Argument with my GM, looking for build to prove my point


Advice


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys, the other day i got into a friendly discussion with my gm, the premise we play on a 15 pb game, no background traits and with only 4 books, core manual, apg, um and uc, i play an archer inquisitor , injfiltrator and conversion inquisition, i m nota too Much min maxed, i have like :
14 str
18 dex
12 cos
10 int
14 sag
8 carta
Feats: precise shot, point blank, rapid shot and extra bane
Composite Longbow adaptive seeking +1
Back-up Masterwork longsword

My master ranted about 2 of my spells, blistering invective and litany of sloth on how they just let me skip feats tree for Free, ie sword that UC and UM are just full of things like those 2
I said that even with just the core manual and the APG YouTube can do way more powerfull combo and i want to prove my point. Until now the first that gas come to my mind ie the sinthetist that can be a Real powerhouse, more so the vanilla summoner, and other idea?

Ps i written this post on my phone, Will check and do the correction when i Will arrive at home


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Play a Human Invulnerable Rager Barbarian with Superstitious and the FCB for it.


Archer Inquisitors are very powerful. They can throw down some pretty amazing self buffs for damage and have a whole handful of tricks allowing them to handle a melee throw down (either to escape or just beat the thing to death with a sword). It is a very strong build.

The synthesist summoner is a dangerously powerful build. Between the relative confusion of how the summoner/eidolon work together in a large set of scenarios and the simplicity of the build that allows even relatively new players to build a very powerful character. Unfortunately, relatively new players tend to end up playing with relatively new GMs who don't know enough about the rules to either manage the confusion or properly handle a synthesist's power which exacerbates the issues enormously.

However, just because you aren't playing the MOST powerful build possible (and it isn't a summoner, they are just the easiest to understand and build), it doesn't mean the Archer Inquisitor isn't very powerful. There are threads on the board, one just the other week actually, that addresses means by which a GM can handle archers in the game. We can help things go back to being a challenge for everyone, rather than the cakewalk that Inquisitors can make out of certain common-to-new-GM encounters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I couldn't understand some of what you wrote. But:

alexander leah wrote:
... ranted about 2 of my spells, blistering invective and litany of sloth on how they just let me skip feats tree for Free, ...

Is kinda correct. It does. But only for limited number of times for day and inquisitors don't get very many spells. If you are doing that, you are NOT doing all the other wonderful things you could be doing with your spells. And at low levels can probably only do it for 1 or 2 combats.

It is situationally kinda nice, but it really isn't that super powerful. The barbarian Scavion mentioned will very consistently kill a lot more.

Silver Crusade

It sounds like he mainly has a problem with those two spells you cited. Well, just swap them out for different spells. They really aren't the best spells on the inquisitor list anway. As an inquisitor, your spell llist should really be focusing on self buffs that allow you to put your judgement and bane class abilities to the best use.


alexander leah wrote:
My master ranted about 2 of my spells, blistering invective and litany of sloth on how they just let me skip feats tree for Free

You're an archer, and those are close range spells. When I'm archering I'm usually further away than 30' (probably between 40' and 60'), but we play a lot of outdoor campaigns.

My monk/inquisitor gestalt guy was built to be a melee skirmisher, however, and loves those spells.

What ranges do you normally work with?

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I am having a hard time understanding your post.


Agreed that post was a little too rough to read. There are more powerful spells I've seen gm's shake their heads to. Litany is nice but it is only for a round and you are burning a spell for the benefit. Blistering is nice, but again not breaking too much. Most people I run into shake their head when I cast Divine favor (with fate's favored)For +3 hit and damage at level 4. Still since you can't use traits +2 is nice, for a full minute I wont complain. Wrath would probably be better for you but you get the idea, for a "core" inquisitor that is pretty powerful and it takes the place of weapon focus and weapon specialization (for a minute) Spells do that, a leap of greatness for a short period of time.


