So the feat is here:
I'm left with a few questions:
1) can you cover natural weapons with this filth?
So I'm about to DM a game again, but it's a small group (myself and two players). I'm suddenly stricken with the urge to join the party. I know from experience that the DMPC is a bad idea, but that got me wondering: what if we all play characters but two of us take turns DMing?
Yes, this means half the time I'll have a DMPC, but the other half of the time he'll just be a PC. And with some thought and effort we can come up with rules or plot reasons to prevent a DMPC from doing things like spotting traps the DM knows about or generally solving encounters designed for the party.
So what do you think? Is alternating DMs and a character for everyone a good idea?
I realize planar adventures will be the last Pathfinder hardcover so I'm really excited for it. I also had a sweet idea for something I'd love to see: Etraplanar beast companions as alternatives for rangers, hunters, druids, etc, possibly associated with planar archetypes for those classes.
This may be a little zainy and out there but I'd love to be able to team up with some kind of shadow hound or ethereal bat or phase shifting beetle. Maybe they could be more intelligent than proper animals or vermin from our plane and have supernatural or magic abilities allowing for a more subtle play style than "POUNCE!"
It makes sense that with 2E in the works, 1E is gonna wind down a bit, as there's not much of a future for any system once its replacement is anounced. Nonetheless I think it would be smart for Paizo to release a book with new PF1E classes and features.
First I think a lot of hardcore players who don't like the new version of the game would actually shell out for the final hardcover book, especually if it's loaded with cool content and they plan on playing this game forever.
Secondly this book would be an excellent canary in the coal mine for any interesting class/rule ideas Paizo wants to try for 2E. Paizo might be able to look back on this book and say "Wow, that class that turns into a squid and uses ink magic was really lame but the arcane ranger with a magical brast companion was pretty cool."
Sometimes you want to play an elf, and you don't necessarily see him as a ranger or wizard or rogue, but as a distinctly elfy concept. Some stealth, skill with a bow, a touch of arcane magic.
Sometimes you want to play half orc but none of the classes convey the level of brutality inherent in orc warfare.
Sometimes you want to be a dwarf who holds the line like a stalwart defender from level one, shrugs off magical attacks and can do unique things with axes, hammers and shields.
Basically I think the idea of a generic class or easy access prestige class for every race would be really fun.
I'm anxious about Pathfinder 2.0 and not entirely optimistic, but there is something about a reboot that I like: The prospect of some of these optional rule systems and fixes becoming core rules.
Look at automatic bonus progression for example. I blame 3.5, But nevertheless it is an absolute disgrace that players have to think in a meta/powergamy way to stay on par versus monsters. The rat race of trying to buy power items damages the narrative and disincentivises purchasing and crafting fun flavor items. The ABP saves us from this hastle, and I think something like it must be made core.
I also like the idea of variant multicasting, or something like it, becoming core.
Something like the wound threshold system, and maybe the called shot system would be cool as non optional systems too. HP as it is doesn't adequately convey the idea of being injured
Since the 70's/80's/90's tabletop roleplaying has come a long way. The basic idea of DnD/Chainmail is as relevant as ever but some things have aged poorly (remember THACO amyone?)
I think one of those ideas that has proven a little silly and dated is the concept of the performance bard (aka every bard that hasn't taken the archaeologist archetype).
I think there's a longing for a 3/4 bab 6th level caster jack of all trades core class and historically this role has been filled by a guy who sings, dances or performs comedy in battle. But does it have to be that way?
With the advent of pathfinder several core classes that were pigeonholed in 3.5 got alternative options: rangers could now share their favored enemy bonuses instead of taking animal companions and druids could take domains for example. What we need is an alternative feature for the bard.
For many the performance ability has a campy,antique and whimsical charm. But I think we could use a cooler, less silly alternative. Here are some alternatives:
An archaeologist style buff to attack, save, skills and damage. Where a typical bard gets new types of performance, he gets combat feats.
A cavalier banner like ability. This makes him a group buffer but changes the flavor entirely.
An ability that emphasizes his jack of all trades role by allowing him two standard actions X times per day as long as they're different types of actions. Aid another and cast a cure spell, for example.
Give him SLAs for illusion and mind control abilities not tied to music
I just saw the vampire hunter on the SRD. This surprised me because usually when a new class is in the pipeline there's a lot of buzz on the forums beforehand.
I have to say I like it. There are some serious problems with the class, like having a vampiric focus that increases charisma when the class uses wisdom to cast, and having d8 hit die (hillariously, one focus gives you 1hp per level, rquivalant to being d10, which all other full BaB get for free).
