Time's Memory's page

There is a 3PP archetype that is a Zen-style barbarian on the d20 site called the Serene Barbarian. Still doesn't say you can be lawful, but it sounds like what you're looking for.

I worked on a character concept at one point that was a wild rager archetype; however, the plan was she would never go into a rage. I wanted her to be constantly fighting to keep the beast within in check, knowing that her rage would consume her. But, by RAW, I never could figure out a way to do it, unless I took only four levels in barbarian and switched to something else. -- I know that isn't exactly what you're looking for, but the idea was a character fighting to stay in control, not giving into bloodlust. (I gave but up on the idea and became a chaotic good barbarian with celestial totem powers).

Thanks, Mapleswitch. The fighter dip won't help -- the bonus feat has to be a combat feat, and raging brutality is an general feat.

Assuming you had a BAB +12 at 12th level, is there a way you'd have a feat slot you could spend to get this feat at 12th, or would you have to wait until 13th?

Basically, is it impossible to take raging brutality at 12th, no matter what class/multi-class you take?

The feat Raging Brutality from Ultimate Combat has the following requirements: Str 13, rage class feature, Power Attack, base attack bonus +12. It isn't a combat feat; it's a general feat.

I feel like I'm missing something. Is there any way a character could get this feat at 12th? Fighter bonus feats have to be spent on combat feats, and everyone else gets feats on odd levels.

I'm not seeing a way to take this before 13th (but I might be missing something obvious).

Wow -- thanks for all of the suggestions.

I've been doing some research on roleplaying -- reading Ron Edward's GNS theory of rpgs. It is eye opening. Most of my group is very gamist, but others are more into simulation. I see now that a lot of the suggestions I'm getting (FATE, GURPs, CoC) move away from simply gamist play. Identifying a problem and actually fixing it are two different things . . . but it's a start.

Some of the games mentioned sound awesome. I would love to play Doctor Who, Leverage, and Monsterhearts. They all sound like a lot of fun. But, they would probably all be a no-go in my group.

Basically, several of my group could give you a list of 20 genres/settings/systems/styles that they utterly despise, but would have trouble coming up with a list of 3 games they like -- and no one's 3 would be the same. We're playing PF now because everyone was neutral on it.

I know some people might say the obvious -- to disband or take a break, but we really want to have fun roleplaying (and have).

It is interesting how Call of Cthulu keeps coming up. We played one Conan campaign were the gm wanted us to learn to run from stuff (to play smarter), but that plan lead to over 20 pc deaths and a fair amount of resentment. I wonder if we'd do better in Cthulu.

Keep the suggestions coming though. I'm going to start pitching some ideas to the group in the coming weeks. Our gms (we rotate) are usually secretive about exactly where campaigns are going -- but I think maybe some more discussion before we start this time might help.

I appreciate all of the suggestions.

I've never played the Amber diceless game. I know it's a classic.

Oddly, I don't think my group has even given GURPS much of a chance. I'm not sure why.

I did a poll a couple weeks ago -- no one in my group has ever read any Lovecraft. It might be hard to drum up enthusiasm for Cthulu.

We had 8 players when our current PF campaign started. We're down to 5 players after 5 months. I'm not even sure combat is the problem, but I know we need a change of pace. We've done so much hack and slash, people don't seem that interested anymore. PF seems really rules heavy at times.

Most of my group views games very mechanically. Some people are there just to hang out with friends and make jokes, whiles others are very focused on the game itself. In PF, for the most part, if you're not in combat, you're not earning XP or getting loot. So, in other words, stuff outside of combat is a waste of time for the serious gamers.

I believe that the game system does influence play style. I think that if we were playing a system that had more rewards for out-of-combat activities, people would be perfectly happy to do more on the roleplaying side.

We generally play PF in 3-5 hour sessions once a week, and the vast majority of our time is spent resolving one or two combats.

I view combat as a sort of lowest common denominator in roleplaying. If players look bored, you can always throw in a fight. But, people eventually get bored with level-rinse-repeat if there is nothing else.

Thanks for the first suggestions. We tried Traveller, but it went into more of a colonial marines meets privateer meets cyberpunk direction (mostly combat). A couple people want to give it another try. Unfortunately, we've run multiple Star Wars campaigns where we were supposedly traders--and they all have a similar feel of doing jobs to get money and spending the money to upgrade the ship. It's fun for awhile, but then you see the pattern.

I've only heard of Exalted--don't know much about it. Thanks for the tip. I'll research it tonight.

