|
I personally find that a CON of 10 or below makes PFS considerably more lethal, as there are random AE damage encounters throughout the scenarios. If it works for you, I'm not going to tell you otherwise, but I prefer not to tempt the random damage gods.
Oh, and CHA is technically not even a dump stat for my dwarf, I just didn't raise it.
|
|
I know it seems like BNW and I butt heads often on here, but in this case, I agree 100%. None of my characters have dumped more than one stat, and even at that not below 8. But in every case, it's been CHA for the *exact* reasons BNW outlined.sigh... and anytime the party needs a little help talking, or your PC has to do something CHA based, you need to turn to the "Party Face". DO you make sure to have one at every table? Kind of like making sure to have someone with Disable Device?
Try branching out some. Pick another stat and build a PC around a flaw. Low WIS? so you have a very guilable and trusting PC.
Low DEX? My wife built a PC with a low DEX and explained she's pregnant. Talk about the RP! Her Pregnant Beermaid is 11th level now.
Low INT? this is so overdone, I expect to see at least one Forest Gump at most tables.
Low STR? Run the OLD wizard... try it, it might fun. It will clearly be different from what you normally run.Or even combine two of the above. Start your next PC with a built in dump stat (or two) and play it up big. A Low CHA is the easiest to RP. Try it with a Low Dex - why's your guy got a low dex anyway? Ask the judge when he catchs you flatfooted if you don't count your dex - then be sure to tell him you have to 'cause you "dodge into the blows".
I have characters with 10's in all the stats you mentioned, except STR. To me, that's close to an 8, I'm just not being greedy about it.
|
Gather information - everyone aids the check.
If the DM lets you. The difference of getting a 10 or a 12 aren't that big, much less the chance of your lack of a +2 being crucial.
Clerics are not often the "Party Face" (short on skill points) and yet need CHA (Channel anyone?)
They get 2 skill points per level. Diplomacy is a class skill for them, and its the second most used skill. If you're a channeling cleric you probably should be a face, if you're not you can drop it like a rock.
Druids handle animal.
Dwarven druid with a 5 charisma has 1 Rank +3 class -3 Cha +4 Link +2 training harness= needs a 3 at first level to get the critter attacking.
"So kid, whatcha doin' here?" Roll your bluff... wait, what do you mean you're swinging on a city guard?!
If you're not a face you're not making the check anyway.
CHA is as important as any other stat.
Nope. Skills aren't the only thing in the system. its not attached to a save.
I've seen a melee PC with a 7 strength (maybe it was a 5?). Halfling Dawnflower Dervish. A real terror in melee (Bonus to hit & damage is DEX based). He planned to get Muleback cords as his first magic item (I think).
I have similar plans for a kitsune ninja. But note that said halfling is out the shoulder slot that normally goes to the ever important cloak of resistance.
It is rather that many people assume that CHA is the logical dump stat - and so you end up with parties of adventurers where the AVERAGE CHA at the table is 7. Out of 6 PCs.
Its not an assumption its a conclusion.
Average con score of 7= dead party. If your average is an 8 but one person is sporting an 18 (Hi ho, hi ho, its off to work we go...) you do just as well as a party with an average of 14.
"And wisdom.... if you're not a perception monkey, or a ranger you not only don't need it, you don't need ANY Of it. "
Will saves. they will get you and/or the party killed.
"And Dexterity.... if...
Getting hit will get you killed
Fort saves and running out of HP will get you killed.
Int looses skill points, but yes if you're dumping it dump it hard. The nagaji paladin with an int of 5 has the same skill points as the Gnome pally with an int of 9 (or the animal companion with an int of 2...)
Just because you can say it doesn't make it so. These have already been demonstrated above.
|
|
The penalty for blowing CHA based rolls are usually loss of prestige or not skating past a fight. Most of the penalties for blowing other rolls is considerably worse.
