A couple of hours ago, John Compton clarified here that since the DR feat no longer stacks with invulnerable rager DR, rebuilds of those feats/abilities would be allowed. In fact, the entire invulnerable rager archetype can be removed at no cost.
I would like to keep my invulnerable rager, but I did take the extra DR feat 3x. I'm really interested in learning if there is way to shore up my weaker DR in other ways. For example, any items that stack? He does have UMD -- any wands or such things that might boost DR?
Alternatively, instead of soaking damage, I guess I could try to play the Armor Class game. My guy is level 10 with an AC of 23 while raging, which is low enough that at such levels I'm almost always hit. I suppose if I could get AC up to 32+ enemies might start missing me sometimes. Is that worthwhile?
Due to this rule change, I'll likely take roughly 30 more points of damage during a typical fight -- the equivalent of a couple more hits. Since most fights end with my character barely standing, this change means I will go unconscious at the end of fights a little more frequently. I do have Raging Vitality so that I won't rage-die when I go unconscious. So maybe another angle is automatic healing or some other protection angle?
With 3 feats and about 24000 GP for gear, how could you rebuild him to survive even just a little better?
20% miss chance is a start! However, I have a Cloak of Resistance (who doesn't?) and in PFS it's not legal to combine items. (Or at least I think so -- there are general Pathfinder rules for combining cloaks like that, but I recall a PFS ruling or something that said PFS refuses to use those rules.)
Do you know of a way to get that otherwise? Or anyone else with other good ideas?
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
DR nerf isn't so huge IMO, especially at higher levels. My recommendation would be to pick up Toughness / Tribal Scars / Stalwart to compensate the loss, and if you have all those already you basically just got three bonus feats! Barbarians are still good, even if they're taking 3 more damage a hit.
As far as AC goes, I tend to abandon AC with barbarians after about level 7. At level 10 you should be able to pick a ring of blinking to help mitigate some hits if you're concerned about it, or grab some heavy fortification armor to cut down on crits. Both will keep you alive longer.
|
Take a look at which types of bonuses you are receiving to AC and try and get more of the other bonuses if it would be a meaningful amount.
Buy a belt that has con on it. A belt of physical perfection +4 with str and con could be reasonable.
Looking for ways to just kill whatever you are dealing with is also an option. You are less likely to get hurt if your enemies are dead.
Buy a belt that has con on it. A belt of physical perfection +4 with str and con could be reasonable.
Hmm. Normally I'd laugh and say "too expensive." However, I have the +2 version of the belt already, so I only need to pay 30000 for the upgrade to +4. And I previously purchased Mask of the Mantis, which I think isn't allowed in PFS and must be refunded.
If I do that, I have exactly 30000 in cash, and it costs 30000 to do it, so maybe that's the best option.
ring of blinking
I don't like that Blink imposes a 20% miss chance for ME as well. However, I do like the "miss chance" concept in general (when I can impose it on the bad guys), and since I can't wear the cloak or use the ring, it seems like maybe a wand of Blur is the best option. It's only 4500 GP, it lasts 3 minutes, I can UMD it, and it has no downsides that I can see. Decent option.
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
20% miss chance is a start! However, I have a Cloak of Resistance (who doesn't?) and in PFS it's not legal to combine items. (Or at least I think so -- there are general Pathfinder rules for combining cloaks like that, but I recall a PFS ruling or something that said PFS refuses to use those rules.)
Do you know of a way to get that otherwise? Or anyone else with other good ideas?
Does your character have Darkvision?
Does your character have Darkvision?
Yeah.
|
|
There's no way it's pvp. At best its being a jerk but even then I'm skeptical.
Bloodrager with new darkness inducing powers (to make up for the loss of DR)
"Okay, dropping Darkness on myself"
Party that *doesn't* have means of defeating that to *be able to SEE* in the middle of a fight.
"WT... NO, Don't do that! We can't see if you do!"
Bloodrager "But I have to, or they'll hit me!"
Not only is it 'being a jerk', but it could lead to fatalities. And also begs the question -- if a player drops one form of darkness, and a different player drops Greater Daylight to negate it so they *can see*, is THAT also being a jerk/pvp?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no way it's pvp. At best its being a jerk but even then I'm skeptical.
