Trader2699's page

I have been playing ROTRL with the same group, for over a year now. We are at 12th level, and getting ready to enter the Runeforge.

My character, a Shoanti Bard/Barbarian pursued Shalelu from the moment she appeared in Burnt Offerings, even going so far as to take a level of Ranger to impress her.

She finally gave in somewhere after the retaking of Fort Rannick, and they became an item.

Unfortunately, my GM is evil and has had her kidnapped by Karzoug, while pregnant with my child. Karzoug appeared to our group after killing Mokmurian and told us as much.

Not even worth it. I'd give up my dicebag and play DDO if I had a group like that.

They are selfish, and counterproductive to the whole point of the game.

If you don't drop them like a bad habit, you have no self-respect.

I'm a "tech" person in real life, but this is all I ever use:

http://www.dreamstime.com/legal-pad-and-pencil-image3620015

Old school.

I am playing a wizard in PFS who just hit second level.

Per the CRB, when a wizard levels up, he can add 2 spells to his spellbook. In normal games, I would come across other spellbooks, scrolls, NPC wizards, etc. that would allow me access to more spells. How does this work with PFS? Do I just get the two spells per level? Why not just be a sorcerer if I am going to be that limited?

This has always been my issue with Paladins. Supremely awesome power, which is tempting for any player, but all that power comes with responsibility.

No biggie...I'll just have to find another way to segway into the next chapter. One of my PCs is super sweet on Ameiko...

Incredible responses! Thanks so much for everyone's ideas.

So far: when things started happening (dreams, the Bane spell), the player wised up right away. He's now saying he wants to play a different character, as the two of us have opposing viewpoints as to what Lawful Good is.

Oh well...

I'm a big fan of scrolls. As another poster put, each scroll is potentially another spell in the spellbook.

Also, I like scrolls for useful spells you know your wizard doesn't want to memorize.

Knock and Identify come to mind.

Ehm... Why? Sure, summoning isn't worthless at level 1, providing flanks and all, but even with AS, you're probably better of dropping a color spray or sleep. The SM II list isn't very good IMO, but I guess if I were a human conjurer i'd probably pick it up by then. If I weren't a human, I'd no way pick AS before level 5.

I can't see how summon monster I or II with +2 to hit/damage and a few extra hit points will beat +4 initiative ever.

I'm not saying you don't memorize Color Spray/Sleep at 1st level.

I'm saying for longevity, Summoning is the best thing you can do at mid levels, in my experience. Every time a foe is tied up with one of your Summons and beating on it, that's damage you and your allies aren't taking, hence the +4 CON. Every time your summons hit and hurt your foes, those are mini blast spells you don't have to cast so you can focus on buffing and battlefield control, hence the +4 STR.

The Summon Monster II list is a joke without AS. With it, it's actually really good.

If you're playing PFS, you get Spell Focus for free at 1st level instead of Scribe Scroll, so I'm a little biased. Improved initiative is great, I actually made a post praising it earlier in this thread. My point was, IF you are going to focus on Conjuration, those two feats are best for you.

If you're going to be a conjuration specialist, your first two feats are spoken for, sad to say.

1. Spell Focus: Conjuration
2. Augment Summoning

If there's a better way to do this, I haven't found it.

Normally I'd recommend the Conjurer, but if the campaign is only going to 4th level, then go Illusionist all the way. Specialize in Color Spray and Silent image, watch your DM twitch.

At 3rd level take Invisibility and create Illusions whenever combat gets too intense. Improved Initiative is a good feat to take.

I agree. For a Ranger/Scout, it's better to focus on the TWF tree to maxmize SA damage when you get to flank.

I'd go:

1) Ranger 1 (Imp Initiative): At this point, you bow at Range, and draw a sword/axe/whatever when close.
2) Ranger 2 (TWF Style): Get some MW Short swords.
3) Rogue 1 (Weapon Focus: Shortsword:)Dual short sword weilding death.

The rest of the build is up to you, but I might put stock into Stealth and Dirty tricks.

Alternatively, you can Go Rogue at 1st level if you want to be more of a skill monkey and have less HP at the start.

I know this might drastically alter your build, I'm just throwing it out there, as it's the only time I've ever seen TWF come close to the optimization of Two handed weapon or Sword and Board.

