Tired builds


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 463 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

silverrey wrote:
Dundar Hammerhelm wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Honestly, I could name more concepts I'm tired of than "builds".

• 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.

"What 'ave ye got agains' dwarves, eh? We dwarves forge th' bes' weap'ns on Golari'n! If i's nae dwarven, i's crap!"

Funniest thing is that one of my uncles actually talks like that. He stand 6' 6" but everyone's first thought is Dwarf meeting him. lol

Dundar is one of my Pathfinder Society PCs. He's a dwarven fighter with the stereotypical Scottish accent, craft (weapons) for his day job, from a long line of blacksmiths. He joined the Pathfinder Society just to go out and test his family's weapons in the field. That's why he only uses melee weapons with the word "dwarven" in their name. Except warhammers. All warhammers are dwarven. That's why they're Torag's favored weapon.

But back on topic, I do tend to avoid the stereotypical builds these days. My first PFS PC was a typical pouncing superstitious invulnerable rager barbarian, but it was new to me back then. Since then, I've tried to avoid some stereotypes, though I do still have a few "typical" guys, like a TWF unchained rogue, a greedy pirate (though many people are surprised by his class), and Dundar.

But just to play oddballs, I have things like a druid who didn't dump charisma, a witch who focuses on buffing and healing more than debuffing, a thrown weapon specialist fighter, my rogue isn't the least bit greedy, and a pacifist warpriest.


I'm tired of bows. Or ranged weapons in general.

Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way. Well, because it works the same way.


14 people marked this as a favorite.
Envall wrote:
Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way

How do you roleplay arrows?

"I'm all wooden and rigid, as usual. I don't feel a thing anway"

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Fromper wrote:
silverrey wrote:
Dundar Hammerhelm wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Honestly, I could name more concepts I'm tired of than "builds".

• 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.

"What 'ave ye got agains' dwarves, eh? We dwarves forge th' bes' weap'ns on Golari'n! If i's nae dwarven, i's crap!"

Funniest thing is that one of my uncles actually talks like that. He stand 6' 6" but everyone's first thought is Dwarf meeting him. lol

Dundar is one of my Pathfinder Society PCs. He's a dwarven fighter with the stereotypical Scottish accent, craft (weapons) for his day job, from a long line of blacksmiths. He joined the Pathfinder Society just to go out and test his family's weapons in the field. That's why he only uses melee weapons with the word "dwarven" in their name. Except warhammers. All warhammers are dwarven. That's why they're Torag's favored weapon.

I just think it's hilarious that I even got you on the name. ;)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:
Envall wrote:
Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way

How do you roleplay arrows?

"I'm all wooden and rigid, as usual. I don't feel a thing anway"

I suppose you could have a sentient arrow.

I'd probably roleplay it as incredibly excited to help out, and super crushed when he gets used once before the adventurer inevitably forgets to pick him back up after the battle.

It's a depressing life for a sentient arrow.

Silver Crusade

Jiggy wrote:
Fromper wrote:
silverrey wrote:
Dundar Hammerhelm wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Honestly, I could name more concepts I'm tired of than "builds".

• 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.

"What 'ave ye got agains' dwarves, eh? We dwarves forge th' bes' weap'ns on Golari'n! If i's nae dwarven, i's crap!"

Funniest thing is that one of my uncles actually talks like that. He stand 6' 6" but everyone's first thought is Dwarf meeting him. lol

Dundar is one of my Pathfinder Society PCs. He's a dwarven fighter with the stereotypical Scottish accent, craft (weapons) for his day job, from a long line of blacksmiths. He joined the Pathfinder Society just to go out and test his family's weapons in the field. That's why he only uses melee weapons with the word "dwarven" in their name. Except warhammers. All warhammers are dwarven. That's why they're Torag's favored weapon.
I just think it's hilarious that I even got you on the name. ;)

That's the real reason I couldn't resist responding. But really, I intentionally built that one to embrace the stereotype wholeheartedly, so it just shows that I succeeded.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The most tired build is a barbarian that has just come out of rage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PK the Dragon wrote:
D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:
Envall wrote:
Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way

How do you roleplay arrows?

"I'm all wooden and rigid, as usual. I don't feel a thing anway"

I suppose you could have a sentient arrow.

I'd probably roleplay it as incredibly excited to help out, and super crushed when he gets used once before the adventurer inevitably forgets to pick him back up after the battle.

It's a depressing life for a sentient arrow.

