|
It does feel rather homey. The difference between Paizo and others I might mention [cough!WotC!cough!] is that it feels like they opened the door and said "Come on in. Look around. Tell us what you like and don't like." And then they listen. That just freaking boggles my mind sometimes. By which I mean "Thank you Paizo".
You forgot the fresh baked cookies Paizo hands out. :)
You forgot the fresh baked cookies Paizo hands out. :)
I was too busy being mind-boggled.
|
|
I was too busy being mind-boggled.You forgot the fresh baked cookies Paizo hands out. :)
Yeap, it is quite a difference and it is very nice. I've been part of the WOTC community since before they bought TSR.. when they were ONLY about Magic. Even then, they had a firewall against their customers. Granted now it's worse because of big brother, but I know what you're saying.
The thing that really gets to me is that I feel like sort of an honorary member of the design team (insofar as my suggestions and everyone else's are really getting looked at objectively).
same here and folks are seeing there ideals or ideals forms on the boards being worked into the alpha.Its a damned nice feeling to know you have a real say and real input.
same here and folks are seeing there ideals or ideals forms on the boards being worked into the alpha.Its a damned nice feeling to know you have a real say and real input.
So True!
=).I think this is one of the reasons Pathfinder RPG is gonna rock!
Bah.. I feel a group hug coming on.. I better get to bed before that happens. :P
Yeah...I'm up past my bedtime.
See you all tomorrow.
Bah.. I feel a group hug coming on.. I better get to bed before that happens. :P
We ARE NOT hugging you in a bed! Stop that.
Btw, is Second Darkness gonna have higher starting level in the first Adventure than Level 1 now that you have a Multiclass Fighter/Arcanist in the mix, or is he the only 2nd Level Character.
x)
|
|
Btw, is Second Darkness gonna have higher starting level in the first Adventure than Level 1 now that you have a Multiclass Fighter/Arcanist in the mix, or is he the only 2nd Level Character.
It's level 1. He'll start out as a single class character and will become a multiclass character as his level increases.
Keep in mind that Second Darkness doesn't have to start with the descent into the underdark.. it could.. but it likely won't.
Btw, is Second Darkness gonna have higher starting level in the first Adventure than Level 1 now that you have a Multiclass Fighter/Arcanist in the mix, or is he the only 2nd Level Character.It's level 1. He'll start out as a single class character and will become a multiclass character as his level increases.
Keep in mind that Second Darkness doesn't have to start with the descent into the underdark.. it could.. but it likely won't.
Shame, but you are propably right.
I hope he starts as Sorcerer, but since he is more melee based, he most like is Fighter first.What I understand from Second Darkness Chapter 1: "Shadow in the Sky", is that it start from Riddleport. I dont have my Gazeteer yet, so you guys that already have it. Can you tell me, what sort of place is it? Bigger than Sandpoint, I imagine.
One other thing to note, of course... Seltyiel will be statted up during Second Darkness, which is a 3.5 product. We won't be doing PF RPG stats for him at LEAST until August of 2009... and I suspect he'll have to wait even longer than that.
Also: although they're showing up as the pregenerated characters for Second Darkness, Lini, Seltyiel, Amiri, and Sajan were not chosen or designed to make a "perfect group" for that campaign. They just happened to be the final four who need stat blocks. Once we start up AP4 in February 2009, we'll have all 12 iconics to pick from for the first time, and that'll be the first chance we get to customize the type of characters chosen for the type of campaign AP4 will be.
How about putting out a poll for 12 favorite iconics, and maybe choose the top 2 as members of AP4 that way the last 2 can be used to make sort of perfect group.. =).
Maybe when you PF RPG stat them you can also broaden their backstory a little more / or future goals with some PF RPG Feats.
|
A Neutral Evil villian is also more likely to work with the heroes to stop a greater evil but betray them in the end. (Think Doctor Doom in Rise of the Silver Surfer as a modern example.)
i can't think of an iconic villain who has turned on his onetime allies more than Doctor Doom, i am almost certain that most of the grognards on this messageboard would classify Doc Doom as Lawful Evil. Besides Darth Vader, i cant imagine a more iconic villain to fit the bill of that alignment.
A Neutral Evil villian is also more likely to work with the heroes to stop a greater evil but betray them in the end. (Think Doctor Doom in Rise of the Silver Surfer as a modern example.)i can't think of an iconic villain who has turned on his onetime allies more than Doctor Doom, i am almost certain that most of the grognards on this messageboard would classify Doc Doom as Lawful Evil. Besides Darth Vader, i cant imagine a more iconic villain to fit the bill of that alignment.
