If I take draconic bloodline and gain a +1 to each damage die, will that stack if I'm cross blooded with wild blooded primal (as it gains another +1 to each damage die)?
Anyone know?
Both bonuses are untyped, and as a result they should stack. That said, check with your GM; both powers come from similar sources, so it would not be surprising for a GM to rule that they do not stack.
The lower amount of spells available and the -2 on will saves from crossblooded are quite a large penalty. Combined with the fact that direct damage spells aren't considered the most powerful options a caster has, I don't really see a problem in letting those two stack.
The lower amount of spells available and the -2 on will saves from crossblooded are quite a large penalty. Combined with the fact that direct damage spells aren't considered the most powerful options a caster has, I don't really see a problem in letting those two stack.
Well its an all druid (storm archetype) with 1 level of sorc for the bloodline bonuses (+1 dam per dice on all electricty for two different bloodlines). So the fewer sorc spells don't mean anything. Weather and Cloud are the two druid domains.
Ah you might have mentioned that. Still the -2 Will saves applies. And you're losing a level, are you sure it's worth it? Druid's most powerful spells are the control spells, not damage.
The problem with your plan might very well be that the +1 bonuses apply only to actual Sorcerer spells, not spells from other classes. Not sure if there's an official ruling about that, but I can see it being that way.
Not sure if there's an official ruling about that, but I can see it being that way.
Its in the FAQ. Bloodline bonuses apply across classes.
And they should stack; properly applied, it goes a long way to making blasting a viable build option in comparison to control options.
Well its an all druid (storm archetype) with 1 level of sorc for the bloodline bonuses (+1 dam per dice on all electricty for two different bloodlines). So the fewer sorc spells don't mean anything. Weather and Cloud are the two druid domains.
In that case, anything we say here does not apply; you need to ask your GM directly on this issue, because this is clearly a cheese build.
Well its an all druid (storm archetype) with 1 level of sorc for the bloodline bonuses (+1 dam per dice on all electricty for two different bloodlines). So the fewer sorc spells don't mean anything. Weather and Cloud are the two druid domains.In that case, anything we say here does not apply; you need to ask your GM directly on this issue, because this is clearly a cheese build.
Except not. This is 100% legal.
Except not. This is 100% legal.
Legal options can still be cheese, and often are.
A one-level dip specifically intended to gain a boost to one's damage output as a result of another class' specialized mechanic is cheese. This especially true when the that benefit bypasses the intended penalties associated with the ability. It's a loophole in the rules. The abilities in question were clearly not intended to function in this manner, and any GM would be in their right to disallow it.
As I said before, the rules support the idea but check with your GM first.
It has been clarified by the developers that bloodline arcana affect all spells cast by the character, not just sorcerer spells.
This has been considered by the devs, and they see it as fine and in many ways, intended. He's gimping his druid levels just to get some measly extra damage.
Nature has seen his service to her, and deemed it time to awaken the ancestral blood in him.
My friend, one one level dip is not cheese.
Cheese decisions, by definition, have to legal within the rules. It is the taking of those rules and stretching them to apply in ways and situations that they were never intended. I actually support the use of cheesy character choices; I allow them in my games fairly often. That said, it is important to recognize this for what it is.
Benefiting from a class mechanic in a way that minimizes or eliminates the penalties that were designed to balance that ability is cheese.
Oooh, I see your issue. And yes, I do see your concerns. I thought you were worried about the arcana.
I think that Crossblooded is badly designed, but I also think that their hands were tied. I believe that the -2 will save was added on to deter such dips.
You can ask your GM for maybe a one level PrC that does the same thing. +2 damage per die of electricity damage. No increase in Will saves. No caster level. And maybe something from the Wind mystery.
It's not like this will make blasting more powerful than whacking with a big stick, or pincushioning your foes.
Don't forget that a one-level dip into sorcerer also lets you use all those nice arcane spells (in wand/scroll form, at least).
|
Cheese decisions, by definition, have to legal within the rules. It is the taking of those rules and stretching them to apply in ways and situations that they were never intended. I actually support the use of cheesy character choices; I allow them in my games fairly often. That said, it is important to recognize this for what it is.
Benefiting from a class mechanic in a way that minimizes or eliminates the penalties that were designed to balance that ability is cheese.
I would argue that something is only cheese if it has no story to support it. If someone brings me something strictly mechanically based to my games, that has no story to support the mechanical decisions, I call it cheese, which is severely frowned on in my games.
