You're right, there unfortunately are a lot of people who have yet to learn that there are systems outside of D&D.
Yeah. If you can't fathom that other people might have different preferences than you, I feel sorry for you.
Yeah. If you can't fathom that other people might have different preferences than you, I feel sorry for you.
You're right, there unfortunately are a lot of people who have yet to learn that there are systems outside of D&D.
And if you can't imagine how people who want to play a game centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, would rather use a system centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, then I truly do feel sorry for you.
Do not chain yourself to a system. You will not earn Bonus Fandom Points by playing a game ill equipped to what you want.
|
Yeah. If you can't fathom that other people might have different preferences than you, I feel sorry for you.
You're right, there unfortunately are a lot of people who have yet to learn that there are systems outside of D&D.And if you can't imagine how people who want to play a game centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, would rather use a system centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, then I truly do feel sorry for you.
Do not chain yourself to a system. You will not earn Bonus Fandom Points by playing a game ill equipped to what you want.
How fortunate that no mods run around deleting your posts for telling people which game should they play over here, eh Cirno? :D
|
Why is that fortunate? Are you really prepared to claim that Pathfinder handles building up of long-term relationships, creating contacts, rivalries, intrigue and politics between groups with anything more than GM decisions? The mechanics are extremely limited and vague. Which is not true for a number of other systems.
I know it's popular to reduce the GM to a reference book, but the idea of any of those things being governed by game mechanics is fairly abhorant to me.
It's subtlety and persuation.
It's the person that is accepted in the company of highborn and able to loose tight lips.
It's the gray eminence behind the scenes.
It's the ambition behind great persons.
It's Mata Hari
It's ScheherazadeAnd if you must go that battle, just UMD that mage armour and be off.
How can you do any of these aspects better as a Geisha than as a regular Bard?
Nobody's arguing that the concept is solid. It's the mechanical representation of said concept that's not.
How fortunate that no mods run around deleting your posts for telling people which game should they play over here, eh Cirno? :DYeah. If you can't fathom that other people might have different preferences than you, I feel sorry for you.
You're right, there unfortunately are a lot of people who have yet to learn that there are systems outside of D&D.And if you can't imagine how people who want to play a game centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, would rather use a system centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, then I truly do feel sorry for you.
Do not chain yourself to a system. You will not earn Bonus Fandom Points by playing a game ill equipped to what you want.
Oh noes I'm suggesting people not play D&D for literally every game imaginable.
Next I'll do something even more awful and say something like "Call of Cthulhu is infinitely better for playing a Lovecraftian horror game then Pathfinder is"
WAIT NO I BELIEVE THAT TOO OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
|
|
How fortunate that no mods run around deleting your posts for telling people which game should they play over here, eh Cirno? :DYeah. If you can't fathom that other people might have different preferences than you, I feel sorry for you.
You're right, there unfortunately are a lot of people who have yet to learn that there are systems outside of D&D.And if you can't imagine how people who want to play a game centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, would rather use a system centered around espionage and intrigue, politics and diplomacy, then I truly do feel sorry for you.
Do not chain yourself to a system. You will not earn Bonus Fandom Points by playing a game ill equipped to what you want.
Oh noes I'm suggesting people not play D&D for literally every game imaginable.
Next I'll do something even more awful and say something like "Call of Cthulhu is infinitely better for playing a Lovecraftian horror game then Pathfinder is"
WAIT NO I BELIEVE THAT TOO OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Actually, CoC mechanics have little to do with Lovecraftian horror, apart from the sanity system, which is modular enough to copy-paste into any system really.
I've played CoC horror under no less than three game systems (BRP, WoD, GURPS) and I've never noticed a difference.
I can perfectly imagine playing Pathfinder with tacked-on sanity system (which isn't hard to do, really) and doing a bang-up job for CoC horror. A bunch of level 1 Experts against the unspeakable. You have all the tools to make that work.
And actually, the latest Carrion Crown adventure has a simple sanity system for use in PF.
Now, how does CoC horror fit with plane-shifting heroes who shoot longbows 7 times in six seconds is an entirely different story :)
|
|
I can perfectly imagine playing Pathfinder with tacked-on sanity system (which isn't hard to do, really) and doing a bang-up job for CoC horror. A bunch of level 1 Experts against the unspeakable. You have all the tools to make that work.
A sanity system is included in the GMG, by the way.
And I agree that the BRP is no more (or less) suited for Call of Cthulhu than are some other systems. The system, did, after all, originate with a very D&D-style game, Runequest. I do think that the static hit points over the course of a character's career makes the horror aspect a bit easier to achieve compared to a game with leveling hit points. At the same time, it means that a beginning BRP character isn't quite as fragile as a beginning PF/D&D character.
Actually, CoC mechanics have little to do with Lovecraftian horror, apart from the sanity system, which is modular enough to copy-paste into any system really.
I've played CoC horror under no less than three game systems (BRP, WoD, GURPS) and I've never noticed a difference.
I can perfectly imagine playing Pathfinder with tacked-on sanity system (which isn't hard to do, really) and doing a bang-up job for CoC horror. A bunch of level 1 Experts against the unspeakable. You have all the tools to make that work.
And actually, the latest Carrion Crown adventure has a simple sanity system for use in PF.
Now, how does CoC horror fit with plane-shifting heroes who shoot longbows 7 times in six seconds is an entirely different story :)
Except the feel of a system matters.
YOu can certainly do lovecraftian horror with BRP, WoD, and GURPS. In order: BRP is designed to be entirely open ended and indeed was the basis of CoC. WoD is already a horror game, and is skill based, and thus fits rather well into the feel of CoC. And GURPS's big claim to fame is how incredibly modular it is.
The thing is, CoC isn't just "Having a sanity meter." As you yourself said, how does CoC horror fit with plane-shifting heroes who shoot longbows 7 times in six seconds? Or to use my own argument, how does a game of politics, diplomacy, and espionage fit with flying invisible hydra-wizards and the people that kill them?
Pathfinder is a system based on heroic fantasy. Yes, you can probably crowbar and shoehorn other things into it, but it's always going to be second fiddle to the main basis of the system. Even the most espionage-filled game is going to have wizards that throw fireballs and summon hydras, and fighters that can murder giants. It's the same reason I wouldn't use Shadowrun to play fantastic medieval fantasy.
One of the problems with the idea of D&D being the only game is how difficult it can be to break people out of D&D habits. Like playing a superheros game where someone wants to loot the enemies after you beat them, or playing Shadowrun and someone keeps trying to charge the orcs with machine guns.
To use a game I'm in as an example, I'm in a game that takes place in a setting previously used for D&D. We are colonists, merchants, would-be emperors, tacticians, etc, founding a trade colony on a mostly un-colonized continent in order to set up a profitable venture, with dreams of eventually creating a full empire there. All with relatively little to no adventuring, all very skill oriented.
Now, we could try that in D&D, and houserule in how mass battles will go, how the tactics will change things, how to do trade relations with the natives and other countries, how to colonize new parts of the land, how to intermingle with and absorb native villages and cities, and so on, and so forth.
Or, we can play it in Reign.
The second is the far better choice.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
No, I think you don't understand what Zmar meant.
The meeting happens during the ceremony, not after. They sit down, talk, drink tea, while the Geisha is performing her duties.Minute 0: People meet up, introduce each other, make small talk. Geisha starts preparing the tea ceremony. (alternatively this part happens 10 minutes before the guests arrive if possible)
Minute 10: Tea ceremony is finished, Buff kicks in for 10 minutes, "real" meeting starts. Geisha starts preparing tea ceremony #2.
Minute 20: Buff #1 runs out, Tea ceremony #2 is finished, Buff #2 kicks in. Geisha prerpares tea ceremony #3.She can do that 7 times, for 70 minutes total.
but how many rounds do they lose going to the bathroom from drinking all that tea? ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK, I may be a bit slow but how is geisha worse than bard?
I can see the argument that geisha isn't better than bard, just different. I don't see how she's worse though.
When I looked at the geisha archtype, I thought the changes made to make her geisha were thematically appropriate and wasn't really judging them from a mechanical "this makes this character suck" perspective, but I don't really thing they make the character suck.
I heard the "taking out all the seats in a car and replacing them with broken glass still produces a vehicle that can get you places" but it sounds more like a choice of upholstery than a choice between seats or broken glass.
The Tea Ceremony is a very situational free ability (not a trade-off) that works very well with the Geisha theme. It sounds very situational, but very useful in certain situations.
Armor and shield proficiency? Again, fits the theme of the geisha. Does relegate her to a non-melee role but the image of a geisha isn't a melee character anyway really.
Weapon proficiencies? OK, that hurts some to me but just because I'm a weapons fanatic. Most characters (and their players) seem to pick one weapon type and stick with it anyway. Now it just has to be a monk weapon.
Skills change? Well, how important that is depends on the game being ran. I've never GM'd for a bard so I can't say how big this impact is.
Scribe Scroll is nice since bards aren't exactly bursting from their spells per day anyway. Non-combat days, she can stockpile those spells (or some of them, scribing takes time) for days when the magic is more needed. Again, fits the geisha theme because calligraphy is a fine art form and she could scribe her scrolls with brush calligraphy.
What I'm saying is "How is the geisha actually worse than a bard?"
OK, I may be a bit slow but how is geisha worse than bard?
[...]
Armor and shield proficiency? Again, fits the theme of the geisha. Does relegate her to a non-melee role but the image of a geisha isn't a melee character anyway really.
This pretty much.
They loose something that makes the worse in some combat situations. AKA melee. Sure they can decide to be non-melee, but as soon as someone actually hits them, they're worse. It might not be much worse, but you can't really argue that they're not.Also they lose bardic knowledge, which again is not a HUGE loss, but they're again obviously less knowledgeable as a pure bard.
On the other hand they get a couple of skills that are supposed to help in social encounters, but they don't really allow them to do anything that a pure bard couldn't already do.
I sort of disagree with that last part, the half of class level to certain skill checks can be quite nice later on, and gives them a slight edge as Face of the group over a pure bard.
Again it might not be a huge edge, and I'd say its probably comparable to the loss of bardic knowledge or the melee combat capabilities.
Scribe Scroll and Tea ceremony are very situational, but basicly free.
All in all, I think a Geisha makes a bard neither overpowered nor useless.
If you like the idea and it makes sense, play a Geisha, if you don't, then don't, the difference isn't huge, the focus is only SLIGHTLY shifted.
How can you do any of these aspects better as a Geisha than as a regular Bard?
It's subtlety and persuation.
It's the person that is accepted in the company of highborn and able to loose tight lips.
It's the gray eminence behind the scenes.
It's the ambition behind great persons.
It's Mata Hari
It's ScheherazadeAnd if you must go that battle, just UMD that mage armour and be off.
I agree with most of what Ellington wrote, and here is why:
A geisha is a better performer than a straight bard, due to the Bardic Knowledge substitution. Due to the same, she is likely better than the bard in 2 more skills with versatile performer.
A geisha is a better negotiatior and manipulator due to her better diplomacy skill, again due to BK substitution. Combined with a negotiation-oriented versatile performance bonus (i.e. a bonus to perform(sing), which then applies to bluff and sense motive), the geisha will almost always be a better people person than the vanilla bard. We can agree on that, right?
A geisha is perceived as less threatening and more accepted in high society due to her (relative) lack of combat skills, and likely unwillingness to muck about in dungeons, swamps and the like. This is less definite than the above because it will likely involve social factors and not straight mechanical bonuses, but this is how I interpret the fluff of the class. The bonus to calligraphy can also provide a bonus to that, in certain (admittedly rare) situations. In general, I'd say in most cultures that allow for such a role, the geisha will likely be a lot closer to the high classes than a "common entertainer" (bard).
Overall, we can safely say that the geisha is a better performer, a better diplomat, and may have some fluff-dependent bonuses in dealing with nobility "regular" bards may lack. Yes, it lacks some bardic abilities, and some of its abilities require some planning to use properly, but it has a niche and fills it fairly well.
Whoa now...
Don't confuse being a Geisha with being a geisha. One is a class archetype, the other is a profession that can be taken/performed by any class/any archetype. The archetype has no ability to be accepted more than any other archetype, nor is it some sort of requirement to being a working geisha. You could easily play a Paladin who is a geisha professionally.
You just won't be very good at it ;) .
As for relating the archetype to a certain position, this is something some players are uncomfortable with, but I think that it provides a background. As I see it, there are some classes that have some social implications in a game. Take the cleric, for example - you aren't just some dude/tte that can call on an Epic Outsider to help you with stuff, but one of the chosen elite of a religion - which, in most cases, means you have a special social status compared to most other people. From the description of the archetype and the abilities I would expect the geisha bard to have at least the specialized training for a certain position, and likely to be recognized as a member of a certain caste. Unless the DM specifically wants to make sure this isn't the case, this specialized training will likely mean your character will have a different background from a regular bard, and this will likely be reflected in how other characters perceive him/her.
Even without that, the geisha archetype has a few attributes that can make them better companions to nobility. First, as less martial than regular bards they can be considered less dangerous, and more likely to be occupied in urban adventures than the wandering some noble classes may consider distasteful. On the other hand, their specialized training includes skills more useful or desirable to the upper class. Calligraphy, specialized heraldic knowledge, diplomacy - these are typical pursuits of an (urbanized) noble class, and those who gravitate around it. The archetype might not necessarily represent a geisha, but certainly will be an urban entertainer who seeks patrons in the higher echelons of society. I think that this should be reflected in how this character is seen in the setting.
OK, I may be a bit slow but how is geisha worse than bard?
[...]
Armor and shield proficiency? Again, fits the theme of the geisha. Does relegate her to a non-melee role but the image of a geisha isn't a melee character anyway really.
This pretty much.
They loose something that makes the worse in some combat situations. AKA melee. Sure they can decide to be non-melee, but as soon as someone actually hits them, they're worse. It might not be much worse, but you can't really argue that they're not.Also they lose bardic knowledge, which again is not a HUGE loss, but they're again obviously less knowledgeable as a pure bard.
On the other hand they get a couple of skills that are supposed to help in social encounters, but they don't really allow them to do anything that a pure bard couldn't already do.
I sort of disagree with that last part, the half of class level to certain skill checks can be quite nice later on, and gives them a slight edge as Face of the group over a pure bard.
Again it might not be a huge edge, and I'd say its probably comparable to the loss of bardic knowledge or the melee combat capabilities.
Scribe Scroll and Tea ceremony are very situational, but basicly free.
All in all, I think a Geisha makes a bard neither overpowered nor useless.
If you like the idea and it makes sense, play a Geisha, if you don't, then don't, the difference isn't huge, the focus is only SLIGHTLY shifted.
The ability to wear armor does not mean the ability to be in melee. The ability to wear armor means if you are attacked, you have a higher chance of not being hit, whether it is by range or melee.
Because the bard lacks the ability of Sorcerers, Witches and Wizards to cast things such as Mage Armor, it lacks that ability to reduce its ability to get hit.
Tea party and scribe, are not free. They took your ability to wear armor and shields. Weapons may or may not be that big of a loss, but the armor is the huge loss.
And compare the geisha to the other bardic archetypes.
@ Doomdspair' - I agree to a point, the court bard is also a very good nobility-oriented bard. However, there is a difference. The CB's abilities are much more overt. You have to be there to work your mojo, and everyone sees you do it. The geisha archetype is more subtle and works better as a supporting character. It lends itself slightly better to supporting others do their thing due to not losing inspire courage/competence.
True, the rerolls on diplomacy make the court bard slightly better - imo the geisha archetype should have appropriate substitutions to lore master/jack of all trades as well, since they mostly modify the bardic knowledge it loses and JoaT doesn't seem quite the thing for it fluffwise. It is still better at diplomacy than the vanila bard, though.
But now.. I want a "make tea with everything" feat for the Geisha :(
But now.. I want a "make tea with everything" feat for the Geisha :(
That would probably be represented by ranks in the appropriate craft skill. Cooking, for example, involves making serviceable meals or beverages from lackluster substances, or awesome meals out of good ones. Perhaps teamaking could be considered part of cooking? Foraging for more or less usable materials (including food) is an expanded use of survival, though, so is best left to your ranger or druid buddy.
@ LazarX - depends on what you consider "adventure." The Geisha isn't really the kind of bard to go around battlefields, sewers or ruins, but is quite good in urban scenarios where intrigue and stealth are more important than exploration or combat. If only there was a class that allowed you to use your charisma for self-defense, like wisdom for monks... Actually, does anyone remember the old Battle Dancer from the Dragon magazine?
What I'm saying is "How is the geisha actually worse than a bard?"
I pulled that up front to have a nice starter.
When I looked at the geisha archtype, I thought the changes made to make her geisha were thematically appropriate
Thematically appropriate is very nice - and very important.
However, it has nothing to do with whether the geisha is worse or better.
The Tea Ceremony is a very situational free ability (not a trade-off) that works very well with the Geisha theme. It sounds very situational, but very useful in certain situations.
Note that you can't call it a free ability, as it is part of a package.
In order to get this, you might not directly give up something (as in "this replaces", but it's not a freebie, either.
Armor and shield proficiency? Again, fits the theme of the geisha. Does relegate her to a non-melee role but the image of a geisha isn't a melee character anyway really.
It still hits the geisha quite hard. You lose armour proficiency AND the ability to cast spells while wearing armour. While a feat takes care of the armour proficiency (and another for the shield proficiency), the armoured spellcasting is pretty much gone forever.
And you get NOTHING in return. Well, actually, you kinda get, since it's part of the whole package.
Weapon proficiencies? OK, that hurts some to me but just because I'm a weapons fanatic. Most characters (and their players) seem to pick one weapon type and stick with it anyway. Now it just has to be a monk weapon.
Sure, most characters choose one weapon and stick with it. However, bards usually choose a decent martial weapon they get, like a shortbow or rapier.
Now, they only get simple weapons (yes, I know, plus one monk weapon, and they are listed as exotic weapons, but they wouldn't even be very good in the category where they really belong: simple weapons)
So while it seems that it's like it was before, it's really different: The one weapon they pick and stick to is worse than what they usually get.