I'd say Growth, the subdomain of the Plant domain. You can worship Gozreh to get it. It lets you use Enlarge person as a swift action on yourself 3+WIS times per day. Combine that with a d8 weapon that will become 2d6, and you have a high strength build of Inquisitor that can wreck some enemies with reach.

EDIT: I just found out that subdomains are Cleric only. Drag.

I've been watching this thread, and going back and forth on whether or not to comment. When I first started running my own game back in 2nd edition (pre Skills and Powers), I fudged all the time, for "story" purposes.

Just after 3.0 came out, I was fortunate enough to play with a great GM. It was a pick up game, totally unplanned, and the GM was a friend of a friend. He made all his rolls in the open, in front of us, and it was the most enjoyable game I've ever played.

2 PCs died, and we kept gaming, well until 4 AM. Since that moment I have tried to make rolls in the open, in front of the players. If an encounter as written in a module seems too weak for my players, I buff the encounter statically, not dynamically.

I also periodically review my PC's character sheets and wealth levels to make sure there are appropriate CR ratings for their encounters, but that's a whole different story altogether...

No love for the Summonder? Or the Eidolon?

What's up with that?

Improved Initiative. Get this. ASAP.

Being able to go first benefits all kinds of Wizards.

Blast Spell? Hit the enemies while they are standing together.

Charm/Enchantment/Sleep spell? Avoid combat altogether before someone gets hurt.

Summon Spell? Get your target picked early so that the rogue or fighter can flank.

Buff Spell? Get the most out of Haste in the first round, BEFORE the tank goes.

etc. etc. etc.

An Ogre raid would be a good thing in urging the players along.

What's the party's alignment makeup? If they are mostly good, I would have Jakardos insist that he will attempt to retake the fort without the PCs, even if it means his death. Appeal to their nature.

If they are more neutral, have Jakardos lie to them about a mysterious "treasure" the Ogres carried in with them that he can offer to bribe them.

I would also foreshadow the oncoming bad weather that is due to the hags. Make mention that winter is coming, that there won't be time to get reinforcements from Magnimar if the snows come early. Have Jakardos (or someone) tell them that Ogres breed profusely. If they don't take them out now the Ogres will spend the time fortifying and multiplying. Come Spring that fort will be a major base of operations for the Ogres, and all of Turtleback ferry will suffer.

Lots of responses here!

When I first heard the character's justification, my thought was "This is a Neutral Good POV, the greatest good for the greatest number of people."

I think I know what I am going to do, but I don't want to spell it out in this thread as my player might be on these forums.

However, I will be getting the point across that all actions have consequences, both in the physical world and in the spiritual one.

Also, this will be carrying over WELL into Skinsaw Murders. Once my nefarious plot is carried out, I'll necro the thread and fill you all in.

Muahahahahahaa!

When players start a campaign by causing issues, chances are they will constantly be asking for exceptions throughout it.

Best to put a stop to it at the beginning.

My first thought would be to multiclass, with at least 1 level, (preferably two) in Ranger. It will help a lot with the skills you need.

For combat, do you want him to be melee or ranged focus?

For melee, with the stats you listed:

16 STR, 13 DEX, 12 CON, 11 INT, 10 WIS, 16 CHA

Go Human, I'm not sure if you have already, so I won't modify your stats, you'll just need it for the extra skill point every level. Put your 4th level point in INT or DEX, and the 8th in the other. 1st level is Bard, as that's where you will be going long term, and you'll want the favored class bonus. Put it in HP, every time.

Get two levels of Ranger, pick Two Handed Weapon Combat Style (spear), and put the focus of skills on Acrobatics, Survival, etc. He would be a skirmisher, not a real front line fighter. Use the Spear for reach and buff the party. Every combat would be you taking 5 ft steps and poking at your opponent.

On the Bard side, start off with the disruptive spells (Sleep, Silent Image). I would recommend two Bardic Performances (Percussion and Sing) for Versatile Performance. Max out Perception and UMD.

Good feats: Power Attack, Toughness, Weapon Focus

For ranged:

12 STR, 16 DEX, 11 CON, 13 INT, 10 WIS, 16 CHA

Still Human, same progression (1 Bard, two Ranger, the rest Bard), but put the favored class bonuses in Skill Points. I think this build is slightly more effective, but will eat up your feats. Points in INT for more skills, CON for more HP.