The bigger problem is dead levels. For example, at level 7 you can TRACK GASSEOUS CREATURES.
I like the class though. Seems like an ugly little dog with a big personality. I don't think anyone's gonna call This a power class but it's perfect for that obsessed monster hunter or any player who's saying DO I REALLY WANNA MAKE ANOTHER RANGER?!
I'd love to see some archetypes but I'm loving this as of now.
I haven't seen one of these threads in at least 3 days so here goes...
A few class concepts I think we could use, in the form of an ACG part II or otherwise:
1) A caster or pseudocaster with a go all day ray power. A take on the DnD warlock that is not the kineticist. After all, some people don't do psionics and can't understand how CON is a casting stat.
2) A martial buffer/leader. In 4th edition, which was generally god awful and way worse than pathfinder, there was a class for this. I think it was called the marshal, and it was a cool concept. Somebody who does battle ahouts, raises morale, etc. A non magical bard or cleric.
3) A life drainer. We've all seen this, weather in the form of a cool life draining ray (the sith from star wars), Rogue's decaying touch (X Men) or Warcraft's life drain spell. I feel like a life thief with 3/4 BaB and some fighting ability would be reqlly flavorful, either for a villain NPC or a cursed PC. Perhaps she could also drain magic from casters to activate temporary magical benefits.
The eldritch scoundrel does this well but it's a freaking archetype. We need a class.
Despite having an interest in D&D 3.whattever and pathfinder since my teens and having nearly a decade of pathfinder experience, I've never played a fighter. The thought of being some dumb hunk who wails on people turn after turn was never my thing.
About 6 months ago however I started entertaining the idea of a different kind of fighter: A buffing, assisting party leader. Inspired in part by the 4th edition Marshal class (That's what it was called, right?) I began theory crafting something more than a mindless damage machine.
My first fighter, a level 5 human called Brianacus James, has just completed his first session and the results were really entertaining. I'll break down the build by explaining his 7 feats.
Combat adcvice: As a move action I can use this alongside aid another. That plus two to hit for an ally is really good when you stack it with the aid another action. Or you can effect two different players and buff multiple people.
Battle cry: Swift action buff which gives everyone +1 to hit and +4 on saves vs fear. The action economy is brilliant and as a morale bonus it stacks with the insight bonus of combat advice and the untyped aid another
Defiant luck, inexplicable luck and bestow luck: Now I'm rerolling ones for saves, forcing the enemy to reroll crit confirmations and getting a plus 8 to any roll daily, or plus 4 if the roll was already made. And I can allow an ally to take this reroll for himself as an immediate action.
Weapon Focus, Dazzling display: This doesn't have the greatest synergy with my build, after all I could've gone for bodyguard or saving shield. But I needed high charisma for battle cry and I might as well use it. It's pretty decent because the debuff lets me tank better. And it's fun to make my enemies weaker while buffing my enemies
Don't be a dumb hunk. Be like Brianicus.
I've always done homebrew worlds, even when I was quite young and inexperienced. For me the creation of a unique world has always been one of the more appealing aspects of DnD.
That being said it would often be years between campaigns, so new worlds were being created all the time. It wasn't until a year and a half ago that I found a half decade old map, resurected that setting and began building a cannon that stayed consistent.
The continent of Syrix became a lot of fun for me, and felt like a home away from home. Kings, nobles and prominent PC heroes from the past formed an increasingly complex and interwoven cast of characters. It was really cool to be able to reference historical events and heroes, to understand the continent not just as a series of names on Index cards and words on maps but as a living breathing place.
My third campaign in Syrix is when everything went downhill. Despite a fun start with more role playing and out of combat fun than I've ever had, there was a disruptive character. My brother's ranger, established in the previous campaign as an honored war hero, showed psychopathic tendencies for the first time and for no discernable reason. First he threatened to murder a helpful shopkeeper, and when This act got the party outlawed and living in a cave, he threatened the bandit captain who had been letting the party live with them, ending in his trial by combat and death.
Because only one player in the group makes his own sheets, I gave My brother a backup sheet as was tradition when someone dies. This character was a full on murder hobo who died within fifteen minutes, and the third sheet I gave him, apparently trying to avenge the murder hobo's death, became a murder hobo but was Julius Ceasar'd by the party and died.
One session. Three disruptive murder hobos. What really bothers me is how this degraded the story. In fact the thought of my continent bothers me now, the cannon is ruined, like an episode of GoT interrupted by three Tasmanian devils tornadoing Gregor and Jon and Queen Cersei off their horses. I'm throwing the cannon out and starting again.
Any similar experiences?
