Question on a Concept


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

A friend and I are contemplating playing a rather interesting pair of characters at an upcoming convention. I'd like to double check that no one sees any problems with this in PFS before we arrive. Please, do not punt this to the rules board, all that gets is homebrew answers. I want a PFS answer, thank you.

The concept is that one of us will play a synthesist summoner with the mount evolution, and the other a small paladin. Our question is, is there anything that would make that a not valid option in PFS? Second question, could the Paladin make a ride check to potentially negate an attack on his "mount"? Curious to see what other Society Members think of such a concept.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Chester aka Paz

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
The concept is that one of us will play a synthesist summoner with the mount evolution, and the other a small paladin. Our question is, is there anything that would make that a not valid option in PFS?

The FAQ says:

Quote:
You may only select a mount from the listed mounts on page 63 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook unless another source grants access to additional creature choices.

'Eidolon' is not on the list on page 63 of the Core Rulebook, hence is not allowed as a paladin's mount (unless you can find that as a valid option elsewhere).

3/5

He doesn't want it as his divine bond mount, he just wants to ride around on it with the ride skill.

There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member, so given an appropriate exotic saddle I think that you can do this. There might be some problems with initiative, since a character and their mount are supposed to be on the same initiative count. This does sound kind of like a bad joke from the char-op boards though, so expect some people to not be happy.

Silver Crusade

Saint Caleth wrote:

He doesn't want it as his divine bond mount, he just wants to ride around on it with the ride skill.

There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member, so given an appropriate exotic saddle I think that you can do this. There might be some problems with initiative, since a character and their mount are supposed to be on the same initiative count. This does sound kind of like a bad joke from the char-op boards though, so expect some people to not be happy.

Correct, not looking for a divine bond option. We fully expect it to draw funny looks, and we really only plan on using it for the convention. As for it being optimized...I'm giving up a character's whole range of skills to turn it into a small sized paladin delivery system.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Chester aka Paz

That was the only PFS-specific rules issue I could come up with. If it's not relevant, then play on.

You might get a few funny looks from your GM or fellow players; it'd be polite to check with them that they're OK with what you're planning before you start the scenario.


Saint Caleth wrote:


There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,

which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Mental note: buy military and pack saddles for druid.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
Please, do not punt this to the rules board, all that gets is homebrew answers. I want a PFS answer, thank you.

See, this is what I told Dragnmoon a week ago when he asked why people keep asking rules questions here, but I don't know if he saw it or not.

I'll summon him, just in case: Play! Play! Play!

3/5

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,

which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony

Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)


Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:


There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,

which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony
Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)

OMG I'm so taking *Weapon Proficiency: Lance* with my oracle ... saddle up my pirate and spur him into action .. wait ... I need spurs now too

hrmm .. did they make chaps in golorian times?

3/5

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,
which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony
Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)

OMG I'm so taking *Weapon Proficiency: Lance* with my oracle ... saddle up my pirate and spur him into action .. wait ... I need spurs now too

hrmm .. did they make chaps in golorian times?

If you are riding a pirate who is holding a lance, who is going to argue with your fashion sense?


Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,
which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony
Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)

OMG I'm so taking *Weapon Proficiency: Lance* with my oracle ... saddle up my pirate and spur him into action .. wait ... I need spurs now too

hrmm .. did they make chaps in golorian times?

If you are riding a pirate who is holding a lance, who is going to argue with your fashion sense?

hrmm .. good point ... but if I have chaps or not makes a difference ... do I get the cushy saddle or the western saddle.. perhaps a side saddle and then I can still wear my diaphanious gowns while spurring my pirate mount onward to greatness

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
I can still wear my diaphanious gowns while spurring my pirate mount onward to greatness

Ever since the "whips and furs" incident, I haven't been able to read your posts innocently.

:/


Jiggy wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
I can still wear my diaphanious gowns while spurring my pirate mount onward to greatness

Ever since the "whips and furs" incident, I haven't been able to read your posts innocently.

:/

hehe

3/5

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,
which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony
Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)

OMG I'm so taking *Weapon Proficiency: Lance* with my oracle ... saddle up my pirate and spur him into action .. wait ... I need spurs now too

hrmm .. did they make chaps in golorian times?

If you are riding a pirate who is holding a lance, who is going to argue with your fashion sense?
hrmm .. good point ... but if I have chaps or not makes a difference ... do I get the cushy saddle or the western saddle.. perhaps a side saddle and then I can still wear my diaphanious gowns while spurring my pirate mount onward to greatness

I would prefer a western saddle with better support, but when diaphanous gowns are involved I guess exceptions need to be made.


Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
There is no rule that you cannot put a saddle on a party member,
which is especially handy when you're a dainty creature and expected to wallow around in muck... nothing like looking at the 1/2 orc fighter and going ooo pony
Or when you can give your mount lances too... >:)

OMG I'm so taking *Weapon Proficiency: Lance* with my oracle ... saddle up my pirate and spur him into action .. wait ... I need spurs now too

hrmm .. did they make chaps in golorian times?

If you are riding a pirate who is holding a lance, who is going to argue with your fashion sense?
hrmm .. good point ... but if I have chaps or not makes a difference ... do I get the cushy saddle or the western saddle.. perhaps a side saddle and then I can still wear my diaphanious gowns while spurring my pirate mount onward to greatness
I would prefer a western saddle with better support, but when diaphanous gowns are involved I guess exceptions need to be made.

You do make a good point ... and as the pirate is going to be jogging (short, fat.. yeah jogging ... ok walking fast) I might need a way to stay on better than a side saddle would provide. hrmmmmmmm

3/5

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
I would prefer a western saddle with better support, but when diaphanous gowns are involved I guess exceptions need to be made.
You do make a good point ... and as the pirate is going to be jogging (short, fat.. yeah jogging ... ok walking fast) I might need a way to stay on better than a side saddle would provide. hrmmmmmmm

Magic would work too. Either in the gown or in the saddle.


Saint Caleth wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:
I would prefer a western saddle with better support, but when diaphanous gowns are involved I guess exceptions need to be made.
You do make a good point ... and as the pirate is going to be jogging (short, fat.. yeah jogging ... ok walking fast) I might need a way to stay on better than a side saddle would provide. hrmmmmmmm
Magic would work too. Either in the gown or in the saddle.

oooooo I could have a magic gown ...

Hrmm ... gown of pirate riding ... gives bonus to riding non-standard mounts... made of webbing to add to the bonus cause then you'll "stick" to the mount ... also good for helping to "net" baddies

3/5

SO would you have to take it off and throw it to "net" the enemies?

Would that be "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Removed Clothing)"?


Saint Caleth wrote:

SO would you have to take it off and throw it to "net" the enemies?

Would that be "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Removed Clothing)"?

As a guy yes, but she's female .. .so she's already proficient in

Exotic Weapon Proficiency [Remove Clothing] althought any males within a 30 foot radius would need to make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted for 1D6 turns (men have short attention spans).

The Exchange 5/5

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:

SO would you have to take it off and throw it to "net" the enemies?

Would that be "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Removed Clothing)"?

As a guy yes, but she's female .. .so she's already proficient in

Exotic Weapon Proficiency [Remove Clothing] althought any males within a 30 foot radius would need to make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted for 1D6 turns (men have short attention spans).

depends entirely on the male observer ... some would be checking out the "pirate who is holding a lance"... just saying.


Jane "The Knife" wrote:
Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:

SO would you have to take it off and throw it to "net" the enemies?

Would that be "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Removed Clothing)"?

As a guy yes, but she's female .. .so she's already proficient in

Exotic Weapon Proficiency [Remove Clothing] althought any males within a 30 foot radius would need to make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted for 1D6 turns (men have short attention spans).

depends entirely on the male observer ... some would be checking out the "pirate who is holding a lance"... just saying.

True, but that puts yet another gray are into the game. It's easier to say if the junk is below the belt you make the check, if the junk is above the belt you don't


1 person marked this as a favorite.

*wanders in*

*slowly backs out*

"What has been seen cannot be unseen."

The Exchange 5/5

attempting to put this train back on the rails...

Why would you want to spring this on some Judge at a convention? you are much more likely to get ... troubling reactions at a convention where you do not know the judge and he doesn't know you. Plop this "matched pair" down on judges you know now, and find the "hidden issues" (those silly problems we all overlook with new/fun concepts) with someone you trust (that trusts you) so you can work out HOW it works and then "take it on tour".

If you both go on the same inititive, it will make your game (and the judges game) much easier.

Oh! and possible problems I can foresee.
Some judges will rule that:
1) if you have two characters in the same square, they are going to be "squeezed".
2) Rider will have to roll ride checks to do anything.
3) you can't climb stairs while mounted - and other movement restrictions (some of which will not make any type of sense).
4) Mounts armor is costed as barding (2X cost).
5) some other weirdness that I cannot foresee.

