If a wizard has nothing better to do then throw fireballs at ships then isn't a very good wizard. I mean what the heck happened to his minions, are they on vacation.
Besides cannons are useful for spellcasters who didn't mem fireball(or similiar spells), don't have such spells, are out of spells, or think themselves too good to waste magic on pointless ships.
Also why does everybody think that just because it is one of these books that it must be common place or have to exist in there campains like Paizo is forcing it on them.
My final point is...I would still like some stats on trains and maybe a ghost train as well for future world neutral book.
The upcoming Skull & Shackles AP is not a setting. It is an AP within the setting of Golarion. This book is about pirates...IN GOLARION where guns are rare.
If this were a setting-neutral book, a gunslinger archetype would make sense. In a Golarion book, not so much.
Am I the only one really, really disappointed in the Inner Sea Pirate PrC? Seriously, they wrote up a whole new PrC just to give us some flavored Rogue Talents.
Not only does it look like a Rogue- it looks like a weaker version of a Rogue.
The only features the PrC has is Sneak Attack and Rogue, I mean Pirate Talents. Same BAB, saves, and HD as a Rogue. It get lower skill (6/lvl) and Sneak Attack (4d6) progression, and gives up trapfinding and trap sense advancement (or what replaces them) entirely. In exchange it gets one extra Pirate Talent (6 total over 10 levels). Seems like a net loss, IMO.
Now granted, some of the Pirate Talents are useful- they just aren't any better than Rogue Talents.
Personally, I'm going to just nix the whole PrC. Instead, I'll just let any Rogue take Pirate Talents and Advanced Pirate Tricks instead of his standard Talents and Advanced Talents. Seems less stupid that way.
Guess thats a problem of PrC´s. Paizo doesn´t really like them. Always the lousy +0 BAB on first level, really hurting medium BAB classes. Then for many other classes no real advancements. Except you are a speööcaster and get casting advancement sometimes.
|
Am I the only one really, really disappointed in the Inner Sea Pirate PrC? Seriously, they wrote up a whole new PrC just to give us some flavored Rogue Talents.
Not only does it look like a Rogue- it looks like a weaker version of a Rogue.
The only features the PrC has is Sneak Attack and Rogue, I mean Pirate Talents. Same BAB, saves, and HD as a Rogue. It get lower skill (6/lvl) and Sneak Attack (4d6) progression, and gives up trapfinding and trap sense advancement (or what replaces them) entirely. In exchange it gets one extra Pirate Talent (6 total over 10 levels). Seems like a net loss, IMO.
Now granted, some of the Pirate Talents are useful- they just aren't any better than Rogue Talents.
Personally, I'm going to just nix the whole PrC. Instead, I'll just let any Rogue take Pirate Talents and Advanced Pirate Tricks instead of his standard Talents and Advanced Talents. Seems less stupid that way.
Your solution for the problem you perceive is perfectly valid for you. That's fine. However, bear in mind that the PrC is one that any nonlawful class can enter into (this makes the monk and paladin ineligible to take it, but does open up the awesome possibility of an antipaladin of Besmara being able to take it). So why should it offer better talents than what a rogue can get? Why should it offer more sneak attack than it does? For those classes that don't get these things normally, what the prestige class does is fine. The original pirate PrC that they wrote up, the Shackles PrC has the added requirement "+2d6 sneak attack" which meant that in Pathfinder only a rogue or a ninja could take it (the KQ spell-less ranger can do it as well). This leaves out other classes to make it fill a niche that is decidedly rogue and in my mind that's not remotely fair. Also, bear in mind that the talents are done to represent options that can be taken by any of the pirates from the nations presented in the book, in any combination as needed.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I want to see an antipaladin of Besmara/Inner Sea Pirate reaving across the Inner Sea. I might have to write one up for my Skull and Shackles campaign, just to see how it would turn out. I think I derailed my own post. Let me get back to you on that....
You complain about PrC´s having 2d6 SA requirement?
What about all the other PrC´s that have spell levels or bardic stuff or who knows what as requirement?
The point is more that it doesn´t have SA every 2 levels, so rogues get nerfed of their damage by taking it. And most stuff you get is not really making up for it.
