Verik Vancaskerkin

atomic_swerve's page

5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS


I'm preparing to GM a campaign (starting at level 1) for my wife and 3 friends, and we've started discussing characters. So far the classes are Samurai (Ronin), Druid, Gunslinger (Pistolero), and Magus. The Druid is opting for a mounted companion, and of course the Samurai has his Mount feature, so there's 2/4 characters that will have some mounted focus.

My players think, and I eagerly agree, that it would be a cool theme for the party to be glory-hunting outriders, and all have mounts that won't just be liabilities spending 90% of the game tied up outside a dungeon.

My ideas to make this work so far are:
- Give the other two players a combat-trained horse for free, since that would be nearly half of their starting wealth otherwise (and Gunslingers might as well be shooting gold coins every round)
- Give everyone the Mounted Combat feat for free at first level, to alleviate the worst of the feat tax needed to make mounts awesome.
- Give everyone Ride as a class skill, either through a trait or another gimme (as a note, I use traits normally).

My concerns with the above:
- Giving the other players horses might be unfair to those who have starting wealth balanced against a class feature. Granted, Animal Companions are much better than normal mounts, but most of the time they are going to be used the same way (getting from one place to another and quickly).
- The Gunslinger and Magus have distinct disadvantages when mounted that later feats in the Mounted Combat chain are meant to alleviate (concentration, one-handed weapon vs. lances, ranged attack penalties in particular). Mounted Combat might not be enough to make mounts worthwhile for them in the short term or long term (if they are too frustrated by mounted combat by the level they can invest in more feats).
- Again, those that have the Ride skill already might be cheated if everyone else gets it too, and "forcing" trait selection just to keep up with half the party is just as bad.
We don't want a powerful game (we all just came off a campaign like that, it was exhausting), so I don't want to be handing too much out at first level even if it's only to keep the players from dying from falling damage off their horse.
- I like dungeons. I like mazes and traps and claustrophobia and deeper beings of pure terror that even the darkness hides from. Personally, I will have trouble constructing scenarios that take advantage of mounts beyond charging enemy mounts from the other end of a field. This could be its own topic, but I'm throwing it in here anyways because it's on my mind.

For some context, before any of this mounted stuff came up, I was already planning on the first 2-3 levels of the game being a long-distance caravan escort. Mounts just make the goal that much easier. Any advice on the above problems, any solutions, experiences, and any more worries I haven't considered yet are appreciated.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Offensive Defense with Sap Master would be INSANE with that number of SA dice being rolled...Especially with Dodge bonuses stacking.

It won't contribute to damage, but by my cursory reading you'd be getting +20 AC a round at 20.


Grand, simply grand. I did know about the enhancement bonuses when you're using a weapon with the descriptor for the maneuver you're attempting, but this opens up a whole new world of possibilities for me...Thanks!


I have a wonderful, stereotypical idea for an Indiana Jones-ish character that uses a whip for Combat Maneuvers. Obviously, Paizo intends us to use the Archaeologist archetype for this sort of character, and so far I've been thrilled with that it has to offer. I want to be a bit of a controller in combat with the whip, tripping and disarming from range, but I'm stuck on some language from UC:

"Archaeologist's Luck: As a swift action, an archaeologist can call on fortune’s favor, giving him a +1 luck bonus on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and weapon damage rolls."

I know disarm and trip attempts can be made in place of attack rolls during a full attack, but they aren't attack rolls per se. I believe AL should give its bonus to CMD checks, but I'm not much of a rules lawyer and I wanted to know if this belongs in errata or I should ask to have it house-ruled in. Thanks!


I'm curious about the Bard archetypes...I've gotten a good awesome picture of the Archaeologist, but there was talk of Dervish?