Darth Vader, Great example of Evil villain. What Vader wanted was power to prevent those he loved from harm/dying. That led to quest for more power which led to siding with the evil Sith which led to him killing women and children and even killing his former friends.
But than at the end he killed evil emperor and saved his son.
I think "some" Characters that are labeled with "Evil" alignment could just be little misguided or doing wrong/evil things for goals they think in the end are better/good. And than they might at the right time for right people actually do good things.
=)
|
|
An evil iconic. Joy. Nothing like murdering your own party members while they sleep, then sacrificing the local villagers to the blood god to keep an AP on track. He's cool-looking, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have had someone a bit more heroic. I'm hoping at least that Paizo will provide compelling reasons why he DOESN'T sacrifice his party-mates for dark power.
Truthfully, I'd have liked to have seen a paladin/sorcerer with an abyssal bloodline. Someone who may be constantly fighting to keep his or her darker impulses in check but who wins the fight. I'd also liked to have seen exactly two iconics of each non-evil alignment. It appears that unless Sajan is good, Seelah will be the only LG iconic. Blah. Then again, we've already got 3 NG iconics (Valeros, Kyra, and Ezren) so that's already off the table.
...oh good God, what have I done to anger you this way. Don't answer that.
I'm going to summarize this with as few snide remarks as possible. The whole murdering party members and whatnot? Not evil. Stupid. Evil is as evil does. Stupid is as stupid does. Evil can be summarized by the following: Having a goal and doing anything needed to accomplish it. Let's analyze the typical evil goals, shall we?
Power/Revenge: Why would anyone after power murder their adventuring party? You've managed to surround yourself with a group of people(or people like materials) who defend you. Look out for you. If they're stupid enough, they trust you. Why ruin your best asset in your quest for ___ with nothing to gain? Play it cool, maintain your usefulness, and they maintain theirs. It's a simple alliance. And in a quest for power or revenge, what greater ally do you have than the people? Save that village from bugbear slavers. Gain a reputation as a hero. Then, when all is within reach, you have that many fewer enemies. Then you want to kill X for what they've done to you. Why would the people doubt your words? You've saved them. Gave them their lives. Why would you...
You failed your detect sarcasm check on some key sentences in that first paragraph, didn't you?
Fact is, evil characters tend to be unreliable. Heck, even chaotic neutral characters tend to be unreliable. If they don't like something, they don't do it, no matter how crucial it is or who gets hurt. If they want something, they take it, no matter how crucial it is or who gets hurt. If they feel like doing something, they do it, no matter how crucial it is or who gets hurt. See a pattern here? It's personal bias, yes, but there's a reason I do not allow non-good PCs for any reason in my games.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
You've managed to surround yourself with a group of people(or people like materials) who defend you. Look out for you. If they're stupid enough, they trust you. Why ruin your best asset in your quest for ___ with nothing to gain? Play it cool, maintain your usefulness, and they maintain theirs. It's a simple alliance. And in a quest for power or revenge, what greater ally do you have than the people?
Sounds like Survivor to me.
--
|
|
I think that evil characters can cooperate with party members and achieve group goals. Their motivations are what are different. I remember reading an article, I think it was in Dragon a long time ago, that talked about what exactly Evil is. The thing I remember about it was it said that just because something is evil doesn't mean it is automatically self destructive and out to kill, rape, and pillage every person, village, or empire it meets. Evil characters can form friendships, they can exhibit teamwork. Sometimes, evil is simply that by cultural definition. If the party runs into a tribe of savage cannibals that sacrifices and eats every first born child in their village, they would be evil by the definition of the traditional culture/adventuring group.
However, in that culture everyone has been raised doing the same sort of sacrificial cannibalism. Perhaps they are taught that in that way the spirit of all first borns (whom the tribe believe are blessed of the Gods) is shared by the entire tribe and lives on through each tribal member. According to their cultural mindframe, they are not evil. In fact, they probably think that the culture the party hails from is the evil one. Thats the thing. Evil never thinks of itself as evil. Perhaps a character seeks to murder every gnome it ever meets. Sounds evil right? But what if his family was killed by a gnome serial killer? Is he evil then?
