![]() ![]()
Alignment is soooo sticky that I say toss out strict/definite rules. Myself I have players designate realms their character originate from.
E.G. A paladin who seeks to battle and destroy red dragons should not be penalized for using red dragon scales for armor.
Alignment and its parameters are sooooo subjective that it really requires a solid game world concept and adjudication. ![]()
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
AD. You have ignored the comment... "you need to take a look at your posting history and review it with unclouded eyes sir. It's quite distressing."Arrogance 101 = "I apologize for making you see what you said and how it came across to others." Are you really reflecting what is "exactly going on here"?
Ok flame war over.... As a GM of Mr. Glutton (a proud, and self exalting name of course vs. Adamantine Dragon, a name of humility); Glutton has come a long way to becoming a balanced player. Partially from taking on the critical and sometimes unrewarding (praise-wise) role as a DM.
Sometimes his responses are knee-jerked. He apologized. Way to lay into the wound sir.
From my perspective
![]()
Excited to see some more work on what is arguably the most iconic of all Fantasy classes (round table and such).
![]()
Fleshgrinder wrote:
OMG Brilliant!!! A little light sounding at times, but the theme is bang on.![]()
Lochmonster wrote: There's always The Classic Orc Song Amusing, but pretty General Audience in context. Looking for what orcs would be with a Restricted Audience. Actually worse than that.![]()
limsk wrote:
I believe that is because that is the movie in a nutshell :D :D :D Or at least 1 barbarian.![]()
Looking for peoples thoughts/advice on music that is Orc Themed. I'm building an Orc Campaign for a home-brewed Campaign (using Pathfinder System).
So far I've been taking from the Book of Eli Soundtrack, 300 Soundtrack and Spartacus Blood & Sand but am looking for more. Heck some non-lyrical "musical" heavy metal would be welcome. ![]()
I'm bumping this post as I'm likely a horrible person... or at least horribly honest. The banquet food was fine. If you cannot handle salt then I guess this was a spicy meal for some.
For me the complaint with the Banquet was how long the speeches went. It was like the worst wedding I've ever been to. STOP TALKING ALREADY!!!
Thankfully the CEO was drunk. That was amusing and honest ;) :D
The unprepared nature of the banquet was part and parcel for my whole Paizocon experience... except the store. That was well conceived. But then that is where the money is. Best of luck next year. I won't be attending.... unless I get to sit at a table with a drunken Ed Greenwood!!! ![]()
Just edit out the non-useful magic items from the pre-fab adventures. Sub in some legit magic items that the PCs may not want to sell.
![]()
Deadmanwalking wrote:
IMO all mundane classes need some love. I think the joy of 3.5 / 3.75 is that with any class you can define its "intended purpose(s)" in a unique and fun fashion. As opposed to 4.0 where it gets all blandified and standardized... or basic D&D, oh those were the days. Rogues do not NEED to be stealthy tumbly backstabbers, but if they so choose to do so, some help in the Tumble arena isn't a terrible thang. Now that I muse more Archetypes are really a simple solution to many instances discussed to date.
Obviously CMD isn't the way to go with Tumble, but as there is no consensus on a better solution, it makes this discussion moot. That and who said these rules were ever realistic ;) ;) ;) ![]()
StreamOfTheSky wrote: The classes that utilize it are too squishy to do melee well, and needed the tactically flexibility to maneuver into flanks or away when things go south. Hence my proposal for allowing Rogues and Monks half their class level to Acrobatic Tumble checks... there might be options to create that, I've not read all the books front to back. To me, it would alleviate changing an existing mechanic for all classes, but bolster those that need to tumble the most. Those soft, supple, squishy non-magical classes.![]()
Donovan Lynch wrote:
So Inquisitors would be the bestest anti-tumblers in the game... ? It just doesn't make sense to me (no pun intended).![]()
First off Deadmanwalking, pls do not even try to respond with thine Min-Max examples to what I'm about to type.
Now that my disclaimer is out of the way; I'll suggest a way to have some potential for a mundane lady like a Rogue to be able to Acrobatics her way past a big baddy monster. I like the Thanis Kartaleon suggestion, but that may not be enough... I guess it depends on the beasty. A simple solution might be making the check for half move -5DC and +5DC for full move? As opposed to +10DC on a full move. Another thought was with "mundane" classes such as Monks, Rogues & Fighters they might be able to gain a half level bonus to Acrobatics to avoid AoO. Much like a Ranger Tracking bonus.
I say "mundane" as Spells are so potent/versatile that any spellcasting class needs no love imo. I enjoy encouraging non-spellcasting classes. Lambast me as u will. ![]()
Curious on feedback.
Hurdy Gurdy of Expeditious Banter Aura: Moderate enchantment and transmutation CL: 7th
Description:
Construction:
![]()
Once you mix in the Anti-Paladin the whole concept of a Paladin is over with.... which is a good thing.
