pH unbalanced |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm tired of all the builds that have a positive con mod ;)
Oh no wait, it's really that I'm tired of all the builds that don't have a 5 in a stat. People just aren't dumping hard enough ;)
Seriously though, I'm not a fan of all these "non-combat" builds I see.
I'm a rogue, I don't need to do combat, I do skills.
I'm a bard, I inspire courage and skills, I don't need to do combat.
I'm a cleric, I heal, I don't need to do combat.Because these people all have horrible combat stats, and after a few sessions or level realize that the game is a lot of combat and they feel useless during combats and then ask for help in increasing their combat and are stuck because they don't have the stats for combat.
One of my early RPG revelations was this: the thing that was most likely to cause your character to die was being in combat. And the thing that makes your character most likely to be in combat...was being good at combat. No matter how good you are, eventually the dice will turn against you.
But the next most likely thing to make you die in combat is...being bad at combat. Because eventually you will have to fight.
Therefore I always strive to make my characters "good enough" to hold their own, but not so good that they are expected to be in the front line.
Third Mind |
The "minion master" concept had gotten frustratingly old / stale for me. Mostly because that's all a friend of mine will ever, strike that, has ever played. Whether it be games I run for him and others, or games I've played alongside of him, he only plays that type of character. Which is fine, it is his character after all, and he should play what makes him happy, but part of me wants to see what he could do with other styles of character outside of the now tiring norm.
I can agree on the concept of the "Never afraid of anything ever" character to be tiring too. Makes horror games far less fun when no one reacts to anything in any way.
Athaleon |
7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Almost every blaster caster is the result of dragons boning with orcs, and most paladins (or anyone that relies on self-healing) come from the Fairy Orphanage
This annoys me because it's a result of generic mechanics granted by specific fluff. It's why I always allow refluffing of simple mechanics like feats and traits, and why I get annoyed at DMs who don't.
Some other examples are:
- Almost every defensive-minded fighter is either a Halfling or a Human with a Halfling in his family tree (Cautious Fighter feat)
- Many people with quick reflexes developed them as a result of being bullied as children and learning to react quickly but not fighting back directly, or whatever (Reactionary trait)
- Only Gnome monks (or Human monks descended from at least one Gnome) may pose the sort of philosophical questions so baffling that it makes their enemies stop in the middle of combat to ponder (Bewildering Koan feat)
Atarlost |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of my early RPG revelations was this: the thing that was most likely to cause your character to die was being in combat. And the thing that makes your character most likely to be in combat...was being good at combat. No matter how good you are, eventually the dice will turn against you.
Like many early revelations this is in fact wrong. If you aren't a hiding in the back being useless you will be in combat every time there's a combat. If you don't carry your weight you're dragging the group down. Dragging your group down causes TPKs. If you're carrying more than your weight in combat you're in every combat, but so are the characters carrying just their own weight and any that aren't carrying their weight who are at least trying.
If combat can be avoided it's by being good at stealth or having a good face, neither of which is at odds with being good at combat.
The better a group is at combat the fewer rounds they spend in each combat and the fewer chances they have to get unlucky. A group good at combat is almost always composed of individual characters who are good at combat, though there are some interlocking builds where some or all members completely fall apart if separated.
Claxon |
Claxon wrote:Shocking Grasp Dex to Damage MagusIf there were any other spells on the magus list that were as good as Shocking Grasp for a first-level slot, you'd see more variation, but there's a grand total of three melee touch attacks on the magus spell list at first level. Chill Touch, Frostbite, and Shocking Grasp.
The frostbite STR magus is just as good in most cases, people just get ants in their pants about dex to damage for no good reason.
Quote:Superstitious Beast Totem BarbarianIf they wanted to make Beast Totem less mandatory they should probably have made even the slightest bit of effort towards making it more workable to move around while fighting. Can't blame a guy for taking one of the only existing cures from "stand still or suck syndrome."