Frankly, in PFS, I don't care if I don't have a face in the group. The scenarios are written so they can be completed without them. It's not like roleplaying can somehow change the choo-choo track nature of the scenarios.
My first character was an INT 10 human cleric. I can tell you that not having skills has driven me batty to the point where there is no way I'm dumping INT on a PFS toon. Ever. If that's not valid enough for not "branching out", I'm sorry.
|
|
sigh... and anytime the party needs a little help talking, or your PC has to do something CHA based, you need to turn to the "Party Face". DO you make sure to have one at every table? Kind of like making sure to have someone with Disable Device?
My druid finds traps, disarms traps, knows the local fauna and flora, tracks, gets people through the wilderness, knows the denizens of the dungeon, speaks 8 languages, and has willingly volunteered to be lowered into swamps, mud puddles, cesspools, pits, and the still warm innards of a number of creatures because someone thought that a part of it would make excellent scrimshaw on their mantel, can buff the party and tags along with the living incarnation of why dinosaurs went extinct from their own awesomeness.
Is it really too much to ask if he has someone go talk to girls for him because he's from a communist dys/utopia and isn't sure how to go about it without filling out form 49574-B: permission to begin courtship?
Low INT? this is so overdone, I expect to see at least one Forest Gump at most tables.
He's gump, he's gump, whats in his head...
He's gump, he's gump, he slays undead....|
|
BNW - everything you say is true, and everything has a counter arguement. It's all opinion, subject to Judges calls and table veriation. You say: "Its not an assumption its a conclusion." and I say, it's a faulty conclusion then. Perhaps gained from a limited test sample?
First the odds aren't opinion they're just math. Secondly no, you can't pull an accusation of a limited sample size when you yourself are running into a large number of people who've reached the exact same conclusion.
Secondly reversing the word play but winding up with something that is completely false doesn't make your point. many characters Can dump cha with minimal side effects. The same can go for strength, but its absolutely false for wisdom and especially con. Charisma is the stat dump that hurts the most people the least: thats why its so common, not because of some misconception about its usefulness.
|
|
"First the odds aren't opinion they're just math" huh? what odds? did I miss part of your statement qouting odds? I'll go back and re-read it after this...
AHem... the parts where
-why a druid doesn't need cha to handle animal
-why average party charisma is meaningless. Snow white has the same +Diplomacy with seven dwarves as with seven bards.
-that if you insist on needing a wide variety of social skills, +int will make most builds better at it than +charisma
I believe I stated as much for CON, though I did point out that a large number of PCs I have seen have 10 CONs (I would say the majority of non-frontline fighter types I have seen have CONs of 10 or maybe 12).
Yeah that's not a dump. You don't see a lot of Lucky 7 cons, or elves with a con score of 5 because it will cost you something.
Please support this statement:"Charisma is the stat dump that hurts the most people the least: thats why its so common, not because of some misconception about its usefulness." I do not find it to be true.
A fighter archer or any non charisma based build has little chance of 1) Being the one to have to make the diplomacy/bluff check in the first place or 2) succeeding based on raw charisma if they do have to make the check. The difference between a 7 charisma fighter and a 12 charisma fighter making a dc 20 check isn't much, but for making a dc 25 check its exactly the same.
Try to show me what charisma does for a typical fighter build. Give me a 20 point buy character.
|
A character who wants to be a jack-of-all-trades (non-specialist), someone unwilling to dump stats for extra points (especially int/cha, when applicable), or taking a lot of the weaker kits is "unoptimized". An optimized character, then, is one who specializes in a job and does it very well, is willing to lower stats (especially CHA) when it doesn't help their job, and picks archtypes that help to make them more effective at doing their job.
I work with a different set of definitions.
min/max: a character that sacrifices breadth for superior ability at one or two tasks. Dominates in his chosen field but of minimal value when his one trick does not work.
optimized: Not usually overwhelming in any one area but able to function well in a large array of scenarios. Will nearly always have an answer to any problem.