Unless it's a really COOL arrow, like Yondu's arrow in the Guardians of the Galaxy movie.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:
PK the Dragon wrote:
D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:
Envall wrote:
Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way

How do you roleplay arrows?

"I'm all wooden and rigid, as usual. I don't feel a thing anway"

I suppose you could have a sentient arrow.

I'd probably roleplay it as incredibly excited to help out, and super crushed when he gets used once before the adventurer inevitably forgets to pick him back up after the battle.

It's a depressing life for a sentient arrow.

Unless it's a really COOL arrow, like Yondu's arrow in the Guardians of the Galaxy movie.

You mean the arrow that can cast mass hold person on all the guys with guns when you're surrounded, so that you can pick them off one by one without having to worry about the rest of them returning fire?

Yep, pretty cool arrow. ;)


Grey Lensman wrote:

My usual problem with low CHA characters is that they always try to force their way into diplomacy despite the presence of someone with...

I have the exact opposite problems with players in my group. They dump charisma down to single digits(sometimes even down to 5) and then just try to sit invisible any time it isn't time to swing a greatsword.

This despite the fact that a general description of that charisma score is: Uninteresting, rude, boorish, and generally unpleasant to be around

Sure it is a custom decription but honestly given that charisma is how naturally charming or good with people you are it seems fairly reasonable. 7 would be either immensely anti-social or just extremely rude. At least someone butting into a conversation with their 7 charisma is acting like they have a 7.

Same issue with the occasional players rolling up with an 8-int fighter and because the player is an intelligent human being they still provide lots of solutions to puzzles, better tactics, strategies, etc for dealing with various situations.


D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:
Envall wrote:
Especially when people roleplay a 5 damage arrow and 30 damage arrow the same way

How do you roleplay arrows?

"I'm all wooden and rigid, as usual. I don't feel a thing anway"

They're all lawful good anyway.


Leitner wrote:
This despite the fact that a general description of that charisma score is: (...) rude, boorish (...)

Says who? What, you never met a charismatic yet rude person in your life?

Low charisma does not make the character an ass.


Leitner wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:

My usual problem with low CHA characters is that they always try to force their way into diplomacy despite the presence of someone with...

I have the exact opposite problems with players in my group. They dump charisma down to single digits(sometimes even down to 5) and then just try to sit invisible any time it isn't time to swing a greatsword.

This despite the fact that a general description of that charisma score is: Uninteresting, rude, boorish, and generally unpleasant to be around

Sure it is a custom decription but honestly given that charisma is how naturally charming or good with people you are it seems fairly reasonable. 7 would be either immensely anti-social or just extremely rude. At least someone butting into a conversation with their 7 charisma is acting like they have a 7.

Same issue with the occasional players rolling up with an 8-int fighter and because the player is an intelligent human being they still provide lots of solutions to puzzles, better tactics, strategies, etc for dealing with various situations.

Sounds like they're role playing low charisma just fine to me. :P


Ventnor wrote:
Leitner wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:

My usual problem with low CHA characters is that they always try to force their way into diplomacy despite the presence of someone with...

I have the exact opposite problems with players in my group. They dump charisma down to single digits(sometimes even down to 5) and then just try to sit invisible any time it isn't time to swing a greatsword.

This despite the fact that a general description of that charisma score is: Uninteresting, rude, boorish, and generally unpleasant to be around

Sure it is a custom decription but honestly given that charisma is how naturally charming or good with people you are it seems fairly reasonable. 7 would be either immensely anti-social or just extremely rude. At least someone butting into a conversation with their 7 charisma is acting like they have a 7.

Same issue with the occasional players rolling up with an 8-int fighter and because the player is an intelligent human being they still provide lots of solutions to puzzles, better tactics, strategies, etc for dealing with various situations.

Sounds like they're role playing low charisma just fine to me. :P

Lol, sure. An occasionally "uninteresting" person with 6 charisma could happen. But mostly it is just some fighter/barb/etc who doesn't gain any mechanical benefit from charisma and doesn't want any drawbacks from it. The other three terms of course do not mean you'd likely sit quietly in the back and defer all answers to the party face.

@derklord http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/ability-scores#TOC-Charisma-C ha- says: Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.