As for superstition, it's the prerequisite for so many rage powers, not all of them part of the Uberbarbarian, that a lot of people are going to take it anyway.
Quote:Mounted Lance Builds (regardless of size)Yeah, how dare that guy that's playing a knight use the knight's iconic weapon. You don't see rangers going around with longbows!
As was said earlier, for a lot of people it's their first time using something. The fact some billion people neither you nor they have met or ever will meet have used a similar build should not make it a faux pas to use something effective.
Like Jiggy, I am more tired by concepts, including things such as:
-The utter mercenary that needs to be bludgeoned over the head with sacks of gold to remain involved in the story and will usually have to be bribed to go anywhere near the plot hooks.
-The "seen it all" wizard whose vast education apparently means nothing ever frightens, impresses, or interests him.
-The loner that has no interest in or respect for the rest of the party, but for contrived reasons is forced to stay near them so the player is still able to y'know, play the game. Ostensibly this is often meant for character development, but in...
While I understand your points, and agree with you from a mechanics basis it makes me no less tired of seeing them. Yes, there are a few specific options for a magus or barbarian that make them exceptionally effective compared to the others. But that is exactly what creates a lack of build diversity and makes "tired" builds.
This is equally true of archers mentioned earlier, where I also pointed out the mechanically necessity or extreme benefit of the feats which end up in virtually every ranged attacker build.
Wraithguard |
I get to play so infrequently that there is one role I am a little tired of playing and one particular combat type our party has bid farewell to.
I am tired of playing support casters, but my friends love having me play one.
The one to see retirement is basically any character focused on mounted charges.
Well, after about 6 levels he was tired of being drastically inferior to his mounted skills. Whenever he had to get off his horse and do something that wasn't "Charge" every round he felt very weak. On his horse, well, he could solo some encounters quite handily.
pH unbalanced |
pH unbalanced wrote:One of my early RPG revelations was this: the thing that was most likely to cause your character to die was being in combat. And the thing that makes your character most likely to be in combat...was being good at combat. No matter how good you are, eventually the dice will turn against you.Like many early revelations this is in fact wrong. If you aren't a hiding in the back being useless you will be in combat every time there's a combat. If you don't carry your weight you're dragging the group down. Dragging your group down causes TPKs. If you're carrying more than your weight in combat you're in every combat, but so are the characters carrying just their own weight and any that aren't carrying their weight who are at least trying.
If combat can be avoided it's by being good at stealth or having a good face, neither of which is at odds with being good at combat.
The better a group is at combat the fewer rounds they spend in each combat and the fewer chances they have to get unlucky. A group good at combat is almost always composed of individual characters who are good at combat, though there are some interlocking builds where some or all members completely fall apart if separated.
I mostly agree, but you're missing the point. You absolutely have to carry your weight. But you never want to be the most effective combatant on your side. Intelligent enemies target the most effective combatant first. The safest position to be in is to be about the fourth most powerful character on a six person team.
This isn't a Pathfinder rule; it's a general RPG rule, and it's more important in deadlier systems. It also assumes that the *only* thing you care about is the survival of your individual character.
Charlie Bell RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16 |
BadBird |
The thing with Cavalier is that it isn't difficult to make a character who can add level to damage into an effective dismounted combatant; Orders and Greater Tactician provide lots of interesting options as well. But people double-down on being mounted terrors instead of rounding out the charscter, and then feel deeply aggrieved when they have to dismount - or they decide to be 'clever' and create a Cavalier that can remain mounted at all times. As if being able to pull a combo like Challenge + Order of the Dragon + Greater Tactician just isn't relevant if you're not on a horse.
Paradozen |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dervish Dance Shocking Grasp/Frostbite Magus. The class can benefit greatly from both defensive and offensive buffs, including teleportation effects, party-wide buffs, polymorphs, and illusions. Seeing so many builds based on 1-2 traits and 2-4 feats which let them reduce their flexibility and utility makes me generally sad.
