I've converted a few monsters from 3.5 to PF, but other than that it hasn't come up.
There are plenty of items of flavor or 'fluff' from 3.5 products that I may incorporate, though there's hardly a lack with PF as time goes by. As far as players go, the few I've been able to have with recent moving were able to create the characters they wanted with PF rules and classes, so nothing 3.5 was requested.
I don't have a hard and fast rule about it, but I'd want to look it over first, whatever it was that they wanted included. If it wasn't ridiculous and not having it would make the game less fun then I'd allow it, or make a PF version of it if needed.
As we play in the Forgotten Realms (one group: Shadowdale: The Scouring of the land, the other group: Demonweb Pits) we use creatures from 3.5.
But the rules are all pathfinder. There is only one player in one of the groups who is playing a... I don't know something from tome of battle: Book of the nine swords. He can keep up with the rest of us, but he is probably the weakest character of the group.
i wonder how you incorporate L5R into your games?
The best Dramatic Mass-combat system EVER.
Personally, my group uses a good amount of 3.5 content, mainly because the game has been ongoing for years and started as 3.5. Having said that, while I use the Vow of Poverty with my character (not trolling, I swear), the cleric and my Druid are both trying really hard to only take feats and more importantly spells that are pathfinder material. I can't really expect the Wizard to retcon out all the spells he has in his Spellbooks that are not Pathfinder (Vortex of Teeth, I'm looking at you) but with Druid and Cleric spells changeable per day, and having SO MUCH material to choose from , we each independently decided that it was probably best for the game to minimize non-canon material.
As hard as it has been for me NOT to take Venomfire or the "bite of the were-cheese" spells, I don't regret it.
so far as a dm I've used several modules but not allowed any of the player stuff. I done see the sppealor need for things like bo9s I'n Pf with the clSs fuxes done.
Pf only has worked.
I use a fair amount of my 3.5 library, which is one of the reasons I'm not constantly buying Pathfinder products. For example, I find the Duskblade to be more than adequate for my Gish needs, and the Magus less appealing to me in its execution, so Ultimate Magic is less appealing as a whole.
I also love the levels of customization that a wide variety of base classes permits that just isn't something that Paizo's archetype-overload allows for, and have a total of about 35 classes in all that I allow players to use in my games. I've had several in the Kingmaker game I've been running, and haven't had any real incompatibilities between them (aside from one player just having general difficulties with getting the Monk class to live up to what he wanted to do - he's been much happier since I let him replace his levels with swordsage instead).
First of all
*fistbump*
Scout gets used.
+1
Second, I honestly don't like to mix them up. I know they are compatible, but I've already seen a player attempt to 'optimize' using both systems together. For some reason 3.5 is fine for playing 3.5, but it rubs me the wrong way when mixed with Pathfinder.
I hope I get over this eventually as I have far too extensive of a 3.5 library to not make use of it. To be completely honest I don't have a good reason to not allow any 3.5 material.
As a dm I am fine using 3.5 material with slightly adjusted mechanics, or (mostly) fluff. I do not allow 3.5 material directly for players, but I'm willing to work with players to adjust some 3.5 material to pathfinder standards or rather my standards for the game based on pathfinder.
Edit: I forgot - I make heavy use out of the Magic Item Compendium, as core magic items are always overpriced and uninteresting, and everything just becomes about the "big six," whereas the MIC gives me a ton of really flavorful, fun items that characters of all levels, particularly the 1-6 range that I prefer, can actually benefit from and use.
Edit: I forgot - I make heavy use out of the Magic Item Compendium, as core magic items are always overpriced and uninteresting, and everything just becomes about the "big six," whereas the MIC gives me a ton of really flavorful, fun items that characters of all levels, particularly the 1-6 range that I prefer, can actually benefit from and use.
Yep, using the MIC in your game will bring back the ''magic'' in the magic items of your campaing. :)
I've used loads from previous editions, monsters, races, feats and more. As I'm now gearing to a fully Pf game, some stuff will have to be brought over, if somewhat modified. Too much good stuff was created in 3.X to just cast aside.
Have almost every 3.5 book and used it all until the APG came out, it constantly floors me how amazing that one little book is, as the stream of character ideas that rolls out of it cannot be abated.