Dictionary.com says among other things:

the special virtue of an office, function, position, etc., that confers or is thought to confer on the person holding it an unusual ability for leadership, worthiness of veneration, or the like.

charm, magnetism, presence.

a special personal quality or power of an individual making him capable of influencing or inspiring large numbers of people

a quality inherent in a thing which inspires great enthusiasm and devotion

- That's not to say someone couldn't be highly popular and still be a jerk. But you are not likely being a jerk to your followers or those you are trying to influence(as on average that makes you less likely to listened to). Still, you can play your 5 or 18 charisma character however you like. I certainly won't be stopping you.


Yeah, I read the description for charisma. Doesn't say anything about how polite a character is, though. "someone butting into a conversation" is a lack of manners, not a lack of charisma. Influence someone can easily be jerkiness (think Alpha Bitc­h* actively making a guy doing something embarassing for her own amusement).

* The classic Alpha Bitc­h archetype is a good example of high charisma - beautiful, strong leader, able to attract and influence people.


Leitner wrote:
- That's not to say someone couldn't be highly popular and still be a jerk. But you are not likely being a jerk to your followers or those you are trying to influence(as on average that makes you less likely to listened to).

The most charismatic guy I know has a personality that I have yet to hear anyone say a single good thing about. He is a manipulative SOB that openly and proudly tells people that he plans to use them until he is tired of them and then never look at them again. Even with that as a personality when he walks into a place half the room wants to marry him and the other half would follow him into Hell.

You don't have to be a nice, let alone good, person to be charismatic. Some people literally reach a point where everyone can hate them and still feel the need to follow them. I despise the guy and how he treats people. Still call him a friend and talk to him semi regularly though. :/


I know this is supposed to be a thread about builds we are sick of seeing, but what I'm seeing is a laundry list of weaknesses in the system.


Doomed Hero wrote:
I know this is supposed to be a thread about builds we are sick of seeing, but what I'm seeing is a laundry list of weaknesses in the system.

Kind of one and the same really. People see a weak point and try to avoid it. End result is a lot of builds following the same path trying to avoid the same landmines.


VERY Low Str/High Dex/High Con Kineticists...

I get that the Kineticist is heavily focused on Constitution, but every single build resolves around high Dex for ranged attacks and being able to lift only a twig.

Why don't energy blasts add Intelligence modifiers to damage and why don't physical blasts add Strength modifiers to damage... is beyond me...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:

VERY Low Str/High Dex/High Con Kineticists...

I get that the Kineticist is heavily focused on Constitution, but every single build resolves around high Dex for ranged attacks and being able to lift only a twig.

Why don't energy blasts add Intelligence modifiers to damage and why don't physical blasts add Strength modifiers to damage... is beyond me...

Because the poor class is limited enough. Each element is a bit of a straight for the poor thing, so being based around the best stats in the game is a small bit of compensation.

If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
HyperMissingno wrote:
If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.

We tried. They weren't listening.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HyperMissingno wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
Still takes 3 rounds of casting so you can't fix it mid-combat.
You misunderstand. It WAS in combat.
Wait what? How the hell did you pull that off...and how the hell di combat last that long?

Humm. I'm starting to think I'm not very good at this (at least not mechanically, at any rate).

I haven't even heard of most of the build options that people are describing as if every character in existence takes them. A while back someone suggested to me that a melee fighter with 'only 16 Str' was unrealistic, and now this...

I'm assuming HyperMissigno's statement is implying that most combats will be over before 3 rounds have passed. I'm rather used to combat being more of a back-and-forth dozen-or-so-rounds affair.

Honestly this is rather neat and eye-opening. I knew I wasn't the type to optimize particularly hard, but I guess I didn't really just how big the gap was between my table and some other people's. (If I ever end up playing with y'all, I'm pretty sure my usual assumption that 15 is an acceptable number for a primary stat at 1st level will get me butchered in a heartbeat.)

...But as to the actual topic. The two characters types I'm tired of are diplomacy-guy, and stealth-guy, specifically of the variety that gets upset if they ever have to solve anything with strandard combat, and specifically specifically if they built that character without bothering to check what anyone else was doing, leading to them being constantly at-odds with the rest of the party who all made gung-ho warrior types.


Atarlost wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.
We tried. They weren't listening.

Quoted For Truth


JiCi wrote:

VERY Low Str/High Dex/High Con Kineticists...

I get that the Kineticist is heavily focused on Constitution, but every single build resolves around high Dex for ranged attacks and being able to lift only a twig.

Why don't energy blasts add Intelligence modifiers to damage and why don't physical blasts add Strength modifiers to damage... is beyond me...

