rashiakas's page

Wow, these are amazing. Could you kindly send me a PM as well? Much apreciated.

I don't think its odd at all. The player characters are waiting for the lottery to give them the Sanctum (not they they know that in advance), but so were the Scorched Hand. I think that all along they were trying to be (mostly) legit. Asking around to see if anyone else had gotten it, and offering to trade if they found someone with it. (Trading isn't technically allowed, but it would prevent other parties interrupting them, which is exactly what happens.) By their third and final draw, they still haven't gotten it, and neither has anyone else they've made contact with. So, giving up on being legit, they start their own expedition, but because it's now the time of the third draw, this is just when the players get the place for real. So the timing is necessarily close. Besides just adding flavor to the world around the PCs, that's one of the reasons why the scene in the bar with all the other groups is so critical. If the players get tipped off that there's another group interested in the place before they even get it, and those people come off as jerks, then it should feel inevitable that they find them there, rather than coincidental.

(In my game, my players decided that they wanted to trade with the Scorched Hand when they realized what they got. They thought that would make the two parties good friends... only they couldn't find the Scorched Hand to trade with, because the other group was already busy stealing their site.)

Nebta-Kufre, on the other hand, doesn't really need to have been literally the same day. A day or a few days before works just as well. The most important thing about his trip is that he got in and out (mostly) quietly, and got away with the BIG prize before either of the other two groups even got there. The timing of his finding the place being so close to the others is coincidental, but that's because it was a hard place to find. The item he's looking for is very well warded.

Yeah I am fine with the scorched hand being there, its just that Nebta-Kufre on top seems a bit too much coincidence. I think I let him steal the artefact as soon as the necropolis opens.

So I am preparing to start this AP soon and wondered if anyone had players question the fact that after thousand of years 3 parties enter the same tomb at exact the same time. I think it is a bit strange that Nebta-Khufre enters the tomb at the same day as the scorched hand and the players do.

Did anyone had this problem? Could there be an easy explanation, something I am missing?

The whole "a spell is evil" thing is really a bad concept, as only the intent can be evil or a part of casting the spell requires an actual evil act, like a sacrifice or a certain spell component. I get why there are good/evil descriptors in the game, but they should never affect alignment imho. If you cast infernal healing on a dying child, is it an evil act? Do it again for his also dying parents and your soul is doomed.

Heh, another feat that requieres combat expertise. Paizo, Paizo never learns...

I gm a group who meets once a month for about 8-10 hours each session. We started way back in 2011. We are currently in part 4 of carrion crown, about halfway trough.

My group is pretty RP heavy and I added lot of exra content like carrion hill, but still it takes a long time to finish an AP if you play once a month.

But it is a lot of fun and we all are eager to finish the campaign, no matter how long it takes.

I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to thank Brodyz and Rakshaka for their excellent work. Saved me a lot of time.

Both Archetypes replace true judgement, so you might want to drop witch hunter.

But why would anyone hit on a hard to hit low threat character?

Or you could be a Human and take the dodge feat.

I'm ging to assume it isn't broken since you give no reasons. It is fine to be against something without any logic. People can have fear of trees and balloons in real life. These are phobias, you seem to have one with Summoners.

There are plenty of reasons. Why did paizo change how polymorph works again? Why did they alter the druids ability to shift? Right. But obviously it is okay if the Synthesist Summoner don't need to use this new rules.

Now for the Summoner base class, I have to ask, why do we get a class that has six spell levels, but gets a lot of spells earlier? The summoner get the ability to summon monsters faster, better and more often then any other class. And we all know how powerful summon monster is. That would be okay, but not on top of that spell list and a eidolon.

Anyway, this discussion is moot and I don't think anything can be achieved here. And in 4-5 weeks another thread will pop up, from another frustrated DM, but he probably is lazy to read the rules or his party isn't optimised well enough.

While I can sympathize with the narrator wanting to have control of his world, I can't help but think that the story grinds to a halt without the player. Telling a story through PF is a collaboration. If my player wants to play a summoner, I will make room for it.

And any DM who isn't willing to do everything his players want is bad? I think not.

Now if the summoner was actually overpowered (hint, its not) I might consider banning it. I certainly wouldn't invent out of "its my world and it doesn't fit" excuses for not playing with on in the party.

There we go again. "hint, its not" - well, "hint, it is". Let's argue like 5 year old kids, shall we? And accuse other people to invent excuses. I like it.

Gruingar de'Morcaine wrote:

For me, part of the issue with this discussion is why it is so one-sided against the GM.

Eyes wide with disbelief. O-O

Are we reading the same discussion ?

The one where everybody agrees that a GM has every right to restrict what he allows at the table and where many people say that he does not even need to justify why ?

Yes. This is absolutely in the GMs right. If you don't like it, play elsewhere. I'm not doing hours of prep time, investing money in miniatures etc. and offer a place to play where everyone can enjoy a good time to justify my reasons for banning an obviously imbalanced and broken class. Get over it.