By the standards of our own modern day culture, every PC in the D&D would be considered evil. Think about it. They are mass murderers, thieves, power hungry, violent, destabalizing to communities, etc. etc. However in the D&D world where Dragons and Demons are real. Where vast treasure hordes and ancient tombs await exploration and discovery adventurers are treasure hunters, couragious, and heroic. Its all about what you were brought up to believe. Our Half-Elf friend was victimized by his parent, abused, beaten, tortured, and suffered at the hands of those he trusted. He seeks vengeance. He hungers for the power to right the wrongs inflicted on him in his life. His view of the world isn't sugar coated because he experienced harsh reality his entire life. He is willing to step over the line to get the job done because he understands that the bad guys don't play by the rules either. So he is willing to fight them on their terms. That doesn't mean he will instantly murder the party at the first opportunity for gold. It doesn't mean he will sacrifice babies to Demon Princes or rape innocent women in every village he goes to. He wants vengeance for what happened to him. That doesn't mean he is incapable of friendship, alliance, and cooperation. In his own psychologically scarred mind he is just doing what must be done, and his enemies best beware. This dogs got a whole lot more than a scary bark, he has got one hell of a bite.
I LOVE that Paizo is willing to have an iconic PC that is not all about saving the day and "kid friendly". This guy has a violent and disturbing past, and it gives him AMAZING depth. If I get to play AP4, I absolutely want to play this guy. Allowing an evil PC isn't for everyone. That said, a player may want to play an evil character specifically to explore the dark side of humanity. To see how the world looks through the eyes of someone who has been so horribly abused as Serytiel has. Wanting to play an evil character doesn't mean they are just waiting for the first chance to steal the other players gear or stab them in the back to dump them in a trench.
This Iconic is EXACTLY why Paizo is the BEST company in the gaming business. I can't wait to see what else they have in store for us.
An evil iconic. Joy. Nothing like murdering your own party members while they sleep, then sacrificing the local villagers to the blood god to keep an AP on track. He's cool-looking, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have had someone a bit more heroic. I'm hoping at least that Paizo will provide compelling reasons why he DOESN'T sacrifice his party-mates for dark power.
Truthfully, I'd have liked to have seen a paladin/sorcerer with an abyssal bloodline. Someone who may be constantly fighting to keep his or her darker impulses in check but who wins the fight. I'd also liked to have seen exactly two iconics of each non-evil alignment. It appears that unless Sajan is good, Seelah will be the only LG iconic. Blah. Then again, we've already got 3 NG iconics (Valeros, Kyra, and Ezren) so that's already off the table.
Give me strength.
Next you'll be saying that a the bad guys should wear black hats.
Almost any motivation for group and inter character cohession that can be used by a good character to explain why a group stays together and even acts in a heroic manner can be used to describe why an evil character does the same. It some time needs a little twist, but mostly just a plain port will do.
-Friendship, companionship, love & lust
-Best way to achieve a goal.
-Best way to survive
-Best way to earn money to help with the survivial goal.
-the fact the other owes you money
-the fact the other has a talent you enjoy(music, cooking ect all.)
|
I've gotta' say I've never been a huge fan of the character backgrounds that feel like level 10 and halfway through their story before they even get past level one. That said, I like the character. He's really really wretched--but like in a good way. He is pretty archtypal. I got a big Raistlin read off him too. Then again, one of the coolest things about Pathfinder are all the little nods to the classical elements of the game, and the literature it's based on. I really enjoy that part of the game and can really feel it in this new guy.
In my heart I will always love Seoni, Valeros and the gang best--but I have to say the Pathfinder iconics are all a load of fun.
I have to agree with you there. Most of these iconics should be at least 6th level judging by their backstories. Still, there is nothing wrog with a compelling character backstory. I also have to say that Amiri's actions are far more evil than anything in Seltyiel's backstory. I know it was a one time thing, but while Seltyiel may have a selfish and possibly evil outlook, Amiri has actually commited very evil acts.
Regardless of anything else, I was utterly enthralled with the backstory. Bravo!
I have to agree with you there. Most of these iconics should be at least 6th level judging by their backstories. Still, there is nothing wrog with a compelling character backstory. I also have to say that Amiri's actions are far more evil than anything in Seltyiel's backstory. I know it was a one time thing, but while Seltyiel may have a selfish and possibly evil outlook, Amiri has actually commited very evil acts.I've gotta' say I've never been a huge fan of the character backgrounds that feel like level 10 and halfway through their story before they even get past level one. That said, I like the character. He's really really wretched--but like in a good way. He is pretty archtypal. I got a big Raistlin read off him too. Then again, one of the coolest things about Pathfinder are all the little nods to the classical elements of the game, and the literature it's based on. I really enjoy that part of the game and can really feel it in this new guy.
In my heart I will always love Seoni, Valeros and the gang best--but I have to say the Pathfinder iconics are all a load of fun.