Lol because the Kineticist is already a factory of sadness. Why would they want to make it even worse?


Honestly at around level 8 or so most fights are 3 rounds or shorter unless a big enemy comes into the fight in the middle of it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:

VERY Low Str/High Dex/High Con Kineticists...

I get that the Kineticist is heavily focused on Constitution, but every single build resolves around high Dex for ranged attacks and being able to lift only a twig.

Why don't energy blasts add Intelligence modifiers to damage and why don't physical blasts add Strength modifiers to damage... is beyond me...

I'll take "massive double-standard vs ye olde STR-dumped blaster caster" for $500, Alex.

Why WOULD energy blasts add your intelligence to their damage? Intelligence to damage doesn't make any damn sense at all, from any angle. As for physical blast, you're not THROWING the damn thing. With both blasts, you are guiding an outpouring of kinetic/elemental energy through your body to damage your opponent. The tougher you are, the more of this energy you can pump out, hence CON and nothing else impacts how much damage a kinetic blast does.

And the lightly armored and almost exclusively ranged class is very highly focused on the stat that lets you aim? Surprise and alarm!


Leitner wrote:
7 would be either immensely anti-social or just extremely rude.

Immensely seems like a bit of an overstatement. We're talking about a -2, one skill point in a class skill puts you +2 over a normal person with no special training.

Quote:
At least someone butting into a conversation with their 7 charisma is acting like they have a 7.

Butting into a conversation you have no business butting in on seems like more of an unwise decision than an uncharismatic one. At least to me.

HeHateMe wrote:
JiCi wrote:

VERY Low Str/High Dex/High Con Kineticists...

I get that the Kineticist is heavily focused on Constitution, but every single build resolves around high Dex for ranged attacks and being able to lift only a twig.

Why don't energy blasts add Intelligence modifiers to damage and why don't physical blasts add Strength modifiers to damage... is beyond me...

Lol because the Kineticist is already a factory of sadness. Why would they want to make it even worse?

Well he didn't say instead. Half con + int would be a minor but decent damage boost for an energy blast user and let them spread their stats around a bit more since they don't really need to max out their dexterity.

Doomed Hero wrote:
I know this is supposed to be a thread about builds we are sick of seeing, but what I'm seeing is a laundry list of weaknesses in the system.

Are you surprised? Even a moderately optimization minded build is going to play to a class' and the system's strengths and against its weaknesses, which inevitably means builds like that are going to be more popular than builds that rely on substandard options, which inevitably means more people are likely to see them as over exposed, which inevitably means that it's going to come up in a thread like this.


Derklord wrote:

Yeah, I read the description for charisma. Doesn't say anything about how polite a character is, though. "someone butting into a conversation" is a lack of manners, not a lack of charisma. Influence someone can easily be jerkiness (think Alpha Bitc­h* actively making a guy doing something embarassing for her own amusement).

* The classic Alpha Bitc­h archetype is a good example of high charisma - beautiful, strong leader, able to attract and influence people.

You don't have to interrupt into a conversation(although yes, lacking charisma and thus being more inclined to the previously mentioned "rude, boorish, and generally unpleasant to be around" would make you more likely to be that sort of person). But sitting silently every time an important NPC gives orders, asks questions, or just in general any time there is friendly interaction with anyone is fairly odd.

Your example of an alpha b*%@* could fit a high charisma character of course. The charisma stat does also include attractiveness(which I find a bit odd, but that is neither here nor there). But that is the sort of charisma that would probably only work on about 50% of the population.

The fact is that this thread is talking about played out builds. And in my opinion that is the 5-7 charisma murder hobo is hideously played out. You can of course backstory it away all you like but your basically just deciding that since you have no intention of ever rolling a diplomacy check that you'll trade it for +1 attack and damage.

It is again, the same as my 8 int fighter example. Sure, you can pretend to be an idiot savant, or argue that you'd have some insight into this puzzle because of some misc thing in your backstory. But the end result is usually people just decided they wanted more physical stats and paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient.

EDIT: @Squiggit A 7 in a stat, god forbid a 7 really is extremely far down the scales. Sure in pathfinder you get used to moderately high strength characters able to outlift Olympian athletes here on earth doesn't mean that a 12 strength guy who is reasonably strong doesn't have a fairly sizeable difference between a 14 strength guy.

