Dragonchess Player wrote:
I'll probably stick with PF1, because it's what my group is comfortable with. We're all middle aged to mature adults, with busy lives, and not a ton of spare time or funds to invest in new systems. If I ever win the lottery, maybe my view will change. All that said, if I ever do branch out again, the above post is the best dang sales pitch I've heard so far for PF2. 3.x hooked me by being the first system where any race could be any class. I love the nigh unfettered ability to customize. Pathfinder's archetypes and alternative class features enhanced that. And though it's usually blasphemy to bring it up on these threads, I will say 4e was fun/strong on two fronts; ease of entry, and character/party balance.
As usual, this all comes down to preference. I'm an O.C.D., follow directions, order of operations type player. I enjoy level 1, and I often do play casters. However, I also play in bigger groups, we are generous with stat generation, and we always have eager/willing healers in the party.
Thank you to everybody for their responses. I'm always touched by the spirit of sharing, creativity, and goodwill that comes from this community. (Yes, even when there is heated and sometimes contentious debate :p) I think the purpose of this thread is pretty well wrapped, though I'm open if folks find new, free, and functional options. I will start a fresh thread of what I'm looking for in NPC's for those who might wish to share and/or show off :) Thanks again.
Ryze Kuja wrote:
Hmmmm. Five bucks is certainly reasonable, though I'm usually adverse to spending money on anything "frivolous" for myself. Will Combat Manager actually let me build characters inside of it, or is it just for tracking information I plug in? Either way, thanks for the responses.
Hi folks. Been a while since I've been here. Still plugging away at working on my part of my group's ongoing shared campaign. I was wondering if any of you can point me to a reliable character generating app or site. The way I build my characters is a long and tedious process due to my O.C.D. I'm looking for a way to churn out some quick NPC's with character levels for some of my encounters, and I need something where I can just scroll through options on a menu, plug in choices/numbers, and play. I'm not too tech savvy, and my laptop is becoming more and more woefully out of date, so something free/cheap, basic, and simple to download/access would be helpful. Thanks in advance folks. p.s. (I did try and search first, but everything I could find was 7+ years out of date.)
Big respect normally to Chell, but I will have to second that that's all wrong. You absolutely can use a gore and bite on the same turn at level 1 if you had the ability. The only hinky spot comes with claws/pincers/slams if/when they are on the same limb. As to the OP: BAB on characters in relation to number of attacks per turn affects Iterative attacks. Iterative attacks explicitly are those made with a forged/manufactured/crafted weapon. (Technically unarmed strikes fall here too, but let's not confuse the issue) So, with your BAB at 7, you are entitled to two attacks (at +7, and +2) with your greatsword, when taking a full attack action. During this full attack action, you may also include any Natural weapon attacks you may have. However, all Natural attacks when combined with forged weapon attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks. That means you can use the bite, but only with your BAB -5 (+2, in this case). Secondary Natural weapons also only add half your Str mod on damage. These restrictions reflect the difficulty/awkwardness of combing weapon attacks with Natural weapons. So, TLDR: Full attack with Greatsword and Bite at BAB +7 ---> one sword at +7, one sword at +2, and one bite at +2. P.S.: For other options or confusion :p . . . . If you had multiple Natural attacks, let's say claw, bite, slam. You could do all three of those as a full attack action at level one, and each would be at full strength.
The dEVIL is in the details. There's nothing new under the sun. What makes something original is how you put pieces together. The conversation partner of the OP mostly sounds like a hipster or a nihilist without any additional context. However, for that individual, or any group really, I find the best way to present an engaging or compelling evil is to tap dance on the line of your real-world players' fears and ethics. Obviously this requires trust/consent on the part of all parties, as well as a relatively intimate knowledge of your players. If you threaten kids for the players who are parents, or subvert faith for those who are devout, or whatever, you're going to get that visceral feel that some players want. However, like others have said, this type of thing should be done sparingly. Variety is the spice and all that. You need the bad guys with bad guy signs to make a contrast for those more involved villains. The tropes you use, or that your players respond to, also help you to set the tone or theme of your campaign.
Hear, hear! Always happy to see some undiluted positivity coming out. I will second these kudos. I'd like to also respectfully add DungeonMasterCal, Set, Quixote, and Mr. Charisma to this list of worthies. I'm sure there are others I have favorited over the last few years; but all of these names, above and here, have provided many laughs and wonderful ideas. Thanks to you all!
