Pathfinder General /pfg/

>>52024221
>What do you think of the newly
There's too many goddamn splatbooks now and I have no way to keep track of any of them. I feel lost. It's just like 3e all over again.

File: No Kobold that's not for you.png (257KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 800x800px

As a reminder, applications for Legends of Dragonsfjord ARE CLOSED. If you submitted an application already I'll need you to send me your character's sheet by mid-Sunday so I can review it along with your backstory.

I never hear anything about the Shaman class. Tell me about Shamans! What makes them unique? What's the draw to playing them? Have you played a Shaman? Tell us what it was like!

>>52024235
Sorry for overwhelming you. The Avowed is Forrestfire Studios playtest (links to both in the OP) of a HEAVILY 3,5e warlock-inspired class. It just underwent some pretty heavy changes to bring its numbers in line, mitigate its ability to get a single stat to every goddamn check and save in the game, and be the best at knowing everything forever. If you're interested in what changed, here's my post from the last thread:
>>52023948
We hope you check it out, but understand if you're not interested. Thanks for your time. ^^

>>52024200
>Use Disguise to trick a magic item into being used?
Here are some quick thoughts for that one. Disguise/Bluff should be rolled into one for deception. Give them special uses such as:
>being able to mimic the surface thoughts of the creature they are disguised as for Seek Thoughts
>be able to fool magic lie detection

Knowledge:
>read books at a touch
>gather information by touching objects using knowledge checks (Psychometry)
>knowledge to gather information where there are no people to ask

Diplomacy/Intimidate:
>inflict better status effects like with the skill unlocks
>diplomacy faster (instead of taking a minute)
>diplomacy to reproduce effects like Sow Thoughts
>gaining the ability to analyze social hierarchies at a glance

Literally off the top of my head.

>>52024202
>Skill bonuses are fairly boring across the board, but I personally take a great joy in having a +6 bonus to a social skill at low levels.
I don't fucking care what you take joy it. It's boring and bad game design. Fuck off.

>>52024250
I have played one and GOD DAMN they are strong. They are in essentially every way simply better than a witch, they are jostling for the front as best tier 1 caster.

Anyone 'ere interested in an E6/P6 Noiralog game on Saturdays? Gonna be needing four people if anyone's up for it... Also gonna be using some experimental houserules, too, because i'm an absolute madman.

I'll post the lfg if there's at least two or three people interested, not looking to have only one person apply like the last time with like two other people trying to get me to use even more houserules.

File: 0217.png (179KB, 436x728px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 436x728px

This one's cuter anyway.

>>52024263
At level 1 the best bonus you're gonna get to diplomacy is +2 to a minute. Diplomacy takes a minute. So +2 to one diplomacy check at the cost of a spell slot and a spell known.

Avowed has +6 to three skills and it never runs out. Like I said it messes with internal balance between classes and is also just plain boring as an ability.

>>52024250
>what makes them unique
Access to the not inconsiderable shaman spell list as well as the full sorcerer/wizard spell list via wandering lore spirit/arcane enlightenment

Do you know why you never hear about them? Because there were 10 classes in the Advanced Class Guide. Seven of them range from amazing, like the skald and hunter, to solid but uninspired, like the bloodrager or slayer. One of them is the swashbuckler. The other two are the arcanist, which is well known as the biggest cheese class, and the shaman, which fills the same role, and is the third strike against the book.

>>52024275
Your opinion is valid, and I'm sorry you don't enjoy the feat. However, we do not believe that a +6 to a small number of skills warps the game to the extent you believe it does - at least, not in the majority of campaigns. Especially given those resources are resources spent not becoming better at combat.

>>52024301
I'll chime in and say I don't think it's boring at all. You're not the only one using the avowed, anon!

>>52024301
>What is Charm Person

>>52024221
Social Graces is +4! +4!

>>52024301
>what is charm person
>what is suggestion

Bards got spells, man

>>52024310
The feat isn't the fucking problem, the clauses themselves are. I will list why:
>at low levels it messes balance between avowed and non-avowed
A bard, for instance, can no where near compete with an avowed at knowledges at level 1, something bards are supposed to be good at. Avowed have +5 across the board to outclass them at it.
>they're boring
flat bonuses are extremely boring and uninspired, these are extremely boring and uninspired


>>52024334
>>52024330
>lel charm person
>because you can always use mind control magic with no repercussions
People who shout "charm person" are cancer because using charm person has massive repercussions in any conditions where you can't just kill the person once you have the information. I am also talking about level 1 when you limited access to those charm persons. Also charm person has a saving throw, it doesn't just happen.

>>52024327
What about a flat +6 bonus is interesting? Please explain it to me I want to understand your position.

>>52024247
>And what about the guy who wanted to be a suave non-avowed, and is being outdone by the avowed because of this bonus?

"What about the guy who wanted to hit things hard, and is being outdone by the barbarian because of rage?"

"What about the guy who wanted to Ex-debuff in melee, and is being outdone by the unchained rogue because of debilitating injury?"

"What about the guy who wanted to buff his party, and is being outdone by the bard because of inspire courage?"

The avowed's skill boosters are a fucking massive cost, anon. You only get 5 least clauses per character normally, and they're often gonna be spent on non-skill stuff.

Ok, I am going to put forth another example.

Let us say someone wants to go for knowledge skills, reasonable enough right? Let's say it's a bard. They have a class feature all about this.

A level 3 bard, a reasonable level to start at, has +1 to all knowledge skills. A level 3 avowed who took the clause has +6. The bard is a full 25% worst across the board and will be worse until he is level 14 (or 7 if he steals the clause via a feat).

Or let us say for diplomacy. If a man doesn't want to just use mind control he is beaten easily by an avowed. Mind control is most times not an option for MANY reasons. People don't fucking like when you use mind control, so unless you never have to talk to the guy again you likely can't just use it on him.

Or stealth. An avowed has a +6 to stealth at level 1 compared to any other class. How are they supposed to compete?

At low levels what ever the avowed chooses to be good at he will be better at it than any other class who tries to invest in it.

Why is this good design?

>>52024353
THIS!
If you have something at your access and it doesn't break the game (looking at you, wizard spells), why aren't you using it? Rage to get stronger smacking isn't busted, but you're a fucking idiot if you complain that your Inquisitor isn't doing as much damage as a Barbarian. Using a clause isn't busted to get a +6 to a skill or three, but you're retarded if you're complaining that your Fighter isn't as smart or talented as a Bard, Alchemist, Investigator, or yes even an Avowed.

>>52024346
>What about a flat +6 bonus is interesting? Please explain it to me I want to understand your position.

I like having bigger numbers on my character sheet. Looking at skill DC tables, especially at lower levels, and finding things the game lets me do as a result of these numbers is fun to me.

A +6 bonus to a couple useful skills is a bonus that feels on par with stuff like "walk on walls," "shoot lightning from your hands," and "see invisible things and in magical darkness."

A bonus less than that does not.

>>52024353
Any skills the avowed chooses to invest in no class can match him at. If no one can even be comparable when they also specialize in the thing then that is a problem. Classes who specialize in the same thing should be roughly equal in how good they become at it. The ceilings should be neat the same. Avowed push the ceiling a lot higher for themselves.

>>52024367
>At low levels what ever the avowed chooses to be good at he will be better at it than any other class who tries to invest in it.

At the cost of literally every part of his utility stuff. This is like complaining that a barbarian who focuses on hitting things hits things hard, anon.

>>52024367
Because the Avowed ALSO INVESTED IN IT, YOU FUCKFACE. They don't get the Clause and then something else; you're throwing away a clause that could be doing something literally impossible to do (like walking on walls and ignoring difficult terrain, or breathing underwater and in the vacuum of space, or being able to have a rider effect on your main source of damage), in order to... be good at some skills. Which anyone can do with investment, moreso now that the feat exists. So you used up one of your resources, JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE WOULD, to be good at something, JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE WOULD.

>>52024353
Oh for fuck's sake. You can make a competitive damage dealer without having to find a way to get rage. There exist other buff builds that can do it as well as a bard. What options do you have except going for that clause if you want to get knowledges?