Asking about mechanics in a forum does not scream cheese, unless the person says so from the get go.
I would argue that something is only cheese if it has no story to support it. If someone brings me something strictly mechanically based to my games, that has no story to support the mechanical decisions, I call it cheese, which is severely frowned on in my games.
Asking about mechanics in a forum does not scream cheese, unless the person says so from the get go.
When there's a legitimate story reason for such decisions, that's when I allow them. They're still cheesy choices, since recognizing something as cheese is a strictly rules-based observation, but they're justified cheesy choice.
Justified cheese is well-aged, and easier to stomach. But it still needs to be approved by one's GM. After all, some folks are allergic to cheese entirely. ;D
This is no more cheese than taking one level in fighter for armor proficiencies and free feat, as long as the player has the decency to at least introduce and explain it through roleplay.
Actually it is much more cheesy. There are no designed penalties to be bypassed in the case of taking a level of fighter in order to gain greater armor proficiencies.
|
|
This is no more cheese than taking one level in fighter for armor proficiencies and free feat, as long as the player has the decency to at least introduce and explain it through roleplay.Actually it is much more cheesy. There are no designed penalties to be bypassed in the case of taking a level of fighter in order to gain greater armor proficiencies.
You mean, except losing a level in your primary class, which now ranges from "... acceptable" to "totally sub-par" ?
Do you punish your players for wanting to be efficient (but failing at it, since they multiclassed) ?
Well I'm kind of new to pathfinder, but to be honest the whole d20 and pfrg systems are mong systems. Thats how they were designed. I come from 25 years of old school grognard AD&D and there is a HUGE difference in these types of systems. I use the word 'build' to describe characters in these newer systems for a reason. I mean lets be serious, we are talking about a system where people can go buy whatever magic item or spell they desire. So please don't throw the cheese card at me.
Thats not to say, that I'm not willing to try and have some fun with pathfinder. I'm giving it an honest go and who knows our gaming group may switch (with some house rules implemented I would imagine).
And why wouldn't a storm druid synergize with a dip in sorc for blue draconic/wildblooded primal electricity in both mechanics and story? Its not like taking something from different genres or themes and mashing them together.
With the spontaneous casting of druid domains spells, I think the bonus to electricty really allows the druid to be more of a direct damage dealer for storm type spells, albeit not as good as a pure sorc or wiz I'm sure.
Well now wait a minute, HA, do you think it's cheese to take any levels in other classes than your main if they provide some mechanical benefit?
Because that's the road your argument is starting to take, as Maxximilius has pointed out. And I can't recommend digging your hole any deeper. You already said that taking a level of fighter is cheesy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Benefiting from a class mechanic in a way that minimizes or eliminates the penalties that were designed to balance that ability is cheese.
Actually, this is min-maxing, or optimizing.
Cheese is generally distasteful, or has a bad smell/odour associated with it; for instance, the Supreme Cleaving Barbarian with a bag of rats. There's no reason for anyone to carry a bag of live rats to use with Supreme Cleave other than to abuse gaming mechanics; you can try and justify it, but its always going to sound distasteful.
There's nothing distasteful about a Druid having the spirits of wind and the dragons of the sky in his heritage; in fact, it can be downright characterful.
Both of the above situations can involve optimization, but not both are cheesy.
|
|
Cheese is generally distasteful, or has a bad smell/odour associated with it; for instance, the Supreme Cleaving Barbarian with a bag of rats. There's no reason for anyone to carry a bag of live rats to use with Supreme Cleave other than to abuse gaming mechanics; you can try and justify it, but its always going to sound distasteful.
It first begun eons ago, with a pale-skinned barbarian king, Grokognac The Mighty, who angered an ancient eldritch god of Blood and Pestilence. His daughter refused the invitations of the god to become his wife.
As punishment, thousands of giant rats appeared in the tribe's camp, by the ill effects of a long-forgotten thaumaturgic spell dealing with the foulest eras of necromancy.
Grokognac dealt with the dire rats one by one... or, more precisely, as hours passed, several felt, for each blow dealt.
To protect the mighty cleavage of his daughter, The Mighty discovered the secrets of delivering Mighty Cleaves.
For each rat who felt, one other died. Then two. Then three. It was action economy and edition upgrade everywhere ; and Grokognac the Mighty was happy of such deed. The god's heralds died, to the last one, and never the angry god came back, now afraid by the power of the Mighty Cleave.