Had a guy, every. Single. F$**ing. Fight.
deeper darkness.
We challenge a group to a fight? deeper darkness.
We get jumped? deeper darkness.
Try to snipe someone? deeper darkness.
Try to sneak past the SLEEPING monster? deeper darkness.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Have you thought about getting concealment through dropping light levels?Does your character have Darkvision?Yeah.That's not a viable option at random PFS tables.
Not everyone has means to see at lower light levels and it could be considered 'PvP'...
Its not really the most difficult of things to counter for what a Barbarian is going to get a hold of (ie. Light/Torch counters Light). Unless you get Shield of Darkness as a third level wand at which point its one square.
EDIT:Note I haven't looked at the light mechanics closely enough so I could be completely wrong.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no way it's pvp. At best its being a jerk but even then I'm skeptical.Had a guy, every. Single. F&@@ing. Fight.
deeper darkness.
We challenge a group to a fight? deeper darkness.
We get jumped? deeper darkness.
Try to snipe someone? deeper darkness.
Try to sneak past the SLEEPING monster? deeper darkness.
20 minute encounters turned into 2 hour long slogs.
EDIT: That was supposed to be an edit, not a reply grrrrrrrr.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no way it's pvp. At best its being a jerk but even then I'm skeptical.
You cast a spell that
-halves my movement
-Costs me my dex bonus to ac (rendering me vulnerable to sneak attacks)
-rendered me incapable of taking aoos
-keeps me from targeting my foes
There's no way thats NOT pvp.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
There's no way it's pvp. At best its being a jerk but even then I'm skeptical.You cast a spell that
-halves my movement
-Costs me my dex bonus to ac (rendering me vulnerable to sneak attacks)
-rendered me incapable of taking aoos
-keeps me from targeting my foesThere's no way thats NOT pvp.
The problem is that most go to spells kind of have similar problems and to single out Darkness as being particularly problematic is a bit odd.
|
|
I disagree. It hasn't done anything to violate the rule as it currently stands. At most it is inconvenient. You aren't being harmed by the caster of the spell.
This is even more so true if you are outside the range of the spell when it is cast and the player with the darkness source never moves any closer to you.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you already bought immunity to fatigue somehow, how about Bolstered Resilience?
Double your DR for the first hit every turn.
Alternately, cheesy as heck:
Eldrich heritage into tumor familiar with the protector archtype.
Effectively +50% hp with fast healing 5.
|
|
I disagree. It hasn't done anything to violate the rule as it currently stands. At most it is inconvenient. You aren't being harmed by the caster of the spell.
This is even more so true if you are outside the range of the spell when it is cast and the player with the darkness source never moves any closer to you.
Deeper Darkness has a 60' radius, it is almost certainly affecting everyone.
I don't consider it to be PvP, I do think it is often going to be acting like a jerk. Unless the rest of your party are set up to be able to take advantage you are essentially saying that your ability to play the game should trump everyone else's ability to do stuff.
That's just a bit s*@!.
If the character was built for darkness combats and wanted to use it in at least 1 fight during the scenario I would expect other people to okay it. I think it be selfish to not do so. Especially if the party was prepared for it.
|
|
If the character was built for darkness combats and wanted to use it in at least 1 fight during the scenario I would expect other people to okay it. I think it be selfish to not do so. Especially if the party was prepared for it.
Most tables I've sat down at for PFS play have *not* been prepared for it.
I can count on two fingers where the party WAS prepared for it.
|
|
"I want to use darkness sometime this scenario. My character is specialized in using it."
Follow this up with, "Hey I haven't gotten to do my thing yet. Is it ok if I do it next combat?"
I would expect the answer to be yes at this point. If it isn't I wouldn't be thinking the darkness user is the jerk here.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I want to use darkness sometime this scenario. My character is specialized in using it."
Follow this up with, "Hey I haven't gotten to do my thing yet. Is it ok if I do it next combat?"
I would expect the answer to be yes at this point. If it isn't I would be thinking the darkness user is the jerk here.
Or:
"No. Absolutely not. We don't have the resources or the time to deal with that, unfortunately. Thank you for the kind offer but it's not going to work with this group."