>>52024370
Except now my fighter can just spend a feat, something he has plenty of, and be better than the bard, alchemist, and investigator, unless they also pick that feat. By saying "That wasn't good enough, it needs to be buffed," you've created an arms race. And no one wins.

>>52024377
>>52024378
The investment of a single least clause. They will get another to do whatever else they want with it at the next level. And the level after that. And the one after.

>>52024372
>Classes who specialize in the same thing should be roughly equal in how good they become at it

Your comparison point is a bard who has bardic knowledge and spends every single one of his spells per day on stuff, then.

>>52024371
So you're saying that big numbers are interesting because they are big numbers? They are on par with actual abilities and things to do with skills.

Shit I don't fucking know how to argue with such a shit opinion. I suppose you're entitled to it, but god damn.

>>52024370
The bard, the guy who is supposed to be pretty good at knowledges, is incapable of competing with the Avowed at knowledge until past level 10 unless he takes a feat to try and get an Avowed class feature.

The fact is the Avowed is better at their specialization than classes who also specialize in the same thing while bringing nothing interesting to the table besides that number.

Literally it is just big numbers for big numbers, those numbers are boring.

>>52024392
>The bard, the guy who is supposed to be pretty good at knowledges

"Supposedly" but is not, because Bardic Knowledge is shit.

>>52024378
>>52024377
Ok, so he also invested in it. That means for his investment he should be much better than other people who invested in it? Fucking what? What is your reasoning here because I am not seeing it.

The opportunity cost for clauses is less than FUCKING ROGUE TALENTS. I mean holy fuck.

>>52024378
>Because the Avowed ALSO INVESTED IN IT, YOU FUCKFACE.

Except the bard ALSO invested in it. He took a level in bard to get Bardic Knowledge.

1/2 level to knowledge checks and can used them untrained.

My issue with least clauses isn't 'They make you good at skills'. it's that 'They are so very frontloaded'. At level 1, +6 to a skill is 'Half or more of your bonus to that skill' while at level 10 it's a much smaller part of that.

I'd lean towards making them 1/2 level so they match the Inquisitor's boost to Sense Motive or the Bard's boost to knowledge skills.

>>52024378
I think literally anything else in the game would have to make a larger investment for the same returns. Really I think the Vigilante's Social Grace is the closest comparison.

>>52024395
So when someone releases the Unchained Bard and it gives you +6*level to all skills then maybe you'd have a point.

>>52024391
>>52024395
So the avowed deserves to be much better than the bard at it because the bard only gets 1/2 level to all knowledges?

Ok ok, what do you consider "not shit" at level 1? How big does the bonus have to be? Is 6 your cut off because avowed has it on the fucking PDFs?

File: 1472910277408.jpg (20KB, 234x331px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 234x331px

You know what baffles me the most? This guy keeps going on about how the skill numbers are boring and shitty because they're numbers, but is also maintaining that it's bad because people who want to have fun with numbers will want to take it.

Is it boring or is it fun and useful, anon?

I don't blamed the Avowed. I blame Pathfinder. Stupid busted system.

>>52024310
Fucking explain to me the following:
>how does frontloading the ability so much make it balanced with other class's features at low levels?
>why should there be clauses that add nothing but numbers rather than actual class features (the knowledge one gets a pass because it lets you make them untrained)?

>>52024378
It's such a small fucking investment.

>>52024410
We chose +6 because it was the bonus the Warlock gained. We stayed with +6 because that was what we believed was a big enough bonus to feel meaningful compared to the other options available as Least clauses, especially due to the lack of combat benefits.

>>52024406
>I'd lean towards making them 1/2 level so they match the Inquisitor's boost to Sense Motive or the Bard's boost to knowledge skills.

Okay, let's assume that they're entertaining this opinion. How is this fun, cool, and useful on the same level of the non-skill-boost least clauses? Every ability needs to be fun when you pick it, that's the fucking point of a subsystem. "I pick an ability that costs me my entire level's stuff and it's 100% worthless until another 6-10 levels in the future" is not good design.

>>52024406
>>52024416
Because you're somehow missing the fact that other clauses exist. Oh boy, skills, that's really cool compared to SHOOTING LIGHTNING AND FLYING.

>>52024412
Abilities that do nothing but give numbers are boring.

Having +50 to a skill so that you are simply the best at it is both boring, uninspired, and bad game design for balance between other classes.

+50 is an exaggeration to make a point, +6 is still much more than any other class can muster at level 1, the closest you get is Social Grace as +4 to 1 skill.

Things can be bad game design, poorly balanced, boring and uninspired.

This managed to be all of them.

>>52024413
Explain your reasoning.

>>52024416
>It's such a small fucking investment.

It's really not. It's your entire goddamn level.

>>52024413
Come to 5e, friend.

>>52024420
>>52024427
Good, if you're only in it for big flashy things you were never going to pick the skill boost in the first place. If you want to be an avowed skill monkey then it's still on the table.

>>52024429

So is the Bard's entire level. I mean, if the bard spends all his spells on 'Be good at skills' he can't actually match the Avowed in those skills WHILE the spells are up. Let alone when they are not.

>>52024428
>This managed to be all of them.

This is your opinion, and I guess that's all I can really say there. My opinion is that it's decent design, a fun ability, and feels great to pick.

The designers of the avowed seem to agree with me. Though you really need to convince them, not me.

I'm going to bed, it's 1am here and I'm too tired for this.

>>52024418
Yeah, it's a dumb fucking idea. Make them give new ways to use the fucking skills and a scaling bonus. Make them interesting abilities rather than the shit it is now.

Jesus christ it's like you learned how to design games on Paizo's forums. It's embarrassing.

>>52024420
> How is this fun, cool, and useful on the same level of the non-skill-boost least clauses?
It isn't, that's why it's shit. They need to actually give you new things to do rather than just bonuses because just numbers are boring and uninspired.

>>52024427
The fact other things exist does not excuse these from being imbalanced when played against other classes and boring. Just slapping bigger numbers on it was the worst fucking path to take.

>>52024439
>If you want to be an avowed skill monkey then it's still on the table.

Except that the avowed is a 4 skill point class with a Cha focus. They can't skillmonkey for shit without the large boosts. +1/2 level is NOT ENOUGH to actually be good at a skill.

>>52024450
>Jesus christ it's like you learned how to design games on Paizo's forums. It's embarrassing.

haha what. "It's embarrassing" that someone has a different opinion than you on what makes for a useful skill ability? Man, you are really salty about this.

I hope they fucking leave it, just to spite you

>>52024429
If a bard spends his entire level on it he is still worse.

And the avowed gets shapes in addition to clauses, and other class features like bonus feats.

>>52024446
>This is your opinion, and I guess that's all I can really say there. My opinion is that it's decent design, a fun ability, and feels great to pick.
>+6 is a fun well designed ability
I can not wrap my head around why someone would think this.

>>52024450
Write something better then or fuck off. All you're doing is repeating the same thing, over and over, without actually saying anything new.

>>52024427

No, I get that. My issue is that it's got basically zero scaling to it which makes the class too dipping friendly/too front loaded.

I mean, there isn't a level 1 SPELL that gives that big a bonus to those skills and they are short term. It says something when spells are losing out to this effect.

I'd much rather see them get something like the Spellburst Savant by the same dev. 'Take this and all knowledge skills are now Charisma based' and you can use them untrained. It makes them very good at those skills without making them utterly eclipse other people focusing on them.

>>52024451
And yet bards still somehow manage it with just those extra 2 skill points per level. And versatile performance, of course, adding another 2 every now and then, but neither one of those make them better at a skill, just gives them more skills that they can be okay at.

>>52024458
>haha what. "It's embarrassing" that someone has a different opinion than you on what makes for a useful skill ability? Man, you are really salty about this.
It's embarrassing that he thinks it's good design, because it isn't.

>>52024451
They are 2 skill ranks per level behind bard but more than make up for it just with that sweet +6 to all knowledges.

>>52024459
>I can not wrap my head around why someone would think this.

Good for you! I can wrap my head around why someone might not, but for me, and many others, it's fun.

You're not the only one who plays the game, not the only one using the class, and your opinion isn't objectively right. The game supports multiple playstyles.

