Stome's page

736 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.

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

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Every time I see a topic like this I can not help but feel its nothing but poorly veiled "melee can't have nice things."

The fact of the matter is that limiting items does little or nothing to casters but hurts Melee a great deal. Or other less common builds like say a thrower that needs a blink back belt.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:

The Paladin and Ranger are Divine casters.

Arcane spell-casting is the offensive style of casting. So naturally, someone who possesses arcane spell-casting will want ways to use it offensively.

It's really as simple as that.

I still hold that giving the class Spellstrike would fill that "gap" perfectly. Spell Combat remains a Magus thing, but both classes are designed to cast some arcane spells and hit things with a weapon, so both classes should be able to mix the two.

Hahaha why because you say so? I count a whole heck of a lot of defensive and utility spells on the Magus spell list.

Sorry to break this to you but the artificial boundaries you place on a type of magic in your head mean nothing in reality.

The bard has been Arcane for a very long time and yet has very few offensive spells.

12 people marked this as a favorite.

What the real problem is is people thinking their opinion is worth far far more then it is.

Classes not being "beta-worthy" is nothing more then your opinion and a poor one at that. All the classes function (some better then some of the core classes.) I don't like all of them by a long shot but ohh well. I don't like all of any book.

This "I don't like it so its trash and should never happen" mentality is nothing short of childish.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I really think many people don't get this class at all. All this "the casting is not blended with the melee enough" and "I don't find myself using the spells all the time."

.....duh. Its a 4 spell lvl full BaB class. If you want something that blends spell casting more that is what the Magus is for.

The point is just like the other 4 spell level full BaB classes. Mostly melee with the flexibility and options to do something in situations that melee is a poor choice or flat out imposable.

Ranger and Paladin don't "blend casting seamlessly with melee." and all the other such complaints. I don't see why any expected this to be different or even want it to be.

Don't give me "the magus spell list is not good for that.". That's a load. If you think that then you have never really looked at the spell list.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:

A suggestion for the DT: Drop Damage Reduction and Uncanny Dodge, and pick up Spellstrike.

This class is begging to Spellstrike.

Then it would overshadow Magus. I wouldn't mind a limited use ability to get a free quicken under certain circumstances. But its hardly a must.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Funny. Seems to me that a full Bab 4 spell lvl arcane class is new. (and long overdo.) Casting in rage is new, Flavorful and strong effects while in rage is new.

Perhaps you need to read the PDF again.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LoneKnave wrote:

You don't have Spell Combat (or some other similar feature) to mesh your casting with your melee-ness though.

Which kinda sucks. You also lose out on most of the utility spells by having the magus spell list. So you have combat focused spells on a class that doesn't get good at casting spells in combat.

The thing is the magus spell list isn't even that focused on their ability to mesh touch spells with an attack. The number of spells that work with it is low. So ignore shocking grasp and frigid touch (vampiric touch is still more then worth having.)I fail to see how that is a big deal.

What do you gain over no spell list? MASSIVE flexibility. Ranged options when you have no other choice, Burning hands when you run into a
swarm, Infernal healing and vampirc touch for self sustainability if things go horribly wrong, -Invisibility-, most of the best buffs a melee could want, movement/teleport options.

Honestly it covers every weakness melee have. Flying monsters, Swarms, uselessness in any situation that isn't "hit thing", Keeping yourself alive if something happens to the casters or things just go very wrong.

I don;t understand how people can complain about this spell list.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kaisos Erranon wrote:
So it's not the fault of the developers for developing something that isn't the least bit creative?

Again with the over blown opinions. What is or isn't creative is completely subjective. Iteration is a fact of game design. Both table top and digital. Pathfinder as a whole is in fact iterative.

Putting building blocks together in a new way isn't counter to creativity.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love the bloodrager. I have wanted a full BaB 4 spell lvl class for a long time.

But the more I play around with it the more I can not help but feel it makes the Barbarian useless for anything more then flavor reasons. (meaning does not want/hates magic.) Now not to say flavor reasons are not valid. But my personal opinion is that it should not void its parent class completely for all other reasons but flavor.

I think it just gets to much of whats good from Barbarian without losing enough. What I mean is it loses some hp (d10 DD) trap sense (lets be honest its a weak ability.) and rage powers (but most bloodlines are superior anyway.)

So my suggestion is to perhaps think about taking away a bit more of the Barb stuff? Here is a few of my thoughts on it.

Weaker form of rage. +2 +4 +6 rather then +4 +6 +8

Drop ether uncanny dodge or fast movement.

DR stopping at 3/- rather then 5

Simple weapon pref and then added pref from bloodlines (might be to big of a pain in the back side at this point.)