The difference is, while Amiri may be glad of the freedom that her actions brought her, she still regrets them and feels shame. She isn't evil, just has a temper.
Seltyiel is actively seeking power to achieve revenge, he doesn't regret the bad things he has done. He embraces his actions.
Alignment is much more about how one is likely to behave in future, than what baggage you carry around with you.
Anything's possible when you're blitzed out of your mind on absinthe.
And even if something's not possible, you do it anyway. Absinthe is great. It's made of 'erbs, so it must be good.
Bah.. I feel a group hug coming on.. I better get to bed before that happens. :P
So we can all hug you in your bed? No way urchin boy. Tuck yourself in. :P
What, no lovin' for Half-Orcs?
Nope. Because they're fugly. Yes, we're superficial. :P
An evil iconic. Joy. Nothing like murdering your own party members while they sleep, then sacrificing the local villagers to the blood god to keep an AP on track.
You think about the other type of evil. Here at Paizo, you'll get the classy type, not that dirt cheap evil you get in Star Wars flicks these days. "Look at me, I'm evil, I'll kill some children and then choke the women I went evil for to protect." We're talking evil with an int bonus here! :)
He's cool-looking, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have had someone a bit more heroic.
Heroic gets in the way. Those guys can't do the math. If it's "would you kill one to save a thousand", they agonise over it. Now proper evil is pragmatic. They kill three or four just in case the first won't take.
I'm hoping at least that Paizo will provide compelling reasons why he DOESN'T sacrifice his party-mates for dark power.
Meatshields and The Amazing Band-Aid Man are of more use alive.
Truthfully, I'd have liked to have seen a paladin/sorcerer with an abyssal bloodline. Someone who may be constantly fighting to keep his or her darker impulses in check but who wins the fight.
Boooring! What use is it if you know that he'll win?
Besides: Guy with dark heritage who fights against it? Let's give him two scimitars and an astral panther ;-P.
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!
DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mr. Cimmerian, if you would, could you please explain to the court what is best in life?
OBJECTION! Your honour, the witness is stating his personal preference when he was asked for facts!
Wow KaeYoss, did you miss replaying to anything?
I didn't reply to the "A druid, a barbarian and a monk - walk into a bar" thing. Even though I could have.
... "And the bartender goes: What is this, a joke?"
Uhm... No, nothing much left NOW. :P
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
A druid, a barbarian and a monk - walk into a bar. The monk walks up to the barkeep, orders a large pitcher of beer, and brings it to their table.
The druid looks at him over the rim of her mug. "Your strength is as great as an ox, and your ferocity is like the wolverine, my friend, but I am the lady of all animals. I can call the great elephants, the fearsome mongoose; I can assume their forms myself."
The barbarian slams his mug down so hard the pins on the table loosen. "But neither your little elephant or, whatchacallit, weasel can stand against my sword when the rage of a thundering wildfire burns in my heart!"
The druid laughs, and it comes out sounding a little more drunken than she expects. "Well, buster, I command the very elements of sea and sky. How's that sword goin' do agianst a lightning storm, huh?"
"Please, my comrades," interrupts the Monk, finishing her drink. "We all have our strong points in our party. Let us not fight."
The barbarian looks at the monk and concentrates, as if he were thinking very hard. "Now, hold on a minute. The druid's ... all right. She can turn into big, mean stuff..."
"...and we really do wan' to shtay out of the barbarian'sh whhay when he's on hish warpath, but ..."
"...yeah, but wha' 'xactly are you ... your shtrong pointsh?"
As the druid and barbarian fail one last saving throw and pass out into each other's shoulders, the monk rises politely, sets a small vial next to the half-drained pitcher, and says "Immunity to poison."
Sorry. I tried!
LOL.
Good morni...uh...afternoon.
One small vote for him being a Fighter/Wizard over Fighter/Sorcerer. The intelligence boost works well for making skill point ends meet, combat expertise, and even the story description of acquiring a spellbook to learn from.
A druid, a barbarian and a monk - walk into a bar. The monk walks up to the barkeep, orders a large pitcher of beer, and brings it to their table.
** spoiler omitted **
Sorry. I tried!
LMAO
Never underestimate the sober monk in the party.
O,o?
|
|
An evil iconic. Joy. Nothing like murdering your own party members while they sleep, then sacrificing the local villagers to the blood god to keep an AP on track. He's cool-looking, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather have had someone a bit more heroic. I'm hoping at least that Paizo will provide compelling reasons why he DOESN'T sacrifice his party-mates for dark power.