So why don't kindly take a moment to step back and realize this? ^_^;

>>52024471
... You want to change the +6.
Into a bonus that could instead be upwards of +8 by 6th level.

... Really great design.

File: 1471959303947.jpg (429KB, 593x940px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 593x940px

>>52024475
>It's embarrassing that he thinks it's good design, because it isn't.

And that is your opinion! I'm sure they're taking it into consideration.

>>52024469
>write something better or fuck off
It's a playtest you fuckwit. The point is to tell the devs "Hey, this is way too fucking strong," and then it's their job to fix it, or admit that they don't want their class to be used.

I /like/ the avowed. I want to play the avowed, and allow my players to play the avowed, but I'll gladly throw the baby out with the bathwater here.

>>52024469
I did give fucking suggestions. I posted them >>52024275 It doesn't have to be those, that isn't the point here.

I'm saying abilities that give front loaded large bonuses and bring nothing else to the table are boring.

People apparently disagree with 'big numbers are interesting for being big numbers'. Ok, fine, what ever.

Are they more interesting than actual new uses for the skill?

Would you rather take abilities that give you new ways to use your skills rather than just give 'big numbers'?

Because what I would do is actually design clauses that let you use your skills to do cool and new things rather than just give increases bonuses. Heck maybe even give both, but not frontloaded so it messes with early level balance.

>>52024485

Yes, I do.

However, it's not an additional bonus. It's changing which stat the skill is based on.

>>52024480
>You're not the only one who plays the game, not the only one using the class, and your opinion isn't objectively right.

Not him, but that's why people are arguing about it.

That doesn't make you any more right than it makes him wrong.

Ok I want to understand and see where people are coming from. I will take a step back.

Someone explain to me the following:
>Why is a flat bonus to a skill an interesting and well designed ability?
>Is it more interesting than new ways to use your skills?

I am trying to see your points of view so I can explain mine better.

>>52024471
>make the Cha-based class get a scaling +4 to +13 bonus that will be +6 by level 8 at a minimum, and then continue to eclipse the existing one

Well done, anon. You are a good designer. The avowed with a +0 Int mod has no change here other than the bigger bonus.

>>52024492
>It's a playtest you fuckwit. The point is to tell the devs "Hey, this is way too fucking strong," and then it's their job to fix it, or admit that they don't want their class to be used.

Insulting their work is all fine and dandy, but personal insults just make you sound like a shitter who can't handle actual discussion.

>>52024480
Holy shit could you sound like any more of a faggot. You realize we are talking about the balance of a playtest right? It's the fucking purpose of the playtest.

>>52024428
>Explain your reasoning.
The devs here are trying to balance this mechanic internally. Problem is, that's fucking stupid because it doesn't matter if +6 to face skills is worse than scent, or a +4 will save scaling with charisma in a vacuum. No one is going to take Silver Tongue or Blend In unless they're making use of it. +15 diplomacy or stealth at 1 on such a small commitment can tear the right book apart, or the wrong book if the player's right enough an asshole.

AND THIS IS FINE, ACTUALLY. Because people who build at something should be fucking good at it. Except we get to the next issue. No one else is able to commit so little to be so fucking good in this way. I think we can all easily acknowledge that +6 to any given skill is at least good at level 1, because the next best thing is +4 to a smaller range.

But as other anon autistically mentioned, Barbarians are better at hitting shit, Wizards break everything, so if you're making the comparisons there, whatever, forget Avowed, someone else is going to tear a hole in the universe their way.

And that's just a fundamental issue of Pathfinder. You are always best off picking a strategy and becoming a god at it, while becoming as good as possible at ignoring everything else. The problem with Avowed becomes not so much, "I'm too good at this", or, "I'm better than everyone else at this", but, "I'm better at everyone else at this at the smallest expenditure I possible".

And Wizards are even worse, but you know, that's Pathfinder for you. So I don't blame Avowed, the devs are building the class so it competes, I blame the core mechanics making this what it has to do to be relevant. If that makes any sense, it was half unintelligible in my head.

autism speaks

>>52024506

>+0 int mod
>In Pathfinder

Do you hate skill points? The avowed wouldn't have enough skill points to actually take advantage of those least clauses with that little.

You also assume the avowed will utterly monofoucus Cha. You know they removed Spirited Swordplay so you actually need other stats now. The devs themselves said they want the Avowed to need to focus on 3 stats.

>people fucking lose their minds when DHB builds a skill monkey avowed
>people defend the clauses he took like holy text when questioned
Like pottery

>>52024505
>Why is a flat bonus to a skill an interesting and well designed ability?

Because skills are fun, especially at low levels, to a lot of people.

>Is it more interesting than new ways to use your skills?

Depends on the skill uses. In a lot of cases, yeah, because it enables you to use the skills at all, instead of forcing you to invest the rest of your character resources into using the ability you spent a massive opportunity cost on.

I think the difference here is outlook.

You're looking at it as "this is a boring numbers boost."

We're looking at it as "this boost makes us able to use the skills to affect the world! Kickass!"

>>52024506
Jesus, what? I'm not insulting the avowed devs at all. They're trying their best and I'm telling them, along with plenty of other people in this thread, that right now, their best is not right. I am insulting the person who thinks that you can shut down discussion of playtest balance with "That's just your opinion, man." Yeah, and a lot of people share it, and would prefer for the avowed to have balance out of the box rather than have to stick another set of homerules on a 3rd party class to prevent it from being too strong.

>>52024534

>We're looking at it as "this boost makes us able to use the skills to affect the world! Kickass!"

And what about the people going 'There is literally nothing else that gets a bonus that big or even close so it's too big for level 1'?

>>52024534
So why is the avowed the only person who's allowed to have that from levels 1-6?

File: 1436716581696.jpg (397KB, 652x1244px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 652x1244px

>>52024221
Yo, anyone got a copy of Starjammer? I'm running Iron Gods soon and I want to look over the races/equipment inside.

>>52024294
Isn't ironskin monk shit?

File: 1473697172358.png (26KB, 614x585px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 614x585px

>>52024521
Well, it has now.

Thanks for that.

>>52024517
>>52024505
>>52024494
Here's the thing y'all are missing.
Why is an Avowed taking the skills that supposedly "make them better than someone who's investing in it" if there's already someone in the party investing in those skills?
If you've got a Bard or Investigator, who is a Knowledge-Monkey, why are you spending your resources to be good at Knowledge when you could be doing anything else? If you're taking that Clause, you don't have competition because you ARE the party's primary Knowledge-Bot. Same with Silver Tongue; if you're taking it, you're the party's face. If you're not taking it, someone else already has the role of face.

This is a cooperative game; you don't have to be able to do everything better than everyone else and compete against them at their own jobs. If they're the face, if they're the knowledgebot, if they're the disable-device-er and sneaky guy, then you're the guy that's shitting lightning. If nobody in the party is one of those roles, you can take on that role without needing to completely respec your character for it.

So what I ask is the following, what does /pfg/ prefer?

>Front loaded fairly large flat bonus to a range of skills
>Smaller scaling bonus that also gives new uses for the skills

Which would be more preferable as a class feature to take?

Heck the scaling bonus should at level 20 be bigger than +6.

A 2->4->6->8 bonus would be what I would see as best honestly. If I were to do it I would do the following:
>Starts at +2 with new use of skill, upgrades to +4 at 6th level, improves on new use of skill, upgrade to +6 at 12th level, give second new use of skill(s), upgrades to +8 at 18th level gives upgrade to second new use of skill(s)

I would also break the skills up differently as:
>knowledges
>bluff/disguise
>diplomacy/intimidate
>stealth/sleight of hand

>>52024534
>You're looking at it as "this is a boring numbers boost."
I am looking at it more as:
>this boost outpaces anyone else who tries to invest in it for the same level of opportunity cost

Giving a boost is not a problem. Giving a boost and having no one else being able to invest a similar opportunity cost ability to see close to the same returns is. The whole Social Grace being the next best thing and much worse issue.

>We're looking at it as "this boost makes us able to use the skills to affect the world! Kickass!"
This is a good thing.

A smaller less front loaded bonus that also gives new ways to use your skills would be far preferable.

>>52024557
As an addendum to this guy's question, even if the feat was available from level 1, why should a person have to blow a feat to be good at their skills?

