That I enjoy playing a crazy Russian.
The last one I actually played:
"Nothing ruins boss fights like a well-placed combat-control spell and letting the raging barbarian and enlarged cleric go to town." (And, after winning said boss fight, I can now tack on haste to the equation.)
The one I've spent the last week building:
"Taskshaper is the Blue Mage I've always wanted."
That I finally understand that ability score damage works like negative levels or nonlethal damage, counting up and adding bad things, not subtracting from and taking away good things.
That masks are cool.
Having a back-up character printed out and ready to go, backstory and all, can save alot of irritation if things go south.
-S
A good whip and some space is a bard's best friend — buff and disarm away and the melee types have a field day!
awww i thought it was gonna be like moral lessons like don't judge a book by its cover haha. But anyway.
Stats wise:
A longspear, a high dex, and combat reflexes, means monsters can't get close to you, and you're GM will be thoroughly trolled. Tack on quick draw for when they finally do get through and you're covered.
Moral wise:
Keeping a calm head and thinking before you act can protect you and your friends just as much as a good set of armor.
awww i thought it was gonna be like moral lessons like don't judge a book by its cover haha.
Hmm, do painful lessons count?
Rogue: I'm going to charge the chick with the longspear.
Bard: Are you nuts? She'll run you thru! Hold off a sec until I disarm her.
GM: Do you want to delay then, Rogue?
Rogue: Nope, I charge with my blades.
GM: Alright she takes her AoO on you <rolls> aaand that's a nat 20 <rolls> aaand that's a ×3 crit <adds up damage>.
Rogue: Yeeaah, can somebody save me, I'm at... -9.
Bard: I'm going to disarm SpearChick™ now. Cleric, can you get Rogue please?
Moral: You can warn a rogue about reach, but you can't make them think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Silly rogue, not using Acrobatics to tumble around AoOs.
Sometimes a LG character must become the over deity of the universe.
that it is good to build a 'things to overcome list'
DR/Slashing, Bludgeoning, Piercing
Climbing/Swimming
Breathing Underwater
DR/Magic
Darkness
Deeper Darkness
Concealment
Invisibility
DR/-
Cold Iron
Adamantine
Silver
Incorporeal
Domination/Compulsion effects
Confusion
Flying enemies
All the on-target arrows in the world don't mean a thing if you only have a +2 Will save.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All the on-target arrows in the world don't mean a thing if you only have a +2 Will save.
Oh, it still means something. Just a very bad thing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can only manipulate NPCs as deep as the GM's campaign prep.
All the on-target arrows in the world don't mean a thing if you only have a +2 Will save.Oh, it still means something. Just a very bad thing.
My party learned this about a chapter ago, after a suggestioned Rogue nearly obliterated the party between sniped attacks and inability to be seen by anyone else while sneaking.
that there is sharp change in the game difficulty around level 6-7
that you should not overthink plot items in PFS
Pcs are unreasonable.
That wizards arent for.me
|
Having a dedicated healer (ie with Channel positive) is an absolute necessity at low levels, if only to avoid the 15-minutes adventuring day trap.
Wands of CLW being NOT available is a huge change to the usual gaming paradigm.
Healing kits are great at low levels for out-of-combat recovery, even though they do take hours to use.
Healing kits are expensive at low levels and should be paid for by the whole party rather than only the healer.
Being extra-cautious is always better than being dead.
Metagaming (in small and believable quantities) is always better than being dead too.
I am able to artfully mesh my GM's diktats to add depth and meaning to my character's story and personality. In other words, everything can be an opportunity for wonderful roleplay.
PCs will always look the other way when another PC's unwholesome practices save the party.
There's not much that's as fun as turning into a dragon and wreaking havoc on an enemy army.
That a good plan and teamwork can help a party of four level 3s take on a CR 7 fight without taking any damage.
Having a dedicated healer (ie with Channel positive) is an absolute necessity at low levels, if only to avoid the 15-minutes adventuring day trap.
Wands of CLW being NOT available is a huge change to the usual gaming paradigm.
Healing kits are great at low levels for out-of-combat recovery, even though they do take hours to use.
Healing kits are expensive at low levels and should be paid for by the whole party rather than only the healer.
Being extra-cautious is always better than being dead.
Metagaming (in small and believable quantities) is always better than being dead too.
I am able to artfully mesh my GM's diktats to add depth and meaning to my character's story and personality. In other words, everything can be an opportunity for wonderful roleplay.
PCs will always look the other way when another PC's unwholesome practices save the party.
No. The healer requirement is a myth. A party of barbs has great offence and hp, doesn't need a healer to win and rage, rarrrgh.
The rogue party sneaking all over and coordinating sneak attacks does not need a healer, a healer that could also interfere with the sneaking.
Fighters covering spellcasters, don't need a cleric by default, druids and summoners relying on summons don't require them, neither do pallies and fighters.
Healer clerics are iconic, and considered a part of the old standard party, but they are not necessary.
Having a dedicated healer (ie with Channel positive) is an absolute necessity at low levels, if only to avoid the 15-minutes adventuring day trap.
Wands of CLW being NOT available is a huge change to the usual gaming paradigm.
Healing kits are great at low levels for out-of-combat recovery, even though they do take hours to use.
Healing kits are expensive at low levels and should be paid for by the whole party rather than only the healer.
Being extra-cautious is always better than being dead.
Metagaming (in small and believable quantities) is always better than being dead too.
I am able to artfully mesh my GM's diktats to add depth and meaning to my character's story and personality. In other words, everything can be an opportunity for wonderful roleplay.
PCs will always look the other way when another PC's unwholesome practices save the party.
No. The healer requirement is a myth. A party of barbs has great offence and hp, doesn't need a healer to win and rage, rarrrgh.