Ranger: Archery Style, Rapid Shot. Skill points are still in Acrobatics and Survival and Stealth. You want to avoid combat as much as possible.

Bard: More controlling and avoidance spells. Cause Fear is good when someone wants to close in melee. Grease can make them drop their weapon, it requires a save every round. Low levels, you HAVE to avoid being in melee.

Lots of feats: The whole archery tree. Point Blank, Precise, Manyshot, Deadly Aim, etc.

This is how I would do it, but I love to multiclass Bards.

I don't see why you couldn't use an acrobatics check to charge.

There's nothing that says you HAVE to go 2x your movement, just that you have to go in a straight line and at least 10 ft, no?

Awesome ideas, all!

I was already thinking about doing a "dream" thing, but tying in Zantus and Ameiko is perfect!

Thanks so much to everyone for their ideas. It might be a bit (sometimes we only get to play once a month), but I will post any interesting developments from this here.

Appreciate the response. The Pally is an archer that worships Erastil, and Gods and Magic just says that Erastil shows his disapproval by turning the offending person into something more useful, like a tree. Might be a little drastic.

No doubt Sheriff Hemlock is going to have words with the PC, but seeing as he's a part of the troupe that is invading Thistletop on behalf of the town, I'm not sure Hemlock would actually arrest him. Hemlock leaves the PCs in charge when he goes to Magnimar, so he really only has himself to blame.

I'm wondering if I can take some sort of angle on this in "The Skinsaw Murders."

No, this isn't about the Goblin babies. :)

I just started a RotRL campaign, we've been through 3 sessions and it seems that the party is coming together quite nicely. However, I had a moral "Paladin" question and wanted to turn to the braintrust on these boards for advice.

Small disclaimer here: I know that asking "Should a Paladin have done this?" is akin to dumping kerosene on a bonfire. I'm not asking whether or not the Paladin "should" have done this, but where I go forward from here.

-

The party had returned from the upper level of the Glassworks, killing all the goblins with a stabilized Tsuto (at -2). They tossed him in the jail. Since Sheriff Hemlock had already left for Magnimar to get reinforcements, there was only one guard to watch him. They went back underneath the Glassworks to the Catacombs of Wrath and killed the Sinspawn, the Quasit, and deactivated the Runewell. Once they returned to heal and question Tsuto, it quickly became clear he was not going to cooperate. They soon came to the conclusion that he was too dangerous to leave alone in the jail with the 1st level Warrior while they went to Thistletop to confront Nualia. The paladin moved into the cell, and attacked Tsuto, reasoning that if they left him alone, he could escape and threaten the town.

Since Tsuto was at 5 hp, the "fight" didn't last long. Paladin won initiative, and 1 rd later Tsuto was dead. He took responsibility for it, making sure the body would be cremated and buried in the local cemetary, and the PCs have moved on Thistletop. They are currently in the nettles, as we had to close that session just after the fight with Gogmurt the druid.

I've been playing since 2nd edition, no question in my mind that Paladin acted inappropriately. My question, how do I deal with it in game? I don't want to make him "fall" over one incident, but I need to make it clear that this sort of behavior is unacceptable behavior.

Any suggestions?

It is pretty bad at what it tries to do, don't get me wrong. BUT, it gives options.

Any fighter/arcane combo is going to be pretty terrible when you stack it up against a straight fighter or arcane spell slinger. It's like combining fried tomatoes with caramel, they are just incompatible from the basis of game design.

But, far be it for game design to infringe upon the wishes of a player to play a sword wielding arcane caster, no?

The key is making sure it isn't overpowered, and that's what they've done here. The core classes are core for a reason, they are the most "pure" of the choices available to a player.

But there's a reason ice cream stores don't sell just chocolate and vanilla. Every so often, someone comes in and orders butter pecan.

Seconding what the other poster said about Spell Focus: Conjuration and Augment Summoning. However, EVERY Druid should take Natural Spell as their 5th level Druid feat, it lets you cast while Wild Shaping.

Forgive me here. I'm not an old school Paizo freak, and I'm definitely not a despicable min-maxer, but I think I see the problem with the Magus class.

New things, especially in RPGs, have to be better to be considered good. The Magus isn't necessarily better than existing Figher-Wizard or Fighter-Sorcerer options, it just gives different options.