>>52024576
Just like it's not a problem for the barbarian to be killing shit infinitely easier than the swashbuckler, right?

Cuz it's a team game.

>>52024572
i'm here to help

>>52024576
"No competition parties" are not a reasoning for some classes to simply be better at specialization that both supposed should be able to invest in.

Why should anyone ever have a bard for knowledges when it could be an avowed, if the avowed will simply be better at it for most of the game?

The fact you will not have two people who invest in the same thing is no reasoning to got two classes ceilings when investing to be different.

If you think it is you may actually be a retard.

>>52024534
And avowed should be the only one who gets that big on a bonus before level 14? Why?

>>52024506
>Insulting their work is all fine and dandy, but personal insults just make you sound like a shitter who can't handle actual discussion.
Trying to shut down playtest discussion with "it's just your opinion" is fucking asinine.

>>52024576
>you can take on that role without needing to completely respec your character for it
No anon that is exactly the problem here.

Also skill overlap in parties is fine because it's a roleplaying game.

>>52024588
That's because the Barbarian and Swashbuckler SHOULD be the same role, but one is infinitely worse.
An Avowed CAN be a role, but isn't required to be one. They CAN be a primary damage dealer, but if their party is Blaster Sorcerer, Barbarian, and Inquisitor, they can instead be the skillmonkey or the tactician of the party. The COULD be good at knowledges, but if you've already got a Wizard, a Bard, and an Investigator, then maybe you should be a blaster instead?
>>52024592
>Why should anyone ever have a bard for knowledges when it could be an avowed, if the avowed will simply be better at it for most of the game?
Because you don't want to be an Avowed? Because you want actual spells instead of clauses? Because you want Bardic Masterpieces? Because you want fucking Initiating and to be a Rubato?

>>52024576
It's a team game. It doesn't matter if anyone is better than anyone else! We're not competing.

If you can't see what's wrong with your post then there is not a lot we can do to help you.

>>52024605
Having two classes who can be the same role and one being much better than the other is a problem. As a knowledge monkey an Avowed is better until level 14 and is FAR better at low levels.

This is a problem.

How are you not seeing that? You fucking talked about it in your post.

>>52024605
You shouldn't be able to be better than your Bard that built to face by casually investing your flex clause away after picking up tools for your build.

>>52024609
>Wizards being so much stronger than fighters is A-Okay!

Anon, consider your words.

>>52024287
Welp nobody responded with interest after an hour so imma just leave this here while I go to bed. Message my roll20 account if ye've got questions and concerns and i'll reply to 'em.

https://app.roll20.net/lfg/listing/71015/a-generic-pathfinder-adventure-title

File: 54acb0f2fb788ad5001322fef140bfcd.jpg (2MB, 1504x2100px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1504x2100px

Hidden knowledge and silver tongue are already ludicrously front-loaded for granting a +6 untyped bonus to a wide swath of skills, but where they truly get ludicrous is the dragon betrothed's 4th-level ability:

>Draconic Concert (4th): Whenever you use a clause with the betrothed descriptor, that clause and the first non-betrothed clause cast by you or your companion before the end of your next turn gains one of the following benefits. Alternatively, you can focus as a standard action to gain one of these benefits with a clause that is currently affecting you (such as a permanent clause).

>All numeric measurements of a burst, emanation, or spread-shaped clause are increased by 100%.
>A clause that creates a number of 10-foot cubes creates twice as many cubes as normal.
>Creatures affected by the clause lose immunity to mind-affecting effects for one round.
>The next skill check you make within before the end of your next turn gains double the bonus normally granted by the clause.
>Creatures making saving throws against clauses enhanced in this way must roll twice on their saves, using the lower result.

Option #4 turns hidden knowledge and silver tongue into a staggering +12 bonus, and that is just not right.

>>52024650
Anon I was being sarcastic. I was saying if you saw nothing wrong with that statement there is a problem.

File: Kikuchiyo.jpg (55KB, 347x250px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 347x250px

Hey /pfg/, how would you stat him?

>>52024287
>>52024651
You chose a bad time to post. Mechanics debates are the strongest power on /tg/, not even waifus can compare.

>>52024652
Oh shit nigga that's dumb, that's really dumb.

>tfw at level 4 I have better bardic knowledge than a level 24 bard

>>52024652
>avowedfags will defend this

>>52024652

Oh jesus christ. That is a lot of bonus.

>>52024666
Actually a Bushi Brutal Slayer Stalker probably.

>>52024652
>>52024674
No, we won't. That's definitely too high for first level, regardless of your opinion on the base bonus, and we'll work on a solution.

I've never looked at Avowed before and I'm pretty sure now that I never will.

I'm working on a setting where one of the continents never developed Vancian arcane spellcasting. The people's there have made due with creating pacts with higher powers, spell-like abilities, physic abilities, and so on.

Any idea on what else to do here? Unique race ideas or societal implications of this?

>>52024652
Forget Silver Tongue, I need to figure out what kind of acrobatics shenanigans I can get up to.

>>52024683
I have not seen any reasoning for the abilities being frontloaded besides you saying "in my opinion it's fine". Do you have actually any numbers based on other classes for why frontloading is a good thing?

>somehow Taveena ended up more of a "well I think it's fine" asshat than DHB
Fucking how? DHB at least pretends to listen to mechanical criticism.

>>52024679
That's wis base though, and Kikuchiyo is temperamental, not level-headed in the slightest.

>>52024703
True, Bushi Warlord then.

Man /pfg/ has been very self-depreciating today. Every thread's been filled with "don't play Pathfinder" and "I wish I could quit this game".

>>52024712
All of the lewd posting, waifu posting, fetish posting, cute posting, furry posting, and other horse shit has lead me to this. I just hate the community so fucking much. Not just here. Pathfinder is a fucking plague, a blight upon RPGs.

>>52024701
I'm sorry. We're trying to come up with a solution that pleases everyone (thus the addition of Legalistic to allow access to these abilities to other classes), but obviously that hasn't been enough. There WILL be changes coming to ensure parity between classes, and Forrest is holding a spraybottle to make sure that my own personal nostalgia for the third edition version doesn't negatively affect the product. That said, we do not presently have a solution that satisfies everyone. We're working on it, and your feedback has absolutely been registered.

Can I just replace Broken Blade with Fool's Errand and call it good fuck Broken Blade

>>52024723
>thus the addition of Legalistic to allow access to these abilities to other classes
Class bleed over should not be a feat. It's a dumb idea that muddles the entire idea of classes.

Make archetypes that give people limited access to Avowed stuff. Make an Avowed Archetype that can temporarily gift clauses.

Feats or magic items that grant class skills are a poor idea design-wise.

>>52024723

Something like the bard ability to use skills for other skills/padgent of the peacock might not be bad. It allows people who otherwise haven't invested heavily in those skills to match up to those who have and will help with the fact that the avowed doesn't have a heap of skill ranks.

Maybe something like:

>Pick one of your pact skills. You can use it in place of X, Y and Z skills.

File: image_0.jpg (48KB, 500x432px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x432px

>>52024723
Thank you, Taveena!

I'm sorry we disagree, and I hope we can come to a satisfying conclusion!

>>52024728
Yes.

>>52024743
>>52024723
And to keep going. Yeah I disagree with you on this shit and I think your class has a lot of fucking issues, but fuck that's what playtesting is for god dammit.

>>52024743
We actually do have these archetypes planned, INCLUDING a Bard one, but that was intended for the next Avowed book - and we're not presently up for starting another project, given how massive they are.

>>52024744
The main concern I have with this is that it's extremely unrewarding as a choice at low levels, and many of the pact skills are, to be honest, pretty useless, being intended more as a thematic ribbon than an actual balancing point.

>>52024763
Quite. We'll keep going until the class is the best it can be.

>>52024777

>The main concern I have with this is that it's extremely unrewarding as a choice at low levels

I dunno. It easily takes someone from +2 (14 int for skill points, no ranks or skills) to +8 (18 Cha, 1 rank + 3 for trained) for a few skills. That's +6 without it being a bonus that other people couldn't get.

But yeah, being the pact skill might be a poor idea as not all pacts get a Charisma skill.