The problem with min/max for damage is, past a certain point additional damage has no meaning. Hitting a 25 hit point mob for 50+ damage is impressive but meaningless. At the same time, my optimized character, who deals a mere 30 damage, is going to kill the mob just a quickly, but can also make a perception check, mingle at the Paracountess' ball and knows the difference between a yellow musk zombie and a juju zombie.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I think ghosts do CHA damage.And charisma.... if you're not a party face you only don't need it, you don't need ANY Of it.Many ghosts agree.I do not understand this reply.
Are you saying many PCs who dump CHA die? or many dead PCs wish they had dumped CHA?
I think the idea is Ghosts use charisma.
Aside, I built the Lahamu specifically for Charisma dumpers ;-)
|
|
"First the odds aren't opinion they're just math" huh? what odds? did I miss part of your statement qouting odds? I'll go back and re-read it after this...
a 10% failure rate whenever he gives a command to his companion.
Omg NOOOOoooOOOOOoooo a possibility of failure for ...2 levels, that you can work around by setting the animal to defend you out of combat so that he attacks something at least.
I do not consider (again, just my opinion) a 10% failure rate to be as good as a 0% failure rate, do you?I consider them very close, particularly as
1) it only lasts a few levels.
2) You only need it to get them to attack specific targets (because of the defend work around)
3) in a d20 based system 10% is the second smallest chance of failure you can have.. Until he gets at least 2 more ranks (levels), he has to roll a 13 to teach his companion the tricks Attack, Defend, Guard, or Track...At first level the critter comes fully trained as per the pfs faq. He should have Attack, Attack, Defend, flank, Down, and Seek (because seek is the "go over there" trick)- no handle animal check is required.
At second level you learn another trick off the bonus feat which..These bonus tricks don't require any training time or Handle Animal checks, and they don't count against the normal limit of tricks known by the animal. The druid selects these bonus tricks, and once selected, they can't be changed.
At third level you'll have enough ranks handle animal to train him via take 10 for every trick but detect and entertain.
Now, speaking of strawmen, its not that this is as good as a druid with an 18 charisma, its just that the difference is mathematically smaller (10% for 1 level,5% for 1 level,none) than it would be for anything other stat.
|
|
my attempt at "doing the math" - again, just an opinion): If even one in 10 adventures requires a second PC to make a CHA skill check (and there are 7 CHA skills), then the "Snow White" example brakes down.
to
If you have a face and you're not interacting with the DM thats your own fault. If you have a face in the party, you're not the face of the party, and you want to yak with the mission important PCs thats just like volunteering disarm a trap with your butcheeks. (aka the barbarian way!)1 in 10 would be generous... to your side. It still makes my point. Remember, hurts the least is NOT "doesn't hurt at all". If you have a 10% greater chance of success for something you need to to 10% of the time you have something that matters 1% of the time. That's about the least amount of harm possible- which is what min maxing is all about. Min maxing is an important part of optimization.
|
|
And charisma.... if you're not a party face you only don't need it, you don't need ANY Of it.
.
Recently I have been seen quite a few characters with a 7 dex score - including an interesting monk - each of them have 1 level in oracle and use charisma for AC and Reflex saves. Still its startling to see all the -2 initiative modifiers.
|
I find it amusing how much people seem to correlate "optimize" with "specialize".
I have to agree with you there, Jiggy!
I still don't get why you have to be overly specialized (in other words, a one-trick pony) to be "effective" or "heroic". In fact, to me degenerate characters (what I refer to them as) are less fun than a generalized character.
Really, the only degenerate character I have played so far in Pathfinder (in and out of PFS) has been the tiefling wizard that I have played once. And I am not sure that I am going to keep the 20 INT at first level... really not sure that it is worth tanking both STR and CHA to me. Having the extra skills is nice, and the extra 1st level spell, but is it necessary?