Try to look at it that way, and it's actually a pretty neat class.

I went and found something I posted awhile ago regarding a potential oracle/bard. I think it's all pretty applicable.

As a level 15 Bard(5)/Cleric(5)/Lyric Thamaturge(5) in 3.5, all I can say is "good luck". The character is thematically fun, but even with access to the 3.5 feats of practiced spellcaster and some of the more obscure feats available in 3.5 (bard/cleric levels stack for turning, neat uses for turning undead, and did I mention practiced spellcaster which doesn't exist in Pathfinder?) the character is WAY behind the power curve compared to the rest of the group. Really if there were a way to bold the word "way", write it in italics and 28 point font it still wouldn't give you an indication of how far behind on the power curve you'll be.

It's fun as hell in roleplay situations, and you'll be amazing when knowledge checks, diplomacy checks, bluff/sense motive checks, and the like are needed, but then again you'd be that cool if you were straight bard. The problem is when combat starts and 9 times out of 10 you'll find yourself inspiring courage (for a crappy +1 or +2) and then pretending you can actually help the group.

Your character's spell progression is downright terrible overall. As a level 5 cleric (which is in some ways better than a level 5 oracle because at least the cleric has 3rd level spells) what I have available is awful. Spell durations are short, offensive spells are virtually useless due to the low saves involved, and buffs provide very minor overall bonuses compared to the favored soul next to me who's throwing out amazing spells. I struggle feeling helpful with a couple 3rd level spells at my disposal, I couldn't imagine having less.

Same holds true to the bard (though interestingly at least the bard abilities make you feel like a bard, the cleric abilities just don't). You're going to be capped with low-level spells with a class that's already behind the leveling curve with their spell progression. What this means is that those DC 16 saves will be resisted by pretty...

This. So much this.

I LOVE both Bards and Clerics (my 2 favorite classes of all time), and I wouldn't try to combine them. 1 level of Bard might be cool for Bardic Knowledge, but even then, you are diluting both classes with the weakness of one. Nevermind the prime stats for a moment (Cleric: Wis, Str, Con, while Bards: Chr, Dex, Int), but what about armor? Bards need light or none, while Clerics tend to go Medium. What would you do during combat, aside from Inspire and be a Healbot? I think you would end up trying to do so many different things that you would do NOTHING well at all.

Boba Fett from SW.

Inquisitor/Rangers or Inquisitor/Rogues make the best bounty hunters.

Long time dice roller here, with some words of wisdom:

1. As a previous poster said, stay true to your dice. One bad session does not mean they are used up. You ever have a bad day? So do they.

2. If you play and run a game, HAVE TWO DICEBAGS. Never mix your GM and player dice. It's just unlucky.

3. Donate dice to new GMs. I can't explain it, but ever since I started doing this, I roll on average 1-2 higher on 20s.

4. If all else fails, put them in the freezer overnight. It teaches them a lesson.

-B

We had some serious problems with that...female.

Some lucky rolls, and a Barbarian chasing her down when she ran with his massive foot speed and one final crit.

However, the first few rounds of combat were so frustrating.

Having played through books 1-2, and ran book 1, I can offer the following.

1. Take your time in Sandpoint. It's a small town, and should feel like it. Burnt Offerings has extensive files on the citizens of Sandpoint. Play with all the characters, and their interactions with each other. Give the PCs time to see this place as their new home.

2. Do NOT separate Sandpoint and Magnimar. They make really nice contradictions, as the small podunk down vs the bustling metropolis.

3. Give the PCs downtime between books to unwind, resupply, spend their money, pursue interests with NPCs. If you keep throwing emergencies at them, it will make them feel overwhelmed, and will unintentionally remove the "reality" of the situation.

4. Have fun with it. If you don't like something about the story/characters, don't be afraid to muck with it. The best thing about RotRL is the fact that it swaps around from being a dungeon crawl to a horror movie to a full-on war. It gives each kind of PC time to shine.

I have a Bard/Barbarian who finally managed to get himself a Mithral Breastplate. Since it's still considered light armor, he can cast.

Is my speed now 30?

20 (Breastplate) + 10 (Barbarian)?

No it requires a swift action. It doesn't say that concentration is required or patiences, it's a half second of magic leakage onto the weapon so that it hurts things more...