Ultimately IMO the Paladin is a religious fervor warrior so devoted to a Gods beliefs that anything outside of it is worthy of destruction. They are all about one dimension; their faith. I personally take from the TV show Supernatural where the Angels are warriors of the Faith of God to a fault. Thus Paladins are Faulted.... like all human beings and Gods. Thus the best way to play a Paladin is to define with the DM the parameters of the Paladins so the Alignment is clearly defined. ![]()
Unit_DM wrote:
I'm running a low magic-campaign with a few major nations outlawing magic and others being very wary of its public usage. Imo the general reason for outlawing or even registering ones casting ability (regardless of source) is much like modern gun laws.
The public (serfs) would naturally fear such abilities that could issue forth at the utterance of a few words and a gesture. This would lead to a large amount of societal disorder with torches, burnings and lots of other unpleasantness. Not the kind of situation a ruler(s) would want on his/her/their plate. The government(s) of any nation would be required to have some form of magical caster and/or magical items capable of dealing with the eventual magical threats that would present themselves in any Fantasy Campaign (e.g. Dragon). Those do not have to readily show themselves to the PCs. It could a DM in reserve situation. My method of balance was merely having PCs keeping their spell-casting hidden which proved to be quite the limiter in urban or populated areas. The wilderness/dungeon settings the spell casters could let loose.
I've also made some minor rules tweaks. Specifically and amusingly relating to a previous post on Invisibility and Fly.
The final bit is magical items. I've limited them, but I've also tailored them a bit more to the players as well as having items that increase in potency as the PC levels up. This means finding the item is a wow moment, but the item isn't typical D&D from the book.
I am personally enjoying it as are the players as the mundane classes can shine a bit more.
![]()
I think D&D isn't designed to be realistic. The mechanics are just not complex enough, there are obvious high-fantasy elements and there is more than just crossbows that reflect this. I prefer to approach the game from a 1st level class approach.
If you start factoring in the more fantastical elements such as feats your departure from reality has begun so why fret. If your goal is to be uber effective; well you'll always find something or other that is more potent than another.
![]()
Um, it is a no-brainer that this spell does not work as written for a good portion of the conditions. I've read one thread and no official answer was given. Way to go on bad editing and even further failure to follow up Paizo-dudes. Tis fun to do world building, but mechanics count as well ;) :) I figure the spell should be an Immediate Action. My DM is a curmudgeon for "official" answers.
![]()
Well that medium barding proved to be the downfall of the character.
I've since gone Inquisitor... now there is a well made class that does stuff. I'm not a "killer" but I can fight. I don't have high AC but I'm not low and suspect to easy hits. I have a heavy warhorse I can ride as I have many skills, but I'm not a skill master. I have special abilities that do not confer negatives (like Challenge) and have a lot of versatility in what I choose.
As a note I was going to go Witch next... but the idea that all my spells were part of a low HP familiar made me think... hmm Wizard good... witch useless. ![]()
Well that medium barding proved to be the downfall of the character.
I've since gone Inquisitor... now there is a well made class that does stuff. I'm not a "killer" but I can fight. I don't have high AC but I'm not low and suspect to easy hits. I have a heavy warhorse I can ride as I have many skills, but I'm not a skill master. I have special abilities that do not confer negatives (like Challenge) and have a lot of versatility in what I choose.
As a note I was going to go Witch next... but the idea that all my spells were part of a low HP familiar made me think... hmm Wizard good... witch useless. ![]()
Arengrey wrote:
Ok do it. From what I can tell a 5th Level Cavalier Light Horse, trained has an STR of 19. Taking from the Animal Companion Stats in the Core Book.
A Heavy trained horse has an STR of 20. It seems it is a Bestiary Horse with an advanced Animal Template.
Now make a Druid Animal Companion Mount.
Last thing of annoyance is I just wanna do heavy barding with decent speed for thematic reasons. Well guess what, I'll get a better AC from using the Mounted Combat Feat to keep the mount alive. Not so thematic, now it is all min-maxing. Either way, I'm beginning to lean towards a straight Fighter as the horse seems very sidelined, and not so useful and/or used much. Oh well, mounted combat feat it shall be. ![]()
Mojorat wrote:
I too love wolf riding halfling cavaliers. It is nice to be able to access potions of Flying like cola at a convenience store. I too remember this style of role-playing when I was younger. Bring out the Klingon Dreadnought piloted by this halfling cavalier and the wizard shall quake in fear :P :P :P ![]()
Arengrey wrote: ...and not all classes are balanced Ideally, they should at least attempt at it imho. Especially in a magic heavy environment. Non-magical classes tend to suffer. Arengrey wrote: but to use the Rogue as a comparison is laughable. Is James EVER going to play a Halfling Rogue ever? Probably not. With good reason. Chet or Erin playing Rogues yet... nope. Only newb players try Rogues, as they think it will be cool until they get smashed for trying the Sneak Attack the uber monster in light armor/low AC + HP's.Cavalier, doesn't seem too attractive if Paladins and Druids rate the same along with them having the Spells. Arengrey wrote: As far as being a horse lord, my belief is that the game designers wanted to create a class that wasn't solely useful on horseback but could also have abilities independent and beyond his mount. So like a Paladin, but without the Alignment restriction or spells... spells being pretty darned powerful ;) Arengrey wrote: I think all this bluster comes from the initial Str stat of a combat -trained heavy horse in the Bestiary, -big deal it can haul a bigger cart of hay at 1st level. It isn't just about feed, it's about barding and heavy armor. It kinda sucks to have to move slower than a dwarf for wearing Heavy Armor and Medium Barding as a Knight... go dwarves. Also conceive of Knights not being 20th Level. Those are human-gods. A "normal" journeyman cavalier level range would be around what ... 2nd to 5th level? A normal 5th Cavalier should be far more capable than a 5th level fighter with a bankroll to buy a Heavy Horse. Arengrey wrote: If you really want a "horse lord cavalier" start him up with the human racial trait: Eye for Talent (+2 to Sense Motive and +2 to one ability score [Str, let's say since you're so hung up on it] of your animal companion),... Ahh yes, researching Min-Maxing capabilities. Something I'd like to avoid. I just think a Cavalier ideally would have a horse that can carry the rider in Heavy Plate, while wearing at least medium barding at early levels.For those who perceive this as "he wants a powerful pet", this has been done by those amongst our region and it kinda sucks. We maka da fun of dem "hey welcome Cat and man who rides cat".