Another one they have to take for the team (the way they lose armoured casting and the armour proficiencies)
Skills change? Well, how important that is depends on the game being ran. I've never GM'd for a bard so I can't say how big this impact is.
The Gisha Knowledge change is something I can see. Not better or worse, just different. Instead of knowledge skills, you get a nice selection of skills you get boosted.
Scribe Scroll is nice since bards aren't exactly bursting from their spells per day anyway.
Scribe Scroll is a lot less useful for spontaneous casters. Wizards and their like can scribe scrolls for spells they are using only occasionally, so they don't have to prepare them, wasting slots each day for something they need only every once in a while.
Using scrolls to keep boosting your spell output can get expensive, and fast.
So, to sum it all up:
Plus, the tea ceremony is only more of the same, but the armour thing makes you lose versatility.
Bards are usually several things at once: Warrior, buffer, charmer, general skill monkey. The geisha pretty much makes them unusable as a warrior, but the other roles aren't strengthened at all.
The geisha is worse off than the bard.
If the tea ceremony would last longer - or at least could be activated within a time window and then last the 10 minutes - it would be more useful.
The geisha will encounter combat as often as the PARTY encounters combat.
And a typical party doesn't take a geisha with again. A party of Geisha, Samurai, Cleric of Calistria and Wizard/Loremaster can have a good time as well and not be particularly combat seeking.
And again, it isn't that it can't achieve stuff in the social sphere, its that the archetype DOES NOT really add to the ability to add into the social sphere.
Like i said, making a car, replacing the seats with broken glass WILL still be able to get you from point A to point B. But to pretend that is an upgrade to its ability to get you from point A to point B is incredibly stupid.
If we made an archetype that gave the bard the ability to grow a fro any time he wanted that replaced... its ability to use a long sword, yes the archetype doesn't fall behind the normal bard. BECAUSE IT IS THE NORMAL BARD STILL.
That's a flawed perception really You get a + 1/2 level bonus to diplomacy and perform (that can really be the bluff and other skills via versatile performance) before any magic kicks in. Those are favour winning, attitude improving skills and you still have your suggestions, charms and other bard tricks that STACK with those. Not having an advantage looks different really. What does Sandman really have beyond the bluff bonus? That archetype is a great sneak and magic thief, but not manipulator. You still fail to make a difference between puppet manipulation in combat and manipulation of people. Geisha plays with motivations and actions of others on far greater scale. The sandman may try to send the guards to sleep. Geisha may be trying make the duke not offer the king aid in critical situation. With skill focuses you may get the bonus really high. Competitive with people's sense motive and DCs of people above your level, like high nobility for example.
And that's what you are doing. It falls behind the normal bard in combat, UMD or not. It stays right along the normal bard in social stuff, because it doesn't really take away from the social things, other than you know.. the several knowledge skills that bards get.
Light armour is really what you are lacking as it was already said you can have the temple sword or a qarter staff or heavy mace (magic staves and scepters anyone?) to keep you within longsword damage range. You are also human centered. You don't really deal with animals to need nature, fiends to need planes and other such. Those knowledge skill are still your class skills really, so you can invest in those you are interested in, but that's the +1/2 level trade-off one generally useful thing for one specifically useful thing. You are a specialist (and in a different area to boot), not generalist.
Also WHERE in the archtype does it say "The geisha is capable of preforming a 'dance' that causes people who fail their will saves to obediently serve the geisha and not know that the geisha is manipulating them. Cause you know, your "control the fools" is far greater with the sandman than the geisha.
Again you se puppeteering as the only real form of people manipulation. This is making people do what you want because they *think* that they are doing it their way but they actually don't and it isn't diplomacy alone. You still have to do some arrangements. Don't you happen to have some ability to forge documents for example? This isn't mental domination, this is the old fashioned, mundane intrigue.
Also the "there are some situations that normal performances cant be used too.." That's a cop-out. There are some situations that you can't use acrobatics. cause like.. you are tied up. However in 99% of the rest of the time you can use it. Especially if your main performance skill is acting. The tea party? You need to have a specific campaign in order for it to work. The whole reason why you say that the geisha is good at intrigue is simply because it can add half its level to diplomacy.
and other manipulation skills... + nothing is lost on the magic side of the thing. Yes, it's better at social mechanics-wise. The rest is a player thing.
Though, I guess if you yourself (as in the player) are as geisha as you seem to think the geisha is, I guess you could totally rules laywer the tea party ability to allow you to tea party ALL THE TIME. It never says that you can't have tea ALL THE TIME everywhere you go. You don't even need to spend performances to have TEA ALL THE TIME.
Of course I can have party all the time. Without the meditative benefit and looking foolish most of the time, but otherwise I can.
What I was saying is that the ability is useable far more often than never as you present it. If you need everything on your disposal to be useable most of the time you shouldn't really buy a feather token of boat unless there is water all around.
So basically, because it is vague, you could start up 10 minute tea parties, every single round, regardless of what you are doing. Fighting a dragon? USE ITS FLAME TO BOIL THE TEA! Shambling mound got you down? TURN THAT THING INTO TEA!
Truthfully that's the only way to really get the geisha to work at all. Make TEA ALL THE TIME. WITH TWO SCOOPS!!
Talking while sitting on a matt and boiling tea does really compare well to a fight. Bluff, bluff, bluff the stupid ogre? You can indeed start the ceremony and it would end immediately probably without any effect other than making a fool od yourself. What I said that you could use no-action skills or maintain the performance for long talk to get an additional bonus. It doesn't defeat common sense really and neither the spirit of the ceremony. It's you who suggest using the ceremony in combat or people sipping tea being unable to have a talk.
I said it's a courtier. You can cry foul all the time you want that a sea druid with an octopus companion is use impaired in typical desert compaign and others won't give a damn, because they can see the "proper environment required for use" label from miles away. And this archetype also has it's own environment. Taking it elsewhere is indeed foolish.