However, I think that there is a competitive feeling out there that people think that they have to make the most effective character anywhere, and that this effectiveness is measured by DPS. This is made easier by the fact that there are so many eyes on the books, and forums such as this. Given enough effort, it is not surprising that the number crunching has been done, and paths to "maximally effective characters" has been determine (assuming DPS is the maximal effective rating).
This reminds me of the days when Magic: The Gathering competitive play was dominated by 2-3 decks... when the only way to win was to go online, find out the decks that are really winning, and build yourself one. That's part of the reason I quit playing back about 13 years ago.
Pathfinder, while based on a tactical game, really tries to be a Role Playing Game. Which should mean that every character is distinct in some way... not just a bundle of high and low stats. I, for one, would rather play a balanced character... and nothing in my PFS experience tells me that this isn't possible. However, I have had situations where I have felt like a second-class citizen, when everything I do has been outclassed by one player's character or another. Including when my level 5 rogue had to play second-fiddle in disarming traps to a 7th level wizard?!?!?
|
|
I start with my concept, and optimize up or down from there. If it's a tougher/weaker concept, like my upcoming Gnome Monk, I optimize up (racial trait swap, etc.). If it's an easier/stronger concept, like my Wizard/Bloatmage, I optimize down (bump Str/Cha, dump Dex/Wis, pick weaker school to specialize in).
Works well for me.
I also try to make sure each character has at least one thing they do particularly well, even if it's just one skill, or being prepared for darkness, etc.
|
|
You should optimize. You don't need it 90% of the time, but that other 10% can be a real doozey- Especially for your first character when you don't have backups.
This does NOT mean you should hyper-specialize. They're not the same thing and for PFS they're borderline mutually exclusive. As a pathfinder agent you're tossed into an enormous variety of situations with whatever ragtag bunch of adventurers Drendle Drang could wrest from bed at 4 o clock in the morning- optimizing means being able to do what you set out to do and to it well. Whatever your character build is you're setting out to be a pathfinder agent as a member of a team of agents.
Point 1: This Will, and i mean WILL involve combat.
You might, at some point in your career, talk your way through a scenario. Doing it every single time borders on the impossible. Expect to spend about 80% of a game in combat and thats 99% of where its important to be good. You had better be good at something in combat.
Combat is something that everyone contributes directly and proportionately to*. If you have two locksmiths one becomes largely superfluous: you don't pick the locks in half the time, add your rolls together or anything-you're probably just a +2 aid another bonus. Conversely If you have two zweinheinder wielding fighters of death with 20 strengths they carve through the scenario ~ twice as fast as one zweinheinder wielding fighters of death with 20 strength.
It should be pretty high on the priority list.
Point 2: Versatility is its own power.
The party needs to try to cover the bases: getting things dead (directly or indirectly), Staying alive, and overcoming different sorts of obstacles/accomplishing tasks. If the party needs to climb the cliff, convince the monk to help them, and then defeat the yeti then a character who can climb the cliff and defeat the yeti with equal aplomb is better than one who can only defeat the yeti.
You need to strike a balance between being a one trick pony and being so well rounded that you can't do anything well, or that you simply overlap with every member of your party.
Point 3:Some ways of overcoming obstacles are just better than others.
Keeping a scroll or two of spider climb on hand hands down beats skill focus: climb. Take the most efficient option and remember you're in a high magic setting. Not getting a wand of cure light wounds and a few potions is like going hiking without a first aid kit and a knife (and then wrestling a bear when you get to the top)
*That rule is dead. Muahahahah!
BNW, this sounds better than some of your earlier posts. It is one of the reasons why I dislike people using such ill defined terms as optimize. Nearly everyone seems to have a different meaning for the word. Many people including myself read optimize and equate that with highly specialized (but not quite to the extent of a 1 trick pony).
Since you actually said what you meant in detail rather than vague shortcut words tham can have different meanings, it is much more reasonable. This is actually much closer to my thoughts on the subject.
