unforgivn's page

A level 5 gunslinger is usually looking for around a +8 to hit (+5 BAB, +5 DEX, +1 Point Blank, +1 weapon enhancement, -2 Deadly Aim, -2 Rapid Shot) and d12+11 damage (+5 DEX, +4 Deadly Aim, +1 Point Blank, +1 weapon enhancement). Picking the bearded devil as my random CR5 to compare against, this gives the gunslinger an 85% chance to hit when withing touch targeting range for an expected DPR of 29.75 before crits are factored in (I'm doing this without the aid of Excel).

Your character, not being a gunslinger but rather a gun-using alchemist, has a bit more complex math. With mutagen, Rapid Shot, and Deadly Aim, his to-hit ends up at +7 for an 80% chance to hit. Using Alchemical Ordnance, you end up with an expected 18.4 damage between your two shots before crits plus another 4.2 from the bomb that isn't subject to critting totalling up to 22.6 DPR. This is 25% less than the pure gunslinger, but what you give up in damage you're getting back in skills and magic. Using the larger gun doesn't seem like it will result in average higher damage since you're paying for it by dropping your chance to hit by 10%.

The way I see it:

Primary roles:

Striker - remove the enemy's hitpoints
Battlefield control - this is the tank role in D&D/PFRPG, since the way you defend your party is by preventing the enemy from being able to attack them at all; also helps to funnel the enemy into your strikers
*Healer - restore your party's hitpoints and remove harmful conditions
*Face - handle social skill tests for the party
(the ones marked with a * are only primary in ongoing campaign type games; in PFS, they can be considered secondary for most scenarios)

Secondary roles:

Buffer - make your party better in combat
Debuffer - make the enemy worse in combat
Dungeoneer - Disable Device, basically
Magic support - magic detection, identification, and dispelling

Ideally, each character should be good at one primary and one secondary, but situations where one character is good at several secondaries allowing others to be exceptionally good at their primary can work, too.

I heard Warhorn is a thing, maybe check that out.

Other than that, just ask. Women are people too, they want the same thing (fun) everyone else does. :-)

Basically this. We run 2 or 3 tables every Wednesday at our FLGS, and every week we have 3-6 female players from across the age spectrum. Just run a good game and be good to each other. If your table fills consistently, then you're doing it right.

It's absolutely the GM's job to try to attract players -- a game that never has enough people to run productively should be a red flag to any GM -- but no, beyond the common decency that everyone here agrees should be part of every gaming experience, it's not anyone's job to try to attract specific types of people to a gaming table.

If a player says that the don't feel comfortable at a table that I'm a part of, then that immediately prompts me to evaluate what's going on at the table that I might not have noticed. It doesn't, however, compel me to agree with that player at all. If I take stock of the situation and don't find anything to be the problem, then hey, I'm sorry you feel uncomfortable and hope you find another table. No one is entitled to a seat at a game, and I have no interest in entertaining unreasonable demands for accommodation.

The same goes for claims of feeling unsafe. If there's a player at a table that has a history of harassment that I'm not aware of, or if there's some other threat to anyone's safety, then absolutely bring it to my attention. If harm were to somehow come to one of my fellow players as a result of participating in my game, then I would feel responsible for allowing that to happen. But if all a person can come up with is that they "feel unsafe" but can't give anything specific, then sorry, I hope you find a game that's more to your liking.

Other people's temperaments and/or mental health situations are not within my direct control, and I'm not going to put the rest of my table through a situation of feeling like they're walking on eggshells just to meet some arbitrary demographic quotas.

By taking steps to make sure the gaming space is safe and inclusive you can in fact make people feel comfortable and safe, not because your forcing them to feel safe, but because they genuinely feel safe coming into a welcoming and friendly enviroment.

That's what you should do as decent human being, not just because you give yourself a title and think of yourself in a certain way.

I don't think we really disagree in terms of how people should be expected to behave when in a gaming group (or just, you know, in general), but I think in this case you're still putting the GM and the table in the situation of, rather than being judged on their conduct, being judged based on the outcome. This serves to validate the ideas that it's somehow the GM's responsibility to try to attract people of one demographic or another and that failure to do so reflects poorly on the GM and their table. Needless to say, that's an idea that I strongly disagree with.