We're running PF Kingmaker now. About a third of the group is into the kingdom building and the rest hate it (it takes time away from combat).

I thought about a sci-fi game where each player gets to design a couple races/cultures and then the game would revolve around how those cultures interact.

Years ago we started the rule of rotating between fantasy then modern/sci-fi campaigns (so we didn't get burned out on any one setting). So, the next thing we'll run will probably be modern/sci-fi.

We've played so long, everyone in the group has a long list of different systems/settings he or she hates (i.e., won't play). It's getting hard to find a place where the Venn diagrams converge of what people will agree to play.

My long-time gaming group has run over 100 campaigns. I’ve noticed that they almost all center around killing something (or re-killing undead).

My favorite game ever was a Star Trek campaign where the GM had the guiding principle that whatever the problem was in the episode, it couldn’t be solved with a phaser.

I’m not looking to start a philosophical debate—just looking for some campaign/game system suggestions where combat isn't the main focus.

People of the Steaming Sea: 4 pages in the Inner Sea just hints at the awesomeness of this section of Golarion. A gold dragon conducting his own private eugenics program with humans and Azlanti-speaking, mask-wearing elves . . . more please.

Blood of Fey: This is the only way my gm is ever going to let me play a half-dryad (I purchased the 3pp Guide to Feyborn, but my group doesn't allow non-Paizo sources).

Thanks for asking for player input.

Time's Memory wrote:

Xzaral wrote:

I know a guy that says a 20 Strength barbarian with power attack is one of the weakest builds in the game and only a fool would take it, but playing a sorcerer/oracle going for mystic theruge is the ultimate form of cheese, trying to break the game, and why he completely disallows multiclassing to prevent that type of cheesy obnoxious powergaming behavior. (Paraphrased to remove profanity he would also have included)

For a second, Xzaral, I thought you were a member of my group :)

How do you know I'm not?

::Queue spooky music::

You would have never paraphrased to remove profanity. I'm the only member of my group who doesn't cuss =)

And hey, I only have one level in barbarian . . . the rest are fighter.

I know a guy that says a 20 Strength barbarian with power attack is one of the weakest builds in the game and only a fool would take it, but playing a sorcerer/oracle going for mystic theruge is the ultimate form of cheese, trying to break the game, and why he completely disallows multiclassing to prevent that type of cheesy obnoxious powergaming behavior. (Paraphrased to remove profanity he would also have included)

For a second, Xzaral, I thought you were a member of my group :)

Cheese.

Munchkin. Min-maxer. Power gamer. Metagamer.

Every community, profession, or hobby develops its own unique derogatory terms, which all hold a particular sting for its own members. In roleplaying, we’ve come up a litany of insults to hurl at other players who aren’t “real” roleplayers.

My group’s gaming sessions are filled with making fun other players—sometimes in good nature, other times as thinly veiled attacks. After a heated exchange with another player last weekend, I thought about how quickly we are to accuse one another of trying to cheese the system.

Here is a quick list of some things in PF that will get you accused of being a cheesy min-maxer:

• Any stat over 16
• Any stat under 12
• Playing a race that gets a stat bonus in your class’s primary stat
• Playing human to get the extra feat
• Playing any non-core race
• Playing a class a race is not traditionally known for
• Picking any feat outside of CRB or APG
• Using any weapon not present in AD&D
• Using a two-handed weapon
• Using any archetype not in APG
• Having an AC over 25
• Summoning anything
• Having a pet and/or familiar
• Using any rule from UC
• Multiclassing (double offense if it’s a dip)

That is just a few. Basically, we’re now suspicious that whatever other players are doing, they’re probably trying to cheese something. Also, I think we know that the term itself stings, so we’re quick to sling it around to make a point.

Just wondering—have other groups out there run into the problem where everything comes under the cheese microscope? And, as a gaming community, are we too quick to hurl these derogatory terms at others? Even in fun, it is a good thing to casually accuse someone of being a power gamer?

In short, has everyone gotten a little to free in the use of the c-word?

I appreciate everyone's input -- I tend to agree with you that, by the rules, it isn't self destructive, but with my group, getting charmed or dominated is a sure-fire way to get killed.

I've played with the same basic group for years, and PKing (a couple players love to do it) almost brought the group to an end. There always seems like bad blood and old wounds just under the surface, and players are looking for an excuse to PK "legally". I was once engulfed by a creature (I think it was an enveloper or something like that) and the players took it as a good excuse to kill my character under the premise of stabbing the creature to death.

