Cool everyone, thanks for the imput!
Search Posts
I was considering doing rolls as such: 1 roll for each 5 monsters. Crits need to confirm twice, damage xnumber of monsters. Example:
Does this seem unreasonable? The PC's are starting at level 7.
So I am working on this campaign where each of the PC's are strangers to one another, and all wake up in pitch black. Once they make their way out of where they are they will be in a city that each of them sees as their own hometown, meaning for example, the Dwarf sees that a dwarven town, the Human sees a village on the Moonshae isles, the Elf sees some elf village, etc. Eventually it will get weirder with certain actions resetting them back to the pitch black room. Anyway, Normally a group goes from goblins and kobokds en masse up to bigger and bigger things until they are fighting party vs on BBEG. I want to shake it up. So they are going to be fighting hoards and hoards of low CR characters, with one "scripted" battle being over a thousand CR 1/2 Goblins. Kobolds are using their traps, small size, move and shoot feats and small holes in rocks/caves/etc to retreat into. I want the goblins set to burn and bomb them, with all being good at throwing bombs their alchemists make and doing a fade. I want the Orcs to be well trained, geared like a PC, and capable of more than "GETS THEMS! RRRAAAARGH!!!" Basically I want then to feel threatened all the time becuase the little monsters they can easily 1v10 are being smart. Does this seem like a good idea? There will be some BBEG's to fight, but mostly they are solving the mystery of what is going on while just being swamped by skilled grops of easy mobs.
I generally take a class at level 1 that will give me a lot for a 1 level investment. Any class that is melee gets a level of fighter (If I'm not playing a fighter), my Oradin has 1 level of Life Oracle with Magical Knack. A sorcerer I am building has one level of Rogue to give me a bunch of unlocked skills. I know that this will leave me a level behind on spellcasting and other features, but I don't really care. I play characters that I find fun, flaws and all. Were I actually ever given the chance to get to level 20 I may consider going single class, but it's not happened in any games I have played over the last couple years. Summed Up: Multi- Classing is fine as long as you accept the negatives along with the positives.
Fainting? Like passing out due to stress or a case of the vapors?
Err-nee-buh-dee?
For fun I am creating a level 3 character as a back-up in case my soulless Oradin dies forever. I will be leveling this guy on the side so if/when my Paladin dies I can hop right back in. I want Bluff , Linguistics, and Sense Movive as the main skills with the ability to crush peoples heads if needed. The group is very casual, with two super new players, a new GM, myself, and my fiance. If a character dies we start a new character at the same level. (Rolls are 4d6 drop lowest, nothing below 10)
Class: Fighter 2
---------------------------------------------------------------- Trait: Fast Talker for +1 bluff
At level 3 I would have:
------------------------------------------------------------------ So now what I need is a good race and build to compliment this. Race wise a straight Aasimar seems good for the +2 to Wisdom and Charisma, and using the True Speaker alternate trait for +2 linguistics and 2 languages per point. Does this sound reasonable? Any race is allowed as long as it is Pathfinder related and not 3.5...although I MAY be able to push a 3.5 race if it is a perfect fit. ----------------------------------------------------------------
I was also considering going with the crit feats and a Tetsubo for x4 crit or Scythe for x4 crit, Trip, and no need for a feat. Or, for something different, get mobile with a spear and some Lunge Feats and such. I don't know how well that would work, though. Mostly I am looking for ideas for something other than Falchion Crit Fighter number 20015. Something different. ----------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see my GM having a problem with me switching around my feats, since we are so low level and he doesn't mind a slight adjustment and it shouldn't do anything. I think I could easily get away with two Life Links, one for the Barbarian, one for the Rogue and just heal the Bard if needed since he only shoots a bow. How would switching it up to:
Would that work? Finally, what spells should I be looking at? Also, is piling on the HP via Constitution like I have been doing a smart thing, over Strength? I keep wanting to take Toughness somewhere in there, but at the same time is 1 HP a level a good thing? Normally I play either a straight wizard, or a straight fighter so Paladin/Oracle is new to me.
So, we have started a Pathfinder Rise of the Runelords campaign. We have two super brand new players, a player who is fairly new and has taken on GM duties,my girlfriend who knows the basics, and myself, who is the most seasoned. We are all level 3
My goal is to go until I get Life Link, which will give me three levels of Oracle, and three Life Links. After that I think I want to go back to Paladin to be an off-fighter when needed. I also want to use Dazzling Display so am working towards that. Mostly I want to fill whatever gap is needed. Nobody is a power gamer so I can make this a "For Fun" build, which is why it isn't asoptimized as it could be. My build - (Not sure what you need) Paladin 2 / Life Oracle 1
Fort: 12 Ref: 6 Will: 11 HP 60 Went with Ancestral Arms for a Bastard Sword Oracle Mystery: Channel
Feats:
Traits:
I also took a light wooden quickdraw shield if needed. Anyway, what are some suggestions on where to go once I get Lifelink. Disclaimer: I know that some of you may want to strike me for this build and choices in feats and traits, and I accept that
No, you match the damage category for your actual size. The weapon is made for medium characters, so it is a medium longsword, even if it is technically about the size of a halfling (3 and 1/2 feet) The reason why there is a small category is because people can also play halflings and gnomes, which re small sized. So their long swords would technically be tiny. This rule you are quoting is so you know what size the object takes up for thing like spell effects. If a spell says it can move a 'tiny object', then you could move a medium character's dagger, or a small character's longsword.
Okay, that is how I understood it. The GM believed that it would have you utilizing a 1 category smaller damage column, so our gnome would use small weapons, but only tiny damage, our humans would use medium weapons and use small category damage, which made no sense and was something I had never heard of/played. Thank you for your help!
I have a question about a single rule regarding weapons: According to the rules:
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder." Does this mean that my Human Warrior using a longsword 1 handed uses the Small category 1d6 weapon damage, or would he still use the Medium category 1d8 damage? My GM and I were going around and around about this and I really don't want to argue the rules with him, just understand how my medium weapon is doing small weapon damage. If that's true I would, personally, only want to use 2 handed or Large weapons. Thanks ahead of time for your help in this issue. |