>>52024728
Fool's Errand is the worst discipline.

>>52024826
Anon, that's not how you spell Tempest Gale.

>>52024777
I would be fine with it starting as a +2 and scaling to a +8 as I level up.

Social Grade provides a total +20 over the course of the game. This would provide a total +24. It's a little better but not hugely. It's also no longer massive frontloaded.

People take social grace. Think of it that way.

File: Velvet_Model_Render.jpg (56KB, 600x596px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x596px

Its 3am and i can't sleep, so naturally i'm trying to figure out how anime I can be

At present, i'm trying to figure out how to make Velvet Crowe from Berseria

I'm guessing a Fiendbound Marauder, utilize a combination of unarmed strikes, a gauntlet in one hand and a Klar in the other

Could be neat.

>>52024826
but at least it isn't "I'm Broken blade, watch me deal 20d6 damage at level 5"

>>52024777
Most skill monkeys are much more unrewarding at low levels than Avowed are.

Someone list current recruiting games.

What I remember is:
>Dragon 2
>Dragonborn
>Curse of the Lazy Throne
>this guy >>52024651

Anyone else?

>>52024816
None of the pacts actually get a charisma skill as a pact skill, due to Avowed getting all three social skills, disguise, and use magic device as normal class skills. So pretty bad, unless you're a Strength based Dragon Pact.

>>52024833
Not a bad point, but personally I prefer the sideways scaling of Social Grace to vertical scaling, which has felt pretty meaningless to me at lower levels. That said, we'll definitely consider it.

>>52024777
Avowed blow other skill monkeys out of the water at low levels.

>We actually do have these archetypes planned, INCLUDING a Bard one, but that was intended for the next Avowed book - and we're not presently up for starting another project, given how massive they are.
If you don't make a fucking Bard/Fiend Pact one with a Devil Went Down to Georgia theme I will fucking gut you.

Though I think DHB said something about making a class that does that.

>>52024856

>None of the pacts actually get a charisma skill as a pact skill, due to Avowed getting all three social skills, disguise, and use magic device as normal class skills. So pretty bad, unless you're a Strength based Dragon Pact.

Yeah, in retrospect that part was a poor part. Still, I stand by the base idea of skill replacement being a good way to get some nice versatility/bonuses.

>>52024855
Dragonborn's not recruiting anymore. It closed a few hours ago.

>>52024833
>>52024856
Actually so here is an idea:
>+2 at level 1
>+1 additional at level 4 and every 4 there after
>+7 at level 20
>gives +21 total opposed to +20 social grace
>vertical which is better at high levels than horizontal
>however skill are predetermined rather than chosen

This roughly compares I think.

>>52024856
I don't know what kind of games you've been playing, but I think the team is seriously underrating skill bonuses. Skill focus does see use on sets where you don't need as many feats, Social Grace is considered a great reason to take Vigilante. I think there's too much consideration towards combat here, it's important, but most adventure paths give you plenty of opportunity outside of it.

You know, I've never actually seen someone play a Hunter.

>>52024903
I'm doing it in RotJR!

>>52024903
I have!

Its actually pretty sweet

File: 1481690196533.png (2MB, 1000x1386px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1000x1386px

>>52024891
>Social Grace is considered a great reason to take Vigilante

Since when?

>>52024903
Had a guy who played a half-orc hunter with a hippo. Fuck I hated that hippo.

>>52024475
Let's be real for a sec
If 2hu
2FUCKINhu doesn't point out it out as a problem, I think you're making something out of nothing.
Want to know why? Because 2hu has jerked the highest possible numbers and aspects of the class, pointing out every potentially manipulative or exploitable piece.

In terms of pointing out high numbers, 2hu has already done that.

>>52024891
Not enough adventure path games, so our experience will be substantially different. That said, it's really messy to do upward scaling here. A lot of spells - arguably the closest analogy - don't scale at all, and our design goal was something that feels significant at all levels. Kind of trying to avoid 'ehh, it's no use now, I'll wait until later.' It's a delicate balance. Also one that Forrest told me she had ideas for right before she left, so I'm just kinda sitting here apologizing to you guys.

>>52024891
>Skill focus does see use on sets where you don't need as many feats
I've never seen anyone take skill focus in real game except as a prerequisite for something else. Even if you DO have spare feats, there are much better things to spend them on.

>>52024950
Uh. bro?

2hu has been pointing it out as too high.

>>52024950
2hu has been focusing on the combat potential of the class.

File: TomboyMonk.jpg (154KB, 1748x2480px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1748x2480px

would you marry a tomboyish monk who just wants to be a dancer/performer? She doesn't know where babies come from though

>>52024950
2hu did complain about it.

>>52024221
what is going on with miss fox lady's sword? why are fantasy swords so crazy?

>>52024951
+2 to three skills is already better than skill focus. Scaling to +4 is fine.

+2 to three skills is something I would be willing to take at level 1.

>>52024962
Yes, provided somebody else in the party can give her the talk first. Because it'd make me feel like I'm grooming her if I had to do it.

>>52024950
2hu did mention it as a problem.

i should apply to a game

File: Meguhuh.jpg (73KB, 1128x628px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1128x628px

>>52024261
>Reflex None
>30ft is a bit slow. 40/80 maybe?
>Autosave against all further ones for a full round
>Can be weatherproofed against
>4th selection now grants reflex-half if you... failed reflex and it hit?

This needs work. Maybe the feats will help it though, surely there'll be some nice combos in th~

>none. just like barrage.
... Oi.

>>52024970
A lot of people are thinking about it in terms of whether they'd take it at level 1 over something else, but I can't help but think of it more as, would I take this at level 5 after I've gotten my important bonuses.

Though I'd totally take it at 1 at +6 just because you'll pass every relevant skill check rolling a natural 1. Like, goddamn.

>>52024684
Mike Pence said the same thing about men in shady airport bathrooms, and look how well that went.

>>52024962
Compare >>52024971 to >>52025002

>>52024999
Sorry. Open to suggestions - the main reason was that we brainstormed and they kinda already did anything. The 4th effectively means 'when the missile finally hits something, everything nearby also has to save against damage'.

>>52025048
... 'already did anything'? They already did a lot of stuff we had ideas for.

Level 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 Barrage damage:
Character takes 16 DEX 15 CHA, puts the racial in charisma, and all three level ups as well as he gets them. Headband will be +2 at 6th and +4 at 12th. Overcharge taken at 3rd. A third selection for Barrage is taken at 6th and level 4 at 10th


Lv 1~2:
2x 1d6 = Avg 7. This is a bit on the low side

Lv 3~4: Pulse +1d, Overcharge +1d
2x 3d6 = Avg 21. Enough to one-round a CR-1, but there's no debuffs going on here. 14 damage would mean 3 rounds required to take down =CR, and 2 for the -1. This is okay so long as further optimization options are available somewhere out there

Lv 6: Pulse +1d, Overcharge +1d, CHA to Damage (5)
2x 5d6+5 = 45. No longer enough to kill CR-1 in one round (52hp median)

Lv 9: Shots +1, Pulse +2d
3x 7d6+5 = 88.5 Still just a bit short of CR-1s despite the massive buff this time.

Lv 12: Pulse +1d, Overcharge +1d, Cha to +7
3x 9d6+7 = 115: No longer enough to kill CR-2(126) in 1 round; Just barely attains CR-3 (114).

Where this is an issue is the fact that these numbers are without any of the debuffs or debilitations that one would generally go "but you're doing this to the target too", as this is with overcharge on.

Clearly the numbers are not far behind, but they ARE behind and slowly falling further. I'd suggest some kind of... uh... I dunno, maybe a pendulum. Kinda wanted to bash that guy's head in at work for playing with his damn yoyo half the damn shift.

Pulse Pendulums are +1 or better light-flails through which aether pulses may be freely channeled or fired. Similar to a defending weapon, as a free action when attacking or using your aether pulse you may choose to transfer the weapon's enhancement bonus to the pulse itself, increasing the damage (but not the to-hit) of your aether pulse by +2 for every +1 of enhancement bonus given up this way.


That handles a WBL cost on the class for non-weapon-loaded shape users and gets the damage about 2/3 of the way back up.