TL;DR I don't think the makeup of your table should be used to measure your success or failure as a GM.

Absolutely under no circumstances should a GM or player ever fell uncomfortable or unsafe while playing with other people.

As a GM or player, I can set expectations for conduct and hold the rest of my table to them, but I can't make anyone feel comfortable. Likewise, I can make sure that a person is safe, but whether or not they feel unsafe is not under my control.

Just run a good game at a table where you ensure respectful, decent interpersonal conduct. If you do that, then you've done your part as a feminist/ally/whatever, no matter what the sex/gender ratio at your table ends up being.

The best you can do is run a good game at a table where inappropriate behavior (this includes both the creep and the spotlight hog) doesn't get tolerated. You can't control other people's feelings.

Already seeing a few things that will get a big, giant "NOPE" stamp when it comes to PFS play. Oh, well.

Since this class seems to most closely resemble a bard or investigator, I really hope those improvisations are potent in order to make up for the loss of spellcasting.

The oradin idea is interesting, since this is definitely a Paladin who wants to mix it up. The worry I have is that you've inherited the Swashbuckler's problem of "you have a million things to do with swift actions" and "lay on hands" is adding one more to the pile.

To be honest, most healbot builds could use a little complexity in my experience if only just to keep the player awake.

Anyone else want to take a shot at building an oradin with this archetype? If it works out, it could end up a lot more interesting to play (and to play alongside) than those builds usually tend to be. I'll likely give it a try myself when I get some alone time with my PF books.

Roll your to-hit die and your damage die together if at all possible.

"It's unbelievably hot in Seattle right now"

*looks up Seattle forecast for the week*

*sees not a single day with a high above 80F*

*looks up Seattle record high temp for August 1*

*it's 86F*

*weeps internally*

Natural weapons are a category of weapons, but the things you're asking about (like Weapon Focus) apply to specific weapons, not to entire categories.

That's a really potent feat. Hopefully it won't get banned in PFS.

unforgivn wrote:

Splash weapons don't normally add STR to my knowledge.

Indeed not, but the Unchained Barbarian doesn't get a bonus to strength, but a bonus to 'melee attack and damage rolls, thrown weapon damage rolls, and Will saves.'

RAI is obviously no, but RAW? Just maybe so.

Correct, but you've missed the point of my comment. If alchemist bombs are "thrown weapons" such that the Unchained barbarian can add her rage bonus to them, then the good old CRB barbarian should have been able to add her STR the entire time.

Splash weapons don't normally add STR to my knowledge.

I'm playing with some people who are new to the pathfinder business, and while they have the basic mechanics down, I'm worried they may fall into trap feats and options on the basis of them sounding cool. In example, our gunslinger with no ranks in UMD picked up a spell tattoo for a Light spell, which he also thinks is going to be permanent and not one-use.

So to start us off, I've heard quite frequently that Scorpion Style and its derived feats are a huge trap option, especially for monks who get them as bonus feats. What is it exactly about them that makes the tree a trap?

For Scorpion Style in particular:

1) you have to declare it in advance
2) its a Standard (meaning you don't get iteratives or Flurry)
3) even if it hits, its effect is negated by a Fort save (which is the best save for most monster types) with a middling DC

In other words, it's a feat that lets you waste actions all day.

So, I haven't read the Unchained book yet. But this means that the Unchained rogue is just plain better than the old rogue and a new player who uses the core rules effectively plays a worse version?

Sorry if I'm sounding cynical, but it just feels weird telling the players I am trying to get hooked with PFS "You don't want to play a rogue before picking up Unchained."
Keeping new players away from awesome classes for the sake of their own sanity (because they tend to be a bit more complicated than core classes) is one thing, but this sounds more like "This class can do what yours can, but better."

"You don't want to play a rogue before picking up Unchained" sounds a lot better to me than "you don't want to play a rogue."

I don't see how the problem posed by OP is really a problem (unless the assumption is that players and GMs believe that the things that exist in their game worlds must also exist in reality).

Ioun stones

Cracked Green Ioun stone You can choose either attacks or saves when you buy the cracked one for 4k. Can not resonate with a wayfinder since it is cracked.

Wayfinder more than 100% PFS legal. It is the mark of a pathfinder. If you played to confirmation you can get a free one or you can buy one for 250gp from your season 6 guide. This also has a list of Resonated powers for each stone. Clear spindle is a good way not to get dominated.