Heaven's no, 3.5 leads to warblades, scouts, and other horrifying things. That's just amongst the non-casters.
Warblades are awesome.
|
I was more saddened by the mentioning of the scout. I get the warblade complaint, but the scout?
Warblades are awesome, but the scout is one of the most brutal classes if you know what you are doing. One very simple build, spending about 15k gold, and you could destroy entire cities, or at least very large sections of it (counted in range increments of the bow), with a few thousand more gold, you can do it repeatedly, in a single round of combat.
You don't even have to be that high level starts around 5th, becomes way better around 8th and again at 15th. Adding one level of rogue makes it all the more effective and is in fact one of the critical parts. Yes, it's very specific, it doesn't have very many openings, but it will kill the ever-loving crap out of whatever you need dead.
This build has plenty of move, go-first, and killitude. I regularly kept up with the Warblade in our party using it. Mind you, the killing cities was just an example, you can destroy armies of any type.... though undead are probably the most expensive to handle properly.
I was more saddened by the mentioning of the scout. I get the warblade complaint, but the scout?Warblades are awesome, but the scout is one of the most brutal classes if you know what you are doing. One very simple build, spending about 15k gold, and you could destroy entire cities, or at least very large sections of it (counted in range increments of the bow), with a few thousand more gold, you can do it repeatedly, in a single round of combat.
You don't even have to be that high level starts around 5th, becomes way better around 8th and again at 15th. Adding one level of rogue makes it all the more effective and is in fact one of the critical parts. Yes, it's very specific, it doesn't have very many openings, but it will kill the ever-loving crap out of whatever you need dead.
This build has plenty of move, go-first, and killitude. I regularly kept up with the Warblade in our party using it. Mind you, the killing cities was just an example, you can destroy armies of any type.... though undead are probably the most expensive to handle properly.
You mind explaining or pointing to a thread that does?
I had my own ranger/scout combo before it was even posted online, but it could not destroy cities.PS:Any class can be broken. One guy on the boards had a level 10 commoner take on several CR 10 monsters. Anyway back to the city destroying scout.....
edit:I am guessing this will be some theoretical optimization build using a very loose interpretation of the rules that no GM would allow.
First I've heard about it, and I feel it's probably not the scout part of the combo that is the problem.
I am thinking the same thing. I remember combos on the old boards where you got infinite attacks/damage, Pun-Pun, and other builds(like the Diplomancer). I don't ever remember scout on its own breaking the game.
|
|
First I've heard about it, and I feel it's probably not the scout part of the combo that is the problem.
The scout's what makes it work consistently, while it does apply to fighters and other flexible or ranged classes, scout does it best for two reasons: A) it stacks with rogue, which is one of the other classes that do it well 2) it works even when your enemies are otherwise defended against generic sneak attacks
Simply because Skirmish doesn't require flankers, the opponent to be flat-footed, or anything aside from a movement action.
Take the demolition gem, a bow, 1 level rogue, 5 levels scout, improved skirmish, ambush skirmisher (or whatever it was that made rogue and scout levels stack), ranged skirmish, a potion of arrow storm, preferably a splitting longbow, and the splitting spell. Yes, the last two parts are expensive, but it's like +3 and a cheap ranger spell. To add on to it take a belt of battle, and....either the scout's headband, or the skirmisher boots, I forget which. Screw it take them both, they are pretty good. One action to use a one-shot item use of the splitting spell, move, drink the arrow storm potion, fire.
Watch everything, within 60 feat, wither under 1d3+1d4+1 arrows, each doing 1d8+4d6 skirmish+3d6 sneak attack. Not including any strength bonus. Buildings take an additional d6/arrow from the gem. Then, if there's anything still alive, use the belt of battle to do it again, and if there are any especially stubborn individuals still kicking, use the boots/headband (whichever it was) to do it twice more. Now if there is anything still alive after that (buildings, animals, people, monsters, etc.) run, as you've found yourself well outside your CR.
When you get to a 6 BAB get manyshot and improved manyshot, this will allow you to fire twice the arrows, they all add sneak/skirmish, and they all crit.