>>52025048
The missiles are a little slow and unwieldy. The general idea isn't bad of course...

First the number of targets - and I HATE having to say this, HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE - is too high at the earliest levels. What made the old-old circus bad was that that many targets was basically impossible in the range it had.

Lower it to 4 missiles, increasing by 2 at 6th, 12th and 18th.
2nd selection adds 2 missiles as well, but instead of doubling the shape, you can now put 2 missiles on a single target

Rank 3 moves their movement speed up to 80ft from a new base of 40: It's beyond sad if people can outrun the damn things, sometimes by level 2, and 60ft is pretty normal for most characters by level 8-10. Do mention these things should be capable of flight; it's homing missiles, not Search-Snake!

Rank 4: use wording similar to the Rocket Launcher for clarity. A direct hit gets no saves, Splash gets saves. Splashes also count towards the max of 2 hits per turn even if halved, so it's better to get direct.

The autosave-vs-everything-else needs some work there: AS-IS it even protects from whatever modulation you may have had loaded on the initial hit, because it took damage therefore it CANNOT catch fire or get stunned or anything.


As for feats: Consider that these are basically a perfect *carrier*: some suggestions follow

>>52025276
Good ideas. Likely to implement a number of these. Especially the save whoopsie.

File: 145c016cd8c7cbd51e0562e6b983acba.png (1MB, 827x1182px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 827x1182px

>Divine Pact
>Attunement: When you make this pact, you must choose the deity who granted you this pact, and two of their domains. Creatures within 30 feet suffer a –1 penalty to AC and on saving throws against divine spells, domain powers, and blessings. This bonus is doubled for spells on your chosen domain’s lists, your chosen domain’s domain powers, and your chosen domain’s blessings. Further, the doubled penalty applies spells and spell-like abilities that are on your domain lists, even if they are not divine spells. You may choose a number of creatures up to your Charisma modifier who instead gain a +1 bonus to AC and on saving throws against the same effects, similarly doubled for the abilities associated with your chosen domains. You may change which creatures gain this bonus as a standard action. The bonus and penalty each increase by 1 at 10th level and every ten class levels thereafter. In addition, you treat all feats that require you to worship your patron deity as avowed bonus feats.

Setting aside the wording errors like "this bonus is doubled" on a penalty, how is this supposed to be a good attunement? It is insultingly situational considering how divine casters are buff-oriented.

Domain lists are often quite idiosyncratic and unhelpful.

>Undead Pact
>Attunement: Choose bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing. You gain damage reduction equal to your class level, overcome by that damage type. In addition, you are healed by both negative energy and positive energy.

Meanwhile, how is this not too good for an attunement? If we compare it to the dragon attunement:
>Attunement: You can count as being dragon type when it would be advantageous for you to do so (including for prerequisites and requirements), and become immune to sleep and paralysis effects.

The undead attunement will be a life-saver more often.

Likewise the undead damage reduction will probably be more useful than the elemental attunement's single-type energy resistance and conversion.

>>52025363
I dunno 2hu, getting put to sleep is pretty much a death sentence when hostiles are around.

File: 3548eb64751464d11edef050390cfb1e.jpg (425KB, 2044x2330px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 2044x2330px

>>52025514

Full attacks from enemies are much more common than sleep and paralysis effects, and until 11th-level, the avowed either has no noteworthy defenses against such things or defenses that come with non-negligible drawbacks (old one attunement, escape clause).

As well, you cannot possibly convince me that single-type energy resistance 2 × class level is as valuable as damage reduction (class level)/slashing.

File: tmp_10073-14870538518602143610116.jpg (1MB, 1819x2093px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1819x2093px

>>52025654
>As well, you cannot possibly convince me
Well that's a given, considering your ego.

>>52025654
Yeah, but undead pact isn't immunity to damage, just resistance. You have to figure out the damage equivalence of a character death before you can figure out the probability, and thus possible value loss, of a CDG.

>>52025363

2hu, will you please take a look at this and do your worst?

>>52025640

>>52025684
I'm slowly succumbing to madness, I've been inching closer and closer to 2hu's viewpoint as time goes on.

>>52025701
An hero before it's too late.

>>52025701
2hu's viewpoint is entirely valid when working under a certain premise, namely that char-gen is something to be won.

>>52025723
That's basically it yeah. I'm not quite DHB yet, but I'm finding myself going: "I have a concept, and these guidelines. Why shouldn't I just build it as strong as possible between these?"

When I was new it killed me taking Power Attack over a fun character building feat at 1, but now it kills me to add CHA when it does nothing mechanically for me.

If I want to try dual-wielding, what class should I choose? I want to be able to use dual weapons with maximum efficiency, not drag them around to look cool and edgy. Until recently I played as casters only, and now I want to try something new.

>>52025765
Slayer's the best dual-wielder in the game.

Still shitty at it, but you know.

>>52024855
There's the WotR w/Leadership game.

>>52025765
Vigilante with the Lethal Grace talent gets 1/2 level to damage, which really helps with the finessing normally required for TWF builds.

File: itanolaunch.gif (5MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 400x300px

>>52025276
(oh also there should be something in regards to targeting walls,etc. Obviously, though, if you aim at the ground; you can only splash the target, not get a direct hit, though it at least will have hit that square instead of careening off into who knows fuck where)

I'm writing these with a bit of the damage issue in mind. Wonder if you'll recognize the naming scheme...

Tornado:
>The other term for it is massacre
Prerequisites: Circus II and Barrage III
As a Full-Round action, you may fire as many missiles per chosen Circus target as you have available Barrage beams. The number of missiles a target may be affected by increases in accordance. This remains a 'standard action' shape for the purpose of feats affecting certain action shapes.

When you use your Aether Barrage, you may forego up to all available attacks. Each beam you give up in this fashion allows you to detonate a single one of your missiles on the field harmlessly. This detonation immediately becomes the origin point for a full Aether Barrage, using the modulation/overcharge/infusion and target settings of the source missile.


>Example: You are level 8, dealing 4d6+6 (cha) per barrage beam. You use a full-round action to fire three missiles instead of two at a target. Your following turn you detonate the missiles. This gives you a total of 9 attacks (3x3) in two turns, as opposed to 6 attacks but with 3 "right now" in the original turn. This not only ensures brutal scaling at highest levels, but also ensures you do not murder everything in the first round which some people have issues with especially paizo-preferred balance types.

>>52024651
>Minor Gestalt
>Based on a post by an Anon

Oh! Hey, you took my suggestion and EXPLODED it into something big, with all this fancy formatting. Will read through it all soon.

>>52025765
Content allowed? PoW's Stalker, Dervish Defender Warder, and Warlord do a pretty solid job at it too.

>>52025363
>>52025654
Great, but given the bonus is based on class levels, it's important to look at the pact as a whole. I mean, I personally want to buff the dragon attunement as well (though either that fell by the wayside or Forrest talked me down, I can't remember). It was one of the early pacts we wrote, so there's likely to be some weirdness. That said... 40 fire resist is still going to save your ass a good bunch, and Undead is MEANT to be one of the hardest pacts to kill through brute force. They're the pact MEANT to be able to stand toe-to-toe with a monster and eat its full attack. We have different design goals for different pact attunements.

The variety of domain options you get from any given god should give you enough DECENT options to choose from regardless. Is it less than ideal from a newbie-friendliness standpoint? Yes. It is also the only goddamn way we could fit a deity's portfolio into this besides writing up an individual pact for every single deity? Also yes!

Plus it'd help if you actually pointed out the typos so we can fix 'em, instead of just talking about them. I mean, I know you're not our editor, but that's a hell of a lot more useful as feedback.

Also, we literally just had this discussion elsewhere. I'm responding here just so that people in this thread know your concerns have been addressed, but that's kind of frustrating. Choose one avenue of communication.

I mean, I kinda want to nerf undead anyway because the Stone, Metal, and Sand earth elemental subpacts I've got here give DR bypassed by TWO types. Still. different design goals for the pacts.

>All this hatred for broken blade
I keep seeing it but usually with weapon group adaptation. Is it really that bad? How broken will it be if I pair it with a 2/3 initiator gestalt like myrimodon/druid that focuses on polymorph and broken blade?