What you guys all want? Finally there is a superior use for the one cleric spell that makes enemies make a wills ave to attack you (forgot the name). With your magical enhanced travelling tea set, a certain wondrous item that gives you boni on craft alchemy and can heat fluids you can actually make tey everywhere. I can totally see that happening in dungeons and elsewhere. And who needs armor all the time? Just dont get in frontline. Take stealth. And high Dex. And bracers of armor. Or some Chainmail Bikini Feats. Lol-
I would like to apologize for not having read the description of the Geisha well enough. I thought the Tea Ceremony replaced the normal performance of the bard, most notably inspire courage. Now that I see that it doesn't, I think the Geisha is a pretty nice archetype, if situational.
|
The Geisha is no better or worse at combat than any other Bard - she's got the same BAB, and can choose a Monk weapon (such as the temple sword) easily as good as the Bard standards. She's got lower defenses, because she's not proficient with armour and shields... but then again, a lot of characters proficient with shields never use them, so it's mostly just down to losing 4 AC from not wearing a chain shirt... (okay, it's also a lot more expensive to enchant Bracers of Armour than to enchant actual armour...).
If the Geisha is 'clearly' meant to be an NPC and to not be an adventurer, going the places adventurers do, then neither is the Wizard... or the Sorcerer... or the Monk for that matter.
Is Tea Ceremony circumstantial? Yes - and as with all such things it's up to the player to try to make the most out of it - but since it doesn't rob you of any of the Bardic Performance standards (as the substitute features of most other Bard archetypes do) you're no worse than a vanilla Bard when it comes to Bardic Performance... plus you have the Tea Ceremony option too.
The Geisha gets Scribe Scroll, and a bonus on Craft (calligraphy) which can be used (instead of Spellcraft) when creating magic scrolls (Core book page 552). She's clearly a 'casting focused' rather than a 'melee focused' Bard, by design, although there's nothing stopping such a character venturing into melee with great success (especially once level 2 spells open up - Blur, Mirror Image, and Cat's Grace are all nice defensive standards).
She's a better Diplomat, Performer, and scroll-maker than the vanilla Bard - in many ways she's a better 'bard' than the bard - she's a better 'face' and a better entertainer... she's slightly more squishy in combat, and has lower Knowledge skill checks (apart from Knowledge (nobility) at which she matches the vanilla Bard), but that's it, really.
The question becomes, when you're planning a Bard character, are you looking primarily at the guy's melee combat role, or looking primarily at the guy's Bardic Performance and spellcasting? If it's the former then the Geisha probably isn't for you, if the latter then she (or he - there's no rule saying the Geisha archtype is femme-exclusive) is a solid choice.
A more role-play oriented way of looking at it may be: do you picture your character wearing armour? If the answer's 'no' then, again, the Geisha may well be the Bard for you.
KaeYoss: Face role is better and attack isn't too worse. It's the armour where the hit landed. Mage armour can get you basic chain shirt protection and you can invest a bit more in protective amulets, but that's about it. Geisha insn't built to engage in battle.
Still I can't see anything to make geisha useless as some people say it is.
EDIT: tea ceremony - it doesn't mention any consumables aside from bardic performance round, so it can be refluffed to particularly any ritual-like undertaking appropriate to the particular culture. Even a silent meditation without any food involved or a massage.
Needless to say most cultures have a tradition of sharing a drink or a snack with friends and certain more or less formalised parts of that. Be it drinking of kava, tea or coffe, braking bread together.
Needless to say most cultures have a tradition of sharing a drink or a snack with friends and certain more or less formalised parts of that. Be it drinking of kava, tea or coffe, braking bread together.
Or it could be have nothing to do with eating or drinking, and is just a longer performance. I can't get the image of a belly dancer out of my head for some reason...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that a book largely intended for PC use ended up getting large amounts of NPC stuff. Putting a large amount of rules like this in a book that is suppose to be intended for PC use, is like having going to a Chinese buffet, but all the food is reserved for the cook making it.
Actually, UM is intended for anyone who uses magic in Pathfinder, whether player or GM. It's not "intended" to be exclusively, or even mostly, for PCs.
Needless to say most cultures have a tradition of sharing a drink or a snack with friends and certain more or less formalised parts of that. Be it drinking of kava, tea or coffe, braking bread together.Or it could be have nothing to do with eating or drinking, and is just a longer performance. I can't get the image of a belly dancer out of my head for some reason...
Scheherezade comes around again :)
The problem is that a book largely intended for PC use ended up getting large amounts of NPC stuff. Putting a large amount of rules like this in a book that is suppose to be intended for PC use, is like having going to a Chinese buffet, but all the food is reserved for the cook making it.Actually, UM is intended for anyone who uses magic in Pathfinder, whether player or GM. It's not "intended" to be exclusively, or even mostly, for PCs.
Whether or not it is for the PCs the GM can always use it. But when you put things in there that are for the GM, the players will end up wanting to use it. If in ultimate races/advance race book you put in "God race" where the character would be a god, and you are trying to gear it towards a GM, you don't think that the players will look at it and want to play it?
Realize that a GMs area of usage will forever always be larger than a players. I've had GMs pull creatures and things from other RPGs and convert them over. As a player, I can't say I want to play a Night-elf Mohawk and just port over what I want. As a player, I'm more likely to be limited to what the official PF books say (and if I'm real lucky 3.5 stuff too.) Than I am to create custom races/feats/classes etc.
The GM is the one who gets to do that. Creating stuff for the GM is helpful, but please, if it is geared towards a GM keep it in the GM books. Don't create an "Advance players guide 2" and randomly throw in GM oriented stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again you se puppeteering as the only real form of people manipulation. This is making people do what you want because they *think* that they are doing it their way but they actually don't and it isn't diplomacy alone. You still have to do some arrangements. Don't you happen to have some ability to forge documents for example? This isn't mental domination, this is the old fashioned, mundane intrigue.
Okay, so you go "Manipulation isn't just puppeteering.. you can use puppeteering to manipulate!" Making people think they are doing it their way is still puppeteering.
Creating Forgeries is not craft calligraphy. That is Linguistics.
Really you are trying to say the whole ability of intrigue and manipulation is based off the fact that at level 20 you could have +10 to diplomacy, and then use signing for bluff/sense motive.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha. Cause seriously, unlike any other performance skill, you never really need to stop acting and no one could really tell when you are acting. In fact when you stop acting, they may think that is when you are acting.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha. Cause seriously, unlike any other performance skill, you never really need to stop acting and no one could really tell when you are acting. In fact when you stop acting, they may think that is when you are acting.