The fact is each strength mod means you can lift roughly a 3rd more then the guy right below you. This works negatively as well and that is really pretty crazy when you consider how far down that would be.


HyperMissingno wrote:
Honestly at around level 8 or so most fights are 3 rounds or shorter unless a big enemy comes into the fight in the middle of it.

Definitely-possibly a table-by-table thing. I'm GM for a party that's actually at 8th level right now. They average a dozen or so rounds, usually. Maybe a bit less. Last session's fights were 12 rounds, 19 rounds, 8 rounds, 1 round, and 10 rounds. Only that last one had a big enemy show up towards the end (made them take maybe 4 rounds more). Fast fights are not the norm here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Leitner wrote:


It is again, the same as my 8 int fighter example. Sure, you can pretend to be an idiot savant, or argue that you'd have some insight into this puzzle because of some misc thing in your backstory. But the end result is usually people just decided they wanted more physical stats and paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient.

You say paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient. I say that they are paying attention to the negatives and you just think the negatives aren't enough. There's a penalty associated with having a low charisma: you're worse at bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, perform and UMD without some special feat or trait to change things. Saying "I'm going to not engage in social situations because I'm bad at talking to people" is paying attention to those negatives and makes sense both from an in character and gamist perspective.

Now you can say those penalties aren't enough and I'd agree with you, but phrasing it as someone ignoring the negatives is just disingenous.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I dunno, sitting silently every time an important NPC is giving orders, asking questions, or interacting sounds like a typical case of social anxiety to me.


Squiggit wrote:
Leitner wrote:


It is again, the same as my 8 int fighter example. Sure, you can pretend to be an idiot savant, or argue that you'd have some insight into this puzzle because of some misc thing in your backstory. But the end result is usually people just decided they wanted more physical stats and paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient.

You say paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient. I say that they are paying attention to the negatives and you just think the negatives aren't enough. There's a penalty associated with having a low charisma: you're worse at bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, perform and UMD without some special feat or trait to change things. Saying "I'm going to not engage in social situations because I'm bad at talking to people" is paying attention to those negatives and makes sense both from an in character and gamist perspective.

Now you can say those penalties aren't enough and I'd agree with you, but phrasing it as someone ignoring the negatives is just disingenous.

I'll just post my edit here:

EDIT: @Squiggit A 7 in a stat, god forbid a 7 really is extremely far down the scales. Sure in pathfinder you get used to moderately high strength characters able to outlift Olympian athletes here on earth doesn't mean that a 12 strength guy who is reasonably strong doesn't have a fairly sizeable difference between a 14 strength guy.

The fact is each strength mod means you can lift roughly a 3rd more then the guy right below you. This works negatively as well and that is really pretty crazy when you consider how far down that would be.

END EDIT:

And again, that is one way to play low charisma, as is being rude and interrupting people. It makes sense if your character is anti-social. But yet again, in my experience most people just ignore the stats when it is inconvenient.

Their 8-int fighter is stuck in a puzzle with the rest of the party but the player is smart enough to figure it out and he'll put forward the solution. Their 7 charisma barbarian that is "Anti-social" and doesn't put a single word in when the mayor is asking them if they'll help put down some undead is challenging half the tavern to drinking contests and gambling the night away.


Squiggit wrote:
Leitner wrote:


It is again, the same as my 8 int fighter example. Sure, you can pretend to be an idiot savant, or argue that you'd have some insight into this puzzle because of some misc thing in your backstory. But the end result is usually people just decided they wanted more physical stats and paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient.

You say paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient. I say that they are paying attention to the negatives and you just think the negatives aren't enough. There's a penalty associated with having a low charisma: you're worse at bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, perform and UMD without some special feat or trait to change things. Saying "I'm going to not engage in social situations because I'm bad at talking to people" is paying attention to those negatives and makes sense both from an in character and gamist perspective.

Now you can say those penalties aren't enough and I'd agree with you, but phrasing it as someone ignoring the negatives is just disingenous.

I agree with Squig, the penalty for CHA dumping is simple: you're locked out of basically all social interaction in the game. If the player in question doesn't care, that's a different issue entirely.

I have a Cha 8 character and I rp him as a total trash talker. BUT, I only talk trash during or just before combat. That means there's a large part of the game where my character doesn't contribute. It kinda sucks cause I'd like to participate in more social interaction but there were more important stats I needed to pump up.

The penalty is there, the issue is does the player in question care about the downside?