... Expect to spend about 80% of a game in combat ...
While agree with most of what you said in this post, I have a minor quibble with this portion of you post. I don't think it is necessarily 80%.
While I have not played/read a huge number of scenarios, most of them it seems only require 1 or 2 combats. Most of the rest can be talked through, avoided, reasoned with, sneak past, bribed, etc...Not easily mind you. But if you have a real stealthy/face/utility heavy group and really work at it I think you might be able to get it down to 50%-60% range possibly even a bit lower.
Now the way most groups actually play it ends up being 80+%.
|
|
I played 3.5 briefly and then year later moved onto pFS. My local group told me a handful of things that were "essential" to survive. That I do not have any stat lower than 10, I take toughness at first level no matter what, that magic users should focus on damage, start a stat at 20 is the stupidest thing you could do, colorspray and sleep with not worht takign since they level out, but a wand of curelight after the furst adventure(great advice but I refuse to ever buy one for any character).
I made a 5 str, 20 cha gnome with spell focus illusion with colorspray. Every spell he takes focuses on control. I built directly against the advice that was given to me. I would say in my local area he is one of the most powerful builds. I know enough about D&D to know what is powerful and that action economy was more dangerous then hurting the enemy.
This is against all the advice I was given on how to build a powerful character. When I was levling him almost everyone kept telling me that my colorspray would become useless, and that I was dumb for taking that spell and spending feats to make it better. Well I knew the heavens oracle would make it powerful through his PFS career.
I say make something powerfull you enjoy playing. Expect encounters where you are useless and let the other players thrive in those environments. You are a team play as a team.
|
I have seen your gnome around on the other boards. Very impressive character, and nice backstory.
I think that a charcter has to be more than just a bunch of numbers, and that there are benefits to both the min/max approach and to the well-rounded approach. Like the difference between a JOAT(Jack Of All Trades) and a One Trick Pony.
As a matter of fact, I like those terms so much better than the ambiguous, but widely used "min/max" and "optmized", which some people think mean the same thing.
Funny thing is, to a certain extent the approach is class dependent. I am going to stick the "Core Four" for this discussion, because the other classes tend to be derived from these four, either by extension, reflection, or combination.
Fighter - The best Feats require multi-level Feat progressions. Class skill selection and Skill ranks per level are both limited. You have to have a very narrow focus to do awesome things with a fighter, otherwise, you're just another meatshield. So it makes sense to make this guy a One Trick Pony. Focus on a particular weapon or fighting tactic and concentrate your build towards that goal. This requires a min/max build. Dump any stat except CON that you doesn't help you do your "trick". INT or CHA are the ones that are least likely to be needed for your Feat progression, and I would dump either of them below 10, or I wouldn't bump them if the race modifier took them below 10.
Wizard - Another candidate for the One Trick Pony strategy. At low levels you usually only get one really good spell, and as you go up in levels, you tend to use the same types of spells, only stronger. Skill points are average and Skill selection is low, so you have limited ability to become a well-rounded character. You can dump CON (I wouldn't go below 10) to get better DEX or CHA bonuses to help with any Skills you think you DO need. Definitely dump STR. Any situation where you need STR, you should be running away from.
Cleric - Now we find a JOAT. The cleric is supposed to provide buff and beef, as well as save face. In order to fill their purposes, they need to be well-rounded. They especially need to survive in order to keep the rest of the party alive. CON, or a good substitue, like TOUGHNESS or DIEHARD, is almost as important as WIS, and INT or CHA (not both) are needed for the social skills. If you have a Cleric in your party, they should definitely be the "face". Most likely dump is DEX, but this is another ability I wouldn't dump below 10.
Rogue - Definitely a JOAT. The whole Skill rules set was invented for the Rogue in the first place. You need both DEX and INT to get the most out of the Skills. STR and CHA provide character flavor (thug or conman) by which is one is high, but WIS is not essential. I wouldn't dump anything below 10 for this character, and would probably try to make up negative race mod.s to get to a minimum of 10 across the board.