Light armor with "If the bloodrager gains med armor pref they can then cast in med armor without ASF"

In no way am I saying do ALL of those. They are just thoughts I have on the topic. But its only one mans opinion. So you know take it with a grain of salt.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I am really getting tired of this over use of extremely vague terms like "niche" "concept" "not distinct enough" and so on without even trying to attempt to define the terms you us.

Its a common tactic used when someone is trying to push their opinion as fact and its pretty easy to see though.

You don't like it that's fine. Don't buy/use it. But trying to pretend that you not liking it makes it factually bad/wrong/poor is low brow at best.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So in your -opinion- there is some vague line where something -feels- [Insert another vague term here. Flavorful, distinct, concept or the like.] enough to be a class?

That's nice. Everyone has an opinion. Mine is that a class is anything the game designers want it to be... because they are designing the game...

2 people marked this as a favorite.

For one making them archetypes means they would have to go through a lot to make sure nothing funny happens when mixed with other archetypes. Making it a class means a nice clean slate.

And frankly I don't get this complaint. So perhaps it could have worked the same or close as an archetype. Your point is? Why do you care so much if the way to make [Blank] is a class or a archetype as long as it works. The end result is the same. I could not care less if they called them "super fun time vocations." as long as they function.

It really does just feel like people need something to complain about.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would assume he like the Ranger and Paladin has a caster level of his class lvl -4.

I am a bit sad that he can cast out of rage. I personally saw it as a balancing factor. Because lets not kid ourselves its a strong class. Having to worry about bloodrage rounds and being able to be in bloodrage when you need a spell. It would make playing the class well very tactical. But that's just my opinion so of course take it with a grain of salt.

I am also in the camp that thinks a few of the bloodlines are a bit strong. Arcane being the one that jumps out at me. It simply just gets the best arcane buffs a bit to easily. I would drop a couple (displacement and haste) move some to a tier up (blur) and add some of the weaker arcane buffs in there (like false life.). They would still be plenty useful since we are talking about action free buffing here.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

"3 (more like 4) PC's working together perfectly where the BBEG and minions do nothing to stop them from setting up this convoluted combo can kill the BBEG!!"

Well duh. The list of ways 3-4 PCs could kill a BBEG in one round under perfect circumstances when nothing is done to counter it is pretty long. Simply 3 rage-pounching Barbs could easily one round kill any BBEG thats of a proper CR for a BBEG of that lvl.

Stagger isn't anything great. Using a full round to partially limit one targets actions is a so-so trade off at best.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Drop this group. Seriously. The kind of person that gets so proud of himself because "My PC can kill your PC...using this over powered homebrew race." is just flat out not worth gaming with.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have kicked around this idea a few times. My version of it uses Kensai. Also uses a arcana that most think is near worthless. Pool strike.

You see pool strike is (SU) and therefore CAN be used while raging. Later on grabbing arching pool strike. That mixed with arcane strike and gloves of arcane striking makes for interesting AoE ability.

Spells mostly buffs, out of combat utility and recovery (Infernal healing.)

Have not tested it out in play yet but I think the idea has promise.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
There is a difference in universality. Everyone has the core rulebook, and the Bestiary is the same across the board. Anything else has to be considered optional. There shouldn't be general rules found only in other books. I am really surprised by the level of venom, considering that almost everyone agrees on what the preferred rule is. For me it's just a matter of the text. The attitude almost seems to be, "How dare you care about this, I care very much and think it's wrong you care about this."

Firstly since there are monsters in the GMG and the Bestiary is in no way needed to play then it is also NOT core. So the argument falls apart right there.

Secondly what is considered optional is nothing but your opinion. You are welcome to it of course but thinking is in universal shows nothing but arrogance.

It is not universal, at all. To me since almost everything is freely available on a couple of sites there is no reason for anything to be secondary. But this is only my opinion and I don't expect anyone else to do things as I do. Nor do I feel the need to try and cram my opinion down anyone's throat and pretend its a fact.

7 people marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
That rule is in the advanced race guide. It is directly opposed to the rules in the bestiary so really it depends where you look as to what the aasimar pc gains.

Its not "opposed" it is a specific rule that trumps the general rule. This is a core concept of the system as a whole. Specific trumps general. It very much is a system of exceptions.

Its starting to feel like many of these FAQ "request" are people that know good and well what the RAW and RAI are and disagree with it. Then they try to mask that disagreement as manufactured "confusion" they pretend to see in the rules.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The funny thing about opinions is everyone's is different and few or none are worth more the3n any other.