Squiggit wrote:
Leitner wrote:


It is again, the same as my 8 int fighter example. Sure, you can pretend to be an idiot savant, or argue that you'd have some insight into this puzzle because of some misc thing in your backstory. But the end result is usually people just decided they wanted more physical stats and paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient.

You say paying attention to the negatives is inconvenient. I say that they are paying attention to the negatives and you just think the negatives aren't enough. There's a penalty associated with having a low charisma: you're worse at bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, perform and UMD without some special feat or trait to change things. Saying "I'm going to not engage in social situations because I'm bad at talking to people" is paying attention to those negatives and makes sense both from an in character and gamist perspective.

Now you can say those penalties aren't enough and I'd agree with you, but phrasing it as someone ignoring the negatives is just disingenous.

The point does remember me a situation I'm tired of seeing. The "party face", where one guy have high cha and social stats and the other party members don't even bother to talk because "let the guy with the high diplomacy do the talk, every talk, like ever". Not really a fan of social skills for that.


Hehateme wrote:
I agree with Squig, the penalty for CHA dumping is simple: you're locked out of basically all social interaction in the game.

Except this isn't remotely true.

Your main interaction with other characters is diplomacy, not charisma. Charisma has only a very minor effect on your diplomacy score: raw that's all it does.

So Dullard the stale is only 5% less good at talking as Sir Perfluous the Average, to start with.

So, if you have a character with an 8 charisma and a 12 int, and one with a 12 char and an 8 int, the one with the 12 int can put an extra point into diplomacy. At level 1 they'll have the same diplomacy score, at level 5 he'll be 5 points ahead, at level 10 9 points ahead etc. A stat has VERY little impact over what it's supposed to control and thats exactly why that stat get's dumped so hard: it isn't even that important for doing the job asignet to it, much less anything else.


HeHateMe wrote:


I agree with Squig, the penalty for CHA dumping is simple: you're locked out of basically all social interaction in the game. If the player in question doesn't care, that's a different issue entirely.

I have a Cha 8 character and I rp him as a total trash talker. BUT, I only talk trash during or just before combat. That means there's a large part of the game where my character doesn't contribute. It kinda sucks cause I'd like to participate in more social interaction but there were more important stats I needed to pump up.

The penalty is there, the issue is does the player in question care about the downside?

Well I'm not talking about one player in particular. Although one does play almost nothing but 2h power attacking fighters, barbs, rangers, etc.

But generally speaking, no they don't care about the negatives. The character is made in advance intending to not have to roll any diplomacy or what not because another player in the group has already taken party face as a role.

But having 8 charisma doesn't mean you can't participate in social situations. Our skulls and shackles campaign has my elf alchemist with 9 charisma as the party face. Past level 5 or so the willingness to put points into the skills matters far more than your stat. Sure I'd never out diplomance a bard unless for some reason they had no diplomacy but I do fine for most situations.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The tired builds I can think of aren't really builds, but like others said, concepts. I don't know if these have been said, but here are a few:

- Any character who stays apart from the party and avoids contact. When their party is in trouble, they typically laugh and say "not my problem" as they run off.
- Characters with no character. This is more of a player trope than a concept, but players who don't care who they are playing, they just want to hit things and tend to either play on their phone or, occasionally, physically leave when combat isn't happening.
- "I WANT TO PLAY SASUKE FROM NARUTO OMG"
- Super 1337 gods from planet Xetan who ruled the universe once but are now level 1 kineticists.
- "And that is how I achieved a +258 to Acrobatics!"

And 2c on Cha discussion that doesn't really need to be happening at all: the people saying the difference is "5-10%" are ignoring the difference between someone who invested and someone who didn't. The difference is typically a -1 or -2 vs a +7 or +8. This roughly translates, in-game, to low Cha players never talking due to a rightful fear of ruining a social encounter.


Simply having social skills as skills and charisma as a stat encourages every player who doesn't have the highest modified skill in the party to keep their mouth shut. It's a fundamental flaw in the notion of linking skills to levels.

To allow everyone to participate in social scenes you have to either deliberately break up the social skills in a way that encourages splitting them among different people, get rid of the notion of social skills entirely and freeform RP conversation, or progress skills by use rather than on level up.

That second doesn't work if the real world players have different levels of real world social skills.


@Atarlost: I find your analysis flawed.

Doomed Hero wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.
We tried. They weren't listening.
Quoted For Truth

And why would they?