>>52025857
Yes, Broken Blade is literally broken in terms of how much damage it does at all levels of the game. 2/3 initiaton doesn't matter since everything powerful is still within your grasp, and earlier if you take Advanced Study.

>>52025868
How does advanced study make it worse?

File: 9375aecbf17348ed2f82c24c9b06b8df.jpg (485KB, 700x613px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 700x613px

>Court Fey Pact
>Sense: You automatically detect the presence or absence of illusion effects within 30 feet. This does not reveal the location of illusions or which objects are illusory, only that they are there. If you wish, you can exclude specific effects that you are aware of from this sense.

Logically, if you automatically and inexorably detect illusion effects, could you not pinpoint an illusion as you move towards it?

>>52025686

You would also have to determine just how common sleep and paralysis effects actually are, as opposed to ubiquitous physical attacks.

>>52025857
The problem with Broken Blade is two things. One, the +2 damage for free with discipline weapons. Two, the devs were obviously going into it with an idea that "Unarmed is weak, if we don't make the unarmed discipline strong then no one will use it," and made it too strong instead of balanced.

>>52025885
That's what I was saying. If a character death is just worth their actual HP lost then Undead is better without a doubt. But for some people there are other costs to losing a character, whether they are having to go through character generation, having to sit out a session, or simply the loss of a character they've grown attached to. For you it may be a simple choice, but for someone who highly values each character, or who may have a GM prone to using sleep on PCs, the choice is equally simple in the other direction.

And in a way? You don't know where in your 30 foot radius the illusion is, but you know when it enters. Assuming whatever is under the illusion is immobile you should have no trouble triangulating its position on any axes you can move.

>>52025885
You can triangulate its position, yes. That said, multiple squares enter the range each round, so you need to ascertain which one tripped your sense.

File: 3ceddc111658f9f305c0ff706e4b85d0.jpg (431KB, 800x1120px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 800x1120px

>>52025853

If the pacts are supposed to be balanced holistically, then where is the undead pact supposed to be relatively weak compared to the other pacts?

That 4th-level empowerment is highly appreciable damage over time.

>>52025921
>>52025924

You do not exactly teleport from your starting position to your ending position. If the "illusion check" only triggers at certain points during your turn or the round, then it should state such a thing; as it currently stands, the "automatically detect" wording suggests that detection is instant the moment an illusion comes into range.

Even then, how would this work outside of combat, while cautiously advancing into an area?

File: 998f9cd7b6b73609924d733a474bf547.jpg (65KB, 600x839px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 600x839px

>>52025921

>a GM prone to using sleep on PCs

As opposed to using full attacks on PCs?

File: happy-megumin.jpg (10KB, 280x210px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 280x210px

>>52025835
Aether Trebuchet
>Something about fission, pumps, and a lasing medium.
Prerequisites: Circus III, Aether Lance I
As a full-round action, you may fire a single missile at a target within charging range. This missile's movement is doubled (80/160ft). Upon firing you suffer all penalties or secondary effects of a charge such as reduced armor class, and may not perform any movement (including 5' steps) until the end of your next turn.

Upon the missile reaching a distance to the target equal to your normal reach, it explodes into a focused Aether Lance (beam length and all), treating it exactly as though you had performed an Aether Lance charge yourself, even including power attack and strength. If you have Aether Drive, use the missile's Rank-1 damage as your melee weapon.


Aether Inferno
>EXPLOOOSION!
Requires Circus IV and Blast, Well, Wrath, probably any of the AoEs
Upon exploding - successfully or otherwise - you may choose to have your missiles instead create the effects of a cascade or AoE pulse shape of Rank II or higher. Only a single missile per target may be detonated each round in this fashion, and only a single shape may be chosen on any given turn (if it's a well-turn it's a well-turn) as usual, but it is otherwise a use of the other pulse shape

>in other words, one of your missiles blows up into a well of motherfucking bees? not your problem anymore

>>52025961
If I assign a relative value of -1,000,000,000 to the utility of character death, the frequency of death from sleep spells is irrelevant. The utility gained from avoiding that situation is greater than that gained by avoiding smaller bits of damage over a larger period of time, assuming they do not cause character death. Personally I believe class level is too high for the scaling, but that's a separate balance question from whether or not sleep immunity is an ability worth having in certain scenarios.

>>52025993
>die from full attack

>>52025884
Advnaced Study lets 6/9 initiators grab maneuvers as if they were 9/9

File: Court Fey.png (9KB, 750x550px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 750x550px

>>52025944
And to keep the discussions separate, here is the triangulation aspect of the Court Fey pact. If you are walking from Point A to Point C, and at Point B you detect an illusion (radius of sense in green), then the illusion might lie anywhere along the leading edge of that radius. You can further narrow it down by taking a 5 foot step to the side, determining which quadrant it is, and so forth, but the "ping' would not tell you exactly where it is, just that it has breached your radius.

>>52025850
>>52024651
Looking over it, I'm not sure how much I agree with your point choices, but you've definitely made me realize just how many class features could/should be poach-able with the idea

I was thinking you were overvaluing the rogue/slayer talents, but then I realized that it includes Ranger Combat Styles. I was thinking of having that be a separate choice.

Other ideas for class features to poach:
>Inquisitor Judgement
>Alchemist Extract progression
>Investigator talents
>Domains
>Channel Energy
>SoP Hedgewitch Traditions
>Sneak Attack
>Bloodlines (both bloodrager and sorcerer)

Really, there's a lot.

>>52025944
You come within 30 feet of MULTIPLE points, even if you're moving in increments smaller than 5 feet. That's how movement works. You also come within range of something 30 feet to your right whenever you move five feet straight ahead. So my answer: the same way.

Undead pact has no movement abilities, no ability to benefit their allies, no ability to control enemies, and no ability to deal with effects that cause encounter loss besides hit point damage.

>>52025989
'Charging range' is going to vary a lot, exploding into lance makes it a movement option, a charge attack at range is always weird to deal with, and the interaction with ANOTHER combo feat is far from ideal. Aether Inferno is ultimately just really, really damn hard to future proof, interacts bizarrely with a lot of already existing effects, and potentially results in you using a clause called Inferno Inferno.

>>52026052
Good diagram!

>>52026052
I don't think you have that right, you hit less squares than that.

>>52026095
that's two infernos too little.

>>52025701
>>52025723
>>52025748
2hu may be a munchkin tier faggot but he's a useful faggot, because generally speaking balance issues [are] issues.

>>52026016
Well that's the thing. What's the chance that you die from a full attack? In my experience, it's pretty low. My party has TPK'd to explosions and mass sleep spells, but never to a guy with a sword. The undead pact would just be saving us healing supplies, while the elemental or dragon pact would be keeping us from dying.

>>52026150
Possibly! It's just a quick mock up to demonstrate that you would have multiple points to check. While I was making it I considered adding more detail, and pointing out how while one of the points might be an invisible stalker lying in wait, another might be a hidden door, and a third might be an object in the next room over.

File: 2dea9ebe99b5cb361f9d85c044bb8c8b.jpg (700KB, 1250x990px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 1250x990px

>>52026052

I concede partially here.

I would also like to point out, however, that you can also adjust your movement mid-move to better triangulate the illusion's position. As well, anywhere outside of a wide, open space, you will certainly be able to narrow down the location of the illusion.

>>52026095

>Undead pact has no movement abilities, no ability to benefit their allies, no ability to control enemies, and no ability to deal with effects that cause encounter loss besides hit point damage.
The same could be said of the elemental pact from levels 1 to 11, except that the elemental pact is worse about it, and the undead pact has actual narrative power from its 8th-level empowerment (kill a dozen creatures in an encounter, gain a dozen clues).

File: Court Fey 2.png (22KB, 750x550px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 750x550px

>>52026186
Actually, the opposite is true. Triangulation is easier on an open field, while a cramped corridor makes it more difficult. Consider the attached image. The player character stands at the red space, their sense radius in green, and three illusions, or potential illusions, highlighted in blue. At point A is a bauble enchanted with an illusion spell. At point B a door hidden similarly. At point C an invisible enemy. Without the restriction of the walls it would be easy to quickly deduce which squares can and cannot contain illusions, but within the confines of the room and halls presented it is difficult to find a square where one, but not the other, illusions are in range.