See I completely disagree with you. I would rather see Prestige Classes done away with completely. It is a fiddly and clunky system that was nothing more then a poor bandaid for how bland and poorly made many classes had been in 3.5.

Archetypes on the other hand accomplish the need of fleshing out chars so they are very distinctly different even with the same class. And honestly if you think they only vary slightly you really haven't taken a good look at many of them.

A bard that is far more like a rogue? (but better.) Yep. A intelligent fighter that uses his brain a to help overcome the enemy? Yep. A rangerbarian? Yep.

Many of these trade out MAJOR class features for another classes MAJOR feature. Hexcrafter being another one. These things are in no way minor.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
slade867 wrote:
mplindustries wrote: hear through the door that there's something on the other side--with your absurdly high perception check, you think it might be X

My group/s: Listen through a door? Ha! We kick that b#@%& open! (sometimes literally)

mplindustries wrote: appears you've tracked the creature back to it's lair--with your Survival check, you can tell that the tracks are rather fresh, so it's almost certainly home.

Can happen.

mplindustries wrote:
......[familiar, animal companion, trained bird, arcane eye, or stealthy scout character] spots a group of foes. They are [unaware of you/unconcerned with some random bird that doesn't look special/etc.]. The scout can then return to the party and tell them what they saw.

My group/s: That's WAY more trouble than it's worth. We just walk our path. If we walk into a clearing and there's an enemy camp there, we see each other at the same time...and then we kick their ass.

mplindustries wrote:
...[one of several divination spells] gives you some indication that there's definitely some combat going down soon.

My group/s: WASTE a spell LOOKING at something when you could spend that spell blasting or Hasting???? LOL!

mplindustries wrote:'s pretty damn obvious that the BBEG is coming up imminently for one of many different reasons.

Happens sometimes.

mplindustries wrote:

Seriously, it's extremely rare to not have some kind of warning a fight is coming--I can't even imagine the sort of game where you wouldn't. Maybe I just play more cautiously than you?

Our groups play VERY differently. My group would see your style as tedious and a little cowardly. You would probably see mine as foolhardy.

I agree that with a chance to buff often, that helps casters who want to pretend to be martials. Still, why not just buff the martial? You know what's better than casting Barkskin so your AC is closer to the Fighters? Giving the Fighter 2 more AC. YMMV I guess.

Wow.. just wow.. So your whole argument for martails being fine is completely based on "My group plays like impatient meatheads so your tactics are invalid everywhere always!!11!"

Seriously the fact that your group/s do not use the tools built into the system does not have any weight on weather there is balance in the system.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The whole "Its fine with enough DM tampering so its balanced" argument is nothing short of idiotic. Yes with enough tampering anything can be done... freaking duh. That in no way means the game is balanced.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know sometimes this is the case I am sure. But then other times your augment (meaning the "yeah that's great in theory but in play I think not so much." position.) Is simply used to try to counter a point that the person can't counter with real numbers or facts and the assumption that the person they are trying to discredit has never played it in a real game is often wrong.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thing people that don't see the problem fail to grasp is that damage is the least important part of the game. Even the least important part of combat. (unless you have no casters then its the only way to win. But removing casters is not a fix most would like.)

Even a low level example. A well placed glitter dust disables most of the enemies then the melees go in and finish it up.

Who won the battle? The caster or the clean up crew? Melees largely become nothing but janitors cleaning up whats left.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its funny people cry up a storm about Dex magi being way to common and yet want to make up rules (that are in no way supported by RAW.) to remove the one very tiny benefit a Str magus has.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even the shenanigans aside APs are made for a 4 person 15-20 point buy group and even then are on the easy side. With rolled scores and a 5 person party of course APs are going to be VERY easy.

In fact even with a group made for it APs tend to have flat poorly designed encounters. Like single target boss fights. The ppl writing this stuff really need to knock that off. Anyway with a shred of system mastery knows that's just stupid.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright reading back a few I have seen gold called a very low cost resource and whatnot. What game are you people playing? Do you only play casters? Or do you just hand out 2X-3X the WBL?

For melee (who this rule is clearly meant to help) Gold is spread really damn thin as it is. With the high cost of magic armor and much higher cost of magic weapons, Needing at least the two ability belt if not the all 3 ability score belt, A way to fly at least for a short time every day, Save boosting items (since most melee get jack for will saves) and more. These are needed just to function in their intended roles.

Even if you have a caster to make a couple of those wondrous items for you gold should not be nearly as plentiful as some are making it out to be.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Firstly the OP out right said they are not looking for crit builds so as was asked I gave crit no consideration. Also since damage from vital strike is not multiplied on a crit it becomes far less valuable. Not worthless of course but not a priority.