You should also seek Boons from chronical sheets that boost saves associated with will. Carrion hill MODULE has Fighting between the stars boon which gives +1 to confusion and fear effects. Its un typed and permanent. It doesn't get crossed out and the MODULE will get you an entire level.

Just remember that in PFS only the full price ioun stones give resonant powers. The flawed or cracked ones don't.

Missing a lot.

Hitting for pitiful damage.

Every now and again hitting for what damage the party barbarian does on a normal hit.

The plan is to have an individual printout for each of the factions that are more than just another Chronicle sheet. Something akin to a half page, double sided document similar to what is used for quests at Gen Con and PAX.. The plan is also to put them up for download so they can be downloaded by anyone at anytime.

Something the size of a chronicle sheet would actually be preferable over something smaller since it makes organization easier. When your character consists of several dozen 8.5x11 sheets, adding a smaller sheet is more of a burden than a benefit.

Oh, and one other thing I'd like to point out about the Occultist Archetype, am I wrong in thinking that his summoning ability is cast as a spell?

relevant text:

An occultist can spend 1 point from her arcane reservoir to cast summon monster I. She can cast this spell as a standard action and the summoned creatures remain for 1 minute per level (instead of 1 round per level).

you might get smacked by your DM, but it would seem to me that by RAW this means Metamagic rods would work on your summon ability right?

I know what you're going to say, that this is a spell-like ability, however, the way its worded indicates that the SLA is actually just giving you the ability to "cast a spell". So thus Metamagic could be applied to the spell you cast. You can't change the level on it so preparing or casting it using metamagic is out, but by RAW it seems that Rods would be viable.

I'd expect errata, but if this is truly how it works the Arcanist Occultist edges out the straight summoner for being the best summoner in the game IMHO. Standard action summons + superior summons+augmented +(empowered mm rod) = 2d3+1 summoned critters at the earliest that any summoning build could ever do this. Not sure you can optimize it any better.

Rods don't work on SLAs.

I dunno, maybe Leadership feat to get a follower with Butterfly Sting? (unless this is PFS.)

Also this assumes you have a friendly paladin in the party or perhaps a wand of Bless Weapon and a decent UMD?

Knight-Inheritor's Ring

http://www.archivesofnethys.com/MagicRingsDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Knight-Inh eritor%27s%20Ring

"Skill guy" is a bad thing to build your character towards. First off, you've given yourself basically nothing to do in combat, meaning that you don't really get to participate in (or enjoy) a huge portion of the game. Second off, by wanting to be the "skills guy" for your party, you're basically asking everyone else to participate in the out-of-combat game as little as your character does in combat.

The idea of a dedicated skill monkey needs to go away.

Alignments don't map onto the real world like that. In DnD/PFRPG/whatever, alignments are objective properties of people, things, acts, etc. They'er just as much a part of a person as height or weight. In reality, however, "good" and "evil" are subjective value judgments that we make on an individual or cultural level about those sorts of things, and as such only exist in the abstract.

I think a lot of the wild talents should be combined to save space and improve readability of the class. If a talent simply refers to another talent for its entire rules text, then why not merge the two into a single generic talent that the player can add the proper elemental fluff to on their own?

Rogue for the +1d6

+2 all-purpose damage (from controlled rage) is way better than +3.5 damage during the surprise round.

So, does anyone have a copy of the guide that hasn't been ruined by anonymous edits?

EpicFail wrote:

everything a Rogue can do other classes can do as well without having its mechanical problems.

This is wrong. What other class can use the Intimidate skill to impart the Frightened condition?

Barbarian can panic opponents with Intimidate using Dazzling Display and Terrifying Howl.

The answer to your question is, "When you want to play a Rogue."

It's not all about how powerful a class is mechanically. It's absolutely silly to say that the Rogue is a useless class because other classes do a lot of their stuff better; the class has it's own mechanics and lots of people have fun playing a ROGUE, not a Slayer/Ninja/Investigator/whatever.

I'm not arguing that you have to be a Rogue to be a sneaky backstabber or anything like that. I am arguing that saying you should never play a Rogue because it isn't the best class is a ludicrous concept, especially in a tabletop RPG, where power NEVER has to be an issue if you don't want it to be.