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
If the character was built for darkness combats and wanted to use it in at least 1 fight during the scenario I would expect other people to okay it. I think it be selfish to not do so. Especially if the party was prepared for it.I disagree. It hasn't done anything to violate the rule as it currently stands. At most it is inconvenient. You aren't being harmed by the caster of the spell.
This is even more so true if you are outside the range of the spell when it is cast and the player with the darkness source never moves any closer to you.
Deeper Darkness has a 60' radius, it is almost certainly affecting everyone.
I don't consider it to be PvP, I do think it is often going to be acting like a jerk. Unless the rest of your party are set up to be able to take advantage you are essentially saying that your ability to play the game should trump everyone else's ability to do stuff.
That's just a bit s*@!.
Honestly if you were built for darkness correctly no one should have any problems because you shouldn't be casting Darkness to gain concealment. Admittedly, the material is relatively new but still its now easy to not be an ass when it comes to utilizing darkness.
Edit:I kind of find the knee jerk reactions obnoxious for that very reason especially when Darkness the spell was never uttered.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah that's the kind of answer where I think everyone else is the jerks at that point.
Everyone else at the table is 'jerks' because they:
Want to be able to see?
Want to not lose their Dex bonus to AC?
Want to move at normal speed?
Want to not get sneak-attacked?
Edit: This is a knee-jerk reaction?
|
|
If you can't be accommodating enough to let someone enjoy their character for 1 part of a scenario yes I do. It is even more true if you have the option of staying outside the area.
Darkness spells are very powerful. A character who can take advantage of it when enemies can not do so is especially scary. If the player who can fight in darkness runs into the room with it on and other players are standing back it isn't long before the enemies start stumbling their way out into a bunch of readied actions. It can be a brutally effective tactic.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah that's the kind of answer where I think everyone else is the jerks at that point.Everyone else at the table is 'jerks' because they:
Want to be able to see?
Want to not lose their Dex bonus to AC?
Want to move at normal speed?
Want to not get sneak-attacked?Edit: This is a knee-jerk reaction?
Want the fights to not last 2 hours?
Want the session to not run into overtime because you have more than one fight?|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you can't be accommodating enough to let someone enjoy their character for 1 part of a scenario yes I do. It is even more true if you have the option of staying outside the area.
Darkness spells are very powerful. A character who can take advantage of it when enemies can not do so is especially scary. If the player who can fight in darkness runs into the room with it on and other players are standing back it isn't long before the enemies start stumbling their way out into a bunch of readied actions. It can be a brutally effective tactic.
And this is where the line blurs between what's allowed and what isn't.
"I'm an Evoker/Crossblooded Sorceror focused on Fireball. Oh, wait, no one's immune to fire? No one has Evasion? I don't even have Resit Energy in my spellbook...and none of us have the money to buy any scrolls? Well, not fair! You won't let me enjoy my character for one part of a scenario!"
And a Fireball can be (arguably) less trouble than Darkness/Deeper Darkness.
I wouldn't have a single problem with someone objecting to having a Darkness spell cast, and would enforce the no PVP rule at any table I GM'ed with Darkness.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah that's the kind of answer where I think everyone else is the jerks at that point.Everyone else at the table is 'jerks' because they:
Want to be able to see?
Want to not lose their Dex bonus to AC?
Want to move at normal speed?
Want to not get sneak-attacked?Edit: This is a knee-jerk reaction?
Want the fights to not last 2 hours?
Want the session to not run into overtime because you have more than one fight?
I have a deeper darkness guy, and I reserve using it.
The effectively blind players might not have fun spending the game in such a state.
This is one of the things you drop when things get real.
It is a jerk move dropping it every fight without a whim for how the other players feel.
I always ask how the other players feel about me dropping it before I do.
|
|
If you can't be accommodating enough to let someone enjoy their character for 1 part of a scenario yes I do. It is even more true if you have the option of staying outside the area.
Darkness spells are very powerful. A character who can take advantage of it when enemies can not do so is especially scary. If the player who can fight in darkness runs into the room with it on and other players are standing back it isn't long before the enemies start stumbling their way out into a bunch of readied actions. It can be a brutally effective tactic.
And this is where the line blurs between what's allowed and what isn't.