The Wizard argument is another thing I do not understand. If the Wizard is better, then why do you want to play a summoner in the first place? A conjurer can summon and improved familiar gives you a companion, so the only real difference fluff wise is that a summoner can customize his companion. So why do we need a summoner?

Depends. If I could agree with you that no other class can do what you want, your flavour would be appropriate for the setting/campaign, then I wouldn't mind talking it over.

rashiakas wrote:

What seriously annoys me is that apparently a GM who doesn't like to spend extra time on a badly designed class is lazy.

You are lazy for not being willing to at least read it over. That's your perogative, and I won't say you're not allowed to. However, if you haven't read the damn thing, how can you possibly claim to understand that it's poorly written?

Do you take this attitude with any strange build your players bring you? "OH IT'S TOO MUCH WORK TO READ UP ON IT, NO, IT'S BANNED." Yeah, have fun with that.

If you can't handle reading over some rules/errata (that's what rulebooks and PDFs and such are for, by the way) then maybe the job of DMing for Pathfinder isn't quite for you? I hear there are plenty of splendid rules light RPGs out there. Some that fit on a single 8x11 piece of paper, even.

First, calling me lazy if I don't want to read the rules of a class that is in the APG is inappropriate. If I were lazy I wouldn't GM.

I also never said I haven't read the class. I know how it works, I (personally) don't like the flavour and I told my players that I don't like the class and why I don't like it.

I still don't like people called lazy if they don't want the additional work all those splatbooks bring. It's optional for a reason, and players are not entitled to anything ever written by paizo.

I just ignore the rest of your post, because I think you didn't want to sound like a jerk. And if I'm wrong, I honestly don't care about your opinion.

What seriously annoys me is that apparently a GM who doesn't like to spend extra time on a badly designed class is lazy.

@Dark Immortal

In my opinion and experience as Gamemaster you have to tailor your encounters around the abilities of your party. Now, I sure didn't want to imply that a single Eidolon can beat a whole encounter, but the usual answer I see, whenever the imbalance of Eidolons/Summoners comes up, is that you can add this or that to your encounter, which largely defines how an encounter plays out and how much the other party members can contribute.

Per example, the AMF tactic suggested by Artanthos might shut the Eidolon down, but it will also affect your whole encounter and this might lead to players not having fun. This problem exists not only in this context, every overly optimized character can lead to a frustrated party, even more so when said party isn't nearly as optimized.

However, I have less problems justifying specific encounter design to even the field if I have one such player, then if I have to do it because a pet is causing this issue and then the player of said pet has his own actions as well, which may further lead to frustration at the table, because frankly, the summoner is a very solid class even without his Eidolon.

Now I understand that this isn't a problem at tables where every player is properly optimized. But I guess that at the majority of tables this isn't the case, and this class is like a jackpot for your powergamer/optimizer. It's a candystore where he can pick the best abilities for his pet and gets some of the best spells as icing on the cake. As I said, there wouldn't be so many threads about this if the class where without issues.

And I totally agree with the rest of your post by the way. The good thing is, every group can decide for themselves what they want and what they don't want. I'm just hoping that paizo is a bit more careful in the future with class design.

Yeah but that can be said about every character in a group. Also, if you dedicate all resources just to counter the PET of a still useful caster, then a group already has won. Eidolon dies? Summon Monster/Summon Eidolon.

And if you build your eidolon intelligently and not only for maximum DPR, it has so many uses even outside of combat that it can easily replace a party member.

I think paizo did a very poor job in the APG, especially with the summoner.

What weaknesses exactly? And the fighter has no weaknesses? Or does your GM only exploit weaknesses of eidolons?

Okay, so in high level play (which most don't play and takes long to get there) a Fighter can beat the Eidolon in usefulness in combat, sometimes. Everywhere else the Eidolon is probably better. And then the Summoner does his action.

What is your point again?

Cool. So an Aasimar fighter with ASM can win vs the summoners eidolon. Way to prove my point.

Again, how does your fighter get his AMF to the flying wizard/summoner/eidolon?

@Dark Immortal:

Again, when the fighter is better 25% of the time and the Eidolon is better the other 75% of the time, rocks the fighter out of combat and ALSO has a caster attached with some good spells and the ability to summon monsters en masse if the eidolon dies/gets banished - then I ask again, how is this class not totally overpowered?

Since when is this a Fighter vs Eidolon duel thread? Also, you can't fly in your anti magic field. But nice try.

The numbers say otherwise. Eidolons hit more then a fighter because they have so many attacks and a huge strength bonus and pounce. And what can fighter do that makes them more versatile then an Eidolon with evolution surge and a caster behind it?

The Summoner is, in my opinion, a badly designed and badly balanced class. It starts with the spell casting that gives a lot of great spells at an earlier level and ends with the mess the Eidolon is. And that every 4-6 weeks another thread about them pops up tells me I am not alone with this opinion.