So I'm retiring as DM after my two session game was derailed and sabatoged by three my brother's murder hobo characters (he went through 3 of my sheets in one night).
My best friend is taking the reins and everyone else that had a character is keeping theirs. The party is as follows:
Human melee inquisitor CE
My inclination is towards a transforming caster.
I usually lean magus. I've made one recently so may not do it again but I'm not certain. I'm considering eldritch knight. I don't do nature themed.
So between magus, ek, wizard, sorcerer, witch, etc. Who would you pick if you wanted to make a brutal magical transformer?
I'm under the impression that druids, magi and alchemists are pretty much the only good classes for Transforming (access to right spells and abilities, BAB).
Am I missing something? Do the wizard/sorcerer/arcanist or any other Classes make good transformers? I've always assumed the lack of BAB and he were fatal but am I wrong?
Can you qualify for certain monster feats if you only meet the prerequisites through a spell or class ability?
Example: as a hexcrafter magus I can cast fly, or monstrous physique (gargoyle) or grab the flight hex. Does any of this qualify me for the Flyby attack feat even though I naturally have no fly speed?
I've done a complete 180. For years I detested the idea of a 2.0 for pathfinder. After all, pathfinder was designed as a reverse compatible improvement over 3.5, which is likely the most highly regarded version of D&D. The very idea of pathfinder seemed like a repudiation of the notion that every 5 to 10 years you have to throw out your old tomes and buy Wizards of the Coast's shiny new pile of books. It seemed so eternal. 3.75 forever, the promised land. But more and more I notice that Paizo's ambitious attempts at reforming an iconic but wonky system have led to some real bloat and confusion.
To show what I mean, let's take a hypothetical character. Let's call him Rollagar. I want to make him a druid, variant multiclass barbarian (because turning into a raging bear is awesome). Then let's say down the line I want to take one level in rogue.
I'm left with a lot of questions. As an optional system, will the DM let me variant multiclass? Will he let me use the unchained Rage rules? I don't know, that's another optional system. Then can I traditionally multiclass that level in rogue after variant multiclassing? The rules say something to the idea of "I don't know, not such a great idea ask your dm". Can the rogue be unchained? Whattevs, ask your dm.
I think a lot of these new rule designs have been a lot of fun, but they need to be organized and codified to streamline the game. I think there should be one summoner that works, one barbarian that works, one rogue that works. I think that these reformed classes, combined with brilliant optional role systems like VMC and automatic bonus progression, show great promise and show us what a pathfinder 2nd edition could look like.
I notice that two concepts aren't adequately handled by pathfinder classes, and I think some new classes would be welcome.
1) A dedicated shifter
There are some archetypes based off this concept, and to an extent, a class (the druid). But all these classes and archetypes either impose a highly specific flavor or theme over this shifting (such as a druid's focus on nature) or simply impose the shifting theme on top of a pre-existing class. There is no generic shifter.
2) A go-all-day ray specialist
The options for this kind of character are to use a psionic class (many tables ban psionics) or to use an archetype of vigilante (a class which is widelay regarded as niche and setting specific). There's a witch archetype too, but the appeal of this kind of character is so broad that I don't think it should be buried in a couple archetypes.
My latest character is a magus. I approached the class in a slightly more unusual fashion because I love to do things my own way and I think the shocking grasp/nova damage approach is formulaic at this point. I took a flail (trip weapon) and built around the concept of tripping through maneuvers and toppling magic missile (thank you magical lineage).I'm also a hexcrafter so I debuff with evil eye.
I was going for flavor and style points but to my surprise this is incredibly effective. I can't crit Fish and my damage is totally mediocre but I completely neuter targets and set up flanks/AOOs with the rogue for opponents getting up from prone. In one or two enemy encounters we dominate.
Do other people use the class similarly? If so why does the shocking grasp crit fishing assassin Steriotype persist?
I find the options for plant and vermin companions very interesting in theory, but I'd like to see them expanded upon.
Of vermin, there are about 6 options. They tend to be so weak and unimaginative outside of the scorpion and mantis that they just sort of don't work. I would imagine that even if a spider is weak he'd have some sort of nifty Web relaTed ability or at least a poison that works.
And plants... need more plants. So many more.
That is all.
Traps are broken, this much is known. It can cost thousands of gold and countless hours of work to make even a basic and moderately effective trap. The rules are so bad that i'm surprised they haven't been revised.
In Neverwinter nights you had a SET TRAP skill and bought traps as mundane or magical items that were reasonably priced and simply placed on the ground to deal damage, create effects or both. I'm thinking of creating simple damage traps, pricing them fairly and instituting a set trap skill.