I love character concepts like this! I would tend to agree with most of the pairings above, but I also like to mix and match against type sometimes. For me, the most fun would be mixing and matching the various beastial races with the elements. Really, any combo could be justified, but at first thought: Vanarran = Wood
I was already debating with myself as I typed those out. I can see many alternate combos there. As there are many more animal kin races, I'd also want to dip toes into the 3rd party elements; or at least break the elements down between their physical and energetic manifestations. Big ol' Tyger themed catfolk, with a giant crystaline hammer, using Earth magics for my personal favorite.
I don't have an immediate example of the party doing the obviously dumb thing, but instead something I feel better matches the cartoon you linked. In our current story arc, the GM went out of her way to emphasize how dangerous and monster infested the seas were between where we started and the island we needed to get to. The entire first third of her story has revolve around us getting hired on as guards to a flying vessel, and avoiding the water at all costs. When we arrived near the coast of the island, of course the docks had been destroyed, and the ship had taken damage from storms and encounters along the way. So, naturally, it was necessary for us to have to leave the ship and guide it in to moor amongst some small islets off the shore. Fast forward, these "small" landmasses were actually gargantuan or colossal hippo type beasts. We later discovered that this was meant to have been a simple combat encounter. However, from all the effort we'd made to avoid all the sea monsters, we were conditioned to fear anything coming out of those waters. We all scrambled and bailed for shore, and basically just waited for the behemoths to move on. Point is, not sure where the balance is, but sometimes the warnings are too effective.
Still can't think of a great dragon encounter I've played at the table, but if it's not too much against the spirit of the thread, I do have a strong favorite from fiction. I believe the name was Fyrentennemar, but regardless, the ancient red dragon from book four of R.A. Salvatore's Cleric Quintet, stands out as an amazing encounter in my mind. He is actually in several scenes, but the climactic fight in the canyon is perhaps my favorite part.
I know I'm quite junior to some players, but in nearly 14 years of gaming, I can't think of one really awesome dragon encounter. I know we've faced a few, even a few CR appropriate wyrmlings (which satisfied my beastiary nerd itch). I'm truly hard pressed to think of an encounter that stood out though. I'll ponder, but in the spirit of the thread, I'll posit an encounter I hope to run in the next few months that I hope goes well. I intend to shrink my party down using the rules from Microsized Adventures. Whilst adventuring in these dimensions (and hopefully being clueless) I intend to take the party into the lair of a youngish fairy dragon; still in the pinkish red faze of developement. From the party perspective this normally tiny beast should appear as a Colossal 3 sized Ancient Wyrm. As we will only be 5th level, I'm hoping an appropriate amount of panic ensues, before we engage the dragon. There are meant to be clues that will push this towards a social and/or skills encounter, hopefully with the party finally realizing they've been shrunk. I'm not above going a few rounds though, if my more impetuous players decide to push the big red button. :p
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
That is an excellent idea! I like random fumble rules normally, but when you played with sharing GM's creativity and consistency vary a fair bit. Having a fumble provoke an AoO, is a wonderful way to normalize this, and a good GM can still describe the how/why of the fumble for proper excitement or hilarity. Cheers for this!
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
To be clear, we actually have played with a dress up type furry in our group before. The outfit was neat, and she was a great story-teller type player. Trying to combine the two hobbies on a regular basis is just a bit much for my brain to process. Plus, my friends house is really warm. Too long in one of the suits and I'm pretty sure I'd pass out. I love a good costume party, but the rest of the time I'll stick to some ears or a tiger tail if I'm feeling the fuzzy.
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
The only race I can think of that any group I've played in has collectively banned were Warforged in 4E. Just felt wrong for the games we played. I did have a GM who absolutely hated halflings, because to him ALL halflings were Kinder, but oddly he didn't ban. He just tartgeted any of us who dared to play one. Joke's on him; I played an uber healing halfling cleric. All the monsters tried to get to me through our defensive types. I stayed up with heals, and had enough left over to keep our crew alive while they ginsued the baddies.
Not sure what spells a 15 hd gold dragon comes with, but keep in mind that the beastiary stat blocks are generic examples of the creature. It would be entirely legitimate to swap some of the spells the dragon comes with for some of the players spells known. That way, the power boost is present, but not overwhelming, and he still retains some of who he was pre wish.
