| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The PF Guide says that some classes work better with some factions than others. I've also read that some skills are a better fit with some factions than others.
We're starting a brand new PF chapter and none of us have played with factions before. Does anyone have any tips on which classes and skills work best, okay, and not so great with which faction? I'd hate to see a player design his character around a specific faction just to learn that he doesn't have the right skills to be successful at his faction missions.
Here's what I've gathered so far:
Andoran: Diplomacy
Cheliax: Knowledge (planes)
Grand Lodge: ?
Lantern Lodge:
Osirion: ?
Qadiran: Diplomacy and Appraise
Sczarni: ?
Shadow Lodge: ?
Silver Crusade: ?
Taldoran: Sleight of Hand
Does this seem right? I know it's not a perfect match, but I'm just talking about general skills that align with most of the faction missions.
Thanks
Okay. This list was more for my players' FAQs. I'm not playing a character, just being the GM. I just wanted to give them all the information I can find on the good/bad/ugly for skills/classes for factions.
|
While I'm sure you could put together this information, it seems very meta-gamey. The faction missions you need to complete shouldn't drive you to create a character with certain skills. The best way to learn what you need to have is playing. Characters aren't meant to always get every PP.
If anything, try to make sure to have at least 1 social skill, 1 knowledge skill, 1 physical skill, and any trained only skills available. Just because certain factions (over)use a certain skill doesn't mean you'll automatically be denied the faction point. The GM at the table is given the power to reward creativity, which means they have flexibility in helping a character achieve their mission (aka allowing someone to use a different skill to complete a task if they can justify the use in helping them achieve their goal).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In general the most "important" skills are:
- Perception
- Knowledge, especially local/history and nature/arcana/planes for creature identification
- Diplomacy, with Intimidate & Bluff following close behind
These will serve in helping solve faction missions as well as the primary over-all mission. Adding in some trained only skills like Linguistics, Use Magic Device, & Sleight of Hand are extremely useful. Traps are becoming a more prevalent challenge, so having Disable Device is increasing in popularity.
My best advice is just have a wide array of trained skills. For local groups that play together often, try to build around diversity and you will vastly increase your chances of success whether faction missions or otherwise.
The best place to look for things like that are the faction boons you can purchase from the Field Guide. Many of them let you specialize in a skill.
|
In general the most "important" skills are:
- Perception
- Knowledge, especially local/history and nature/arcana/planes for creature identification
- Diplomacy, with Intimidate & Bluff following close behind
I agree in principle, but I can't resist nitpicking :D
Perception is like a cell phone.. you don't really NEED it because if it becomes necessary to use it.. everyone else around you is going to have it ;D
I'd bump diplomacy up on the precedence. Not every faction mission requires diplomacy of course.. but it sure seems like every scenario does have ONE mission that requires it. If it's not yours, odds are good that somone else at the table could use your assistance on it.
Perception is like a cell phone.. you don't really NEED it because if it becomes necessary to use it.. everyone else around you is going to have it ;D
If everyone thought this way, though, no one would have it. :P
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In general the most "important" skills are:
- Perception
- Knowledge, especially local/history and nature/arcana/planes for creature identification
- Diplomacy, with Intimidate & Bluff following close behind
I agree in principle, but I can't resist nitpicking :D
Perception is like a cell phone.. you don't really NEED it because if it becomes necessary to use it.. everyone else around you is going to have it ;D
I'd bump diplomacy up on the precedence. Not every faction mission requires diplomacy of course.. but it sure seems like every scenario does have ONE mission that requires it. If it's not yours, odds are good that somone else at the table could use your assistance on it.
I'd say you've got perception and diplomacy backwards. You only need one diplomat in every group, but perception often determines who gets to act and who doesn't in a surprise round, so everyone needs it.
|
|
Perception is like a cell phone.. you don't really NEED it because if it becomes necessary to use it.. everyone else around you is going to have it ;D
I'd bump diplomacy up on the precedence. Not every faction mission requires diplomacy of course.. but it sure seems like every scenario does have ONE mission that requires it. If it's not yours, odds are good that somone else at the table could use your assistance on it.
My list was not intended to be in any ranking order. Just that, in my experience, as both a player and GM, those are the most important and most often used skills whether we be talking faction mission or combat/non-combat encounter.
As far as the other part, why wouldn't your theory about Perception apply to Diplomacy as well? Hell, any skill could be assumed that someone else at the table will have it. Using that logic, I would recommend taking more obscure skills that others at the table are not likely to have, so you can be the "savior" when the unusual Knowledge(engineering) or Linguistics check is called for.
|
|
As far as the other part, why wouldn't your theory about Perception apply to Diplomacy as well? Hell, any skill could be assumed that someone else at the table will have it. Using that logic, I would recommend taking more obscure skills that others at the table are not likely to have, so you can be the "savior" when the unusual Knowledge(engineering) or Linguistics check is called for.