One-Trick Ponies, assorted. If the trick works and has been suitably tricked out, it will probably drop foes so fast that the others will wonder why they even bothered rolling initiative. If it doesn't work then player has far less fun and can even be brought to the point of uselessness.
Atarlost |
I mostly agree, but you're missing the point. You absolutely have to carry your weight. But you never want to be the most effective combatant on your side. Intelligent enemies target the most effective combatant first. The safest position to be in is to be about the fourth most powerful character on a six person team.
This isn't a Pathfinder rule; it's a general RPG rule, and it's more important in deadlier systems. It also assumes that the *only* thing you care about is the survival of your individual character.
It's really not because if everyone follows this policy the party is stuck in a race to the bottom to avoid being above average. By deliberately trying to not do your part and let other people lose their characters you're encouraging them to also not do their part and by playing a less effective character than you could be you're increasing the likelihood of TPK.
You're in a variation of iterated prisoner's dilemma following a betray always strategy.
PK the Dragon |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally am getting a tad sick of never being able to have a low WIS score as a non-caster without sending a massive signal to the GM "mind control me to make life hell for the rest of the team!".
I mean, there's a chance the GM won't resort to that, but I don't like resting BOTH my character's survival and the party's survival on the GM playing nice. I mean, I could chalk it up to paranoia except mind controlling spells are cast often enough in games I play to KNOW it's a nasty weakness to have.
I'd rather dump CON. At least CON, if I die it's only me that bites it due to my poor choices.
So, gone is an entire archetype of foolish young men setting out to be heroes. All adventurers possess a large degree of innate wisdom no matter the character concept.
I haven't encountered most other specific builds enough to be sick of them. This is really the only thing I've noticed- when I create characters, I am specifically herded towards WIS and CON, because the consequences of not having those two stats are dire.
Claxon |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, it's worth noting that a Clear Spindle ioun stone set within a wayfinder can really help to dissipate your worry about killing the rest of your team. It protect your from mental control as protection from evil does. In traditional games most of your enemies are evil, so it would protect you from their dominate person spells and such.
Now, I'm still not saying you should dump your wisdom but it make it slightly more possible.
If you really want a build where you can be headstrong and unwise, simply play a paladin or barbarian. Divine Grace can negate and overcome the penalty that low wisdom would impart. For the Barbarian, superstitious + human favored class bonus can impart crazy high saves that negate the -2 if you start with 7 wisdom.
PK the Dragon |
Thanks for telling me about the ioun stone. I know about a lot of gear, but the miscellaneous items, there's too many of them, and I don't really know the ioun stones well. That'll help dramatically in the future, if the GM allows it.
And yeah, Paladin can mitigate thing (but if I want to do the foolish young adventurer, Paladin isn't REALLY what I'm thinking), and Barbarians are great at being unwise battle ragers, but I feel myself going into the same grooves to achieve low WIS martials that aren't a COMPLETE liability. An ioun stone will help with that, though.
I don't mind having weaknesses, after all- I just mind having weaknesses that kill other people, lol.
Grond |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing I don't like is when you have certain races with features that lend themselves to really only doing it "one way" with pretty much any build. The most glaring example of this is fate's favored with the Half Orc. I have nothing against trying to make mechanics work better for you but it would be nice to have equally good options in different ways.
As for specific character builds I'm not a fan of one person wanting to be the DPS murder machine and essentially forcing other players to prop them up with heals and buffs and skill related face work.
Lukas Stariha |
jeremiah dodson 812 wrote:One thing I've developed a serious distaste for is the Quick Footed Halfling racial trait.Why? What's wrong with halflings being as fast as humans?
I agree, but understand someone getting annoyed with an alternate racial trait that is, for most purposes, always better than what it replaces.