DungeonmasterCal wrote: I put very few limits on players compared to a lot GMs I know. My setting is a cooperative homebrew but I originated it so I run things via benevolent dictatorship. I'll allow them to do a lot of stuff by bending rules or using an "at that moment use of the Rule of Cool" but I have final say over things. No gunslingers and no "furry" races are the two biggest that jump to mind immediately. I'm with you on the gunslingers, but I'm a total critter lover. If you're saying no furry as in the dress up community, I'd have to agree. No disrespect, just not my thing. If you're saying none of the critter races, then I have to rail. I love my ratfolk, catfolk, and kitsune characters. Anthro PCs matter! :P
We collectively GM in my group, so we set any restrictions during the world building sessions. We're pretty open, but usually it's just creating a line of how far into 3pp we're willing to go. We usually stick to Paizo races, but will make group voted case by case exceptions. All 3pp spells are available, but we stick to the Paizo classes excepting archetypes. Generally we all avoid gunslingers, but the option does exist in our current world. Similarly, I do think we avoid all/any of the android/robot type races. Living constructs okay, but we try to stick to a "pure" fantasy setting. The only other time that I've ever played long term with restrictions is if we do what we call a "challenge" game. Then we as a group call out people's playing habits/styles, and each of us has to build something outside of our typical wheelhouse.
I've been inspired by song lyrics, random movie quotes, the plethora of characters from other games, plays, and film, and various board games, but I don't know that I've ever taken inspiration directly from a piece of art. I'll have to ponder on this, but if nothing else, this might be a fun way for me to create my next character. Cheers for the idea!
Rysky wrote:
There's a complete sentence there beyond what you snipped. Quoting out of context so you can snark at people accomplishes nothing. When you look at the whole sentence "Paizo, in all its infinite wisdom, made the Daylight spell, and actual-kill-vampires-light-of-day two different things.." , the implication is not that Paizo made the spell, but that they made (or possibly just continued/enforced) a difference between the spell and actual environmental daylight. That is a case of poor naming conventions and/or poor use of terminology that causes confusion. Not saying V-Monk is right or wrong (opinions can't really be either), but taking things out of context isn't useful to the conversation either.
Happy New Year! Only have one character and campaign I've played in this past year, but we're having a blast. Homebrew world in a sandbox style campaign. My character is a Ratflolk merchant prince with a penchant for travel, trade, currency, and cuisine. Gestalt Pestilence Sorcerer/Dimensional Excavator, Blacksnake, Plague Bringer Alchemist Level 4. There have been many adventures and laughs along the way. Perhaps the coolest thing though, is that the wife half of the couple that hosts our game has stepped up into the GM role for the first time ever. She's amazing. Completely surprised herself with how good she is, and how much she's enjoying running the game. She's a great role-player and amazing storyteller. Seeing her find this new joy in the hobby has been a real treat.
Andostre wrote: My aptitude is that I know that there are optimal probability-grounded solutions and I kind of know how to go about figure them out, but I'm too lazy to do so. Also, sometimes I just think of something more funny. What's my build? Bard with a Jester theme? Ultimately it's for you to say. I guess what I took to many words to say is, what class/character would you play if you were put into the game world? Not what skills you actually have IRL, but what class mechanics make sense for you on an intuitive level. If the horde of orcs is approaching, are you picking up the sword, the bow, the wand? Or, are you digging a pit, wrapping bandages, waving a flag, or crawling into the shadows?
So, I was reading another thread, and had one of my stray thoughts dance across my mind. What if a group built their characters based upon how their brains work? I'm probably phrasing this terribly, but I'll try to explain what I mean. The example given in the other thread, was talking about how some players at higher level play may need to do a lot of math and account for many variables before declaring their actions on a turn. Totally reasonable and a valid way to play. But that got me thinking about players who just decide what they want to do, and just go for it. Sometimes this can lead to sub-optimal outcomes, if not outright disasters. For other players though, they seem to just intuit how the system works. That sort of player almost always make the "best" tactical decision with seemingly no time spent doing the math. By extension of this, I jump to player aptitudes. We all bring different skills and life experiences to the table, but there are also those inherent talents or strengths within us. I'm pretty good a quick basic math, but no so hot at visualizing spatial relationships for example. So, taking those innate talents into account, what if a group builds their party around those aptitudes. This is a bit different from building a character who IS you, but there are similarities. The question you would have to ask yourself is, if someone with my mind was in this world, what type of adventurer would I be? You don't need to duplicate or stick to your own real world stats and skills. This is still a fantasy game, but instead, put yourself into a character who thinks/acts/responds/strategizes in a way that is organic to the real you. So, instead of the "balanced" party, you might end up with a crew of all casters and one rogue. Or nothing but fighters/martials, all bards, cavaliers and monks, etc, etc. I guess I'm just curious if anybody has ever built a group like this. Has anyone tried this, or maybe do you play that way all the time? What kind of group composition did this create? How did the game play go? For a further example/clarification. Most of my early gaming friends were the classic brainy/academic geek types. Casters were a natural fit for most of us (though not everyone played those classes). As I've met other players over the years, I've met folks who's natural tendencies when declaring actions would indicate rogue, or "healer", bard, "face", "tactician", whatever. Not all of these are going to be specific classes obviously, but also/or style/jobs/roles that you fit into. The way my brain works, I'm not the most tactically savvy or quick on my feet. So fighter or ranger isn't necessarily the best choice for me; at least within the context of this discussion. Eager to hear folks thoughts and experiences. Cheers all.