My argument is that One Trick Ponies and JOATS are both appropriate strategies, but for different classes, and any class will go more or less one way or the other. In the end, there can be 50 different appropriate shades of grey between the two extremes of
20 point human min/max 20 11 10 10 10 7
and
20 point human optimized 14 14 14 12 12 11
(without trying to get into all of the variations that could occur if all the different race mod.s were taken into account).
Personally, most of my characters end up somewhere between these extremes, usually because of specific character concept requirements, or desired combat tactics.
A good player knows what their character is capable of doing right now, and what the character expects to be able to do when he "grows up". The character has a "life of its own".
"I'm trying to build the best (fill in the blank) ever", is probably not the best way to go about designing a character, but "I wonder what it would take, inside the rules of the game, to make colorspray an awesome spell" is probably one good way.
Jimbo Juggins himself was created in an attempt to prove that "Sticks and stones will break your bones".
Favored weapons: sling bullets (hand tossed) and quarterstaff.
A lot of his stats were picked because of "character background": Sharp-eyed halfling juggler/magician/escape artist who throws things and twirls sticks with both hands. He was born in the 3.5 era, before Pathfinder or Class Archetypes and Race Variations even existed.
WIS for Perception & Sense Motive, CON for the legendary halfling toughness, and general survivablitiy. Acrobatics, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand for his main Skill set, all related to his circus act "Day Job". Definitely a "well-rounded" character, despite 2 stats at 10, and a primary stat of 18. STR was actually bumped, not dumped up to 10, and the CHA is a 10 with a +2 racial mod. I probably would have bumped CHA instead of WIS, if it wasn't already at 12.
STR 10
DEX 18
CON 14
INT 10
WIS 13
CHA 12
|
|
On my ten characters, 5 have no score below 10, 3 (2 FOR, 1 CHA) one between 8 and 10 and 2 with one score less than 8 (my two sorcerers). Only one has a CON score of 14 all other have between 11 and 13.
None of them died during their life as pathfinder agent even in season 4 !
Nevertheless, all my characters are "optimized" for what I want they must do - Face, combat, control freak...
None of them are better than a specialized character, but all of them can help them in most situations.
|
|
It all comes down to this: The advice forums are full of EXTREME optimization. Concepts like "Casters must have a 20" and "Dump stat to 7" are as common as weeds. That type of optimization leaves you with a big hole somewhere and you may end up regretting that hole in PFS.
Starting Stats are nothing without knowing what your concept is. I have a Aasimar Bard with the post-race stats (14, 15, 15, 12, 9, 15) and he was designed to be optimized for the concept I had. He rocks at what he does.
|
|
Doyle: Druid Level 10: S7 D14 C14 I14 W19 Cha7
He's a faux Rogue so i needed int for the skill points , dex for stealth and disable device, and a high wisdom for spells and the perception score. I don't think he's ever gone unconscious, but there have been times when that 14 con was the only thing keeping him up. Strength is kind of irrelevant when you have saddlebags and charisma was only needed for levels 1-2.
Corvus Cailean: Tengu Inquisitor Level 5: STR: 14 DEX: 17 CON: 12 INT: 7 WIS: 16 CHA: 7
Archery build for Str/Dex. Since, for some odd reason, Calden Cailean doesn't grant the liberation inquisition, i went with the conversion inquisition. It replaces charisma with wisdom for diplomacy bluff and intimidate... which pretty much replaces charisma for everything. It also helps his schtick as the old disheveled drunk that dispenses oddly salient advice.