This *is* a house rule, but one of my PFS gms required us to actually help the player in *some* way in order to roll aid another checks. Usually this took the part of minor diplomacy. Since Aid's DC is so low and it's not like there's a penalty for failure, even the most CHA dumped players had nothing to lose by contributing to diplomacy.

Scarab Sages

Atarlost wrote:

Simply having social skills as skills and charisma as a stat encourages every player who doesn't have the highest modified skill in the party to keep their mouth shut. It's a fundamental flaw in the notion of linking skills to levels.

To allow everyone to participate in social scenes you have to either deliberately break up the social skills in a way that encourages splitting them among different people, get rid of the notion of social skills entirely and freeform RP conversation, or progress skills by use rather than on level up.

That second doesn't work if the real world players have different levels of real world social skills.

I'd stop playing if they got rid of social skills and gave freeform RP conversation as a replacement, for multiple reasons.

1. *MORE* Table Variation. No longer would you have a dc27 diplomacy or dc35 bluff check to pass the encounter, now you have to craft a conversation that the DM thinks would be good enough for a specific character for success.

2. I as me think vastly differently than my human characters, let alone my non human characters. Gm says, "you fail to influence the sorcerer because you used human emotion to try and convince him, but you are a Nagaji. Nagaji don't have human emotions. The sorcerer casts chain lighting. Everyone take 57 damage and roll me an initiative." Yea. That doesn't sound like fun.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like how the first page, someone stated that they hate seeing useless rogues. A rogue is, unfortunately, easily replaced by everyone else. They have no edge in which they are the better choice. The full BAB martial classes are better at straight up combat. The bard, wizard, witch, and other int or 8+ skill classes are better at skill rolls. Trapfinding can easily be replicated by a wand of detect traps, or an alchemist, ranger, cleric who prepared the dang spell.

That's until you stroll into the room and you dual-wield saps, and you knock everyone unconscious and steal the spotlight from the fighter and put all the other damage dealers to shame and you laugh in their faces maniacally. I will never tire of the master of saps.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

On the original topic...

Small sized Aasimar became a thing at my table for a while... which just reinforces the "speed is not tied to size" complaint from earlier.

One player always used to play a Rogue in 3.5. In Pathfinder, he switched to Rangers and Inquisitors and almost never had Disable Device. Then came the Trapper archetype and after that the Dungeon Rover. Three times in a row... Toothy/Scavenger Half-Orc Shapeshifter/Trapper/Dungeon Rover Ranger. I expect for the next one he will ask about the Dusksight racial. Even the unchained Rogue didn't pull him away from this build, though I am hopeful that the Investigator will, which is what he tentatively has lined up for Strange Aeons.

Conjuration Wizards... again and again and again.

Reach clerics of Desna with a Summoning focus... again and again and again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rub-Eta wrote:

@Atarlost: I find your analysis flawed.

Doomed Hero wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.
We tried. They weren't listening.
Quoted For Truth
And why would they?

Because getting feedback is the point of an open playtest?

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Open playtest is just marketing.


Rub-Eta wrote:

@Atarlost: I find your analysis flawed.

Doomed Hero wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
HyperMissingno wrote:
If you want more variety in the class yell at the devs.
We tried. They weren't listening.
Quoted For Truth
And why would they?

The developer working on kinetesist interacted more with the community than any other.

He made many adjustments to the original class based directly on community feedback.


Darkbridger wrote:

Reach clerics of Desna with a Summoning focus... again and again and again.

To be fair, what else is a cleric supposed to do?


Blackwaltzomega wrote:


Charisma and physical appearance are not tied together. This would imply you'd need to be fairly good-looking to be much good at disguise or playing guitar or scaring the bejeezus out of someone. Hell, even that you need to be good-looking to be any good as a liar.

Charisma is people skills. That's the beginning and the end of it, in my book. Knowing how to trick someone into believing your lies, knowing how to talk someone around to your point of view, knowing how to sell a disguise or work a crowd or how to hoodwink a device you weren't meant to use normally. Someone with low charisma could be fairly attractive, even, they'd just be bad with people. Without extensive practice, they're not very good liars or don't present their views well, and they can't work a crowd like...

AD&D 2nd edition had Comeliness. So you could be a stunner but a complete butthead in social situations. Think of some pretty noble trustfund kid who treats others like servants and grovels to those of higher station.

201 to 250 of 463 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Tired builds All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.