And, when I was charmed I did point out at the time the party could use subdual damage. I think that would have spoiled the humor of it for them. The GM had a local priest raise me for free, or I probably would have woken up nude with my equipment sold to pay for the raise.

For the record, in my 30 years of roleplaying, I've never PKed anyone (aside from in Paranoia).

A couple weeks ago, my 8th level fight in Kingmaker was dominated by a vampire. The vampire had me hack down my party's cleric, and then the other four PC's killed me. I was raised, but now I'm wondering about the wording of the spell, for future incidents.

Dominate person says "Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out." If my character knows that openly attacking the party is a sure-fire way to get killed, would she follow the same command again? I can see covertly trying to fulfill the instruction, but otherwise it seems clearly self-destructive (the party has already shown the outcome once).

When my group played 3.5 Conan, we had a couple near TPKs from dominate--I know the usual interpretation is you do whatever you're told, but I was wondering whether any groups handled it with more nuance than that.

Thanks for any thoughts.

Sipping jacket and done.

Thanks for the info about sipping jackets. I'd never heard of that item before.

Drunken brute seems a little useless -- you get around the AoO for drinking the potion, but still take one from retrieving a stored item.

I certainly agree that the potion would be "used" even if you didn't swallow it -- no spitting it back in the bottle.

Part of the problem is retrieving an item is one AoO and drinking the potion is a second. Even if you have accelerated drinker or drunken brute archetype, you're still taking an AoO.

I can see it might be asking a bit a GM to allow this. I was curious what other people thought -- or if there are any rules I hadn't seen to cover it.

Here is a question for the rules lawyers (and rules paralegals).

Under the description of potions, it says in the core book that they are about 1 oz. of liquid, or 2 tablespoons.

Is it possible for a character to put the liquid in his/her mouth and swallow it later?

For example, a group listens at a door and hears several voices speaking goblin. The group's fighter pours a potion of cure light wounds into his mouth, but doesn't swallow it. The group rushes the room. On rough 3 of the combat, the fighter takes a big hit and decides to swallow the potion he is holding in his mouth.

If this is possible, what kind of action would it be to swallow the potion? Free, swift, immediate?

I'm not trying to push my GM to the edge -- just wondering if there is any way to get some economy of action into drawing/drinking a potion.

I thought about getting a second level in barbarian and taking Lesser Celestial Totem (While raging, the barbarian benefits from increased magical healing. Whenever she is subject to a spell that cures hit point damage, she heals 1 additional point of damage per caster level. In the case of non-spell healing effects (such as channeled energy or lay on hands), she heals a number of additional points equal to the class level of the character performing the magical healing. This does not affect fast healing or regeneration.)

That fits with my character growing up in a church/temple, but going a different direction in life than a cleric (I'm still a sucker for flavor). We've got a paladin and a cleric in the party and a wizard who can cast cure lights as some part of a racial ability, so plenty of magical healing.

The second level would get me DR 1/- from invulnerable rager and put my feats from fighter back on even levels.

Is that worth it to have all of my fighter feats (spec, greater focus, greater spec) pushed back by two levels instead of by just one?

And I didn't know about the trait berserker of society when I made my character, or I would have gotten it. Maybe if I bring good enough snacks the GM will let me switch.

I think the OP will be immensely helped by 3 more pages of this...

I do appreciate everyone's input. This is my first PF campaign -- and we actually found we had been doing some stuff incorrectly in 3.5 (no one cheating, just a lot of assumptions that we knew the rules).

I went with a drunken brute/invulnerable rager. The drunken brute doesn't fit into my character story at all, but the group's alchemist wanted some frontline fighter who could benefit from a bunch of potions -- and I don't mind if that's me.

It might be a long time until I take level 2 in barbarian (and see any invulnerable rager DR). For now, I'm going to stay with two-handed fighter to get the feats and the archetype abilities. I'm going to get into full plate as soon as possible. The group's cleric is buffing my AC and there's an animated shield in the magic shop in our starting town. I'm going to try to keep my AC up to a decent number. The group's archer is becoming the main damage dealer and the paladin is the party leader -- so I'm trying to become a consistent frontline fighter who can stay up and hold the line while dealing good damage. The group's rogue is hoping I can be a flanking partner too.

Here is what I was planning on for feats (roughly) with level 1 in barbarian and the rest fighter. [I think the campaign is only going to 18th]. I might replace an Extra Rage with Toughness -- but I left a bunch there because it looks like raging brutality will burn a ton once I get it.