PrC´s could be written different for different classes, continuing some of their iconic abilities and replacing other class abilities.
|
|
The purpose of a PrC is to allow players who have a particular concept to realize that concept with whatever class they may want to use. The pirate is not limited in concept to the rogue, though that class makes a very good one. A fighter should be able to take the pirate PrC as should a barbarian, bard, or any other class that can meet the requirements. It shouldn't be limited to just the rogue. What you cite as a complaint is a misunderstanding of my statement, which was to point out just how limited to classes the original PrC was compared to this one (and I only listed the Pathfinder core and variant classes that were eligible to take it; the class is 3.5 so whatever 3.5 classes that have sneak or stealth attack could take it as well which weren't many). The Inner Sea Pirate is more open class-wise, allowing those other classes that aren't rogue to get some sneak attack while offering the rogue (or ninja or spell-less ranger) limited continuation of that same ability. Regardless, you can get up to +4d6 of sneak attack dice if take all 10 levels (+7d6 total if you come in strictly as a rogue). The previous one actually only gave +3d6 over 10 levels but it was required that you have an initial +2d6 of sneak attack (even though the earliest you could take it as a rogue was 6th level, which meant that you could have +6d6 total after taking all 10 levels) and the abilities you got, though more flavorful, were more situational than those provided by the Inner Sea pirate (which are more utilitarian in nature). My only complaint about the Inner Sea pirate is that it didn't offer the shipmind or fogcraft abilities from the other PrC as either advanced talents or Shackles only talents (which could have opened up the other pirating regions of the Inner Sea to have specific talents as well), but word count may have been a factor in preventing that from happening.
It's not bad for what it does. Could it be better? Probably, but I think its more balanced in regards to the other classes that can take it. And that was probably their main concern. I was expecting something more mystically inclined, say in the vein of Pirates of the Caribbean (which I personally did not enjoy). This is more Errol Flynn, Douglas Fairbanks or Tyrone Power in nature than Johnny Depp. More old school than new. I like that it doesn't discount what's come before in favor of what's being portrayed now.
|
I and others in my group where a little disappointed in the book. not enough Arch-types in the book and Zero detailing or pictures of the ships or more details on them.
While the information on the key area of pirates was nice, I just felt like more could be there or yet another source book by the time the Shackles and Skulls is released.
While the information on the key area of pirates was nice, I just felt like more could be there or yet another source book by the time the Shackles and Skulls is released.
Like the Campaign Setting: Isles of the Shackles? I'd prefer it's release prior to Wormwood Mutiny as well, but at least it's not long after instead.
So why should it offer better talents than what a rogue can get? Why should it offer more sneak attack than it does? For those classes that don't get these things normally, what the prestige class does is fine.
Why should the Inner Sea Pirate offer better Talents than a Rogue can get? Because everything else about the Inner Sea Pirate is objectively worse than a normal Rogue. This is a fact, not a debate. The question that needs to be answered is, "Why would I (as a non Rogue) take this PrC, instead of just multiclassing into one of the pirate themed Rogue Archetype?"
-An ISP has the same BAB, HD, and Saves as a Rogue.-An ISP has less skills per level than a Rogue.
-An ISP has slower Sneak Attack advancement than a Rogue. It gets a single Talent in return.
-An ISP gives up Trapfinding, Evasion, Trap Sense, and Uncanny Dodge. It gets nothing in return.
-An ISP has an alignment requirement and 3 skill requirements, unlike a Rogue.
So if the Inner Sea Pirate is worse than a Rogue at everything else, it's Talents better be a lot better than the Rogue's, otherwise what is the whole point of the PrC? And the problem is that on the whole, the Inner Sea Pirate's Talent list is not better than a Rogue's. Arguably it is worse.
You have a much, much smaller list of Talents available than a Rogue does. And in this tiny list are some real stinkers like "Drink for Free." And many of the others are boring static bonuses with some pirate fluff attached.
And, hell, it's not like the Rogue Talent list doesn't already have plenty of pirate friendly options. Black Market Connections, Combat Trick (pirateish Feat), Combat Steal, Firearm Training, Grit, Ledge Walker, Rope Master, Strong Stroke, Terrain Mastery: Water, Wall Scramble. And if you took Ninja Trick -> Wall Climber, you'd get everything the Pirate Talent Rigging Monkey and the Advanced Pirate Trick Defensive Climber would give you- but better. And these are just the basic Rogue Talents.
In addition, you could take one of the many pirate themed archetypes to get some additional cool pirate bonuses that this PrC can't even hope to compete with. Swashbuckler, Rake, Pirate, and the brand new Smuggler are all good thematic options that grant additional pirate abilities.