(Especially since the movement speed increase arguably makes you better at Acrobatics than the skill bonus, as Acro checks are taking at huge penalties when moving greater than half speed)Zedth |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
• The grumpy, Klingon-minded, beer-swilling dwarf who is either a fighter or cleric, generally dislikes elves, and has a last name which references some mix of hammers, shields, and/or stone.
I never, ever get tired of this one. Call me crazy, but I just freaking love the classic Tolkien/D&D dwarf archetype. They're always welcome at my tables!
Blackwaltzomega |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
HyperMissingno wrote:And how, pray tell, is a realistic reason different from a good reason, to your mind?Tarondor wrote:Their legs are shorter?I said good reason, not realistic reason.
I have a realistic reason a red dragon's breath weapon, which can melt rock, instantly kills any character caught in its blast. That's not a good reason.
I have a realistic reason a T-Rex's bite, the most powerful bite in all of history and evolved to tear apart gigantic dinosaurs, instantly kills any humanoid unfortunate enough to be hit by it regardless of their HP. That's not a good reason.
I have a realistic reason dragons can't fly and giants can't support their own weights. That's not a good reason.
Pathfinder is not and never has been realistic.
Chess Pwn |
A good reason is something that seems fair for the mechanics involved.
Like, they are slow speed because they are great melee fighters so this balances that by making it harder to close in onto enemies.
That is an attempt "good reason" why a race is slow.
The dwarf's good reason is that they aren't encumbered, so they are always moving that speed.
But currently many see it for halflings and gnomes are, I'm small, so I'm slow. Which while making sense to some realistically, doesn't really make for a good trade. Nor really needing to me true. a medium animal in our world doesn't mean it goes faster than a small animal. A dog and a fox are different sizes, yet go basically as fast as each other in our world and that's the same as in the game. In our world children keep up with parents quite well. So if the game world said that small races went 30ft I don't think you'd see people complaining that it was breaking realism for them.
jeremiah dodson 812 |
jeremiah dodson 812 wrote:One thing I've developed a serious distaste for is the Quick Footed Halfling racial trait.Why? What's wrong with halflings being as fast as humans?
Because now seemingly all Halfling are quick Footed, and it removes a MAJOR factor of being small. Why can Halfling just switch a trait and basically remove all true penalty for being small while Gnomes, Dwarves, Goblins, ect are stuck being slow. Halfling are already the Superior small race, they didn't need a trait "buff".
Ventnor |
Ventnor wrote:Because now seemingly all Halfling are quick Footed, and it removes a MAJOR factor of being small. Why can Halfling just switch a trait and basically remove all true penalty for being small while Gnomes, Dwarves, Goblins, ect are stuck being slow. Halfling are already the Superior small race, they didn't need a trait "buff".jeremiah dodson 812 wrote:One thing I've developed a serious distaste for is the Quick Footed Halfling racial trait.Why? What's wrong with halflings being as fast as humans?
Goblins have a 30 ft. move speed.
DocShock |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really hate the fate's favored sacred tattoo combo too. My primary beef with it is that orc ferocity (especially when ramped up with the ferocious resolve feat) is one of the absolute coolest racial abilities in the game. If you want a +1 luck bonus, buy a headband of fortune's favor, stone of good luck, or robe of stars, and then kill the guy that thought he had killed you even though your guts are hanging out.
Blackwaltzomega |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really hate the fate's favored sacred tattoo combo too. My primary beef with it is that orc ferocity (especially when ramped up with the ferocious resolve feat) is one of the absolute coolest racial abilities in the game. If you want a +1 luck bonus, buy a headband of fortune's favor, stone of good luck, or robe of stars, and then kill the guy that thought he had killed you even though your guts are hanging out.
Eh. Frankly, I consider Ferocity massively overrated, particularly when Half-Orcs can trade out Intimidating for Shaman's Apprentice and get easy access to Die Hard.
