Hi y'all, most of my current WoD group has basically scattered to the four winds. Good new is I've found some 2-3 potential players. They're more into Pathfinder, and I'm willing to give it a go. Any recommendations for learning the system (aside from reading the books, which one of the potential players will loan to me in eBook form)?
@276 Well, Tomb of Horrors is a classic and probably the Trope Codifier for the Killer Game Master and Everything Trying to Kill You - . Plus, it's arguably the Ur-Example of masocore gaming - you know its reputation as a meat grinder, and you seek it out to see if you can overcome it. On top of that, it's kind of having the nuclear option as a game master - "behave or we'll run Tomb of Horrors" is an effective threat for groups that get to rowdy that aren't into masocore gaming.
Mind you, if you do have a rowdy group that's into masocore gaming, you flip that script by converting a module that's built for kids (or, alternately, Toon), and run them through that.
@277 Well, good news - if you know 3.5, you know most of the mechanics of Pathfinder.
Granted, I recommend perusing the Core Rulebook for some of the changes. Each class has some tweaks and changes, and it won't take long to get acquainted to what changes. If you know the players in question, it can also help to read up on the various rules they've tweaked that play to their strengths. Two areas I personally had to heavily study up on were combat maneuvers (the stuff you can do with physical attacks that aren't just "I swing my longsword at them" - trips, grapples, stuff like that) and skills.
That said, I personally found the rules for those parts to be more intuitive and flexible than in 3.5 (though YMMV of course).
For now, I recommend not touching much of the Advanced or Ultimate books until you've got a good feel for the system, unless you have a player that's really into non-standard material (like... uh... me, who tends to gravitate towards odd races when playing). It's easy enough to incorporate once you get the material, but learning new races, classes, and powers while learning how the old stuff was tweaked can be a bit distracting.
edited 14th Nov '13 7:29:29 AM by 32_Footsteps
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.Yeah, Pathfinder is pretty much 3.5 with most of the fluff removed. It does have some pretty significant differences in isolated instances, like with the Paladin's Smite Evil, but for the most part they're similar enough that you only need to make sure to read spell and ability descriptions to double-check that they still do the same thing.
As for odd races, I'm actually really excited for that third-party book coming out at the end of the year with a pony campaign setting. And not just because I'm a fan of MLP. They genuinely look fun to play while not upsetting game balance too much.
edited 14th Nov '13 9:02:23 AM by CDRW
If you know 3.5, you know how Pathfinder works, essentially. A LOT of rules changed, so you might want to read up on those, but trust your players to point out the rules if a discrepancy shows up.
Me and my friend's collaborative webcomic: Forged MenThanks guys! While I'm sure my players will end up teaching me a lot, the more I know about the system the less likely derails are to happen.
Since it's fluffless 3.5, I'm now toying with the idea of porting mythical monsters from Pre-Hispanic Latin American civilizations just to keep them on their toes.
So, I had the players do something really stupid in last night's session, and I wanted to run it past folks to see what they think is the appropriate GM response.
The players have been exploring a ghost town, and found that it was recently torn apart by a combo of dire skunks and zombies that invaded from outside of town. It was getting late, and two NPCs had rode up and offered a place for them to stay. Though the party's inquisitor used Detect Evil and found they faintly pinged.
The two options I was ready for were for them to fortify themselves in the town over the night, or to take them up on their offer to stay. And there were encounters for both paths. But instead, they decide to leave town and set up camp in the fields. The fields that they knew, both from multiple warnings and personal experience, to have a bit of a zombie problem.
Not terribly surprisingly, they got attacked multiple times on different watches by zombies.
The zombies themselves weren't the hard encounter. No, the problem is that they're going to get smacked by a penalty for having missed so much sleep dealing with zombies. I'm thinking of ruling that they don't get to replenish spells, channel attempts, and that they're all fatigued (cannot run or charge, -2 to strength and dexterity) until they can get a good night's sleep. Do folks find this fair?
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.I'd allow a save (after all, what about heroic individuals who run for days?) and have some nonlethal damage.
Me and my friend's collaborative webcomic: Forged MenIsn't there something in the books on what you get without sleep? At the very least, they're fatigued. Though I've noted for fatigue, that if the group is powerful enough, you can cast a few Lesser Restorations to remove the fatigue status. Who needs sleep?
For spellcasters, the nastiest is to say they didn't achieve eight hours of rest, so they can't replenish spells. If you don't want to be quite that nasty, you can enforce the rule that any spells cast in the eight hours of rest before preparation counts against that day's limits.