Overall - I wish you luck - and I think it would be fun to have you two at my table.

Grand Lodge

Purple Fluffy CatBunnyGnome wrote:
Saint Caleth wrote:

SO would you have to take it off and throw it to "net" the enemies?

Would that be "Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Removed Clothing)"?

As a guy yes, but she's female .. .so she's already proficient in

Exotic Weapon Proficiency [Remove Clothing] althought any males within a 30 foot radius would need to make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted for 1D6 turns (men have short attention spans).

You may want to find a better word to use than 'distracted'. In PFS the only things that I have seen that make you distracted thus far have been swarms, and failing the 'distracted' save is the same as becoming 'nauseated', which I doubt is what you were getting at, lol.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Daze or Charm are the appropriate conditions.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Mad Alchemist wrote:
Daze or Charm are the appropriate conditions.

"stunned" & "panic" also come to mind -

Liberty's Edge

I'm gonna echo the perspective that this isn't a great idea for convention play. It is almost certain to cause confusion and result in varied rulings. It will cause frustration for everyone as it gets hashed out.

Grand Lodge

Saint Caleth wrote:
There might be some problems with initiative, since a character and their mount are supposed to be on the same initiative count.

Initiative is simple. They both roll, then the faster one delays until the slower one.

It looks like the Squeezing rule might be the only issue, but a mount and character are not considered Squeezing so unless the GM wants to be "difficult" you are probably good to go.

I do agree that this is something that is better for familiar faces. Surprising a con GM with this will just add more stress to an already stressful environment. Not cool. If you are willing to accept table variance and not get to play this way sometimes, I say go for it.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

How about this.

You make the paired duo. And a pair of backup characters.

You ask the GM if they're ok with the pair. If they say yes, you play them. If they say no, you whip out the backups.

Grand Lodge

I personally think this is a wonderful concept, but it might be a good idea to use this character with your regular circle of GMs rather than strangers at a con.
Go with what Norse suggests.

Shadow Lodge 2/5

I've given this some thought and done some research and can find nothing specific against it. However if it had been sprung on me at a table at a con, I'd have been quite annoyed and likely ruled against it in various ways some of which have been mentioned above.

Not necessarily fairly, but out of a general dislike for the synthesist, and the feeling that something must be quite broken about the build to work the way you describe it. :)

Having said that, you can sit at my table and I'd allow it without prejudice. Other judges, I'm not so sure given the environment and the time needed to think it through.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

It's kind of silly but I don't see any reason to shoot it down.

Silver Crusade

Well, the problem is that he is in the military and needs to take leave in order to be able to play. We'll bring alternate characters if the GM doesn't like it. There isn't really anything broken about it, I'm turning a potential damage beast into a Pint Sized Paladin Payload delivery system.

And yes, we are aware its perfectly silly. To be honest, the *point* is that its rather silly.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Sounds good to me. As long as this isn't an effort to turn the nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine into a slightly more nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine, you've got my approval.

I'd like to see another not-optimized sythesist out there other than mine. Is anyone else capable of it?

Silver Crusade

Feral wrote:

Sounds good to me. As long as this isn't an effort to turn the nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine into a slightly more nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine, you've got my approval.

I'd like to see another not-optimized sythesist out there other than mine. Is anyone else capable of it?

I can build characters as optimized or as generic as I feel the need for.


Feral wrote:

Sounds good to me. As long as this isn't an effort to turn the nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine into a slightly more nigh-invulnerable-eidolon-death-machine, you've got my approval.

I'd like to see another not-optimized sythesist out there other than mine. Is anyone else capable of it?

Sorry, I'm physically incapable of building any sort of Summoner. There isn't a single class I hate to see more.

The Exchange

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
A friend and I are contemplating playing a rather interesting pair of characters at an upcoming convention. I'd like to double check that no one sees any problems with this in PFS before we arrive. Please, do not punt this to the rules board, all that gets is homebrew answers. I want a PFS answer, thank you.

I suppose you could always check with the Head Judge at the convention. :)

If I were asked this at Kubl--, uhm, your local convention, I might look at it two ways:

***Initial thoughts (guaranteed to be wrong):

It's weird. The section under movement states:

"Ending Your Movement: You can't end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless."

However that gives no measure to mounts at all, nor size, nor squeezing. We all know that mounts and PCs can occupy the same square.