As I see it, using versatile performance to double up a performance skill as other skill doesn't mean you are singing, or dancing, or playing the tambourine. It means you use what you learned performing in other areas. A singer can use the subtleties of their voice to make sure they sound convincingly angry/terrified/charmed, and to detect when someone else isn't. An actor knows how to apply make-up or behave as one of the many roles s/he has played. A dancer is light on her feet. A storyteller bard with versatile performance is just that good with words, s/he doesn't need to tell fables every time they need to roll performance rather than another skill.
|
|
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha...
How do you figure that?
The Detective gets the +1/2 levels bonus on Knowledge (local), Perception, Sense Motive, and the information gathering aspect (only) of Diplomacy.
The Sandman gets the bonus on Bluff, Slight of Hand, and Stealth.
The Geisha gets the bonus on Craft (calligraphy), Diplomacy (all aspects of the Skill), Knowledge (nobility), one Perform check, and the two skills that Perform Skill substitutes for via Versatile Performance (e.g. Perform (act) for Bluff and Disguise).
Of the three the Geisha seems the clear espionage winner due to having more espionage-related skills benefitting from her bonus: Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility), Perform (act), Bluff, and Disguise. The Sandman is a better sneak / thief, the Detective is more perceptive, but of the three the Geisha seems to win at being a spy.
The Geisha is no better or worse at combat than any other Bard - she's got the same BAB, and can choose a Monk weapon (such as the temple sword) easily as good as the Bard standards.
That depends on whether the temple sword is available in the campaign, and on whether the GM allows it to be chosen in this regard (note that the monk doesn't get proficiency in that weapon, so I guess many GMs will rule you won't get anything that isn't on the monk proficiency list.).
All the other monk weapons are pretty much crap.
She's got lower defenses, because she's not proficient with armour and shields... but then again, a lot of characters proficient with shields never use them, so it's mostly just down to losing 4 AC from not wearing a chain shirt... (okay, it's also a lot more expensive to enchant Bracers of Armour than to enchant actual armour...).
4 AC. Or 6 for an elven chain. And I wouldn't call that "just" losing some AC. That's a significant amount of AC.
In fact, that's probably more than everything else you're getting for your AC for quite some time.
So you are in the fight, have a crappy AC, and unless the GM lets you use the temple sword, you have a weapon that is not as good as the ones bards use. That makes you a lot less useful as a warrior than bards are.
The question becomes, when you're planning a Bard character, are you looking primarily at the guy's melee combat role, or looking primarily at the guy's Bardic Performance and spellcasting?
Personally, I am looking primarily at everything. Why be a bard, i.e. a jack-of-all-trades, when you are not doing everything.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha. Cause seriously, unlike any other performance skill, you never really need to stop acting and no one could really tell when you are acting. In fact when you stop acting, they may think that is when you are acting.As I see it, using versatile performance to double up a performance skill as other skill doesn't mean you are singing, or dancing, or playing the tambourine. It means you use what you learned performing in other areas. A singer can use the subtleties of their voice to make sure they sound convincingly angry/terrified/charmed, and to detect when someone else isn't. An actor knows how to apply make-up or behave as one of the many roles s/he has played. A dancer is light on her feet. A storyteller bard with versatile performance is just that good with words, s/he doesn't need to tell fables every time they need to roll performance rather than another skill.
Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actually using the performance abilities of the bard. If I'm using my acting skill to act like the worlds analog of James Bond all the time, then it is possible to apply the effects of performance whenever you want with out ever raising suspicion.
Pound for Pound, Spending a single round of bardic performance with lingering song added to it, you can give everyone in your party bonuses for 2-5 rounds. in a typical six man party, that means you gain anywhere from 11-27 virtual rounds for your entire party to make checks. Chances are very high, that you would be able to succeed at any social event that is needed with in those virtual rounds, even if you have some dumb as rock people.
KaeYoss: Face role is better and attack isn't too worse. It's the armour where the hit landed. Mage armour can get you basic chain shirt protection and you can invest a bit more in protective amulets, but that's about it. Geisha insn't built to engage in battle.
Still I can't see anything to make geisha useless as some people say it is.
I don't think it's useless. I'm just saying it's a bad trade.
Face is better, but the lore master aspect suffers for it: Instead of all Knowledge checks, Craft (calligraphy) Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility) checks, and one Perform check get the bonus - and via versatile performance, up to two more skills. That's 10 against 4-6. To be fair, you usually don't get to use all 10 knowledge categories, so I say call it even.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha...How do you figure that?
The Detective gets the +1/2 levels bonus on Knowledge (local), Perception, Sense Motive, and the information gathering aspect (only) of Diplomacy.
The Sandman gets the bonus on Bluff, Slight of Hand, and Stealth.
The Geisha gets the bonus on Craft (calligraphy), Diplomacy (all aspects of the Skill), Knowledge (nobility), one Perform check, and the two skills that Perform Skill substitutes for via Versatile Performance (e.g. Perform (act) for Bluff and Disguise).
Of the three the Geisha seems the clear espionage winner due to having more espionage-related skills benefitting from her bonus: Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility), Perform (act), Bluff, and Disguise. The Sandman is a better sneak / thief, the Detective is more perceptive, but of the three the Geisha seems to win at being a spy.
Because Espionage is not just being able to talk to people. Its being able to gather information, and doing it discreetly.
In that, The Detective has fairly natural abilities of gathering information. The sandman, has the ability to cast spells and make it so no one even knows he did it, and if he is able to deny the dex bonus for his victims, he gains additional DC on his spells.
Again you se puppeteering as the only real form of people manipulation. This is making people do what you want because they *think* that they are doing it their way but they actually don't and it isn't diplomacy alone. You still have to do some arrangements. Don't you happen to have some ability to forge documents for example? This isn't mental domination, this is the old fashioned, mundane intrigue.Okay, so you go "Manipulation isn't just puppeteering.. you can use puppeteering to manipulate!" Making people think they are doing it their way is still puppeteering.