Shamus Woodgear: Gnome cleric of the lantern king level 3. Dual Channeler heading for undead control. STR: 5 DEX: 12 CON: 16 INT: 10 WIS: 16 CHA: 17
Since he's based around channels he needs Cha, so he has it. The trickery domain gives him some really nice skills that go with it too.
|
|
WIS for Perception & Sense Motive, CON for the legendary halfling toughness, and general survivablitiy. Acrobatics, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand for his main Skill set, all related to his circus act "Day Job". Definitely a "well-rounded" character, despite 2 stats at 10, and a primary stat of 18. STR was actually bumped, not dumped up to 10, and the CHA is a 10 with a +2 racial mod. I probably would have bumped CHA instead of WIS, if it wasn't already at 12.
Now lets optimize your character a bit more. Drop your charisma down to nine for 4 points , put the 4 points into intelligence, put the extra ranks into Diplomacy (and other social skills if you need them) and you have an objectively better character after a few levels.
|
|
Try to show me what charisma does for a typical fighter build. Give me a 20 point buy character.
A character I am currently proposing for a PbP game.
Ingvar the Red
Male Human (Ulfen) Fighter 1
NG Medium Humanoid (human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +0
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 18, touch 12, flat-footed 16 (+5 armor, +1 shield, +2 Dex)
hp 12 (1d10+2)
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +0
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 20 ft.
Melee Light Shield Bash +2 (1d4+3/x2) and
. . Chakram +3 (1d8+3/x2) and
. . Chakram +3 (1d8+3/x2) and
. . Chakram +3 (1d8+3/x2) and
. . Chakram +3 (1d8+3/x2) and
. . Longsword +2 (1d8+3/19-20/x2)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 17, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 11
Base Atk +1; CMB +4; CMD 16
Feats Double Slice, Improved Shield Bash, Two-weapon Fighting
Traits Dangerously Curious, Ease of Faith
Skills Acrobatics -3 (-7 jump), Climb +2, Diplomacy +5, Escape Artist -3, Fly -3, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +6, Ride -3, Stealth -3, Survival +4, Swim +2, Use Magic Device +5
Languages Common, Goblin, Infernal, Skald
Combat Gear Alchemist's fire (2); Other Gear Scale mail, Shield Spikes Light steel shield, Chakram, Chakram, Chakram, Chakram, Longsword, Ioun torch, Grappling hook, Pathfinder's kit, Silk rope, 97 GP
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Ioun torch This item is merely a burned out, dull gray ioun stone with a continual flame spell cast upon it. It retains the ability to float and orbit, and allows the bearer to carry light and still have his hands free.
--------------------
Born in the city if Irresin under the harsh rule of the White Witches, Ingvar grew up learning to both fear and respect the power of magic.
A year ago, on a drunken bet, Ingvar and his older bothers Signumd and Regin waylaid a solitary witch, in an attempt to prove they were not afraid of their oppressors.
The witch retaliated with the very magic that Ingvar so feared, killing both of his brothers before he struck her down from behind.
In a panic, Ingvar stole the magic stone floating above the gravely wounded witches head, fleeing the city before anyone could discover his crime.
After nearly a year of running, Ingvar has arrived in the filthy mining town of Diamond Lake, looking for work as a mercenary or guard.
Given his strength, speed and skill at arms, Ingvar doubts it will take long for employment opportunities to become available.
Investment in charisma skills is modest at first level, but will increase. Advancement plans involve a circlet of persuasion by 5th level and eventually a headband increasing both intelligence and charisma.
An example of a high level fighter using charisma can be found here
Make a character you are interested in playing. First and foremost.
|
|
Artanthos, that appears to be a 25 point build.Sorry: as stated, it is for a character I am currently submitting for a game. It was built to that games specifications.
The link I just added for a high level character is a 20pt build.
Here's the difference for when you're playing PFS
Your fighter has both a high int and a non dumped cha. Thats harder to do on 20 points.
There's no guarantee that that fighter would be the party face. A bard, channeling cleric, PFS Sorcerer with half a brain (ie, one that took a trait to get diplomacy as a class skill), or Paladin could be seated at the same table and render the +5, that you've given up a lot for, largely meaningless.