Truthfully, I'd have liked to have seen a paladin/sorcerer with an abyssal bloodline. Someone who may be constantly fighting to keep his or her darker impulses in check but who wins the fight. I'd also liked to have seen exactly two iconics of each non-evil alignment. It appears that unless Sajan is good, Seelah will be the only LG iconic. Blah. Then again, we've already got 3 NG iconics (Valeros, Kyra, and Ezren) so that's already off the table.
Give me strength.
How about you just read my less-sarcastic second post?
|
|
Okay, since people missed my second post, here the gist again.
No, I don't like evil PCs. No, I'd never allow one in one of my games, no matter HOW good the backstory was. (I run good-only games. If you can't fit your concept into lawful good, neutral good, or chaotic good, you need a new concept or a new game. No exceptions.) In my experience, playing an evil PC invariably degenerates into an exercise in trying to make everybody else around the table as uncomfortable as possible and/or a powergaming exercise of the most self-indulgent kind. If you guys have had better luck with evil PCs, more power to ya. I'm sure they CAN work, just not ever in any game I run.
Personally, I don't mind having an evil iconic. there are a lot of campaigns that are run as evil or have an evil character within the party. Often to great success.
|
|
Personally, I don't mind having an evil iconic. there are a lot of campaigns that are run as evil or have an evil character within the party. Often to great success.
I'm not going to cancel my subscription over it or anything. Just very much not my cup of tea. This is one of a very small number of things that Paizo has done that I don't care for. The things I DO like from them are too many to count. Nobody bats a thousand, but if Paizo were an athlete, they'd retire their number not just from the sport they played in the league they played in, but in all sport, ever. The number two RPG publisher in my mind has still been lapped at least once by Paizo.
Evil characters can certainly thrive in a party, no question. Unfortunately, you can't trust the players who play them half the time, in my experience. All too often, they choose that alignment because they don't want to play nice with the other players, want the spotlight but take short cuts to get it, and thrive on the negative attention that acting out gets them, as if they were a neglected child. "High maintenance, low returns" is the concept that I'm trying to convey. Again, this is not every case; it's my experience,
|
A Neutral Evil villian is also more likely to work with the heroes to stop a greater evil but betray them in the end. (Think Doctor Doom in Rise of the Silver Surfer as a modern example.)i can't think of an iconic villain who has turned on his onetime allies more than Doctor Doom, i am almost certain that most of the grognards on this messageboard would classify Doc Doom as Lawful Evil. Besides Darth Vader, i cant imagine a more iconic villain to fit the bill of that alignment.Darth Vader, Great example of Evil villain. What Vader wanted was power to prevent those he loved from harm/dying. That led to quest for more power which led to siding with the evil Sith which led to him killing women and children and even killing his former friends.
But than at the end he killed evil emperor and saved his son.
I think "some" Characters that are labeled with "Evil" alignment could just be little misguided or doing wrong/evil things for goals they think in the end are better/good. And than they might at the right time for right people actually do good things.=)
I would go so far as to say it could be many evil characters might not know that they are infact evil.
In real life I'm sure that many evil people deny to themselves that they are evil.
|
|
Evil characters can certainly thrive in a party, no question. Unfortunately, you can't trust the players who play them half the time, in my experience. All too often, they choose that alignment because they don't want to play nice with the other players, want the spotlight but take short cuts to get it, and thrive on the negative attention that acting out gets them, as if they were a neglected child. "High maintenance, low returns" is the concept that I'm trying to convey. Again, this is not every case; it's my experience,
Precisely.
All too often, they choose that alignment because they don't want to play nice with the other players, want the spotlight but take short cuts to get it, and thrive on the negative attention that acting out gets them, as if they were a neglected child.
Banning evil alignments won't cure that. They'll just go CN or N and say that they can behave like they want.
The only thing that helps against players such as these is the Stick of Pain.
No, I don't like evil PCs. No, I'd never allow one in one of my games, no matter HOW good the backstory was.
I would - but only if I knew the player could pull it off properly. I know a couple of people I'd allow to do it. Or, of course, in all-evil games, which do happen occasionally.
And in one game (which, I must add, is a "try stuff out game", and is quite high-powered, and has gestalt rules and other nifty niceties in it), I am that guy. In a party originally composed of only good characters (with neutral ones finding their way in), I play the openly LE worshipper of Asmodeus (Fighter/Spirit Binder-Devilbinder).
I did it in part to show some of the players at the table (who aren't that experienced) that evil characters in good parties can work, that it doesn't have to turn the party into a pit of vipers, and that it can actually bring a whole new level of enjoyment into the game.