Not in the same way. Magic control like dominate creates a short term effect, but a victim of intrigues played righ can be a permanent and willing subject.
Creating Forgeries is not craft calligraphy. That is Linguistics.
Which is still a class skill for you...
Really you are trying to say the whole ability of intrigue and manipulation is based off the fact that at level 20 you could have +10 to diplomacy, and then use signing for bluff/sense motive.
see ProfPotts's post
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha. Cause seriously, unlike any other performance skill, you never really need to stop acting and no one could really tell when you are acting. In fact when you stop acting, they may think that is when you are acting.
The Shaman above says about it.
KaeYoss: Face role is better and attack isn't too worse. It's the armour where the hit landed. Mage armour can get you basic chain shirt protection and you can invest a bit more in protective amulets, but that's about it. Geisha insn't built to engage in battle.
Still I can't see anything to make geisha useless as some people say it is.
I don't think it's useless. I'm just saying it's a bad trade.
Face is better, but the lore master aspect suffers for it: Instead of all Knowledge checks, Craft (calligraphy) Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility) checks, and one Perform check get the bonus - and via versatile performance, up to two more skills. That's 10 against 4-6. To be fair, you usually don't get to use all 10 knowledge categories, so I say call it even.
I didn't mean that you said it's useless.
|
|
That depends on whether the temple sword is available in the campaign, and on whether the GM allows it to be chosen in this regard (note that the monk doesn't get proficiency in that weapon, so I guess many GMs will rule you won't get anything that isn't on the monk proficiency list.).
The temple sword is in the APG (so all the relevant stats are available by clicking the PRD link on this site, even if you don't have the book) and is specifically a 'monk' weapon. I hardly think having a jerk DM is something that specifically limits the Geisha above all others... ;)
4 AC. Or 6 for an elven chain. And I wouldn't call that "just" losing some AC. That's a significant amount of AC.
AC is AC - and that's exactly what you're losing... until you get someone to cast Mage Armour on you, or get those Bracers of Armour, or whatever... Yes, being proficient in, and able to cast in, armour is better than not - of course it is - but it's hardly a game-breaker for a Bard unless you plan to play that Bard like a Fighter.
Personally, I am looking primarily at everything. Why be a bard, i.e. a jack-of-all-trades, when you are not doing everything.
And the Geisha can still do everything - she just trades some AC for being a better 'face'. So the question remains (if rephrased slightly) - how much focus do you put on each aspect of the Bard class?
Because Espionage is not just being able to talk to people. Its being able to gather information, and doing it discreetly.
Right - and the Geisha can both talk to people and gather information discretly.
In that, The Detective has fairly natural abilities of gathering information...
The Geisha gets her bonus to all aspects of Diplomacy - making her as good at gathering information via that skill as the Detective, but also good at influencing people as well.
The sandman, has the ability to cast spells and make it so no one even knows he did it, and if he is able to deny the dex bonus for his victims, he gains additional DC on his spells.
Yes - the Sandman is a better sneak... but the Geisha can rock her bonus on Disguise, Bluff, Perform (act), and Diplomacy - and three of them off a single skill (Skill Focus Feat anyone?) - for actual infiltration she's clearly the best of the three archetypes. The Detective is a better detective - spotting physical clues, and sweating subjects (with Sense Motive) - and knows more about the streets (Knowledge (local)) whereas the Geisha knows more about high society and the corridors of power (Knowledge (nobility)). The Sandman is more of a glorifed thief - sneaking, picking pockets, that sort of stuff. But to be an actual spy you need to make the enemy think you're one of them - Bluff, Disguise, Perform (act), and Diplomacy all come to mind as the skills required, and the Geisha is the best at all of them.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha. Cause seriously, unlike any other performance skill, you never really need to stop acting and no one could really tell when you are acting. In fact when you stop acting, they may think that is when you are acting.As I see it, using versatile performance to double up a performance skill as other skill doesn't mean you are singing, or dancing, or playing the tambourine. It means you use what you learned performing in other areas. A singer can use the subtleties of their voice to make sure they sound convincingly angry/terrified/charmed, and to detect when someone else isn't. An actor knows how to apply make-up or behave as one of the many roles s/he has played. A dancer is light on her feet. A storyteller bard with versatile performance is just that good with words, s/he doesn't need to tell fables every time they need to roll performance rather than another skill.Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actually using the performance abilities of the bard. If I'm using my acting skill to act like the worlds analog of James Bond all the time, then it is possible to apply the effects of performance whenever you want with out ever raising suspicion.
Pound for Pound, Spending a single round of bardic performance with lingering song added to it, you can give everyone in your party bonuses for 2-5 rounds. in a typical six man party, that means you gain anywhere from 11-27 virtual rounds for your entire party to make checks. Chances are very high, that you would be able to succeed at any social event that is needed with in those virtual rounds, even if you have some dumb as rock people.
Geisha can have this still and has another option of continual bonus over a longer period at certain circumstances. Also six-man party is not typical, 4 man is.
Because a sandman or detective with Performance "Acting" is far better at the espionage than the geisha...How do you figure that?
The Detective gets the +1/2 levels bonus on Knowledge (local), Perception, Sense Motive, and the information gathering aspect (only) of Diplomacy.
The Sandman gets the bonus on Bluff, Slight of Hand, and Stealth.
The Geisha gets the bonus on Craft (calligraphy), Diplomacy (all aspects of the Skill), Knowledge (nobility), one Perform check, and the two skills that Perform Skill substitutes for via Versatile Performance (e.g. Perform (act) for Bluff and Disguise).
Of the three the Geisha seems the clear espionage winner due to having more espionage-related skills benefitting from her bonus: Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility), Perform (act), Bluff, and Disguise. The Sandman is a better sneak / thief, the Detective is more perceptive, but of the three the Geisha seems to win at being a spy.
Because Espionage is not just being able to talk to people. Its being able to gather information, and doing it discreetly.
In that, The Detective has fairly natural abilities of gathering information. The sandman, has the ability to cast spells and make it so no one even knows he did it, and if he is able to deny the dex bonus for his victims, he gains additional DC on his spells.