1 Weapon Focus (Greatsword)*
2 Power Attack*
3 Furious Focus* [replace later with Outflank*]
3 Raging Vitality
5 Weapon Specialization*
5 Extra Rage
7 Hammer the Gap*
7 Extra Rage
9 Improved Critical*
9 Extra Rage
11 Weapon Focus, Greater*
11 Extra Rage
13 Weapon Specialization, Greater*
13 Raging Brutality
15 Penetrating Strike*
15 Extra Rage
17 Greater Penetrating Strike*
17 Extra Rage

He's only letting us change archetypes. One player picked the shape shifting ranger and then found out how good bows are. A bomber alchemist found out that he lost most of his abilities to make potions (and how good that is). And our sacred shield paladin discovered the penalties of tower shields. With three people wanting to change, the GM opened it up to anyone. He had heard me mention wild rager before we started, so he told me to switch if I wanted -- but it has to be now, before we actually start playing at 2nd.

I know the stats aren't perfect -- but the GM had said we'd pay for having stats with penalties. Almost everyone in the group took that seriously and didn't take anything below a 10. The wizard has a 7 or 8 strength and has suffered some for that choice. We haven't done much roleplaying so far (just dungeon crawl), but we're working up to King Maker.

It would be very beneficial to take at least two levels in Barbarian.

Many Rage Powers are stronger than feats.

Thanks Blackblood. I've seen some great advice from you on the forums for barbarian builds and rules clarifications.

Please post your current build.

Also, your build intentions.

Level 1 Barbarian (Hurler)

STR 19
Dex 12
CON 18
INT 10
WIS 10
CHR 10

(25 pt buy)

Feats:
Dual Talent (+2 CON)
Weapon Focus (Greatsword)

I plan on taking most of my levels as a two-handed weapon fighter and focusing on the classics (focus, spec, improved crit). Originally, I had a grand plan of taking Extra Rage multiple times and then getting Raging Brutality at 13th to add in CON bonus to damage when raging. The group I play with has been doing faster and faster progression for years. We have a new GM, and he has promised to reverse that trend (we've had one player already threaten to quit over to slower leveling). So, it could be a year of playing every week before we even see level 13. I started thinking that my master plan might be a little slow for this campaign.

I want to do some high dpr -- but don't want to be a constant drain on the group for in-combat heals or end every fight on the ground.

Hi everyone, I was hoping to get some advice before tomorrow's PF session.

My group just started our first PF campaign a month ago. We decided on slow progression, so just hit second level. After reading the rules more closely, a couple players weren't happy with their archetypes -- and the GM is offering a one-time offer to let anyone switch archetypes on their level 1 class before we start playing this week.

There are 8 players -- and only two are playing melee characters (I'm one of them). I took my first level as barbarian to get rage and more hps. I took the hurler AT because I thought it would be nice way to have some ranged capability in a pinch.

In our first session, my group "withdrew" back to town after about 3 minutes in the dungeon to rest and get spells back. The GM said he was going to have the monsters set traps, ambushes, and recruit reinforcements every time we left like that (he didn't want us resting a day between every fight). We started pushing (and dropping), and I was running out of rage rapidly.

Originally, I'd looked at the wild rager for a two level dip (with the plan of using the reckless fighting for an extra attack and never raging, since that would endanger the group). I was scared off by the -4 AC -- but nothing seems to have trouble hitting me with my current AC. I plan on taking most of my levels as a two-handed AT fighter.

My question, since running out of rage seems like it will be a real issue the way we're running this campaign, especially if barbarian is just a dip for me, would wild rager be a viable AT? Is it survivable, or just asking to get cut down? We have an alchemist in the group, and, if nothing else, I was thinking of switching out with drunken brute to get the potion drinking ability (even though, it has absolutely nothing to do with my backstory).

For anyone who cares, my character was dropped off as an infant at a nunnery/church by her prostitute mother. She was rebellious and had little aptitude for being a cleric. When she was an early teen, mother superior kicked her out for beating up a bully. After that, she grew up on the streets of Taldor. She goes by the name Whorespawn, because that's what mother superior always called her. I took the traits jaded and suspicious. I wanted the first level class to show she's completely untrained and capable of fits of violence. My GM made us roll height and age, so I'm a 4'11" 16 year-old human.

My group is taking a somewhat MMO approach to this campaign -- everybody is expected to optimize and be effective. I'm trying to fulfill my role of damage-dealing meat shield.

Thanks for any advice.

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'm really impressed with how friendly the Pathfinder community is.