So the fighter is better in a few combats then the pet of a caster? Sounds balanced.

Dazzling display is a full round action and has a range of 30 feet. This makes it rather easy to stop him. Also, he gets a -4 penalty for each size category his opponent is larger then him.

Anyway, scare only works on 6hd or less. And if he spends 2 rounds of action to send one enemy fleeing, let him do that. Most other classes would kill an enemy in two rounds worth of action.

That's your opinion Adamtine Dragon. I totally like gender specific items and wouldn't mind classes/feats etc. that are gender specific as well.

Now, what kind of Mystic Theurge would you make from a Cleric with the following stats?

Strength 15
Dexterity 16
Constitution 15
Intelligence 19
Wisdom 18
Charisma 14

The group where I am considering to make an MT consists of an Inquisitor, a Gunslinger and a Monk / Sorcerer (Zen Archer + Empyreal Bloodline).

Not sure how optimized your party is, but Carrion Crown is indeed a rather hard AP so I would strongly advice against a Mystic Theurge. I don't recommend a Witch either, because there are many enemies that are immune to mind affecting and a Witch also lacks defensive spells.

If your choice to play a cleric is not set in stone, I would recommend an Alchemist. You could tank pretty well, dish out good damage with the feral discovery, throw bombs to cover swarms and other nasty stuff and with Infusion you can brew restoration extracts for your party. You also get a lot of skills and the class fits really well in the AP. I'm GM Carrion Crown right now, and the Alchemist in my party really shines.

If you want to stay Cleric, I'd go with the Evangelist Archetype and summons. Bardsong would be awesome for a Gunslinger and a Zen Archer, and your summons can do some tanking.

No, he can't recharge the Staff:

"Imbuing a staff with this power restores one charge to the staff, but the caster must forgo one prepared spell or spell slot of a level equal to the highest-level spell cast by the staff."

Unless I am missing something.

Staves are poorly designed in my opinion. Unless you have a lot of downtime to recharge, I wouldn't bother with them.

My group completed HoH in less then a week and I even added many extra quests and content. Rolling for it is something I would not do personally, just paint the letters when you feel it adds to the game.

So, this gives the alchemist 3 primary natural attacks on level 2? On top of the mutagen bonuses and possibly sneak attack from vivisectionist?

Or did I read the ability wrong?

Firesnake is overrated in my opinion. You get 5 ft. per caster level, starting from you, maximum 60 ft. away. Too close and too short for my taste.

How can you get Conjuration DD as an Evoker?

Well that's not a problem either, you can simply play an elf spellbinder and swap those spells you don't like after you memorized them.

How about a Sohei Monk / Empyral Sorcerer with a guided Weapon?

rashiakas wrote:

You listed shield as a good wand, but it is personal.

And you can use a shield wand. They exist.

Yes, but your familiar can't use it on you, should have been more clear.

AFAIK pressure is not a problem per se, it only makes the air you breathe toxic and thats why you have to decompress via decompression stops. With the right breathing gas (and enough time) you can survive 1000 feet.

Great work Evil Paul, many thanks!

A ballista is essentially a Huge heavy crossbow fixed in place. Its size makes it hard for most creatures to aim it. Thus, a Medium creature takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls when using a ballista, and a Small creature takes a –6 penalty. It takes a creature smaller than Large two full-round actions to reload the ballista after firing.

So, if you have a large creature reloading it, it will only take 1 full round. With rapid reload, it would be a move action. Enlarging yourself should allow you to shot the Ballista each round if you take rapid reload.

You could take the Eldritch Knight prestige class and Vital Strike for some more damage, or maybe the Myrmidarch Magus to use spellstrike with the ballista.

I did read your previous post and had some ideas, but my English is pretty poor so I have a hard time to express my thoughts about it:

I had the same feeling as you when I first read the entry about the Crooked Kin and I plan to either skip them altogether or drastically change them. Your thoughts inspired some Ideas tough and now I really want to implement them in a memorable way and I probably steal some of your ideas.

When I get the time I try to write up my version of the Crooked Kin.

Wow, then I agree, this makes cats really good with smite evil.

@ Reynard_the_fox:

I don't think you get 5 attacks on a pounce, since rake won't work on the same turn:

"A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn already grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn."

Remember that you have to wait till level 7 to get fireball as a cross blooded sorc.

It's as powerful as you make it. If you only want to support and enable your group and if you build the magister around that concept, I wouldn't mind about balance, since you make the game more fun for your group.

Well, you could ask your GM if you're allowed to play the Magister class.

The Cerberi also has combat reflexes and stand still for what it's worth.

rashiakas wrote:

The Bulette is actually a summon monster VI, it's a typo on the d20pfsrd website.

This is now fixed.

You know, it's pretty easy to let us know about mistakes and it usually takes us just a couple of minutes to fix them so please do feel free to report these things to us! :)

Anything else?

You're right. I should have reported that, but I was lazy. Will sacrifice some players in my next game to atone for my sin, sorry :(