Detective is about puzzling out informations from details, geisha is about loosening tongues to spill it out (double edged really, as she has to hire a detective if she is toverify it). This is Poirot vs. Mata Hari Again. And the geisha is also apt at seeding info back, which isn't that much of detective's thing. Sandman again does his thing via direct magic only if ever. Court bard is your concurrent here really, but it has some other unique aspects.
Personally, I am looking primarily at everything. Why be a bard, i.e. a jack-of-all-trades, when you are not doing everything.
Of course its a trade-off.
All the archetypes are. They substitute some things for others, that make you a better specialist in that area, at the cost of something elseFor Geisha's it's social skills/abilities, at the cost of some combat abilities.
With the argument "it's not a jack-of-all-trades anymore" you could rage against ALL the bard archetypes and say they're all junk and shouldn't be in there.
Geisha is probably not for dungeon crawling or combat heavy campaigns. I'm not so sure actually, they can still hold their own I guess. True, they miss mage armor, but could buy potions for that for example, or make a "scroll scribing trade deal" with the wizard. "You scribe me a couple of Mage armor scrolls, I scribe you some others you want". Also they could get the armor proficiency and Arcane Armor Training if they want. Yeah heavy feat tax, I know, but they can do it. (Doing that I would agree it's probably not worth it over the normal Bard though)
It has a place in social and roleplay focused ones though.
I'm tempted to play a Geisha now :)
When I look at an archetype (especially a Bard archetype which has so many different options and combination for what it can switch out and exchange), I ask myself, "What can I do with this archetype that I couldn't do before?" When I look at the Geisha and ask that question, I am thoroughly disappointed.
Now I'm not looking at it from a min-max standpoint- but simply observing what options the archetype opens up. Certainly a geisha is a better diplomat than a straight bard. But most core bards already are already fine diplomats (usually the best in the party). Certainly a bonus feat is nice. But Scribe Scroll is not considered that useful for most bards, and if they want it every bard has access to it. A monk weapon is unique, but there are plenty of ways to get access to a single exotic weapon. Tea Ceremony is by far the most unique ability that a Geisha gets. But even that is simply a modification of other performances, and it is so situational, that it might as well not even be there.
On the other hand, let's look at some of the other Bard archetypes, and what new options they give:
Arcane Duelist- Heavy Armor, grants fighter only feats, bonded weapon, bladethirst
Animal Speaker- Speak with Animals at will, Summon Nature's Ally spells, influence animals
Archivist- boosts party AC and saves with performance, disable magical devices
Celebrity- Can gather a crowd together... This one is kind of "meh"
Court Bard- big combat and social debuffing options, can effect more people with his performances
Demagogue- The same as the celebrity, but actually has the cool ability to incite his gathered crowed to violence
Detective- Boosts allies' initiative, perception, disable device, and reflex saves; force people to tell the truth and stop hiding; disable magical devices; gets unique bonus spells known
Dirge Bard- Can animate the dead, gets unique bonus spells known, and can affect the undead with mind-affecting spells
Magician- Give buffs to casters, counterspell with performance, ignore time increases for metamagic with performance, unique bonus spells known, arcane bond, better wand usage
Sandman- Steal spells from other casters, put enemies to sleep with performance, cast spells in secret, disable magical devices, sneak attack and sneakspell
Savage Skald- Incite others to rage (or let barbarians rage without expending rounds), summon barbarian constructs, grant allies DR-
Sea Slinger- performance to counteract exhaustion, fatigue, nausea, or sickness, make tasks aboard a ship easier, cause wind gusts or storms with performance, a familiar
In summary, it's not that the Geisha is necessarily weaker than the normal bard. It's just that the Geisha is boring. The other archetypes let me disable magical devices, wear heavy armor, make sneak attacks, get unique spells, etc. A Geisha pretty much gives me a little bit better diplomacy and perform skill. Boring.
I liked this thread better when it had more "companion" in it.
When I look at an archetype (especially a Bard archetype which has so many different options and combination for what it can switch out and exchange), I ask myself, "What can I do with this archetype that I couldn't do before?" When I look at the Geisha and ask that question, I am thoroughly disappointed.
Now I'm not looking at it from a min-max standpoint- but simply observing what options the archetype opens up. Certainly a geisha is a better diplomat than a straight bard. But most core bards already are already fine diplomats (usually the best in the party). Certainly a bonus feat is nice. But Scribe Scroll is not considered that useful for most bards, and if they want it every bard has access to it. A monk weapon is unique, but there are plenty of ways to get access to a single exotic weapon. Tea Ceremony is by far the most unique ability that a Geisha gets. But even that is simply a modification of other performances, and it is so situational, that it might as well not even be there.
On the other hand, let's look at some of the other Bard archetypes, and what new options they give:
...
In summary, it's not that the Geisha is necessarily weaker than the normal bard. It's just that the Geisha is boring. The other archetypes let me disable magical devices, wear heavy armor, make sneak attacks, get unique spells, etc. A Geisha pretty much gives me a little bit better diplomacy and perform skill. Boring.
Well, technically I can't think of anyone who could push his talking skills any higher than a focused Geisha. It may be underestimated, but geisha can stright talk people to doing things without resorting to charms and other control mojo. What it presents is an excellent courtier and diplomat
@ zmar: actually, the court bard can be a bit better due to the rerolls on diplomacy they get. Their focus is slightly different, though, and imo a bit more overt.
@ Merkatz - the thing about the geisha is that it actually doesn't change all that much compared to the regular bard. Most other archetypes substitute several performances, BK, loremaster, JoaT, and often versatile performance. It only changes your proficiencies and BK. Yes, compared to most other bardic archetypes, it will have less exciting new things.
Now, perhaps it wasn't designed all that well - as I said before, JoaT/LM are a bit iffy in the case of that archetype, and could well be supplanted by having access to several bonus feats (of which scribe scroll would be just one), a web of contacts, longer-lasting or harder to resist performances, or some intrigue-driven ability such as making your performance or spell effects more subtle. As it is, though, it makes no sense to get a whole lot of special things if you trade almost nothing for them.
On a related note, I'm not sure just how overt a bard's performance effects are. Would, for example, the target of a suggestion or fear performance that met their DC know you tried to mess with their mind, or would they just be unmoved by your oratory/song/dance?