As for why that pactmaker got into that party: They're trying to prevent the ascension of an Eastern Blood God/Demon, who would probably plunge the whole world into chaos. Even the Lord of Baator sees that this is a bad thing (chaos being for suckers, and the Hells being somewhat dependant on fresh human souls), so he sent one of his more capable disciples to help out the party.
He signed a contract that he won't work against the party or do obvious acts of evil (of course, he'll try his level best to bend those rules - though more in the evil acts department than in the working against the party department, since the party is very useful, at least so far). That mainly means that he will continue to make offers of Infernal Pacts with whoever he deems susceptible, but go easy on the virgin blood sacrifices (which never were his cup of tea, anyway).
He himself usually isn't a bad-mannered, foul-tempered tyrant or anything, but actually, a quite affable and sunny fellow (being the sweet-talking specialist). At least most of the time...
|
|
Evil characters can certainly thrive in a party, no question. Unfortunately, you can't trust the players who play them half the time, in my experience. All too often, they choose that alignment because they don't want to play nice with the other players, want the spotlight but take short cuts to get it, and thrive on the negative attention that acting out gets them, as if they were a neglected child. "High maintenance, low returns" is the concept that I'm trying to convey. Again, this is not every case; it's my experience,
Take a look of my "rant" of the evil alignments in a good party on page 1. I think LE can work quite well and that's what he is.
Take a look of my "rant" of the evil alignments in a good party on page 1. I think LE can work quite well and that's what he is.
That's true: Of the evil alignments, LE can probably work best in a non-evil party:
LE: Is all about laws. They like them because they grant them power. They will do their level best to bend them, but they won't break them. They can work in a party - there will probably be disagreements about their methods, but LE will work within the rules. That can extend to "party rules". Make an official Adventurer Company Contract, where you spell out what is allowed and what is not. Make them sign it. If they break it, they're out.
NE: Can work as well. They're selfish, do what they get away with. As long as the party, and those the party works with, can offer them more than the enemies, they will stick to the party. And the smarter ones will probably wait before jumping right over when the other side seems to have the better offer - they know what a betrayer can expect from those he betrayed.
CE: Worst case, but not impossible. They have no morals and the concept of obaying a rule just because it's there is foreign to them. They can be kept in line, though (as long as they don't find they can take over)
Anyway, all this probably depends on those being "passive" cases of evil alignment - those who are evil more because of their actions, not their ideology. If you have an actively evil character who wants to further his dark gods goals, it's far less likely that he can fit into the party.
|
|
Even without the evil alignment, there is something else to note about this iconic. He is going to be weak. 25 point buy plus weakest race in the PHB plus very suboptimal multiclass equals a character that won't even be good as a fifth wheel. I'm not trying to bash you guys, since you come up with some pretty cool characters, but someone playing this guy will probably get real bored really quick in combat. he does have some good role-playing hooks, but his whole combat strategy will involve him spending several rounds using spells to make himself fight almost as good as a fighter. If he had access to some non-OGL feats and spells or he might be passable. If he took the OGL eldritch knight PrC, he'd be pretty good. It's a shame that due to an admitted weakness of the 3.5 system (multi-classing spellcasters) that such a cool character is going to be mechanically gimped.
|
|
Even without the evil alignment, there is something else to note about this iconic. He is going to be weak. 25 point buy plus weakest race in the PHB plus very suboptimal multiclass equals a character that won't even be good as a fifth wheel. I'm not trying to bash you guys, since you come up with some pretty cool characters, but someone playing this guy will probably get real bored really quick in combat. he does have some good role-playing hooks, but his whole combat strategy will involve him spending several rounds using spells to make himself fight almost as good as a fighter. If he had access to some non-OGL feats and spells or he might be passable. If he took the OGL eldritch knight PrC, he'd be pretty good. It's a shame that due to an admitted weakness of the 3.5 system (multi-classing spellcasters) that such a cool character is going to be mechanically gimped.
I agree with you somewhat. Part of the problem is that all the best buff spells are divine spells and not arcane spells. Further he will at best have 5th level spells to work with (assuming he makes it to fighter 10/sorcerer 10). James has made it clear he won't be a blaster type arcane caster, and will primarily buff himself for melee combat. I see his biggest weakness as likely being damage output. If he is a Dex and Int or Dex and Cha based Gish character without a PRC he will struggle to do much melee damage. Arcane Strike as written in the Alpha only adds +1 to attacks and damage with his melee weapons, and I think it doesn't stack once he has an enchanted weapon. He will be able to get Weapon Specialization, but not Greater Weapon Specialization as he won't have enough fighter levels (needs to be Fighter 12 to qualify for the feat). If they made a feat where a Gish could add either their Dex or Int/Cha to melee damage instead of strength he could probably be very good. He won't be high enough level to cast Tensor's Transformation, so I am just not sure where his damage output will come from.