Don't take life too seriously. It's only a temporary situation.I have a question about magic items. One of the players stole a magic sword off of an important character. He at least at some point was a dragonslayer, so I was thinking of making this sword have the Bane effect against dragons. Would you have that come into effect against draconic sorcerers since they have dragon blood in them?
Flyer than an ostrich, moshin' in a tar pit...@285 Well, I don't think there will be much call for them to run in general, as they were provided horses. Still, I'm more interested in the "no charging" rule - that will impact several of their usual combat tactics.
@286 I've been playing it a tad more realistic than that. I've held with C. S. Lewis' take in The Horse and His Boy - people say that they'll just march off like in stories, but that doesn't really happen.
@287 The issue of sleep is one of the glaring holes in Pathfinder - technically, the only thing that a lack of sleep affects is arcane casters, if you go by the strict rules. The system's take on sleep in the Core Rulebook is that arcane casters need 8 hours of sleep to regain spells, but that's the only mention of sleep (outside of magical effects) in the book. Non-spellcasters can apparently stay up forever without penalty (fighters and thieves have the little-discussed class feature "caffeine for blood," apparently). Divine casters just have to pray at the appropriate time of day.
Personally, I find that as silly as allowing elves to "trance" for four hours each day in 3.5 (before anyone brings it up - the Core Rulebook does not include trancing for elves, and the only book that does bring it up is Elves of Golarion - which isn't canon in my game; going by the descriptions in the Bestiary, elves are humanoids, and humanoids require about 8 hours of sleep per day). I'm house ruling on this one, which is why I ask here.
Also, nobody in the group has Lesser Restoration. Even if they did have their spells replenished, they don't have that option.
@288 I'd rule no. There are various feats to take that give you the powers of the various subtypes, and those explicitly state that you gain the potential flaws (like affected by certain types of Bane) of said subtypes when you take the feat.
edited 20th Nov '13 7:12:23 AM by 32_Footsteps
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.So, the Advanced Class Guide play test is out. My opinion on the classes:
Arcanist: if you just take the the casting, the Arcanist is exceptionally powerful, preparing spells known like a sorcerer out of a spellbook. However, EVERYTHING else of the class is lacking. Blood Focus in theory could be interesting, but has not many uses as-is.
Bloodrager: Barbarian-sorcerer turns out well. Very MAD, as you need Con to bloodrage and Cha to cast. VERY interesting bloodlines. It pretty much replaces the rage powers only, as they get most of what else a barbarian gets. It is very spell-oriented, though.
Brawler: The monk without the mysticism. Mechanically, it works, and I don't think it steps on the Monk's toes too much. Powerful abilities, like swapping feats, and the Brawler's Flurry is less than the Monk, but very welcome. Less attacks, but high bonuses. Capstone needs work.
Hunter: Ranger+, that's how I see it. Companion, 6 levels of spells, and a bit of shapechanging. Haven't really looked at it much, never really been interested in either base class it combines.
Investigator: While the brawler and the monk are still respectably different, the Investigator... Yeah. Unless you REALLY want 1 more sneak attack die, Investigator is awesome, since he steals from the Alchemist: extracts, swift alchemy, some discoveries, and some poison stuff, and steals sneak attack (though it is delayed), ANY normal rogue talent, as well as trap finding and trap sense. Yeah. A good candidate for Master Chymist, if he gets access to Infuse Mutagen.
Shaman: Very interesting. Haven't had much of an in-depth look at the class, but it's class features a sort of ability to change Spirits daily, sort of like changing revelations or a second domain. It feels like a shaman.
Skald: Hoo boy. Class needs some work. First off: Rage Song is very situational. With a party full of melee beatsticks, you are amazing. Unless one is a slayer. Or magus. Or melee divine caster. Or you have any ranged damagers. It grants rage powers, which are amazing, I admit. However, has bad synergy with actual rage, and casters will hate you for not doing anything for them. Everything else seems like it's apologizing for Rage Song; Spell Kenning is amazingly versatile, and Scribe Scroll is situational, though appreciated.
Slayer: Class needs work, but looks VERY fun to play. Stunted sneak attack, but has some very fun abilities, like decent skills, hit dice, proficiencies, and Favored Target. He REALLY needs more slayer talents, though, seeing as he can't even steal off the rogue or ninja talents. Looks very fun to play.