For pesky spell-casters, take arrows that trigger an AMF (yes it's expensive, but you are dealing with 3.5 spell-casters, don't expect it to be easy) upon impact. Then accidentally create a magic deadzone, because that's the kind of fallout there should be from AMFing an 440 foot radius area.
|
|
For that much investment, I'd hope he would be able to kill things. I don't see how this makes the Scout class horrifying, considering it requires at least five magic items, two of which are consumable if I read it right. And is defeated by Deflect Arrows and Wind Wall. Or a very simple sundering of the bow.
First I've heard about it, and I feel it's probably not the scout part of the combo that is the problem.The scout's what makes it work consistently, while it does apply to fighters and other flexible or ranged classes, scout does it best for two reasons: A) it stacks with rogue, which is one of the other classes that do it well 2) it works even when your enemies are otherwise defended against generic sneak attacks
Simply because Skirmish doesn't require flankers, the opponent to be flat-footed, or anything aside from a movement action.
Take the demolition gem, a bow, 1 level rogue, 5 levels scout, improved skirmish, ambush skirmisher (or whatever it was that made rogue and scout levels stack), ranged skirmish, a potion of arrow storm, preferably a splitting longbow, and the splitting spell. Yes, the last two parts are expensive, but it's like +3 and a cheap ranger spell. To add on to it take a belt of battle, and....either the scout's headband, or the skirmisher boots, I forget which. Screw it take them both, they are pretty good. One action to use a one-shot item use of the splitting spell, move, drink the arrow storm potion, fire.
Watch everything, within 60 feat, wither under 1d3+1d4+1 arrows, each doing 1d8+4d6 skirmish+3d6 sneak attack. Not including any strength bonus. Buildings take an additional d6/arrow from the gem. Then, if there's anything still alive, use the belt of battle to do it again, and if there are any especially stubborn individuals still kicking, use the boots/headband (whichever it was) to do it twice more. Now if there is anything still alive after that (buildings, animals, people, monsters, etc.) run, as you've found yourself well outside your CR.
When you get to a 6 BAB get manyshot and improved manyshot, this will allow you to fire twice the arrows, they all add sneak/skirmish, and they all crit.
The problem is the splitting enhancement which I banned from my games, not the scout. The first time I heard of splitting was on a build that killed a dragon single handedly with a 3.5 fighter archer. The dragon would have been a boss level fight for a normal party.
Now only that you have the belt of battle in the build. One of the most underpriced, if not OP'd, items from the MiC. If that fighter archer had had the belt then it would have been worse.Here is what you do as an exercise.
A.Take the scout and put it in place of the ranger or fighter without splitting or the belt and see how it does.
B.Take the splitting enhancement, and the belt and put them on an archer ranger or fighter and see what happens.
Then come back and tell me which one gave you the most trouble.
edit:That build still does not destroy armies unless you mean level 1 mooks which is not really a measure of power.
edit2:No snark was intended just in case it was perceived that way.
|
|
For that much investment, I'd hope he would be able to kill things. I don't see how this makes the Scout class horrifying, considering it requires at least five magic items, two of which are consumable if I read it right. And is defeated by Deflect Arrows and Wind Wall. Or a very simple sundering of the bow.
Very simple: without the splitting or the belt, or any magic items at all, he's still hitting for 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8+7d6 if you have sneak) every round at level 6. That's pretty freaking good.
Even Warblades don't have that EVERY round at 6. They can get more, just not consistently. Insightful strike, Bonecrusher, and Soaring Raptor Strike (if it's bigger and you can jump above it), even then the Insightful Strike is questionable.
Now it does fall prey to the same shenanigans that rogues typically do (undead/golems) but against everything else, it works efficiently.
I'd rather gouge my eyes out with a rusty pocket knife than allow 3.5 material to mess with the perfection that is PF. As much as I enjoyed 3.5, it was a product that simply had too many open loopholes, and that was a succession of individual and disconnected supplements. What was the point of publishing new classes if they never got any support afterwards? PF is simply superior in each and every aspect, and introducing 3.5 material only serves to bring back an imbalance in gameplay that does nothing but hurt the game.
In my games, it's just errataed PF material (but you can use everything they've published, which is considerable!), and that is more than enough.