Merellin wrote:
I tend to favor spontaneous casters, though I've played and enjoyed both. Something to remember about the Sorcerer though, with the right bloodlines (and maybe some feats) you can use mind affecting spells on vermin, undead, constructs, and/or other normally immune creature categories. Mesmerist might have a slight edge on this, but not a huge one. The rest of the advice others have given you is all super solid. If you're feeling overwhelmed by full caster, then spontaneous is a good way to ease yourself into that realm. All that said, Mesmerist is built exactly for the concept you're describing. You just need to decide how dedicated to the concept you wish to be. Your race, feat, trait, skill, and gear selections can all give you some options for when your main shtick doesn't work. And, I'll try and Ninja Mark a tiny bit. Don't forget/neglect/underestimate the value of UMD and consumables.
Don't know that I can add too much to this conversation. We all have our creative (and not so creative) answers to this issue. One other thing to consider would be the length of combat. Even the most seasoned of players can lose perspective of this, because real world time for game combats takes sooooo much play time. But, even if you have a combat that drags on for 20 rounds, that's still only 2 minutes in game time. The explanation could be as simple as the time it takes for the combat to resolve is matched by the guards hearing the fight, shushing up their comrades so they can identify the noise, discussing how to proceed, gathering their gear, and setting up a plan of action. By the time all that listening, discussing, and shuffling is resolved, the fight may be over, and the party is already on its way towards the next encounter.
I'd let the player choose at the start of the campaign, but then the choice is set, like eye color. Just a bit of something fun/flavorful. If the player ever wants the color to change, magic or some story factor should be involved. Free form color shifting could lead to coded messages or minor disguise benefits. Certainly not game breaking, but the GM and players would all need to be on board with a small mechanical "freebie".
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
Don't give up on those AoE control spells. Maybe add some extra harassing features or enemies to keep your caster from succeeding at dispelling. If the effect can stick around for multiple rounds and/or fill the engagement area, then your players will have to make multiple saves over the combat. In theory somebody has to fail at least once, and in the meantime they're at least encumbered by the static penalties of those spells. Having other enemy characters spamming other debuff spells and attacks can also make this more effective. If all else fails, cast the web, then AoE burn it up before your PCs can get out of the way.
MrCharisma wrote:
Ah Mr. C, you get me. Thanks for getting to this before I could. Incidentally, I love your mathy brain, but I'm on the opposite side of the crit subject. I can't seem to roll high to save my life; so while the super rare crit can be exciting for me, they don't occur frequently enough for me to think of them as fun. When it comes to weapons, I'm looking at basic utility and/or aesthetics.
Hugo Rune wrote:
My bad. The phrasing threw me a bit when you mentioned the BBEG. This post of yours would also seem to fit in the thread about how you show the party the BBEG is evil/the villain. Sorry for the confusion.
Hugo Rune wrote: For me it's less about the cool class features and more about the concept. The GM could deliver truck loads of barn-door sized clues and the players will fail to associate the likeable scamp chatting to them in the bar with the BBEG they've been hunting down. Why, because of their preconceived notion that BBEG's aren't chatty halflings. I think you hit the wrong thread. I'm reading the one where this response makes sense, but this thread was asking about rarely seen enemy races/monsters to use.
Mark Hoover 330 wrote: The Chef: Catch Off Guard, Throw Anything, and Shikigami Style to start. They carry heavy ladles, traveling kettles, cast iron skillets, and a collection of cleavers, knives and forks. They should also dabble in alchemy. Their armor is light, preferably an apron, with the words "Kiss the Cook" emblazoned on the front. Optionally their helmet is a tall, padded white hat rising off the top of the head. You might even give them Improved Dirty Trick for using spices to the eyes or up the nose, forking a piece of an enemy's clothing to a doorframe, etc. I love this! Best way I've seen to convert the March Hare from Burton's take on Alice in Wonderland.