Kind of like an almost smite sort of effect.

Awesome. I had ruled at the time that it would be legal, and I would be consulting people on these boards for future reference.

I guess I am used to 2nd edition and 3.0 Barbarians that couldn't really do anything while raging.

I have a player in my campaign playing a Bard/Barbarian, and we recently had a situation where he wanted to use the Arcane Strike feat while raging.

Arcane Strike (from the CRB):

As a swift action, you can imbue your weapons with a fraction of your power. For 1 round, your weapons deal +1 damage and are treated as magic for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. For every five caster levels you possess, this bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 20th level.

Barbarian Rage (also from CRB):

(snip) While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration. (snip)

Question is, does the Arcane Strike require concentration? That would be the only thing I could think of that would prevent this from working.

RotRL all the way. I second the poster that said it feels the most "classic."

I think you're making a large generalization here, which is common for these boards.

I play a CN Shoanti Barbarian/Bard named Vaelik, and he's not crazy or stupid. I resent the implication that I chose this alignment because I am lazy.

From the Core Rulebook:

"A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy...etc."

Vaelik is practical, but doesn't feel tied to good or evil. He values his decisions and freedoms, and doesn't seek to impose his values on others. He's not as likely to bash an old lady's head in as he is to help her across the street, but he doesn't feel the need to help everyone he comes across. He works well in a group, imparting wisdom and advice in non combat situations whenever he feels he can contribute, and "hit it with my axe" is NEVER his first solution to a problem. He doesn't believe in terms like "good" and "evil," he thinks they are childish. He believes in "them" and "us."

What alignment would you say he is?

The same players that pick CN and act like idiots will act like idiots when they are NG as well. CN doesn't mean "stupid" any more than LG means "naive."

I think I would end up with the ranged build, as the +2 DEX makes it a natural. I like the halfling build better than the gnome, I'm not sure why.

I think I would RP the LG as he is attempting to be the change he wants to see in the world. The school of thought that if the littlest races can stand up for what is right and good, then the larger races would naturally follow suit. Probably kind of naive, but eternally optimistic. Seems like a fun build.

Viable? absolutely. Precisely optimal? Probably not? Will you do the absolute most damage as a melee paladin? No, but you could still do significant damage, you'd have a slightly better AC, and as others have said you could make a killer archer who gets to ride a medium sized mount (less trouble with narrow hallways).

Oh, I never thought it was optimal. I just like to think outside stereotypes, and I'm so tired of the "stalwart knight on a warhorse" paladin. I'd love to see a little guy who decided to answer the call. But the more I thought about it, the better it seemed to fit, game-wise.

I think it is part of the beauty of Pathfinder that combinations like this are more viable. More than anything else, I think smite working with ranged weapons makes this possible.

I agree. This is not a build I would have attempted in 3.0, or even 3.5, but in Pathfinder it seems to come together well.

I didn't even think of making him a ranged specialist. With a decent ride check, this little guy could cause some carnage with a shortbow!

What do you think the logical progression for feats should be?

I can RP a human better than I can RP and elf for the same reason I am better at playing male characters. I *am* one.

It can be hard with certain builds to put yourself into the shoes of someone who is inherently magical, lives for hundreds of years, etc.

I remember 1st and 2nd edition D&D when there was no reason to be a human, game wise. 3.0 may have gone overboard in making them more powerful, but they are supposed to be the most prolific race for a reason, right?

I was thinking about this the other day. Most Paladins I've seen are humans or half-elves. Would it be viable to build a halfling paladin that specialized in mounted combat, on a riding dog?

The -2 to STR would hurt, but the +2 CHR, +1 to all saves, and the small size might actually all work together for a pretty awesome character.

Thoughts?

Keep in mind regional enemies. If your Ranger is from Shoanti, and is part of the Skull clan, he may pick undead as a favored enemy.

If your Ranger is an elf whose home is right near a valley populated by orcs,...you get my drift.

Personally, I prefer the sorcerer in every way.

Not having to be reliant on a spellbook + being able to cast whatever is in my arsenal (however small) + the customization via arcane bloodlines makes the sorcerer my "go-to" class for arcane spellcasting EVERY time.

Just my opinion.

However, a friend of mine loves wizards, and would rather play a character based on INT rather than a character based on CHA.

