Stabbald's page

It's good to hide rolls for certain things that you don't want to roll out in the open. Things like searching for traps and sense motive should really be rolled in secret by the GM. Otherwise after the rogue rolls a one for trap detection, suddenly everyone is interested in checking for themselves.

Honestly all perception rolls should be handled by the GM in secret, but I don't go that far personally.

I have a character just like what you're describing, and he's a TON of fun to play. He's a 'Cad', a fighter archetype specializing in dirty tricks and improvised weapons. The improvised weapons he uses are mainly kitchen implements (meat cleavers, butcher knives, rolling pins, and of course, his trusty frying pan), but he uses random bits of scenery when it suits him.

As a Cad, you get 'catch off guard' at level 2, so he doesn't take any penalties with improvised weapons.

For traits, I took 'surprise weapon' for a +2 on all attack rolls with improvised wepaons, and 'dockside brawler' for a +1 to damage. It's actually a really powerful combo.

In later levels, I took cautious fighter, combat expertise, improved and greater dirty trick, bludgeoner, and taunt. I also took 'improved catch off-guard (check with your DM, it's third party).

He doesn't do a ton of damage, but he's hard to hit, and he lays down all kinds of crazy debuffs on his enemies with his dirty tricks.

But the most fun is playing him as a food-focused combat gourmet. He plunders every dungeon pantry we come across, and stops to cook a meal every time we come across a kitchen of any kind. He's also fond of cooking for any NPC's we meet.

Certainly sounds interesting, though does he not suffer from not using magic weapons?

Monsters in my game die when they hit -1 unless they are a named creature/npc in which case the standard rules apply. This just cuts back on the prisoner/interrogation thing.

That said, if the players are specifically attempting to capture a mook to gain info from then they will die via the standard rules to give the party a chance to do it.

Are there even any statted deities in Pathfinder?

I thought that was something they went out of their way to avoid.

I did a couple things to point them in the right direction for devotion points:

** spoiler omitted **

I hadn't considered using your second point in that way, and it's a really great idea. Thanks. :)

To be honest... if your players would never do that kind of thing, that might be because they've never thought of it and have never realized that such actions can have rewards. It's probably worth it to flat out tell the PCs that acts like that can have rewards if that's never been a part of gameplay before. If you want to couch it in game, just have folks make Knowledge (religion) checks (or just a Wisdom check) and tell whoever rolled highest, "Oh! Nice roll; that's what you needed to learn this:......"

I was thinking that my players would never do this kind of thing, and for a couple of them I'm probably right. Just yesterday however one of them surprised me in the most delightful way.

SIDE STORY: One interesting playtest result from watching folks play RPGs for the first time. They used the rules and were having a lot of fun fighting monsters and all that... but once the 1st encounter was open, they got stuck. Turns out, they didn't realize that they could open a door (the GM was new too) to go to the next room—they assumed the door was just background scenery and didn't realize that in a tabletop RPG, you can do whatever you want and interact with anything. This is obviously a VERY different scenario than the devotion point thing... but it's similar—if players have never seen a game play element in play before, they might not even realize it's an option. Sometimes, the GM needs to say, "Do you want to open the door and find new adventure?"

Man, this is just about one of the best things I've read on this website for sure. It's interesting to see how sometimes it takes the newest of players to teach us old dogs new ways of looking at things.

I have to assume this is a joke or something. You have enough of a point buy for four 18's, are gestalt, get an extra trait, AND a free ECL?

And on top of that, you want help making something optimal?

GMPC's are exempt from the rule of cool, because they are never cool.

Technically the first fight of the module is watching a Mystic Balor vorpal an ancient silver dragon, with the last action of the latter entity being saving the lives of the players with one last Feather Fall.

That's not a fight. That's exposition. The PC's have ZERO effect on this part of the story and it pretty obviously doesn't count.

You're not going to get much more epic than that. And really, is not fighting entities associated with death and decay after watching such a titanic conflict in many ways related?

No. Not in the slightest. Watching a fight that you can in no way effect and actually participating in and altering a story through your actions are two completely different things.

The first "fight" in this AP is against..

What?! The Monk is actually capable of defending himself?!

Nerf it! Everyone knows the Monk should be completely useless at everything.

I suggest you just point your DM to the Wizard and ask again how your Monk is overpowered.

An all wizard party would be hilarious fun to kill as a dm, with something really basic almost out of the gate (level 2-3). Yes, some low level mounted fighters lance the **** out of you on a charge. Go back to the College of Winterhold in shame. Oh wait, you can't.

I've never understood this kind of GM'ing. Besides, I hope those low level fighters can survive the 5 consecutive will saves needed to dodge all of those sleeps spells being hurled at them.

On topic...

This would be great fun. I'd love to see a team of wizards, each one specialized in one of the schools of magic. I think it would make for a great adventure.

Reminds me of Ars Magica. Good times.

Chaotic Fighter wrote:

Channeled emotion. Super Saiyan.

Okay, if I ever play a barbarian, his hair is going to turn blonde and spiky when he rages.

Except that it takes you 12 full round actions to activate the rage.

Toon?

It's a fail term people use in World of Warcraft to refer to their characters because they look vaguely like cartoon characters.

It makes no sense in that game, and it makes even less sense in this one.

As for "preverting a player's character", it's not your character anymore at this point. And that was a clear agreement at the campaign't start, which I state normally multiple times when players are making characters. I don't mind morally ambiguous characters too much, but I won't countenance evil characters at my table.

You do realize that turning evil doesn't suddenly mean you fall to the darkside Star Wars style, right?

Closed minded GM'ing doesn't seem like good GM'ing in my opinion.