As for feat slots. This is hardly a feat starved build.

So with vital strike and improved vs we have a large bastard sword with impact doing 9D8 or 12D8 on a crit (10% chance unless another feat is spent or keen enchantment.)

Falcata 9D6 or 15D6 on a crit. (again 10% chance unless feat or keen.)
Nodachi 6D8

Nodachi is pretty much out hands down.
Bastard sword is doing 36 average and 48 on a crit
Falcata is 27 avg 45 crit.

Now this is from just damage dice not str and power attack ect. So that would push the crit damage in favor of Falcata of course. Though I am not a super math guy and lack the ability to run those numbers. At least without taking all night. Though I am reasonably sure without keen/imp crit Bastard sword wins hands down. With though Falcata likely wins.

In the end though the OP asked for a non-crit fishing build.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
Dekalinder wrote:
Stunning assault is equivalent to any of the many save or suck spell that wizard or sorc have. The main difference is that said wizard can do it at most 3 or 4 times per day, while you can use stunning assault 5 or more times per round all day long. It's like giving sorc or wiz infinite level 5 slots. You just don't do that, not even at level 16.

3 or 4 times a day, you are kidding aren't you?

More like 25-30 times per day with Spell Perfection. At level 16 you can force an enemy to make 4 reflex saves a round or be dazed for 4 rounds with a DC around 24-30 and a level 4 spell slot. Bump it to a level 6 slot with Persistent Spell and force those saves to 8 per round.

Casters also get to target their Daze effects against any of the three saves rather than being stuck on Fortitude which tends to be the highest save at most levels.

It really is amazing the number for people that clearly don't understand how full casters work that try to post on things related to balance.

Not just what you pointed out but they are also able to buy spell slots with s number of items. And since they don't have to spend coin on extremely expensive gear just to do function as their class they have the coin to burn.

The whole "casters have limited resources" thing is vastly over stated. Ether by people with low system understanding or those that personally want to try and hide the power gap between melee and casters.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In 3.5/PF hafted seems to mean pole-arms made largely of wood aside from the striking end. Though as far as I know there is nowhere it is spell out word for word. Really should be.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Err also something I failed to notice. You list of classes leaves well no healing other then ranger and maybe oracles? (not sure if around means PCs will or won;t be allowed to play them.)

This gives ranger a bit more value too. Frankly I would drop a rogue any day before a ranger. SA is a very weak mechanic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Conundrum wrote:
Good thing vegetables and refuse can't make it they fiber optic cables or I would need to rinse off.

Yep that about sums up how much sense anything you have posted made.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is there really people that have such a hard time understanding what is frankly very simple? There is no fallacy here and you really need to stop trying to pass off you passive aggressive hate for the class as anything but that.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah this is what PFS people really need to keep straight. PFS rulings are not rules. They are houserules or something of the like. PFS is full of them but they are not real rules.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You are right that is not how the world works. But it is how the GAME works. Players do in fact play the exceptional people. And that has been a core of design since 1E at lest.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vulnerable to Fire wrote:
There's a feedback loop. Change the rules to make magic more common and give each character absurd powers, and you make the playerbase expect this, and attract a playerbase that wants this. Next time you change the rules, you follow what your playerbase wants, and so you get even more common magic and powers. Repeat for a few cycles and you get monks who can teleport just by meditating really hard and a CR system where players are assumed to survive and win constantly instead of needing to be worried.

If you don't like it don't play. Sorry to break this to you but your opinion is worth next to nothing.

3 people marked this as a favorite.


The game is not and never should be player vs DM. Wealth by level is a guideline not a hard rule but it still has a very good reason for being there. Because the Cr system assumes a rough level of power from items. While it is far from perfect it is a GAME system and must be built on numbers and logic. For the system not to take equipment into account would be nothing short of stupid.

As for the rest of it. The GAME system is in fact built around the idea that more often then not the PCs will win. And really it is built around the PCs and DM being the center of it. You see I said both there, not one or the other. You are in no way more important then your players nor is your fun more valid then there's.

In the end it is a GAME, It is made for enjoyment. It is designed from the ground up with that in mind.

Your post is full of frankly bs assumptions and fallacies out the ears. A player wanting to upgrade his sword has nothing to do with WoW, An adventure wanting to do all he can to stay alive (by being optimal as they can be.) is not doing it wrong. Anyone that faces danage would be an idiot not to.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
redward wrote:
vonFiedler wrote:
You are saying, by your example, you've never made requests of a restaurant, or registered complaints?
I think a more appropriate analogy would be asking to see the chef, and then demanding he convince you why he put cardamom in the special before you order it. The chef has better things to do with his time.