![]()
Liquidsabre wrote: Your players are fairly inexperienced I take it? Um, actually one of my players is more capable of breaking the game than I care for (Arengrey can verify this) ... and this player discounts Rogues as absolute poo. Something that has been proven over and over again in gameplay, despite my previous misconceptions on the class. Thankfully he plays to a lowered level of play and doesn't try to break the game and lets the less experienced players flounder about.In my low magic Campaign where wands/scrolls/vorpal swords are not for sale at the 7-11 the Rogues can't do their key sneak attack in Low-Light; so when Orcs invade the camp at night them Rogues is neutered. Oooh take 1d6 Mr. Orc; hey I'm 10th level (agan think mundane human). Pretend all magic items and all books are not available for player plunder.
The Cavalier is not a "magical" class, just like a Rogue. Btw, I'm sure this debae has occured elsewhere to death. So if we rehash it, maybe we could link our pov's. ![]()
Yeah, I'm aware there is no winning, but ideally classes are balanced vs. each other.
Level 20 is not something to plan for imho; and unless the adventure is designed around Mr. Horsey it's going to have to be sidelined.
Anyways, I've beaten this horse to death :P ;) and gotten the answers needed. Hi ho silver.... ![]()
Kierato wrote:
So the Smiting PALADIN gets a smarter horse than the Cavalier??? Horse Lord indeed.C'MON DUDES.... the idea of the class is that it is a HORSE LORD!!!
The other 2 classes get SPELLS.... How do u win... with the spells.... um yeah spells make this game hard.... geee. Can ANYONE provde a tactical reason to play a Cavalier?!?!? ![]()
Vil-hatarn wrote:
No response... so the Cavalier who does not get a Squire w/ donkey gets to carry feed? Very unheroic imo....![]()
Ok, so I'm going over my DM's head on this one.... this said I'm a DM so I never do this, and disdain the thought of it. I'm playing a Cavalier. My DM is using the Horse Stats from the PF Core Rulebook. Should he not be using the stats AND Feats from the Bestiary?
Now this said, add in the advanced template
It all seems so wrong for a class that does not cast spells like a Druid (uber-powerful) to suffer under pure druid animal-companion rulz :( :( Hey look, I'm a Druid, my Horse is as good as yours Cavalier-horse-lord, and I cast uber-powerful spells.... u lose Cavalier. ![]()
I just want to know for future games how to prevent this kind of thing with actual rules counters?? Are there any handy feats,skills,knowledge abilities worth investing in to get around the situation above.... The best prevention is not trying to make the uber-character that the DM feels the need to adjust his monsters/NPC's to.
D&D is a complex, yet simple situation of creating balance and enjoyment for all. It takes some push and pull on both sides of the fence. ![]()
I too use Dingle Games. (Friendly Plug) http://www.dinglesgames.com/tools/NPCGenerator/pathfinder/ Please support this gentleman.
![]()
joela wrote: Has anyone's Pathfinder RPG game reached 15th level or higher? If so, what is your experience so far, both from the player and GM perspective, under the rules? I'm both a player and GM. I dropped out for a long time after 2nd edition, so coming into 3.5 (3.75)at 15th level has blown me away.... in all the wrong ways. As a player I'm currently in the adventure path with Karzoug.
So for the next Pathfinder Campaign I've requested the GM deny us more than 2-3 sourcebooks to limit spells and feats etc. As well as limiting the number of classes we can take (3 to 4 for multiclassing), and finally and most importantly, no buying magic items unless one has a really high diplomacy and lots of down time to search and roll those DCs. I am running my Campaign ala low magic using 3.75 rules, and am working to mitigate high level magic sillyness through fear of repurcusions from various "groups" (it's my own gameworld). I've also pushed flying and invisibility up a level so to limit access to key game breakers (imo anyways). |