Now, you can give yourself (as your own eidolon) a mount evolution. Does that make you a mount for another PC?

I think so. A summoner is clearly meant to be able to ride his eidolon. And I don't see a rule against a summoner loaning out his mount to others.

And, as for ride checks, if the Pally has Mounted Combat, he can, indeed, use his skill to protect his mount.

Yeah, looks legal to me. So, if your judge had problems with it and you tried to politely work it out with them AND you politely asked to consult the Head Judge, I'd try to find a good middle ground.

***Second thought:

However, as a person who would want you to be welcome in games in our area, I would advise caution the concept.

I know that a lot of groups think RAW is all that matters. They are wrong, of course. The most important thing is playing in the social group and creating fun *with* others.

Your builds are likely to be perceived as very cheesy. And people might hate what you and your friend do. An optimized synth is already nigh-invulnerable (let alone adding a skilled rider to help negate damage...though you claim you won't be doing damage) and most PFS mods can easily be broken...but adding a power-attacking rider built for it is just going to be silly.

What I hope for all my local players is RP first, crunch second. And I hope you and your friend RP the freak out of this concept rather than have it be purely 'silly'. It seems to be a very power-focused initial concept...I could be wrong, of course. I advocate for an inclusive and well role-played team concept to avoid any bad vibes you might get from others.

My 2 coppers.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Well that's why you build non-abusive ones.

I'm still working on my magus that never Spell Combats.


Feral wrote:

Well that's why you build non-abusive ones.

I'm still working on my magus that never Spell Combats.

It's more than that. It's the type of player they typically attract. I'm usually not very compatible with those types of players.

Silver Crusade

Painlord wrote:

What I hope for all my local players is RP first, crunch second. And I hope you and your friend RP the freak out of this concept rather than have it be purely 'silly'. It seems to be a very power-focused initial concept...I could be wrong, of course. I advocate for an inclusive and well role-played team concept to avoid any bad vibes you might get from others.

Oh, mine at least has as much backstory as I can pack into a character. His, I'll double check with. If its problematic, we'll split up the duo and make it work in some other way.


Kyle Baird wrote:
Feral wrote:

Well that's why you build non-abusive ones.

I'm still working on my magus that never Spell Combats.

It's more than that. It's the type of player they typically attract. I'm usually not very compatible with those types of players.

but, but we get along

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
Feral wrote:

Well that's why you build non-abusive ones.

I'm still working on my magus that never Spell Combats.

It's more than that. It's the type of player they typically attract. I'm usually not very compatible with those types of players.

I see what you did there...

To be fair, I have amended my anti-magus stance and Painlord recently impressed me with a magus of his own that I was immediately jealous of (I wish I had thought of it first).

Sovereign Court

All I know is that as soon as I read your idea I loved it, if you are playing at my table at this upcoming convention I would gladly accept it. That being said I really hope you are playing at my table so I can see this in action lol!

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

I don't see the cheese. There is much, much MUCH more optimized things you can do with a synthesist summoner than provide a low level mount for another character.

Silver Crusade

BigNorseWolf wrote:
I don't see the cheese. There is much, much MUCH more optimized things you can do with a synthesist summoner than provide a low level mount for another character.

Coupled with scent and a skill kick to *survival*, yeah, its about as "anti-cheese" as I can make it :D

The Exchange 5/5

I do stand by my original advice. Don't spring it on Judges. If you have to run this at Cons only, try to talk it over with the Judge before the event - and have several back-up characters (something I would advice always anyway).

A large minority of Judges tend to react negitivily to anything out of the ordinary.
Me: "I like to take 10 whenever I can, on all my skills."
Judge: "What are you trying to pull at my table? I am not going to let you rules lawyer my adventure!!"

Good luck!

Oh! and get T-shirts or name badges made up... Something like "Rider" and "Mount".... on second thought maybe not...


nosig wrote:

Me: "I like to take 10 whenever I can, on all my skills."

At least at my tables there is a valid reason why you can't do this.

CRB wrote:
When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

At Kyle Baird's tables, even the players can't take 10!

;)


nosig wrote:


Oh! and get T-shirts or name badges made up... Something like "Rider" and "Mount".... on second thought maybe not...

muahahahahahaha I'm sooooooooo stealing this idea...

hrmm ... why yes, yes I do need a bunnygnome shirt ... and TK sooooo needs a badger shirt

now to find someone to draw a catbunnygnome for me

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Question on a Concept All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.