I will admit however, that two Pirate Talents could potentially prove to be extremely useful, depending on how the seafaring rules in the upcoming AP get presented. Namely, Storm Sailor, and Windrigger. But even if these interact amazingly well with the rules, I still couldn't justify a full advancement in this PrC. Probably just two, or four levels.
Does anyone know if both ends of the Boarding Gaff are reach and trip?
Looking at this picture, I would say only one end.
Does anyone know if both ends of the Boarding Gaff are reach and trip?Looking at this picture, I would say only one end.
The description in the book does say that it has a hook on each end, which I did think was strange.
The description in the book does say that it has a hook on each end, which I did think was strange.Does anyone know if both ends of the Boarding Gaff are reach and trip?Looking at this picture, I would say only one end.
Sounds like a GM's call to me then. If the gaff you get has a hook on each end, then I would say yes, reach and trip on both end. If not, then no. :D
|
Thanks! I don't blame ya'll, I blame the silly folks at Amazon. They've dropped the ball many times with regards to Paizo products, in my opinion. Of course, what irks me most is that I will no longer be getting the lowest price guarantee. I really hope they don't do this with the RotRL anniversary edition! I'm really looking forward to it! :)
Sounds like a GM's call to me then. If the gaff you get has a hook on each end, then I would say yes, reach and trip on both end. If not, then no. :DThe description in the book does say that it has a hook on each end, which I did think was strange.Does anyone know if both ends of the Boarding Gaff are reach and trip?Looking at this picture, I would say only one end.
Definitely hooks on both end ... after all, from what I can recall of the flavor text, it's intended to be used when you're boarding in order to keep the two ships next to each other ... so two hooks would be pretty darn necessary.
I have a lot of thoughts on this book as written. I'm going to be making a few changes to be sure, first order of business is swap archetype names the fighter one gets renamed Freebooter and the ranger one gets renamed Corsair, at least for any campaign I want to run with this. Now granted if you want to run a golden age of piracy campaign and truth be told this book gives you many of the tools to do just that in a fantasy setting, you need to dial down the availability of firearms from an exotic weapon to martial weapon proficiency. This puts firearms in the hands of those classes that are most prone to use them. In my games where I run this sort of thing the gunsmith feat from UC is thrown out. I take a page from SpellJammer and say that the powder is a non-magical magic item created with a Craft (Alchemy) check which can allow for some amazing things based on how you mix that powder. Golden Age of Piracy and American Revolution are pretty much the same time frame for me and I do think that in some cases this is overlooked by most fantasy settings.
For a Piracy campaign, and I'm thinking of running that for some folks if I can get a bunch of players here in Philly, especially using Fursona to do a Pathfinder rendition of the Furry Pirates game I found amusing mixed with a healthy dose of Iron Claw, I am using Age of Sail/Golden Age of Piracy/American Revolution era technology along with aspects of Adamant's Tome of Secrets. Everyone gets Pirate background as part of character creation, and I'm renaming the sawtooth sabre from ISWG to shark tooth sabre and making it the signature weapon of the Pirate Brotherhood. Bards and rogues can trade in their bows for firearms and alchemists get firearms added to their list of weapon proficiencies for a few reasons, one of which is the fact they make the powder and cartridges so they also know how to use the weapon, and yes I would allow paper cartridges in game for this but not the metal ones, those came later.
|
Fun Fact: the only classes that benefit fully from the Ship Aptitude regional trait for Shackles pirates are barbarians and experts that don't choose Profession as one of their 10 skills.
I never noticed before looking into this that barbarians are the only PC class that don't get Profession as a class skill. Whatdoyaknow
I got this book and I enjoy it, and was especially pleasantly surprised to see the references to river pirates in it. Those guys used to be a big problem in places like Eastern Europe and Pennsylvania; there used to be a gang called the Schuykill Rangers around Philadelphia, and the Hole-in-Rock gang was nasty in the Midwest.
Okay, they were never Blackbeard or Anne Bonney; heck, they weren't Stede Bonnet or Thomas Tew, but I enjoy the reference!
|
|
So a few of the new spells have a material component (salvage, skeleton crew, and unseen crew) but doesn't mention what the component is. That wouldn't normally be a problem, you could just assume it's a component that's covered with a spell component pouch. Unfortunately salvage is a spell that makes permanent repairs on an object that normally could cost (depending on the vessel) up to tens of thousands of gp. Spells like that usually have a costly material component with them.
Developer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey folks! The question about how the freebooter can use quarry actually rose to the top of the FAQ list (in large part because of Mark Seifter's tireless work going through FAQ's), so there's now an official answer!