The rogue party sneaking all over and coordinating sneak attacks does not need a healer, a healer that could also interfere with the sneaking.
Fighters covering spellcasters, don't need a cleric by default, druids and summoners relying on summons don't require them, neither do pallies and fighters.
Healer clerics are iconic, and considered a part of the old standard party, but they are not necessary.
When theorycraft hits the rubber of the gaming table, healers are far more useful than not.
-S
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. The healer requirement is a myth. A party of barbs has great offence and hp, doesn't need a healer to win and rage, rarrrgh.
The rogue party sneaking all over and coordinating sneak attacks does not need a healer, a healer that could also interfere with the sneaking.
Fighters covering spellcasters, don't need a cleric by default, druids and summoners relying on summons don't require them, neither do pallies and fighters.
Healer clerics are iconic, and considered a part of the old standard party, but they are not necessary.
Wow. Sorry for sharing what my recent experience showed me, even if it did not fit with the current RPG Political Correctness.
We had a party with 2 combat rogues, 1 fighter, 1 blasting sorcerer and my negative channeling cleric. Suboptimal maybe, but we made our characters based on what we wanted to play, not to fit some theoretical cadre of what a proper party should be like.
We suffered A LOT from the lack of easily available healing through our 1st-level. I took a 1-level dip in Black-blooded Oracle of Bones far earlier than I thought just to access far more healing resources
- for me through my negative channeling and spontaneous inflict spells thanks to the Black Blooded curse
- for my buddies through spontaneous cure spells
I have not regretted this dip yet.
Having a dedicated healer (ie with Channel positive) is an absolute necessity at low levels, if only to avoid the 15-minutes adventuring day trap.
Wands of CLW being NOT available is a huge change to the usual gaming paradigm.
Healing kits are great at low levels for out-of-combat recovery, even though they do take hours to use.
Healing kits are expensive at low levels and should be paid for by the whole party rather than only the healer.
Being extra-cautious is always better than being dead.
Metagaming (in small and believable quantities) is always better than being dead too.
I am able to artfully mesh my GM's diktats to add depth and meaning to my character's story and personality. In other words, everything can be an opportunity for wonderful roleplay.
PCs will always look the other way when another PC's unwholesome practices save the party.
No. The healer requirement is a myth. A party of barbs has great offence and hp, doesn't need a healer to win and rage, rarrrgh.
The rogue party sneaking all over and coordinating sneak attacks does not need a healer, a healer that could also interfere with the sneaking.
Fighters covering spellcasters, don't need a cleric by default, druids and summoners relying on summons don't require them, neither do pallies and fighters.
Healer clerics are iconic, and considered a part of the old standard party, but they are not necessary.
When theorycraft hits the rubber of the gaming table, healers are far more useful than not.
-S
They are absolutely positively useful, but not necessary. That is the difference. The groups I have been in for years, almost no one ever plays cleric, and yet the games run, the players fight and typically win. They could do with more healing sure, but archetypes like the crazy ranger archer can often keep damage down a bit with that good old arrow spam.
No. The healer requirement is a myth. A party of barbs has great offence and hp, doesn't need a healer to win and rage, rarrrgh.
The rogue party sneaking all over and coordinating sneak attacks does not need a healer, a healer that could also interfere with the sneaking.
Fighters covering spellcasters, don't need a cleric by default, druids and summoners relying on summons don't require them, neither do pallies and fighters.
Healer clerics are iconic, and considered a part of the old standard party, but they are not necessary.
Wow. Sorry for sharing what my recent experience showed me, even if it did not fit with the current RPG Political Correctness.
We had a party with 2 combat rogues, 1 fighter, 1 blasting sorcerer and my negative channeling cleric. Suboptimal maybe, but we made our characters based on what we wanted to play, not to fit some theoretical cadre of what a proper party should be like.
We suffered A LOT from the lack of easily available healing through our 1st-level. I took a 1-level dip in Black-blooded Oracle of Bones far earlier than I thought just to access far more healing resources
- for me through my negative channeling and spontaneous inflict spells thanks to the Black Blooded curse
- for my buddies through spontaneous cure spellsI have not regretted this dip yet.
Rogues, fighter, sorcerer and neg cleric, that can be really strong on the attack and you've got a high deviousness potential there.
A good party.
Hey Bill.
We have never had a weak dwarf character at the table, and the npcs have always been pretty good. One of our dms is very pro dwarf.
Which reminds me, I need to make a dwarven horse archer. Movement penalties be gone!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dwarves still suck.
Haven't played one in 20 years. Played one in a D&DNext playtest.
And guess what, he sucked.
And Dwarf Paladins?
Suck hard.
I cannot BOO this loudly enough!
You stab at the dwarf, scoring a hit but only inflicting a bit of damage (given his hp) and drawing a light stream of blood.
The dwarf laughs, and his axe descends. He seems aroused.
Well technically I figured this out as a player....but have only as yet pulled it off as a GM...
The spells Pugwampi's Grace(Inner Sea Magic pg59) combined with Debilitating Portent(Ultimate Combat pg227) will make grown men cry.
Kara Silverthorn, gnome sorcerer, has taught me that impulsiveness is fun.
GM: "Okay, you see a sarcophagus in the middle of the room. There's a lever sticking out of the side, as well as-"
Kara: "I pull the lever."
Party: "NO!"
I'm not insane. Everyone else is!
If a dm introduces new sunder rules, use them frequently with a heavy mace.
There are in fact feats that I enjoy... I can count them on one hand.. .but they exist.
Also... UMD is awesome.
It is a rare character that I play that isn't well versed in UMD. Even a relatively low-skilled class like fighter or druid will get plenty of UMD love when I play them.