I suppose it matters whether you know what the other people at the table will be playing. I never have known even what people I'll be playing with, let alone which characters they'll be deciding to use. Forgot that some people play with the same people and the same characters session after session :D
If you have no idea what else will be at the table, perception is a safe 'dump' skill since the odds are so low that everyone ELSE will consider it a dump, and you only ever need 1 person really to succeed on most perception checks anyway. OTOH, the only way to guarantee that Diplomacy (or most any other skill.. besides Perception ;) will be at a table is to take it yourself. I mentioned Diplomacy specifically because it's so commonly necessary in at least one faction mission per session.
|
|
I would not rely on another players skills, even with trpafinding. Sure a well rounded table helps if playing up, playing up is a little hard to do, total apl at mid tier.
Additional traits is a great feat, if you want a well rounded PC. I have used it a couple times for to get skills as class skills.
As far as skills, knowledge planes, or religion are skills that I find that hurts most parties when they lack it at higher level.
|
|
stuff
Hrmmm, so if GM's don't run their game the way you think they should, they are somehow "that bad?" Very presumptuous.
There are those who like being ambushed. Losing initiative adds a level of difficulty to the encounter and some players enjoy the extra challenge. There are plenty of cases where the BBEG should/would know you are coming. I would prefer ambush to the BBEG just sitting in its lair waiting for me to come and defeat it.
I've been lightly following this thread, but I think I'm seeing a miscommunication that's causing some trouble. If I'm wrong, ignore me. If I'm not, let me present this different point of view to Bob and nosig.
I believe what james is talking about is not a matter of preference (or 'his way of GMing') but rather the general idea of a GM bettering oneself. I know for a fact that there are things that a new GM can be taught that will improve his/her game without changing their style or delivery. Things like 'visual aids help players experience the scenario with multiple senses' and 'having players roll damage along with combat can speed up play a bit', even some borderline advice like 'during combat, tell the players after they've sat there for 10 seconds that you're going to delay their character until they think of what they want to do, for the sake of keeping the combat flowing'.
If a GM is willing to take constructive advice and food for thought, they can become better at GMing. A group of players that take an active role in advising new GMs within their community can offer this.
On the other hand, if a GM has a habit that is causing trouble, it is worth mentioning at the end of the slot what you felt/observed based on what the GM did. If they weren't aware of the affect of their actions, they will probably be happy you pointed it out. If they're a dick, they'll tell you off and you'll know to move along.
I think you guys are looking to far into what James is saying.
|
|
I'm not advocating "cheating" or fudging dice rolls. I roll in the open and prefer my GM's to do the same (at least for OP). You seemed to be indicating that any ambush would constitute "unfairness," but perhaps I'm just misreading your intent.
Players are free to use stealth or any other tactic available to try and gain an advantage. It's just that, in most cases, the player-characters are invading their enemies well-defended lair. Often times encountering a number of combats prior to reaching the BBEG. That naturally could provide advance notice.
There are also times when the GM has to "cheat" in favor of the players. There are a number of scenarios that lend themselves to all the encounters being provoked at once. Do that, and the characters are dead for sure.
Honestly, I think both sides of this are looking at it from extreme views and reading too much into what was the intent of author.
I think that nearly every skill has its use, but some are more frequently required than others and a few are a near "must-have," per my original post.
|
|
I don't disagree with your concept. Surprise, for the most part, should be a tactic, but not necessarily a foregone conclusion or something outside of the ability of the PC's to impact. PC actions should affect the tactics as written and players should feel like they have the ability to affect the flow of the adventure.
However, the fact is, many scenarios are written with the ambush being assumed. In most of those cases, because of the nature of the encounter there is little chance that the PC's will have an advanced opportunity to avoid the ambush, or to reverse it and ambush the intended ambushers. This would apply to prep spells, etc. as well. With a successful Perception check, you may be able to act quickly, during the surprise round, but that won't help your companions who have lower skill modifiers or just fail the DC.
If judges and writers are just doing this then they need feedback telling them that this isn't the way to do things
I'm sorry, but I have to cry foul. If you are so passionate about this topic (an admirable trait) then why don't you have any scenario reviews accredited on your page? I admit, I have reviewed woefully few myself, but I did not suggest it.
I have no problem with the author writing an ambush encounter. As a GM, I am confident in my skills to determine if the players actions will impact the success/failure of the ambush attempt and adjust tactics appropriately. Most of the GM's I have encountered have done this as well. I cannot think of a single occurrence where I felt the GM pulled a "screw the players, this is what happens-period."