"I'm an Evoker/Crossblooded Sorceror focused on Fireball. Oh, wait, no one's immune to fire? No one has Evasion? I don't even have Resit Energy in my spellbook...and none of us have the money to buy any scrolls? Well, not fair! You won't let me enjoy my character for one part of a scenario!"
And a Fireball can be (arguably) less trouble than Darkness/Deeper Darkness.
I wouldn't have a single problem with someone objecting to having a Darkness spell cast, and would enforce the no PVP rule at any table I GM'ed with Darkness.
Could you please explain what part of casting deeper darkness meets this criteria?
No Player-versus-Player Combat
The goal of Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to provide
an enjoyable experience for as many players as possible.
Player-versus-player conflict only sours a session. While
killing another character might seem like fun to you, it
certainly won’t be for the other character’s player. Even if
you feel that killing another PC is in character for your PC
at this particular moment, just figure out some other way
for your character to express herself. In short, you can never
voluntarily use your character to kill another character—
without their consent. Note that this does not apply to
situations where your character is mind-controlled by an
NPC and is forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder.
Notice it says I can't voluntarily use my character to kill another. I am in no way killing you by casting darkness or deeper darkness. Can i not use gaze of flames or water sight to see through a cast obscuring mist? This type character is built into the rules and are pathfinder legal. I think this sets the precedent that this is not PVP.
Now if you want to argue it on the basis of the don't be a jerk rule that's another thing entirely.
|
|
Could you please explain what part of casting deeper darkness meets this criteria?
No Player-versus-Player Combat
The goal of Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to provide
an enjoyable experience for as many players as possible.
Player-versus-player conflict only sours a session. While
killing another character might seem like fun to you, it
certainly won’t be for the other character’s player. Even if
you feel that killing another PC is in character for your PC
at this particular moment, just figure out some other way
for your character to express herself. In short, you can never
voluntarily use your character to kill another character—
without their consent. Note that this does not apply to
situations where your character is mind-controlled by an
NPC and is forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder.Notice it says I can't voluntarily use my character to kill another. I am in no way killing you by casting darkness or deeper darkness. Can i not use gaze of flames or water sight to see through a cast obscuring mist? This type character is built into the rules and are pathfinder legal. I think this sets the precedent that this is not PVP.
Now if you want to argue it on the basis of the don't be a jerk rule that's another thing entirely.
If someone dies because darkness is put into play by a player, that's passive-aggressive PvP.
"Just because *I* didn't kill you means it's not PvP" isn't a reasonable excuse if the action taken caused someone to say, get shanked in the shadows by a rogue they couldn't see SOLELY because of said lighting conditions.
Please note, if all the other players at the table are 'cool' with this, that's perfectly legit. That's the party agreeing that it's a valid tactic, and to use it.
Or even as noted up-thread the 'Things JUST GOT REAL' situation.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could you please explain what part of casting deeper darkness meets this criteria?
No Player-versus-Player Combat
The goal of Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to provide
an enjoyable experience for as many players as possible.
Player-versus-player conflict only sours a session. While
killing another character might seem like fun to you, it
certainly won’t be for the other character’s player. Even if
you feel that killing another PC is in character for your PC
at this particular moment, just figure out some other way
for your character to express herself. In short, you can never
voluntarily use your character to kill another character—
without their consent. Note that this does not apply to
situations where your character is mind-controlled by an
NPC and is forced by that NPC to attack a fellow Pathfinder.Notice it says I can't voluntarily use my character to kill another. I am in no way killing you by casting darkness or deeper darkness. Can i not use gaze of flames or water sight to see through a cast obscuring mist? This type character is built into the rules and are pathfinder legal. I think this sets the precedent that this is not PVP.
Now if you want to argue it on the basis of the don't be a jerk rule that's another thing entirely.
If someone dies because darkness is put into play by a player, that's passive-aggressive PvP.
"Just because *I* didn't kill you means it's not PvP" isn't a reasonable excuse if the action taken caused someone to say, get shanked in the shadows by a rogue they couldn't see SOLELY because of said lighting conditions.
Please note, if all the other players at the table are 'cool' with this, that's perfectly legit. That's the party agreeing that it's a valid tactic, and to use it.
Or even as noted up-thread the 'Things JUST GOT REAL' situation.
So if I cast a black tentacles and you charge into it, get grappled and die, I PVP'd you?