I suggested a new feat in the "new rules suggestions" section in the alpha boards called Improved Arcane Strike. With that feat, a Gish character can channel their spells into melee attacks and damge. I suggested that it be used as a swift action and add only one spell to prevent the munchkinism of the 3.5 arcane strike. I suggested that it add +1 to attacks and damage/2 levels of the spell channeled with melee weapons for one round that also stacks with Alpha's Arcane strike. So assuming our Half-Elf friend were a Figther 8/Sorcerer 8, he could add a +5 to attacks and damage by channeling a 4th level spell (+1 for arcane strike and +4 for Improved Arcane Strike). He will have Weapon specialization as well, so that gives him a solid +5 to attacks and +7 to melee damage for one round by channeling his strongest spells. If they were to add a feat that let him use an ability other than strength to modify melee damage, he will be quite respectable in combat. There are plenty of Arcane Spells to boost his defense, so I see his offensive ability as the biggest area of concern.
All of that said, I will point out that they have made "suboptimal" choices for the classes and feats of their other iconics before and it has still worked out quite well. For example, I figured Harsk would be totally gimped by focusing on the heavy crossbow. However, he has been very effective in the playtests I have run with him. Its all in how you play him. Also, much of Selytiel's "gimpness" stems from the limited options in the SRD for making Gish types stronger. If you include 3.5 material outside the SRD you can make Selytiel very powerful just by taking the 3.5 arcane strike feat, not to mention some awesome buffs in the spell compendium. Either way though, I love the story and look of this iconic.
|
|
I agree, he would be much better if he used non-OGL stuff. There are three possibilities to make him mechanically viable.
1) Use non-OGL feats, spells, and PrC's
2) Use the eldritch knight PrC
3) Use the Alpha 3 Pathfinder Rules
They can only legally do 2 and 3, and they said they aren't going to do 3. That leaves only one option. If they make him an eldritch knight it doesn't hurt his flavor. It doesn't even have to change his combat style. It would, however, dramatically increase his effectiveness by upping his BAB and caster level.
I wouldn't call it that bad. You just have to concentrate on combat boosters, with only the occasional flashy army scythe thrown in for good measure.
Not to mention that the whole outfit gets a nice boost in PF.
|
|
LE: Is all about laws. They like them because they grant them power. They will do their level best to bend them, but they won't break them. They can work in a party - there will probably be disagreements about their methods, but LE will work within the rules. That can extend to "party rules". Make an official Adventurer Company Contract, where you spell out what is allowed and what is not. Make them sign it. If they break it, they're out.
Ah but be careful. See that's where alignment breaks down, having lawful in your alignment doesn't mean your law-abiding. Having Lawful in your alignment means there's a principle greater then self that dictates your actions. For a lawful evil character that principle could be the principles of your companions. Yes it could also be the letter of the law, but it could also be honor.
Seltyiel doesn't seem like the type of character to form contracts or form that matter allow anyone else to have some kind of bidding agreement hanging over him.
I hate Paladins being called Lawful Stupid because I don't believe for a second that a Warrior god, a guardian god, etc. that Paladins are usually followers of would endorse a paladin that stood back while something clearly wrong was being done. Laws are created by man, not gods.
|
|
I agree, he would be much better if he used non-OGL stuff. There are three possibilities to make him mechanically viable.
1) Use non-OGL feats, spells, and PrC's
2) Use the eldritch knight PrC
3) Use the Alpha 3 Pathfinder Rules
They can only legally do 2 and 3, and they said they aren't going to do 3. That leaves only one option. If they make him an eldritch knight it doesn't hurt his flavor. It doesn't even have to change his combat style. It would, however, dramatically increase his effectiveness by upping his BAB and caster level.
JJ has already said they will not be using the Eldritch Knight PRC. He said that if he makes it to 20th level he will be a Figther 10/Sorcerer 10 or a Fighter 10/Wizard 10. He made it clear that PRC's will not be used for even the Multi-class Iconic. I think he could still be playable, but there just aren't that many great melee buffs that arcane casters have. Bull's Strength and Cat's Grace make sense, but become superfluous once he has a stat boosting item. That is unless they have changed the type of bonus granted by spells like Bull's Strength to something other than an enhancement bonus. If they have, he could get good utility out of that. Haste will be a must have, and Rage would also be something I would stongly consider. Assuming that they cap out in levels at 16 like the other iconics in the first AP and likely the 2nd, then he would be a Figther 8/Sorcerer 8. In that case I think his spell list probably goes something like this if they stick to primarily melee buffs...
0 - Resistance, Detect Magic, Read Magic, Touch of Fatigue, Light, Daze, Mage Hand
1 - Mage Armor, Enlarge Person, Shield, True Strike, Magic Missile
2 - Mirror Image, Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance
3 - Haste, Heroism
4 - Stoneskin
Doing a quick and dirty build using the elite array and a fighter sorcerer build, abilities and attacks might be something like this at 16th level...
Str 18 (12 base +4 Bull's Strength +2 enlarge person)
Dex 24 (15 base +3 level +6 item)
Con 14 (10 base +4 Bear's Endurance)
Int 13 (13 base)
Wis 8 (8 base)
Cha 18 (14 base +4 item)
A high charisma isn't needed when all his spells are buffs, because saving throw DC isn't important. In terms of attack bonuses assuming he fights with a +3 rapier, weapon finesse, and fully buffed he would have....
Melee: +27/+27/+22/+17 (+8 fighter +4 socerer +7 dexterity +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Heroism +1 Haste +3 Weapon Enhancement Bonus)
Damage: 1d8+9 15-20/x2 (+4 strength +2 weapon specialization, +3 enhancement bonus 1d6 increased to 1d8 due to enlarge person effect)
You could tweak that a bit and make him a longsword strength type fighter instead of a dex based rapier fighter and change it thusly....
Str 24 (15 base +3 level +6 item)
Dex 20 (13 base +1 level +4 Cat's Grace instead of Bull's Strength)
Con 16 (12 base +4 Bear's Endurance)
Int 10 (10 base)
Wis 8 (8 base)
Cha 18 (14 base +4 item)
Assuming he fights with a +3 longsword, you get basically the same attack bonuses but more damage output....
Melee: +27/+27/+22/+17 (+8 fighter +4 socerer +7 strength +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Heroism +1 Haste +3 Weapon Enhancement Bonus)
Damage: 2d6+12 18-20/x2 (+7 strength +2 weapon specialization, +3 enhancement bonus 1d8 increased to 2d6 due to enlarge person effect)
Those aren't bad for a Gish type. If he used the longsword build and took power attack, he could get a bit more damage against low AC builds. If you use the alpha and add on Arcane Strike, he could get another +1 to attacks and damage on either build. In the case of the Dex build he is looking at 100 hp (8d10+8d4+32). In the case of the Str build he is looking at 132 hp. You could bump both by taking toughness or getting a better con boosting item. All those numbers are when fully buffed. Feat wise, he has 6 base feats at 16th level plus 5 fighter bonus feats. He probably benefits most from taking the following if using the dexterity build...
Fighter 1 - Weapon Focus (rapier), Weapon Finesse Bonus Feat
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 1
Fighter 2/Sorcerer 1 - Combat Expertise, Dodge Bonus Feat
Fighter 2/Sorcerer 2
Fighter 3/Sorcerer 2
Fighter 3 Sorcerer 3 - Mobility
Fighter 4/Sorcerer 3 - Weapon Specialization (Rapier)
Fighter 4/Sorcerer 4
Fighter 5/Sorcerer 4 - Spring Attack
Fighter 5/Sorcerer 5
Fighter 6/Sorcerer 5 - Whirlwind Attack Bonus Feat
Fighter 6/Sorcerer 6 - Improved Initiative
Fighter 7/Sorcerer 6
Fighter 7/Sorcerer 7
Fighter 8/Sorcerer 7 - Improved Critical (Rapier), Greater Weapon Focus (Rapier) Bonus Feat
Obviously if you were doing a ranged fighter build, then you focus on bows and their assorted feats. I don't know the JJ has said which type of fighting he will emphasize. I still think he needs something to boost his damage output, but if you do the longsword build, you can sub in Power Attack for Weapon Finesse. I am pretty sure JJ said Selytiel would be a Dex build fighter though.
Anyway, that was a lot of work to just tinker. I think as a second line fighter he will be ok, but he is not going to be a toe to toe sort nor is he going to be a blaster sort. If he had Eldritch Knight he could get access to stuff like Greater Heroism and Tenser's Transformation that can bump his damage output significantly. The other concern I have is that to really get him to even what I have here he has to have time to buff for 3-5 rounds before he will be ready to fight. That seems a tough thing to do when you often have to fight on the fly without prep time. Still, he will be a fun character to play regardless.