I do like the customization and flavor that archetypes add to the game. I've played many melee/fighter types and have made a lot of (failed) attempts at integrating magic into the builds. I like the idea of a fighter with something "special" extra, but never wanted to be a caster. That meant dipping into bard, sorcerer, or other casters types just for a flavor ability that will probably be useless at higher levels. The 3 Eldritch Heritage feats in UM make it seem like Paizo doesn't mind the idea of a fighter (or other class) having access to bloodline powers. Arcane Strike is just a cool feat that it would be nice to get without having to dip a level into arcane duelist bard. From some things I've read on the forums, it seems somewhat encouraged to pick an archetype and stay one class -- and I thought this archetype would allow for that. It is also a fighter archetype that benefits from a high Charisma, which is something different.

It would be more painful, but I could replace Weapon Training 1 through 4 and mastery instead of armor training to get the bloodline powers. That would put the level 20 bloodline power at 20th level. It would suck, because weapon training gives some nice bonuses -- but I really am trying to make something balanced, not cheesy. My group moans at some of my ill-fated attempts to integrate magical flair into an otherwise straight fighter build. It would be nice to have an archetype that allowed for it to be done effectively and without twisting the rules in knots.

Thanks again for the input.

It doesn't look over powered to me.

How does the fighter gain the 20th level power if her fighter level - 2 counts as her sorcerer level?

Thanks ShadowcatX for pointing out the problem. I was thinking that any of the powers that were affected by level, like damage bonuses, would count at the fighter level minus 2. Armor mastery is level 19 for a fighter, so this archetype would get the level 20 bloodline power at level 19 (yeah, I know, that is before a sorcerer would get it).

Hi everyone. I wanted to get some quick community feedback on a fighter archetype that incorporates sorcerer bloodlines without any casting ability (like the Eldritch Heritage feats). Would this be utterly unbalanced? I'm a long-time D&D player, but relatively new to PF. Thanks for any feedback or suggestions to make it workable. Below is a rough outline/start of the archetype.

Eldritch-Touched

A very faint hint of sorcerous power from some distant eldritch heritage flows through your veins. While not enough to manifest as full-blown spell casting, you can still, on occasion, tap into your arcane ancestry.

At 1st level the eldritch-touched fighter selects a sorcerer bloodline. She gains the Skill Focus feat in that bloodline’s class skill. That skill is also counted as a class skill for her, if not already a class skill. She gains no other powers associated with the bloodline. Once selected, she may not change bloodlines—Replaces bonus feat (1st)

Starting at 2nd, the eldritch-touched fighter may use any fighter bonus feats to select combat feats or bonus feats associated with her sorcerer bloodline.

Arcane Strike feat (fighter level –1 counts as caster level)—replaces bravery (2nd)

Starting at 3rd, the eldritch-touched fighter begins gaining bloodline powers from her selected bloodline (fighter level –2 counts as sorcerer level).
Bloodline power (1st)—Replaces armor training 1
Bloodline power (3rd)—Replaces armor training 2
Bloodline power (9th)—Replaces armor training 3
Bloodline power (15th)—Replaces armor training 4
Bloodline power (20th)—Replaces armor mastery

My group of veteran players is about to begin our first PF campaign. We're at the character building phase. We've had a question already regarding wild ragers. If a wild rager using Uncontrolled Rage uses the Furious Finish feat, does he have to make the Will save versus confusion if the attack drops the opponent to 0 or fewer hp, or does the rage immediately end?

Here is the RAW text for uncontrolled rage and the feat:

Uncontrolled Rage (Ex): A wild rager's rage functions as normal, except that when she reduces a creature to 0 or fewer hit points, she must attempt a Will save (DC 10 + the barbarian's level + the barbarian's Charisma modifier) or become confused. For the remainder of her current turn, she attacks the nearest creature other than herself. On the following round, refer to the confusion spell to determine her actions. At the end of this round, and each round thereafter, she can attempt a new saving throw to end the confusion effect. The rounds during which she is confused do not count against the rounds she has spent raging that day, but she cannot end her rage voluntarily, nor can she use rage powers while confused.

Furious Finish
You channel all of your rage into one massive blow to crush your enemy.
Prerequisites: Rage class feature, Vital Strike, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: While raging, when you use the Vital Strike feat, you can choose not to roll your damage dice and instead deal damage equal to the maximum roll possible on those damage dice. If you do, your rage immediately ends, and you are fatigued (even if you would not normally be).

Thanks for any clarification on this rule.