Swashbuckler: Well, as a flynning master, this works. If anyone is familiar with exploding dice mechanics, he has them for certain skills, which can explode up to his Dex modifier. Seems MADE for Dervish Dance. His level-to-precision damage is also very cool. Sadly, not for me.
Warpriest: Also needs work. As is, it's basically a cleric with better proficiencies, and a few self-buffing abilities with VERY low duration and high action cost, up to level 6 spells, stunted channeling and Blessings instead of domains, which are very limited in what they can do. Popular opinion is that he needs full BAB.
Me and my friend's collaborative webcomic: Forged Men
...*wonders if his GM is going to murder him if he uses the swashbuckler to play a Dashing Swordsman*
Also. Skald. If you want to play a Heavy Metal Bard!
edited 20th Nov '13 3:19:10 PM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"Hm. SO far the Shaman seems pretty interesting- but I might advocate for removing Hexes, since they already have Spirit Magic to spontaneously caste. (Plus given their plethora of disadvantages I feel like Hexes should stay Witch only.)
I also might replace the need for a familiar with a bonded object (totem?) instead.
Also- while I like basically all the spirits presented, I feel like either "Bones" should be expanded on, or a "Grave"/"Death" spirits should be added- with more Necromancy/Undead style spells.
edited 20th Nov '13 4:16:14 PM by LMage
About the Swashbuckler. Dervish Dancer is actually not that good for it.
For one this deed: "Critical Hit with a Light or One-Handed Piercing Weapon: Each time the swashbuckler confirms a critical hit with a light or one-handed piercing weapon while in combat, she regains 1 panache point. Confirming a critical hit on a helpless or unaware creature or on a creature that has fewer Hit Dice than half the swashbuckler’s character level doesn’t restore panache."
and this: "Swashbuckler Weapon Training (Ex): At 5th level, a swashbuckler gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls with one-handed or light piercing melee weapons. While wielding such a weapon, she gains the benefit of the Improved Critical feat. These attack and damage bonuses increase by 1 for every four levels beyond 5th level (to a maximum of +5 at 20th level)."
would suggest that a Rapier will be your best friend.
Edit: Dervish Dancer "You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability)." Huh. OK, the main problem would be now the Dervish Dancer requires Weapon Finesse, but you get the effects of it from a Swashbuckler ability. Either you houserule it, or you have to get Weapon Finesse feat anyway.
Also, you could try to convince your GM to allow a return panache for any attack suitably punned to make it a Dashing Swordsman.
Also: Could you make a Gnome Skald as Gonagle?
edited 21st Nov '13 3:57:47 AM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"I know I want to make a Fey bloodline Bloodrager. Bloodrager and Warpriest kinda switched in my mind after the play test release; I thought Bloodrager was going to be a lame combo, but Warpriest was going to be awesome.
edited 21st Nov '13 5:34:43 AM by Ninjaxenomorph
Me and my friend's collaborative webcomic: Forged Men
The main reason I've not yet build a Swashbuckler is that I'm simply very unused to building chars without PC Gen.
Also. On an unrelated note. Given that TV here currently shows double eps of Stargate SG 1 on rerun...I wondered:how difficult would it be to build a Stargate themed Campaign with Pathfinder. I think i found a way to entertain myself over Christmas...
Humans: Gunslingers (mainly for the Grit, which i think would fit SGC Soldiers)
Jaffa: Fighters
Goa'uld: Sorcerer with a suitable bloodline (fey?)
Unas: Barbarians (if they show up at all)
Tok'ra: Rogue's with additional Lay on Hands (aka Healing Hand Device) and Detect Evil (aka "Detect Goa'uld")
Jaffa Staff Weapon would probably work as Greatclub in Melee and something suitable bad hitting yet powerful for ranged combat. Zat similar in damage to a staff weapon but only deals Nonlethal damage.
edited 21st Nov '13 2:38:40 PM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"@291 All of this sounds intriguing. Where can I find the complete info on this?
Though I know one player in my group is going to be frustrated. He's basically wanted to play Batman the whole time in my game. His first character was a thief who had tons of alchemical items, and his second was a straight alchemist. It sounds like investigator is his dream come true.
Personally, I'm interested in brawler, because I frequently played monks as if they came from a completely different school of barehanded fighting than traditional Asian martial arts (lucha libre goblin - still perhaps my most memorable character concept ever). An expansion of that idea sounds great.
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.On the paizo homepage search for "Pathfinder Advanced Classes Playtest"...you can get the P Df for free.
"You can reply to this Message!"

What's with the fixation on Tomb of Horrors?