Ferocity is just one more round. Die Hard lets you hold on 'til you're deep enough in the negatives to be killed or you've finished gutting the guy who thought they dropped you. Ferocity won't get you into the Deathless feat line, if that tickles your fancy, but a Diehard Half-Orc not only keeps going at zero, he becomes even more dangerous at death's door than he was at full health. When you have something like that, why not trade out that ferocity for something more useful?
HyperMissingno |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HyperMissingno wrote:And how, pray tell, is a realistic reason different from a good reason, to your mind?Tarondor wrote:Their legs are shorter?I said good reason, not realistic reason.
A good reason adds to the game. A realistic reason makes the game more realistic, and 99 times out of 100, less fun. Realism is what make classes without magic suck so much compare to classes with magic and needs to go away from this game.
Also a small race is not that much better at melee than a medium race Chess, they get a 5% accuracy boost and an extra 5% chance at avoiding hits but they lose a bit of damage and are 5% more likely to fall to a combat maneuver and are 5% less likely to get combat maneuvers off. The only melee combat style they excel at compared to medium (mounted combat) is the one where the land speed doesn't matter. Plus there's a few things they can't do like GLORIOUS REACH TACTICS!
BadBird |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
HyperMissingno wrote:If you think that's a realistic reason you need to babysit more preschoolers. Short legs, but they can move fast.Tarondor wrote:Their legs are shorter?I said good reason, not realistic reason.
I'm not in the greatest shape, but I'll put down serious money on me destroying any preschooler in the 100-meter dash. Too bad they don't tend to have any money to put down...
Chess Pwn |
Also a small race is not that much better at melee than a medium race Chess, they get a 5% accuracy boost and an extra 5% chance at avoiding hits but they lose a bit of damage and are 5% more likely to fall to a combat maneuver and are 5% less likely to get combat maneuvers off. The only melee combat style they excel at compared to medium (mounted combat) is the one where the land speed doesn't matter. Plus there's a few things they can't do like GLORIOUS REACH TACTICS!
You missed my intent. It was not actually an example since I don't feel that any of these slow races are better at combat than non-slow races
But lets say there was a race that had a +4 to str, but instead of being dumb like an orc was slow. The idea being you traded speed for power.
A class that could be considered to try this is the Oread. They are slow and medium and reduce speed by armor. But they have a bonus to str and wis and a dump of CHA. Which is many classes favorite stats to bump and dump. So maybe this is an example of the idea I posted.
Now I'm not saying that the trade is worthwhile, but that this type of thing is an attept at a good reason to be slow.
Devilkiller |
I think that having meaningful differences between races, classes, and other sorts of options is a good thing. I also think DMs should be more open to allowing mounts on adventures. Most dungeons I've seen are big enough for Large mounts if you follow the rules, especially with the Narrow Frame feat.
When it comes to other people's builds I'm not really tired of any builds in particular though I think it would be nice if level 10+ Ninjas had something to do other than turn invisible all the time. I guess there also is a certain "sameness" about many Barbarians. We honestly have been involved in two campaigns in a row (with different groups) which had a Barbarian named Butcher who had Superstition and 300+ HP. The second one doesn't have Beast Totem like the first one, but he's Mythic and has 60+ speed and an ability which allows him to move and still full attack (basically superior to Pounce)
For my own PCs I tend to make the craziest most complicated builds I can, so I never really get bored. For the next campaign cycle I might have to make at least one PC with low AC though since I've probably been relying too much on AC as my primary defense.
HyperMissingno |
I think that having meaningful differences between races, classes, and other sorts of options is a good thing.
I'm also for this so long as there aren't several options that are complete trash and others that break the game. The two reasons combined are why samey builds keep popping up.
HyperMissingno |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You didn't sound too thrilled about the difference of having some races move at Speed 20'. Do you think that's too crippling somehow? If so do you feel the same way about faster races who get slowed down by armor?
Consider it one of many straws on a broken camel's back, and yes, I feel the same way about medium armor slowing other races down, especially since it effects the person most likely to need that speed.