I recall something like this, but I think you may want to go hunting in 4e D&D. What you're describing sounds very familiar. I believe that what your talking about is one of the build types of the psychic class, either in the Player's Handbook 3, or possibly the Psionic Powers book. If not that, then this may have been something from White Wolf's Mage games. Either way, I know I've seen the exact mechanics you're describing. Good luck.
I'd recommend Fetchling as your seventh race for this crew, unless you start combing through 3rd party. If Oracle makes you happy, go for it. However, if it's just the pets issue, both druids and rangers have good alternate class features to their ACs, so only the Hunter really "has to" have a pet. If the tribal idea appeals to you, somehaman and witch are good options too. I could also see using one or both of those as a background for the shared parent. I'm imagining some ritual or plan where the mother or father channeled or communed with various spirits during the conception of each sibling in order to fulfill some prophecy, or pay some otherworldly debt. Quite literally "planned" children.
Evilserran wrote: I've aways loved earthbreakers, but i don't know why. Maybe the name? Maybe its more fun to imagine smashing someone with a massive hammer/club. Earthbreaker has always been my fave though. Thematically I completely agree. I love me a big smashy hammer, and I always associate them elementally with earth. Mechanically, I've seen some good recommendations for mauls or sledgehammers being bigger/smashier though. Aside from my aesthetic preference though, the only justification I have for my hammers, is that I like reliable base damage over theoretical maxes and/or crit fishing. Swords have the better crit chance, and axes the better crit max, but the multiple dice of hammers ensures that I get a decent minimum damage, while still have a shot a comparable non-crit maximums. I don't roll crits often enough for me to care to try and build around them.
If you get a nomadic, gypsy, and/or tribal theme going, then barbarian, bloodrager, and skald all could be appropriate. Druid, Hunter, Ranger, and Shifter could also fit a more primal/tribal type family. Your rogue doesn't have to stand out, they can fit anywhere, especially if you look into the scout or skirmisher type builds.
Nothing wrong with leaning in to stereotypes. How many siblings were you considering this time? It could be interesting is they all had the same two parents, but there's just A LOT of baggage in the family tree. Not sure if they're just alternates or 3pp, but there are chaotic and lawful outsider ancestor equivalents to Aasimars and Tieflings. Can't recall the names, and the current computer I'm on is not multi-tab search friendly. Obviously you have all four of the elemental races, and then chuck in the Fetchlings for shadow elemental types. That gets you to as many as 9 right there, so again, how big is this family?
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
Not to thread hijack, but this raises the question, why ever take the light spell instead of dancing lights?
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
"MUST HAVE BALANCE!" --Mr. Miyagi
ErichAD wrote:
Very much agree, with a small caveat. I'm totally fine with folks who come for the social element, IF they're up front about it from the beginning, AND they just come to observe. Have had one or two players over the years who would have probably had more fun just watching, and have had a couple of watcher who just liked to hear/"see" the story. As for the couples, unless both are enthusiastic players, "Honey, just stay home!" (Funnily enough a couple hosts our games at their house, and I play with my husband ;p )
Ooops. Hit enter and started with a blank post I think. Anyway . . . . . . . Nobody actually has to justify themselves. We all have things we like for one reason or another, and opinions can't really be wrong. What I'd like to discuss here, is a meeting of the minds between those who choose their weapon for aesthetic or flavor, and those who choose for mechanics. I'm not super good at the crunch, but I know there are certain weapons out there that are just held up as superior. What I'm looking for are examples of the ideas, builds, and corner cases where your favorite weapon really gets to shine. Probably difficult to do this with simples, but kudos to those who take the challenge. So when is a morningstar the best choice? What about the old trust dagger, or a trident? The star knife? Maul? Longspear? etc. Why does the weapon you choose belong on the table? What are the features that make it meet your characters goals/needs?
Senko wrote:
I know "marking" enemies was a mechanic from 4E. It was the staple of what made defender classes defenders. However, aren't there some feats that allow a character to make bluff, or intimidate checks to encourage enemies to fixate on them? Even if you can't straight up force an enemy to attack you, if you can impose enough penalties to their actions when you aren't the primary target, they may turn their focus back to you, just because you're that much of a stumbling block. |