Another reason this analogy is just flat bad is that requesting something done to YOUR dish or having it remade effects only you. This is more like walking into a restaurant and screaming that they should permanently change the menu because you don't like something on it. It would effect everyone that eats there and its just idiotic to even attempt.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
leo1925 wrote:

@Jiggy @BetaSprite

It still allows you to say something about the king's/noble's/etc mother and he has to attack you himself (with his fists if he doesn't have a weapon at hand) instead of ordering his personal guard to attack you, and the best part is that you acted in self defense.
So the feat can still break the world.

Ohh so its "melee can't have nice things." There can be gods know how many spells that control people/monsters but the second its something melee can have its not alright because its not magic?

I really thought the PF community moved pass melee can;t have nice things by now. My mistake.

-Edit- And where are you getting this "has to run up and punch" nonsense? They can cast at the feat user and nothing keeps them from drawing a weapon as part of their move if they don't have one in had.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its a freaking standard action to make something focus on you for one round (perhaps two by spending another swift action.) If anything its on the weak side as the action economy of it sucks. Ohh yeah and only once per target.

How on earth can people still be throwing a fit over this?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem with this is a great deal of the time so called "problems" purposed on this forum are in no way a real problem. Its the people that turn out to be the problem a lot of the time. Ether trying to twist something even when they really know its not the case or trying to make something not work because they don't like it but still likely know they are full of it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel about the same as most. They would make much better commando squads and even stealth squads. (low ACP and invis spells work well for this.)Save for maybe Skirnir Magi. They could make an army I suppose. But they take forever to get off the ground (lvl 8) so it would be one serious army. Something I would oath to use.

As for cookie cutter builds I have to disagree. Yes the Dex build is common but just with what I have played and seen played we have a whip trip Magus, Hexcrafter using hair as his main weapon, A halfling slingstaff magus, and I am forgetting at least one.

You know what I have never seen? A Barb that was not THF. So barbs are clearly far more cookie cutter yet there is a great deal less complaining about it. It's more peoples personal dislike for one feat disguised as anti-cookie cutter complaints.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now for some better thought out answers. BBEG's with good will saves is pretty much a must. DO NOT run encounters with one BBEG alone. Seriously this is at the root of way to much "This is OP!" threads. Action econamy alone makes it unwise but also things like this. If that BBEG had a someone that can remove the effect with him things would have gone much better yes?

Rerolls. PF has a plethora of ways to get rerolls. They are great for PCs but even better for BBEG's. 1/day for someone that might very well have a one encounter lifespan means more then 1/day on a PC that should be seeing around 4 encounters a day. (another point here. No 15min work days.) Ways to get rerolls, Saving finale spell, Preacher Inquisitor, and Duel cursed oracle. There surely are more that's just off the top of my head.

Then there are items. Even mundane ones like Soothe Syrup.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There are plenty of ways around high Ac but what I find worrisome is the mind set of "My player focused on being good at this! How do I negate all his work and his whole concept?"

Seriously lets not punish someone for putting forth a lot of effort to be pretty good at defending his friends.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ahh one of these guys. One of you that think you should dictate what people get to play.

Its a game and people should play what they have fun with. How many Ninjas you think there should or should not be in a freaking fantasy game world means less then nothing.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The whole "if you try yo make your C good you are a bad roleplayer!" thing is getting old and frankly is idiotic. These are people that live dangerous lives and risk death at any moment. If you are playing someone that is not trying to be the best that they can be then you are roleplaying an idiot.

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Its a sad sad thing when people complain about having options. Honestly if you don't like them don't use them. There are many people that do like them and frankly the "I don't like it so you shouldn't have made it!" thing is a bit arrogant.

The last thing I want is for the game to stop moving forward because some people don't like more options. I would like to see more alternate classes for instance.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Toned down is one thing but they flat made it strictly worse then many weapons that don't need EWP. That is just bad design imo.

I know a lot of people had issue with this weapon but at the same time it is still only melee. And frankly it was the only weapon forth the feat in 3.5 (Now there are a couple weapons worth it at least.)

While toning some things down from 3.5 was very good it does bother me a bit that this was made useless and yet a good deal of far more powerful things got left alone (a good number of metamagics I am looking at you.)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am having a hard time believing anyone could read the item and come up with what he did.

Perhaps he is a "magic is to powerful as it is" kind of person. Which is something I can understand. Even so rather then trying to be sneaky and change how the item is meant to work he really should just be upfront about it and just ban it honestly.

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