So... Not sure I understand but I think you want a broken character.

A) How to make a more powerful character which is way more broken than the inquisitor.
Steps: 1) select human, 2) Select A level of wizard, 3) Repeat step 2
Bonus Steps: Cast Black tentacles, Magic Jar, Haste, Fly, Overland flight, Any high level summon monster spell, Color spray, Simulacrum, Reverse gravity, Literally and level 2 or higher dazing spell, or any other mildly powerful spell 3rd level or higher.

B) If you want more broken combat abilities invulnerable raging, come and get me, superstitious, beast totem, leadership, barbarian lancers go a long way on that front. All core and all broken.


I'm fairly certain English is the OP's second language, give em' a little leeway, you get the general idea.


yeah i may have missed the focal point of what i was trying to say, and yes, english is my second language and i really need to improve it a lot, that said i wasnt looking for actual builds to play, just some general direction, i posted my actual build to give come context.
My master isnt complaing about the damage i do, just that the UM and UC options and feats give me too much flexibility without spending any resources according to him (15 minute adventuring day).
My point of view is that the problem arent the UC and the UM manuals, since you can do silly things even with the 2 base manuals.


I would ask him if he thinks those spells are bad how he feels about the wizard spell list. Spells are awesome. It's what they do and that is why you have a limited amount of them.

That aside, I feel your pain. My DM is a good guy and a good DM all around, but he ends up having issues with the stupidest things. For instance, Versatile Performance, the level 2 core bard ability, is somehow "cheap," with the implication that I'm a bad person for using it.


chaoseffect wrote:

I would ask him if he thinks those spells are bad how he feels about the wizard spell list. Spells are awesome. It's what they do and that is why you have a limited amount of them.

That aside, I feel your pain. My DM is a good guy and a good DM all around, but he ends up having issues with the stupidest things. For instance, Versatile Performance, the level 2 core bard ability, is somehow "cheap," with the implication that I'm a bad person for using it.

I GM home games all the time and society games I have a very short list of things I've felt are OP.

Crafting feats (double wealth)
Leadership (because why)
A few select high level spells which are just unable to be GM'ed (Simulacrum, Magic Jar, and find the path are three that come to mind)
9th level magic

Permanency and flight can also get out of control but can at least be GM'ed.

With experience you can GM more or less anything but a couple of things are just game breaking.


Don't try to prove a point, just don't, it'll never end well.

Talk over the build possibilities that are very much more powerful than your current guy and explain that you didn't play them because of concerns over balance. If your DM wants to limit what you are currently doing, allow him some room to do that. Try to agree on something you're both happy with and move on.


If you want to be broken, you don't even need anything more than the core rule book. Many of the advanced classes are easily overpowered with little effort, by simply going the same class you're reinforcing the idea that, the inquisitor is broken and will most likely get it banned.

Go a wizard, stack intelligence, spell focus and cast colour spray each fight. At level 3 onwards combine this with with Magical Lineage and persistent spell, enemies need to save successfully twice.

Go a bard, weapon focus>dazzling display + skill focus intimidate. Sing Inspire Competence and you should easily be able to keep the all the enemies shaken (-2 all attacks/saves/skills) while simultaneously giving all your allies +1 to all their rolls. If you want to actually use spells to improve your abilities.

Be a Cleric with high cha, use alternate channel: Rulership, take additional channel feat + selective channeling. All your enemies need to save vs your channel or lose their next action, repeat until everyone is dead.

There's so many overpowered combos available in Pathfinder you really don't need to look or go far.


Core druid. No other books required. Break the game.


Do you hate your GM? Does he hate you? Do you really need to prove a point? Does it really need to come to that over two spells?


yes, me and my gm may have started a childish argument, infact today we laughed at that together, still thanks everyone for the answers

Fun note aside: i skipped the last session since i was busy, group got wiped out by a single evil negative channeling cleric :P

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Argument with my GM, looking for build to prove my point All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice