Lion with anything

Flying won't have much use as our DM HATES players having flying. Almost every dungeon has a low ceiling and the only time we ever get height is when most/all of the enemies fly. So I daresay the flying evolution (or a Roc for that matter) would be a waste.

So given that I'm considering those 3 and can add the evolution, do any of them really stand out and/or are any of them really bad choices?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tels wrote:

Halgra: YOU'RE A ROTTEN LITTLE BASTARD WITH NO SELF CONTROL!! GET OUT OF MY HOUSE UNTIL YOU CAN CONTROL YOUR BLOOD LUST!!!!

...

Here, I packed some cookies for your tip. Be safe and write home! Mummy loves you!

^unofficial headcannon of how that scene went down.

[Edit] Also, Oloch totally gets carepackages from his mother. Including a pretty cutting hat.

I love you. This right here wins everything. Forever.

But really EPIC iconic. CN bloodthirsty far from good warrior first priest second character. LOVE. IT.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The boots, the cloak, the rapier, the outfit, the hair, the look, the flair! I can't take it *swoon*

But seriously, love this character. Perfect amount of the two parent classes while still being it's own class with tons of flavor. And dat backstory! Totally using that in my next campaign near the sea.

This came out really really good. Then again, the only ACG classes I'm worried about in any manner are the Investigator and the Slayer. And that's only because I plan to use them to fade the Rogue out of PC existence, becoming an NPC thieves/assassins guild class (poor Merisiel). And that's strictly mechanics.

Anyway, keep up the amazing work!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Thanks, you guys are the best!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Sharaya wrote:
Shadows_Of_Fall wrote:
Same problem here though it sends me to the store blog. I'm not trying to use the promo, just trying to order normally (saving the promo for an end of the month blowout order with whatever money I can set aside this month :P)

Interesting. We're looking into this one as well, since it does not seem to be the same issue that's related to the promo code.

We can try to submit this from our side of the system, but I'm not seeing a payment method selected for this order. Would you like to use the card that is the preferred payment method for your subscriptions? Just let me know, and we'll get it taken care of.

Thanks!
Sharaya

I may have been mistaken actually. I definitely ended up at store blog at least once but my (fiendish) cat may have stepped on the key board and taken me there. Right now it's going back to the same page as everyone else.

Sometimes my order would make it to the part where I could apply the code and had to hit "confirm order" but then in would take me back to the start. Other times it was just "proceed to checkout" which reset me. The first order I tried to make today I input the code, but I don't know if that caused the issue. Since then I've emptied my entire cart a couple of times and tried to start from scratch without the code (in part because it gave me trouble and I decided to wait on some items and do a bigger purchase later).

It could also be unrelated but I'm unable to view older blog posts as well (the page is just blank). Hope the info helps someone sort it all out.

As for the purchase, I added a single item to my cart and double checked that I only have 1 card on my account to use for a purchase/my subscription so go ahead and use that.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Same problem here though it sends me to the store blog. I'm not trying to use the promo, just trying to order normally (saving the promo for an end of the month blowout order with whatever money I can set aside this month :P)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Oh wow I totally missed the forum. That's what I get for not having enough sleep.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Every time to try to proceed to checkout it asks me to sign in and then sends me back to the store blog. I'm using firefox and when I tried it with chrome it erased my cart and sent me back instead.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
xn0o0cl3 wrote:
That's actually a third tier ability and it never becomes permanent, it just changes from a spell-like ability to a supernatural ability.

Sorry I meant 3rd, dunno why I didn't say it. And in what way would a supernatural fly speed at all times not be considered permanent? Sure it's knocked out by some spells and such, but it is still for all intents and purposes permanent under any normal circumstances.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Claxon wrote:

Maybe using the broom of flying would be the best example.

It would be reasonable for a GM to say that instead of having an extra item (broom or carpet or whatever) that you could instead just have this apply to your armor as a non-scaling enhancement (like the Comfort enhancement). 17,000 gp for overland flight for 9 hours a day attached to your armor seems reasonable to me. Anything less than that just seems too cheap in my opinion. Flight is a very powerful affect, and the price and benefit shouldn't be trivialized.

But with mythic you could get fly from a single use of mythic power at tier 1. At tier 6 it automatically (IIRC) becomes permanent fly speed. I'm talking about Eldritch Flight, which comes at the same time as the ability to make your weapon legendary and then later an artifact.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
xn0o0cl3 wrote:

Winged Boots are cheap as far a flying items go. I dunno how well those fit into your definition of reliable though.

Also, play an aasimar and investing in the feat chain from ARG that gives you wings would cost no gold, but you'd have to spend some feats.

I'm pretty sure the animated armor won't work though. Generally, if you find a work around that's too good to be true, it's broken and you probably shouldn't use it. But, then again, this is mythic, and mythic is all about being OP. See if your GM's cool with it.

What's up with the price restrictions though? You guys are level 10 with five mythic ranks, shouldn't that give you a hefty amount of cash?

My last character was an Aasimar Paladin and the Tiefling fits WAAAY better with the campaign. The boots...ehh...I kinda want to have something...safer than that. Or rather more reliable.

Weird twist though, I am the DM. For now. I came up with a setting in a forest in Cheliax based on Innistrad (from MtG, basically Ustalav) where we can run one-day adventures. Our group consists of 4 total (so 3 players) and we all go to college/have jobs. So if we ever can't all make it we have this side campaign I came up with. Whoever wants to DM and has an idea/can make it DMs the session. The "campaign" theme itself is comedic horror.

Anyway we each have a character (though we can swap them for others down the road) that we'll use in whatever session. The limited cash is kinda due to the circumstances of the set-up. The Mythic 5 is to help off-set the only 2 players at a time but the cash is limited at a normal amount so no one ends up over-geared. Money will be gained slowly but should probably be spent on consumables.

The other DMs basically said "It sounds like it could work, what do the message boards say? We'll see what they say."


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Core as in only the core line, which includes Core Rulebook, APG, ARG, UM, UCombat, UE, UCampaign, Mythic, B1-4, NPC. I meant no AP books or supplementary/campaign setting/player companion books or anything.

Headband of Aerial Agility +6 is even more expensive than the Wings of Flying.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Sadly that would require a higher technology level than we have and the group only uses the core books.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Basically I'm creating a War Priest 6/Duelist 4/Hierophant or Champion 5 character. My race is Tiefling with Vestigial Wings trait. I'm looking for a reliable way to fly and all I see are Wings of Flying which, at level 10, severely break the bank.

I was looking at other work arounds and the legendary item ability caught my eye. Specifically, the art of armor with wings. If I choose the legendary item ability and give my armor flying, could it theoretically allow me to fly, since I'm wearing the armor?

It's a neat idea and is a better option that taking the dual path feat and then choosing the mostly useless Archmage (useless given my classes) to allow me to fly.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
MrSin wrote:
Cpt.Caine wrote:
If I wanted to play a smart, puzzle solver, I'd just play a Ninja (better than a Rogue, but still not "good"), an Inquisitor (great at non-combat encounters, and a lot of potential in combat) or a Lore Warden (duh); all with a 14-16 INT.

Actually that list goes on a for a while, including to alchemist, bard, and wizard. Some of those classes not only have better or more utility but some of them come with better combat ability too!

Cpt.Caine wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
A) It should not be strictly better than the parent class at everything the parent class does (as the previous version was)
I'll disagree with this; when the parent class is bad, the child class should be better at everything.
Another way to look at it is to compare the investigator to all the other classes rather than just the rogue, or even without any classes and just giving it face value. Imo, it comes up subpar.

Exactly. Don't let the deadbeat dead end low class parent kill off the Inquisitors potential! It's time to just let go of considering the Rogue while balancing anything. It's already broken. That ship has sailed. Don't let it hold back other incredible classes oozing flavor and potential.

1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>