I once read here that the best part about being a Rogue is writing it down on your character sheet, and I say: So what? If that's a valuable part of your tabletop experience, and you like having lots of SA dice and Rogue talents (as underpowered as they can be) and other stuff, who cares?

Ninjas are better at the sneak attacking thing than rogues. Ninjas (as well as several archetypes for other, better classes) also can get rogue talents, if that's your thing. If you choose the rogue class as the means by which your character gets to do those things, then you are deliberately making your character less effective at those things than he/she could be.

If a PC is playing his character like a total jerk with the excuse of "that's what my character would do," the appropriate response is to ask why that player deliberately made a character that was detrimental to the rest of the party (and the game as a whole). "But that's what my character would do" is used as a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card way too often.

Haversack full of alchemical items.

Does this kill most cheese builds off?

-25 point build
-Core / APG only assumption (thus synthesist summoners, broodmasters, etc. are banned)
-Above also bans all Magus and Gunslinger builds
-Core races only. No ARG.
-Flat ban on all homebrew, psionics, 3PP, 3.5e etc.

A CRB/APG-only game sounds immensely boring.

Sooo . . . assuming you have the requisite STR is power attack worth it for a monk.

At best, only when flurrying or when you're getting some other big increase to your hit chance (inspire courage, prone opponent, etc). I'm not a fan of Power Attack on 3/4 BAB characters.

AC is typically only useful against mooks, but there are lots of mooks to be fought.

Archaeologist can't disable magical traps until 6, but they're better at it than anyone else.

I won't say flat-out that rogues suck. I will say, however, that anything that you can think of to build using the rogue class can be built better using other classes.

Huh? Have I been making that up for the past 3 years?

Under starting wealth section it usually says "a character begins play with an outfit worth 10 gp or less"....does that not mean what I think it means?

That's clothing.

Some more Society scenarios in Ustalav or Katapesh would be great.

I've been at a table with Jokhas, and he's an absolute treat to play with (and saved my bacon on a couple of occasions).

Hi,

I have a great deal of trouble playing the game as a player, i usually sit home think of concept worlds ideas and stuff and even encounters ideas so i feel i can use imagation to just make dm areas and worlds and towns and if i get something wrong i can fudge it so it works.

But as a player i just can't do, I come up with a character idea but when i try to add mechanics to it or even pick a class or abtilties i get headaches picking the right feats, traits how spells work, i spend more time flipping through books as a player then i do as a dm, and in the end my character turns out to be useless and usually dies in one or two sessions.

I find character creation as a player the most stressful thing and i need help with it greatly to help me ease into being a player.

Build for mechanics first, and let the fluff write itself as you play.

NOTE: I am not saying min-max.

Something tells me my archaeologist bard is going to start carrying a spellbook around with him.

If you make the first save (on the caster's action), then you're staggered for a round and the spell ends. If you fail that first save, then the other 3 saves are made once per round on YOUR turn.

The Summoner is the only new base class that I think shouldn't exist. It's just too good right out of the box that you really have to be a very unskilled player to not totally dominate with them.

The rest of the new classes are great.

I play PFS exclusively, and I almost never have a dedicated healer in our party. In the few cases that we have had one, they've typically been limited to casting something like Bless and then standing there idle until the fight ends. In-combat healing is almost never needed, and a character built specifically to be an in-combat healer is going to be boring to play at most of the tables I've sat down to.

Beyond the obvious potential for houseruling, paying for training hasn't existed since at least 3.0. I've never played any previous editions, so I can't speak on those.

This thread was basically beaten to death before I even noticed it, but I'll add this: the very concept of a dedicated "skill monkey" sucks.

You know all that sitting around and doing nothing that the skill monkey gets to do during combat? Well, that's what he's going to expect everyone else at the table to be doing out of combat just so he has a chance to play.

Making a character that has a smattering of good skill bonuses in addition to combat utility is a great idea, but making a character that is better than everyone else at the table in all skills is a pretty quick route to having most of the table start playing with their smartphones out of boredom.

Having a designated hitter is nice, but you shouldn't really need a specialist damage dealer so long as the party isn't full of cripples. Having a healer is also nice, but having a supply of consumables and a character or two that can use CLW wands will almost always suffice.