Thousands of Grokognac's heirs attempted to reproduce such accomplishment. But, beyond all foes, from mere halfling to dragons, orcs, and space-warping scholars of wizardry ; only the offering of living rats proved worthy enough to activate again Grokognac's The Mighty' Mighty Cleave.
And this, is why I am currently sacrificing one rat for each Mighty Cleave, for such act is a long-held tradition in my family providing me with the ancestral strength and wits needed to perform such divine act of death bringing.
AM REPRESSING AM CULTURE ?
dude, you took point blank and precise shot with an archer ? soo cheese
dude, you took point blank and precise shot with an archer ? soo cheese
I actually have friends that seem to think that way. Maybe not with those 2 feats in particular, but definitely Rapid Shot (or Power Attack for melee martials).
Do you punish your players for wanting to be efficient (but failing at it, since they multiclassed) ?
Nope, but if they multiclass specifically to gain a benefit that they are otherwise denied I require an in-character explanation for the choice. This is especially true if it bypasses limitations or penalties that are built into the system.
Well now wait a minute, HA, do you think it's cheese to take any levels in other classes than your main if they provide some mechanical benefit?
Nope, only if those levels are taken specifically to gain that benefit; yes, I consider taking a single level in fighter for no other reason than to gain the armor and weapon proficiencies cheese. That said, even though it may be cheesy it isn't an exploitation of the rules, and is something I've done in the past myself. Cheese in and of itself isn't a negative thing. It's when cheese is used to exploit the game's inherent mechanics and balance that it becomes an issue.
Cheese is generally distasteful, or has a bad smell/odour associated with it; for instance, the Supreme Cleaving Barbarian with a bag of rats. There's no reason for anyone to carry a bag of live rats to use with Supreme Cleave other than to abuse gaming mechanics; you can try and justify it, but its always going to sound distasteful.
There's nothing distasteful about a Druid having the spirits of wind and the dragons of the sky in his heritage; in fact, it can be downright characterful.
Both of the above situations can involve optimization, but not both are cheesy.
That "cheesy" indicates something is distasteful is your definition, not the general definition of the phrase. Stating that something is cheesy in the context of a game means it bends the rules in ways that are unintended by the basic design. Something stinks, but it may not be a negative thing; cheese in and of itself is not negative. Cheese that potentially exploits the system can be, and a GM needs to be aware of it and consider it carefully before allowing it in a game. Both the situations you describe are cheesy. A GM should feel free to disallow either of them, if he or she decides it is not something wanted in that game. Only one of those choices, however, is a clear attempt to exploit the mechanics of the game. It's up the the GM, however, to decide if the second does as well.
The situation described by the OP is cheesy. I'm sorry, Oxlar, but that's simply what the situation is. You're free to disagree, or even view the phrase in a negative way, but cheese is cheese. The situation is allowed by the rules, but it should be cleared with the GM first as a result.
Well good thing I didn't make a post about whether or not something was 'cheese'. I just wanted to know if it was acceptable by the rules, which isn't subject to one's personal definition of 'uncool'.
But thanks for the additional input that it rubs you the wrong way.
I don't understand. Are you trying to insult me? I have two characters with Sorc dips. Comparing my characters to a dairy product fails to convey whatever message you were trying to make. It is a legal character = thus it will be played. Let all lactose-intolerant people beware.
By the way, for real cheese, add the Tattooed Sorcerer archetype from Inner Sea Magic to it. It stacks with Crossblooded and Primal Bloodline and give you the Varisian Tattoo feat for free (+1 caster level FTW). You lose arcane bond if you had it, but get a nifty familiar in a tattoo.
I find it very hard to call this cheese in anyway shape or form when the designers specifically give it their blessing in the FAQ for the product.
I used to have a GM that would shout "Stop power gaming!" at us whenever we were power gaming.
Like, taking power attack on a barbarian.
Or taking weapon focus.
Or using a greatsword.
|
Stacking damage bonuses, or DC bonuses for certain spell types, or whatever, with a one-level dip is really the only mechanical reason to ever even look at the cross-blooded sorcerer. Actually going above a one-level dip in the archetype severely punishes the character doing so - again, mechanically speaking. So, if it's a cheese choice then it certainly, as far as the numbers go, is one build right into the design of the archetype.
I wouldn't say it severely punishes. A human can use their favored class bonus to get those spells back at each new spell level. I'd say it moderately punishes at most.