I don't think there is a "better." Depends on the player, depends on the GM, depends on the campaign, etc.

Just because they draw from the same list doesn't mean we should compare them.

15th level wizard's bodyguard?

You *wouldn't* see him. Not until he wanted you to. Having played a wizard's bodyguard at high levels I can say from experience you get buffed. A lot. Invisibility, Contingency, Dimension Door, etc. All of these get used to make you pop out of nowhere to slice and dice, or bash and crash.

For flavor, go with a Ranger/Rogue, or an old school Shield Guardian, etc.

If you want to avoid them "taking 20," have them wake up at low tide. Then they have a certain amount of time to make checks before the tide comes in and washes everything out to sea...

I would also throw in a small encounter here. Bandits, looters, goblins, whatever floats your boat. Keep the ECL small, just enough to provide a little bloodshed and danger.

In fact...I'm stealing this for my next campaign.

A lot of DMs make the same mistake, I've even done it before!

6 players means you can't do iconographic "party VS single monster" without one of two things happening most typically.

1. Party DESTROYS the monster, they just have more actions.

2. DM overestimates PCs, or they have a few bad rolls and multiple character deaths ensue.

Shake things up with terrain. Icy, muddy, etc. Multiple enemies using PC-like tactics, hit and run, buffs, etc. Villains and monsters use the treasure they have, it's not just there to reward the PCs.

Best of luck!

A Strength-based monk would be best, I think. I also second the 1/2 orc nod.

Read up on your grappling moves in case you come across a man in black. :)

So many suggestions here that vary wildly. I think everyone has a different opinion of what a Bard actually is. Since 3.0, players have been urged to "Specialize" their character in something. This is relatively easy to do. If you know your Ranger is going to go the master archer route, you start loading up on Bow feats early. All of the other classes (to a certain extent) reward you for "putting your eggs in one basket" so to speak. You neglect one area of expertise for massive amounts of skill in another.

I love the Bard as a class, I have since I played one in D&D 2nd edition (pre Skills & Powers). Every time a new edition comes out, the Bard is the class I always peek at first, followed by the Cleric (but that's a whole different discussion). Bards are all about flavor, no two are alike, and how you build them reflects this.

Bards, to me, are very much a jack of all trades, master of none. They exist to buff the party, and to be able to fill in as needed for primary party roles.

They know how to swing a couple martial weapons, but no one will mistake them for a Fighter. They can cast a few healing spells, but no one will mistake them for a Cleric. They can be a little sneaky at times, but no one will mistake them for a Rogue. They have a certain amount of arcane knowledge and skill, but they certainly won't be mistaken for a Wizard.

This last point is the one that strikes home for me. As spontaneous casters, I am fine with the number of spells they know and can cast per day. They are not primarily a spell slinging class by any stretch, they are just there to "fill in."

What I would like, however, is one spell per level that is evocation based! I'm fine with Bards having limited access to certain spells, but since Bards are "all about flavor," it would be nice to be able to have one that uses Magic Missle, Flaming Sphere, etc as a warchanter.

Just my 2.5 cents.

Maybe if it went up by the appropriate hit die whenever the unarmed strike went up.

For example:

Unarmed Strike is d6 at 1st, d8 at 4th, d10 at 8th, etc. This is assuming a medium creature.

A monk weapon, like a kama is also a d6 for medium, could it not follow the same progression as a monk? We would then have to be very careful about what is and what is not allowed as a "Monk weapon" in the future, however.

Imagine my earlier post about the longsword.

With a d8 at first level, then a d10 at 4th, and a 2d6 at 8th, would you then go to 2d8 at 12th? That seems a little excessive.

I played a fighter/monk in an Eberron setting where I used the feat Whirling Steel Strike to be able to use a longsword as a Monk weapon.

Since I was a 4th level fighter first, I could specialize, use magic swords, etc.

There was still a point where my natural monk damage outdid what I could reasonably do with a sword. I needed to have so many enchantments on a sword (keen, many +s, flaming wounding burst, etc) to be able to keep up. When I did want to go to unarmed, I had effectively lost all the reason for putting feats into swordplay.

I started going the TWF route, using a feat (I forget what it was called) that minimized the penalty for fighting with two longswords, and started carrying more of them, getting them enchanted with the "throwing" ability.

It was a lot of trouble to go through for basically being a monk with a better weapon.