If I cast darkness and you don't get out of it because of it's nonlethal harmful effects it has on you it's pvp?
What about an enlarge person that has a negative impact on you AC, and you die, did I PVP you even if you agree?
What if I cast ice storm over there and since it takes you longer to get into melee and their archers pincushion you and you die, did I PVP you?
If I cast mirror image and the GM makes the archers attack you instead and you die, did I PVP you?
What if I go Invisible thereby forcing them to attack the ones they can see, and they kill you, is that PVP?
If there is any effect of a spell I cast that MIGHT put you at a disadvantage and you are subsequently hurt, did I PVP you?
That's a very slippery slope you are sliding down.
|
|
So if I cast a black tentacles and you charge into it, get grappled and die, I PVP'd you?
If you cast it before the player charged, then my action to charge into it is not PvP. That's a player taking a chance.
If I cast darkness and you don't get out of it because of it's nonlethal harmful effects it has on you it's pvp?
If it ends up in character death because a player couldn't get out of it, then yes.
What about an enlarge person that has a negative impact on you AC, and you die, did I PVP you even if you agree?
No, because the player agreed to have the effect put on them.
What if I cast ice storm over there and since it takes you longer to get into melee and their archers pincushion you and you die, did I PVP you?
Potentially, yes.
If I cast mirror image and the GM makes the archers attack you instead and you die, did I PVP you?
No. That's the GM using meta-knowledge. See 'Don't be a Jerk'
What if I go Invisible thereby forcing them to attack the ones they can see, and they kill you, is that PVP?
No.
If there is any effect of a spell I cast that MIGHT put you at a disadvantage and you are subsequently hurt, did I PVP you?
If you didn't communicate this to at least the player that it was a possibility, then possibly.
That's a very slippery slope you are sliding down.
Actually, no, it's pretty straightforward.
Folks who have AoE style effects at *every single table* I've played at in PFS have gotten party consent before using them, and when it looked like it might possibly impact a player they have *asked* before dropping the AoE.
If the impacted parties agree, then it's not PvP, by definition.
EDIT: It's also very important to note that in most tables I've been at with AoE in play, the people casting them out there have been *exceptionally careful* in placement, even with permission granted by fellow players.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
EDIT: It's also very important to note that in most tables I've been at with AoE in play, the people casting them out there have...
So if I cast a black tentacles and you charge into it, get grappled and die, I PVP'd you?
If you cast it before the player charged, then my action to charge into it is not PvP. That's a player taking a chance.
If I cast darkness and you don't get out of it because of it's nonlethal harmful effects it has on you it's pvp?If it ends up in character death because a player couldn't get out of it, then yes.
What about an enlarge person that has a negative impact on you AC, and you die, did I PVP you even if you agree?No, because the player agreed to have the effect put on them.
What if I cast ice storm over there and since it takes you longer to get into melee and their archers pincushion you and you die, did I PVP you?Potentially, yes.
If I cast mirror image and the GM makes the archers attack you instead and you die, did I PVP you?No. That's the GM using meta-knowledge. See 'Don't be a Jerk'
What if I go Invisible thereby forcing them to attack the ones they can see, and they kill you, is that PVP?No.
If there is any effect of a spell I cast that MIGHT put you at a disadvantage and you are subsequently hurt, did I PVP you?If you didn't communicate this to at least the player that it was a possibility, then possibly.
That's a very slippery slope you are sliding down.Actually, no, it's pretty straightforward.
Folks who have AoE style effects at *every single table* I've played at in PFS have gotten party consent before using them, and when it looked like it might possibly impact a player they have *asked* before dropping the AoE.
If the impacted parties agree, then it's not PvP, by definition.
With apologies to Mr. Asimov:
First Law of Pathfinders
A pathfinder may not injure another pathfinder or, through inaction, allow a pathfinder to come to harm.
Second Law of Pathfinders
A pathfinder must obey orders given it by venture captains except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
Third Law of Pathfinders
A pathfinder must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First Law or the Second Law
Is this more to your standards?
|
|
Well since we weren't there when it was formed, we shall never really know now will we?Situations like these is why the Shadow Lodge was formed in the first place.And have you ever been to Goalrion yourself?
How's the weather during the summer?
No never been to Goalrion.
Then again I've never been to Golarian either....