Why throw the baby out with the bath water?
From what I understand and correct me if I am wrong, if I as one of your players brought up a perfectly balanced/reasonable ability but it happened to have a WoTC logo on it you would say no for that reason alone?PS:I am just trying to understand the mindset.
|
|
Very simple: without the splitting or the belt, or any magic items at all, he's still hitting for 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8+7d6 if you have sneak) every round at level 6. That's pretty freaking good.
How did you get 7d6? Sneak Attack? I count 1d6 from SA, 1d6 from the bow (Scouts don't get longbow automatically), and 2d6 from Skirmish. Are you making the mistake that Swift Ambusher makes it stack for Skirmish AND SA? Because you don't increase SA with it.
Edit: Okay, Imp Skirmish adds 2d6, bumping you to 6d6 total. A Warblade can't top 36 points max?
For that much investment, I'd hope he would be able to kill things. I don't see how this makes the Scout class horrifying, considering it requires at least five magic items, two of which are consumable if I read it right. And is defeated by Deflect Arrows and Wind Wall. Or a very simple sundering of the bow.Very simple: without the splitting or the belt, or any magic items at all, he's still hitting for 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8+7d6 if you have sneak) every round at level 6. That's pretty freaking good.
Even Warblades don't have that EVERY round at 6. They can get more, just not consistently. Insightful strike, Bonecrusher, and Soaring Raptor Strike (if it's bigger and you can jump above it), even then the Insightful Strike is questionable.
Now it does fall prey to the same shenanigans that rogues typically do (undead/golems) but against everything else, it works efficiently.
It seems to me most of this ability is coming from outside sources, and if you applied them to another class you could get better results.
You can't sneak attack every round with a bow.
edit:You can if you are invisible, but being invisible every round is not something to count on. At higher levels many enemies have have counters to invisibility so I am still not seeing how this scout is doing to much.
|
|
How did you get 7d6? Sneak Attack? I count 1d6 from SA, 1d6 from the bow, and 2d6 from Skirmish. Are you making the mistake that Swift Ambusher makes it stack for Skirmish AND SA? Because you don't increase SA with it.
Very simple: without the splitting or the belt, or any magic items at all, he's still hitting for 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8+7d6 if you have sneak) every round at level 6. That's pretty freaking good.
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack for purposes of skirmish and sneak attack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
That said Bonecrusher adds +4d6 and +10 for confirming critical hits. Insightful strike gives you a concentration check for your damage (9+con+d20+feats). Again you can screw up your roll on concentration and you still cant use it every round.
|
|
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
Scout/Rogues don't get longbow proficiency.
Imp Skirmish is understood.
Swift Ambusher stacks levels for determining Skirmish progression only.
1d6 short bow, 4d6 Skirmish, 1d6 Sneak Attack. 6d6 total.
How did you get 7d6? Sneak Attack? I count 1d6 from SA, 1d6 from the bow, and 2d6 from Skirmish. Are you making the mistake that Swift Ambusher makes it stack for Skirmish AND SA? Because you don't increase SA with it.
Very simple: without the splitting or the belt, or any magic items at all, he's still hitting for 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8+7d6 if you have sneak) every round at level 6. That's pretty freaking good.
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
That said Bonecrusher adds +4d6 and +10 for confirming critical hits. Insightful strike gives you a concentration check for your damage (9+con+d20+feats). Again you can screw up your roll on concentration and you still cant use it every round.
Is that(Ranged Skirmish) the one from Dragon Magazine?
PS:It only applies to skirmish damage not SA. I have that magazine.|
|
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
Scout/Rogues don't get longbow proficiency.
Imp Skirmish is understood.
Ambush Skirmisher stacks levels for determining Skirmish progression only.
1d6 short bow, 4d6 Skirmish, 1d6 Sneak Attack. 6d6 total.
Elf. Also....turns out I don't have complete scoundrel. I could have sworn they stacked for both, either way, you only need 3 levels of scout to make it go. Take the rest in rogue. Not that hard a change up. You don't even need ranged skirmish, it's a bonus.
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
Scout/Rogues don't get longbow proficiency.
Imp Skirmish is understood.
Swift Ambusher stacks levels for determining Skirmish progression only.
1d6 short bow, 4d6 Skirmish, 1d6 Sneak Attack. 6d6 total.
Not only that it is only for one attack. There are boots that let you move as a swift action 2/day, but for the rest of the day the scout is not impressive.
So at level six the average is(6x3.5) 21 points of damage.
Archy the PbP archer lays it down.
63 points of damage. Level 6
|
|
So...your complaint now is that Scout is too good a dip for Rogue with Swift Ambusher? I still don't see that as a problem with the Scout class.
Who said I was complaining? You've poked a few holes in it, and they are very easily covered up holes. The point still stands, it's still doing more damage than a warblade is, until the warblade gets some better moves, which it will eventually surpass the rogue/scout, but for most of the levels most people are playing at the scout/rogue is either better, or equal.
Elf. Also....turns out I don't have complete scoundrel. I could have sworn they stacked for both, either way, you only need 3 levels of scout to make it go. Take the rest in rogue. Not that hard a change up. You don't even need ranged skirmish, it's a bonus.
Long bow 1d8. Improved Skirmish (requires 2d6 skirmish, +1 AC gives you +2d6 +2 AC when you move 20 feet instead of 10 feet). Ambush Skirmisher (+1d6 sneak attack, +1d6 +1 AC skirmish gives you: your rogue and scout levels stack). Ergo 1d8+4d6 (or 1d8 +7d6 with a sneak attack, but this will almost never happen). Ranged Skirmish (requires skirmish or sneak attack, increases your range in which you can use skirmish or sneak attack to 60ft). See? That simple.
Scout/Rogues don't get longbow proficiency.
Imp Skirmish is understood.
Ambush Skirmisher stacks levels for determining Skirmish progression only.
1d6 short bow, 4d6 Skirmish, 1d6 Sneak Attack. 6d6 total.
You want me to upgrade Archy to see what I can do in 3 more levels?
|
|
The point does not stand unless you are always fighting in a featureless plain. The Warblade has Str to damage, while the Scout does not have to close to melee. The Scout can still get boxed in by melee, or negated by Deflect Arrows/Wind Wall. The Warblade will do more consistent damage because his damage roll is not entirely random. He can get the extra dice on top of his Str bonus, meaning his minimum is higher than the Scouts 6+Deadly Aim.
Yes, we're off topic, and yes the Scout is my pet class. How could you tell? :)
So...your complaint now is that Scout is too good a dip for Rogue with Swift Ambusher? I still don't see that as a problem with the Scout class.Who said I was complaining? You've poked a few holes in it, and they are very easily covered up holes. The point still stands, it's still doing more damage than a warblade is, until the warblade gets some better moves, which it will eventually surpass the rogue/scout, but for most of the levels most people are playing at the scout/rogue is either better, or equal.
The Warblade is focused on getting damage on standard actions. The 3.5 barbarian and fighter could both outdamage it if both used full round actions. The Warblade's advantage was in situations where they were limited to standard actions. Yes I am aware I said the same thing two different ways.
The warblade was impressive for its options, not for its damage.
Right now the Paladin, Fighter, Ranger, and Druid with an animal companion are ahead of tricked out class using several splat books.
|
|
Scout/Rogues don't get longbow proficiency.Imp Skirmish is understood.
Swift Ambusher stacks levels for determining Skirmish progression only.
1d6 short bow, 4d6 Skirmish, 1d6 Sneak Attack. 6d6 total.
Not only that it is only for one attack. There are boots that let you move as a swift action 2/day, but for the rest of the day the scout is not impressive.
So at level six the average is(6x3.5) 21 points of damage.
Archy the PbP archer lays it down.
63 points of damage. Level 6
-ELF!- ... archery is way better in Pathfinder, on average, you don't have to scour a dozen books to make it work. Yes the maximum isn't as high, but almost no one plays there, because it takes basically everything you've got to get there.
..... yes the Scout is my pet class.
I always knew you were an ok guy.
]
-ELF!- ... archery is way better in Pathfinder, on average, you don't have to scour a dozen books to make it work. Yes the maximum isn't as high, but almost no one plays there, because it takes basically everything you've got to get there.
I already mentioned the boots in an earlier thread, and your scout was using improved manyshot which lets him apply precision damage to every arrow. Would you prefer to use the PF manyshot which would lower your damage. I will even throw in deadly aim, but you might have to drop something to take it if you were using the 3.5 feat progression. Heck use the PF feat progression and take manyshot and deadly aim since a scout would have to use PF general rules anyway.
|
|
Who takes wind wall or deflect arrows? Oh right, nobody. Not in 3.5, because archery sucks in that system. Takes 20 feet of movement chief, if you are in smaller confines than that, then you are clearly in a bad spot for any combat, because you can't fit the combatants in the room. I haven't been in a dungeon that didn't have at least 20 feet of room to work with, if you knew how to work with it, and I've been in a lot of dungeons. I know, I keep track of such shenanigans, in case I ever decide I want to run a scout through there.
Actually, I'd use the Pathfinder version of the scout, who can eventually make full attack actions after moves, adding in levels of traditional scout (which works in horrifying ways because the Pathfinder scout is still a rogue actually), and then I'd use the Pathfinder Manyshot, and deadly aim. Keep in mind, I was only including straight dice in all of this.
Who takes wind wall or deflect arrows? Oh right, nobody. Not in 3.5, because archery sucks in that system. Takes 20 feet of movement chief, if you are in smaller confines than that, then you are clearly in a bad spot for any combat, because you can't fit the combatants in the room. I haven't been in a dungeon that didn't have at least 20 feet of room to work with, if you knew how to work with it, and I've been in a lot of dungeons. I know, I keep track of such shenanigans, in case I ever decide I want to run a scout through there.
Actually, I'd use the Pathfinder version of the scout, who can eventually make full attack actions after moves, adding in levels of traditional scout (which works in horrifying ways because the Pathfinder scout is still a rogue actually), and then I'd use the Pathfinder Manyshot, and deadly aim. Keep in mind, I was only including straight dice in all of this.
Now is the class being powered by the pathfinder scout or the 3.5 scout at that point? If the class that is being touted as OP is the issue then it should be contributing the most.
At best you can say 3.5 splats from several books can be an issue, but the scout is not doing much on its own as much as I like the class.|
|
Okay, I think I get it now. You don't allow 3.5 stuff because of crazy splat book combos you don't want to deal with. The Scout just happens to be one small part of those crazy combos.
A very small part, yes. There's also the aforementioned pun-pun, the frenzied berserker (who, is really just kind of a pain in the butt to get rid of, and basically lethal to your party if he's in your party), and all of the other readily available shenanigans. Heaven forbid we actually start taking gestalt into consideration, egad, what a mess. Could you imagine the shenanigans available then. I'd rather not.
@Wraithstrike: Yes, actually. That's what's bad about it, you combine them, then they go, and it can be real bloody hard to stop them.
Okay, I think I get it now. You don't allow 3.5 stuff because of crazy splat book combos you don't want to deal with. The Scout just happens to be one small part of those crazy combos.A very small part, yes. There's also the aforementioned pun-pun, the frenzied berserker (who, is really just kind of a pain in the butt to get rid of, and basically lethal to your party if he's in your party), and all of the other readily available shenanigans. Heaven forbid we actually start taking gestalt into consideration, egad, what a mess. Could you imagine the shenanigans available then. I'd rather not.
@Wraithstrike: Yes, actually. That's what's bad about it, you combine them, then they go, and it can be real bloody hard to stop them.
Could I not combine a move with any archer's full round attack and it be an issue? The ranger is already going to outdamage the scout so it seems a ranger/scout(PF) is trouble also.
In short if I can replace scout(3.5) with ______ is the scout(3.5) really the issue or is it the things that make the scout able to cause the problems such as splitting?
|
|
Could I not combine a move with any archer's full round attack and it be an issue? The ranger is already going to outdamage the scout so it seems a ranger/scout(PF) is trouble also.
In short if I can replace scout(3.5) with ______ is the scout(3.5) really the issue or is it the things that make the scout able to cause the problems such as splitting?
The way scout stacks with everything else is what makes it a problem. 3.5 spells also make it worse. I don't even want to try to imagine what a caster looks like between the two editions.