There is usually at least one character that fails to succeed at whatever the party was attempting that triggered the ambush, or whatever. I have seen, more often than not, player actions foil a BBEG's plan despite what was written. So, and again this is only my experience, GM's have been very effective at adjusting for IC actions.
Grand Lodge is all over the place. I've had faction missions depend on Sense Motive, Knowledge Geography, and even one where I had to pick a lock :/.
I've only had one for Szcarni (I've played more Scenarios with the character, but they're mostly older, so I get Taldor instead), but all I had to do was climb a pillar (and do some other stuff that didn't require a roll).
Also, the Silver Crusade players like to brag about how easy their missions are. I think they've had three that were just "kill all the undead", like you wouldn't anyway.
But anyway, you never know, really.
|
Grand Lodge is all over the place. I've had faction missions depend on Sense Motive, Knowledge Geography, and even one where I had to pick a lock :/.
I've only had one for Szcarni (I've played more Scenarios with the character, but they're mostly older, so I get Taldor instead), but all I had to do was climb a pillar (and do some other stuff that didn't require a roll).
Also, the Silver Crusade players like to brag about how easy their missions are. I think they've had three that were just "kill all the undead", like you wouldn't anyway.
But anyway, you never know, really.
Heh. I played a scenario in the Andoran faction, from a scenario with 2 faction missions, and spend the whole scenario trying to find one of the missions, and find at the end that we succeeded on the mission, the whole party, without even realizing that was what we were looking for.
And the second mission was an easy RP session, I had more problems with the other Andoran than the mission.
|
|
stuffHrmmm, so if GM's don't run their game the way you think they should, they are somehow "that bad?" Very presumptuous.
There are those who like being ambushed. Losing initiative adds a level of difficulty to the encounter and some players enjoy the extra challenge. There are plenty of cases where the BBEG should/would know you are coming. I would prefer ambush to the BBEG just sitting in its lair waiting for me to come and defeat it.
If you jump the BBEG, you lose the chance to hear his awesomely terrible villain victory speech.
|
|
If you jump the BBEG, you lose the chance to hear his awesomely terrible villain victory speech.And here I thought that they said them regardless... even while they lie dying in their own blood..
No?
-James
Sometimes you can find a copy of the speech in their pocket. You know, in case they forgot it in the moment.
And your little dog too!
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
If you jump the BBEG, you lose the chance to hear his awesomely terrible villain victory speech.stuffHrmmm, so if GM's don't run their game the way you think they should, they are somehow "that bad?" Very presumptuous.
There are those who like being ambushed. Losing initiative adds a level of difficulty to the encounter and some players enjoy the extra challenge. There are plenty of cases where the BBEG should/would know you are coming. I would prefer ambush to the BBEG just sitting in its lair waiting for me to come and defeat it.
I remember one of my earliest PFS games involved a BBEG monologue at the end from the deck of his slaving vessel. The PCs rowed up in a dingy to the side of the boat so the slaver could start his spiel. Half way through the Andoran gunslinger raised his hand and very politely stated he would like to shoot the guy. We rolled for the surprise round and he got the shot off mid sentence. It was a musket ball and crit, one-shotting the BBEG and ending the scenario. Talk about anticlimactic!
|
|
Heh. I played a scenario in the Andoran faction, from a scenario with 2 faction missions, and spend the whole scenario trying to find one of the missions, and find at the end that we succeeded on the mission, the whole party, without even realizing that was what we were looking for.
One of my favorites was when a Barbarian PC's player was very confused over what he was supposed to do for his faction mission. Then he, just to roleplay his character, started to pull random stuff out of a pile of junk. I asked for a Perception check, which he passed, finding the stuff he was supposed to.
My first character was a diviner. They have a class ability to always go first in the surprise round even if they fail their Perception checks (we call in spider senses :P). I remember a villain appearing in a room once and giving a grand monologue.
At the end the GM asked us to roll initiative. I said what about the surprise round? To which he replied, you just hear it. Well, do I get to go since I'm a diviner? The GM say sure!
I rolled a higher initiative, had a wand of scorching ray in my hand already and burned her to a crisp from the shot. Smirking at the GM, so that monologue never happened, did it? No, he said hanging his head, no it didn't.
|
|
Sometimes the BBEG's speech at the end has been building for 3+ hours and it can be extremely anti-climatic if they don't get it out. Often this means I will evoke GM prerogative to launch the soliloquy regardless of actions. Call it a time out. Then progress as normal without negatively impacting the player's actions.
If the speech is that important, a better situation is to set up the encounter such that it'll go off regardless of the character's actions. A well-written encounter will take that into account.