The ability is still powerful. Instant knowledge of the presence of an illusion is the first step before figuring out what the illusion hides. But it is not an instant detection within the radius.

File: cb6910d2bbf1a2148705fdf571204774.jpg (173KB, 350x560px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 350x560px

>>52026341

As far as I am aware, such a sense would still require line of effect, no? Points A and B on your map, then, would not be valid.

>>52026186
Elemental Pact has the bonus of dealing damage even against enemies who succeed on their saving throws, though undead could probably do with a nerf to make its damage not apply on a successful saving throw to halve damage.

>>52026341
triangulation anon, i want to hold hands with you.

>>52026378
I'm not sure where that restriction is coming from, but even if it were so. Move the door one space to the right and leave it open. I was intending for the door at point B to be along the wall of the hallway, not the wall of the side room. Now you should have LoE with all three points.

>>52026409
But can you find my hands on a perfectly flat plane using only three angle measurements?

File: 044b4f1770977f5c733e55910349abe6.jpg (1MB, 875x1225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 875x1225px

>>52026409

Consolation flare is really not that good an ability because it deals relatively trivial damage, it works only on shapes that force a saving throw, and it applies only once per round.

File: 996022dfa76b34543fb403cf03bcad72.png (1MB, 900x1009px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 900x1009px

>>52026428

>I'm not sure where that restriction is coming from
If it did not exist, then the dragon pact sense would not have to spell out an exception.

>Now you should have LoE with all three points.
This is still better than an open field, particularly because you can still see the potential illusions.

>>52026431
Mmm. We'll talk about improving it.

>>52026447
There wasn't actually an RAI on this when we wrote it - Dragon has that clarification because treasure is very often behind walls, in secret passages, and so on. We'll get back to you on the Fey sense's relationship with LoE once we come to a consensus.

So I'm pretty new to the pen and paper thing and am playing a campaign as a cavalier and was interested in the monstrous mount feat but one of the other players is opposed to it because we're playing a setting where magic is rare (he's playing an arcanist), but non-human races and monsters exist.

Can someone give me an argument to help convince the GM to let me take the feat?

>>52026483
>magic is rare
>a guy playing a fucking arcanist
>it's the fucking arcanist that's bitching

Monstrous mount is a pretty bad feat unless you build around it anyway. Go for beast rider cavalier instead.

>>52026515
It was more for funzies than optimisation, I just think it'd be neat.

Plus I'm following a fairly strict set of chivalric rules that precludes the use of ranged weapons so I figured it'd let me get involved in fights where melee doesn't really factor in.

>>52026536
Talk to your GM on those grounds, point out that with low magic, you'll need to find an alternative, and remind him that the guy who's literally a sorcerer and a wizard at the same time is the one complaining.

>>52026483
>one of the other players is opposed to it

So one of the other players is bitching because he doesn't want you to get to do a cool thing?

Why do you play with terrible people?

File: beee7b0e8e77e40fd486bb6c8ceb41d3.jpg (2MB, 2507x3541px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2507x3541px

Why is /pfg/ currently /avowed general/?

>>52026483
Also add that the Monstrous mount companions as baseline aren't that much better in terms of attack power/durability, and you need another feat on top to get them to fly.

>52026603
>one of the other players is bitching because he doesn't want you to get to do a cool thing

its like he plays with PF devs or something

>>52026604
It's better than faggot kitsuneposting general ft. ERP, "teehee so lood", and witchhunting

It's actual productive mechanical discussion

>>52026632
Yeah I saw that, the hippogriff actually seemed to be across the board less deadly and durable than my horse and slower until it can fly.

File: Court Fey 3.png (12KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 750x750px

>>52026472
Well while we wait for that...

>>52026447
Again, the opposite. Seeing the space where an illusion exists does not instantly break that illusion, for one, something that holds true in an open field or a cramped corridor. However, in an open field there is nothing to break Line of Effect, if that does end up being a restriction, and more importantly, triangulation is easy, as demonstrated here.

This is a diagram of our leading edge, that which makes this entire process possible. The bright green squares are those within our sense, while the dull green squares are those that are within our sense but were also within it one square to the left, marked in dull red. As you can see, 13 squares enter our sense with every step, and an equal amount leave.

We take this step. Our sense alerts us to an illusion. If we take a step down and our sense dissipates then the illusion is in one of squares 1, 2, 3 or 5. If it remains, it is not in those squares. Similarly, a step up either confirms or denies its presence in squares 9, 11, 12, or 13. These steps are possible because we are in an open field where are movement is not limited. We could, for example, step to the blue square, where only squares 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are in range, gaining valuable information in the process. In a confined environment, and especially if LoE blocks sense, this would be difficult if not impossible.

File: 1de632204ca0fa15b37f611119d65561.jpg (4MB, 4133x3887px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4133x3887px

>>52026722

On the other hand, if you are heading down a corridor, say, ten feet wide, and your line-of-effect-blocked illusion sense triggers, then it is fairly safe to assume that the illusion is somewhere in the corridor ahead of you.

>>52026768
But we can gain no additional information. We don't know if it's in the corridor itself, or against the walls, and since our leading edge is 5 squares wide we can't even figure out which side of the corridor it's on. We are restricted to one axis.

What quirks and behaviour of a low-char tiefling would you suggest to be described "unsettling"?

File: 020aa146f3fcc979b8c424393ae381a0.jpg (165KB, 956x676px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 956x676px

>>52026786

This does depend on whether or not the sense is blocked by line of effect.

If it is not, then that has a host of implications upon the other pact senses.

>>52026811
No, the statement that a 10 foot wide corridor restricts our ability to triangulate to a single axis is not dependent on whether or not the sense is blocked by line of effect.

If the sense is blocked by line of effect we know that there can only be 4 squares in which the illusion may lie, but we cannot reduce that.

If the sense is not blocked by line of effect then we know there are 13 squares in which the illusion may lie, and we can reduce that, though I'd need to consider how far.

Do you agree with this tier list?
http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=11990.0

>>52026868
I feel like paladin and unchained monk, at least, are lower than they should be.

>>52026890
Invested Regent and Sacred Servant are definitely Tier 3.

>>52026844
>>52026811
This is a problem that I'd certainly be willing to crack my head against later, though at the moment I can confidently say.

Whether or not sense is blocked by line of effect, an illusion within or against the walls of a 10 foot wide corridor cannot be further located, without a means to move outside the corridor.

How do I make a precious cinnamon bun?

>>52027016
Craft (Desserts), go for masterwork.
Why is this a question?

>>52027016
Don't try to make one, or it'll come off as forced. Just make a character.

>>52027016
Take a note out of Aurora's book from Dragon Game 2. She's PRECIOUS.

File: Anime Girl Finger Poke.gif (329KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 500x280px

>wake up
>self pact's AC is gone now???
>yet another thing stripped out

It's... It'll come back right? As a clause or something, so anyone can just grab it? R-right guys?
Christ watching this class be rebalanced is a roller coaster ride.

>>52027037
Don't get too attached to playtests
Overpowered classes are like sugar.
You only notice later how bad they are for you.

>>52027037

Only if it's a Clause anyone can take, and only if Embodiment of the Aether returns.

I want my +4 AC as a warrior dammit!

>>52027033

Just how precious is Aurora?

>>52027033
Her hands look weird

File: CommitSodoku.jpg (98KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 480x270px

>>52027043
>look at Avowed a few months ago, fall in love with some parts of it
>think "yea, this shit looks overtuned to fuck but it'd be great with numbers tweak, surely the playtesting will fix this"
>fast forward to now, almost all the parts I really liked are completely gone instead of being tuned down

I want to be excited, but every set of patch notes seem laser guided to killing my interest.

>>52027033
Aww thank you!
>>52027061
Depends on how insufferable you consider the violent tsundere archetype
>>52027071
Because they're poorly drawn, rushed sketches of clawed gauntlets. It's something that I hope to remedy once I've finalized the design and cleaned up the picture.

Although I can't draw hands for shit anyway so they're still going to look weird.

Do you think that the Fighter class deserves an Unchained variant? Something like being able to swap out the bonus combat feats every morning and having their weapon training bonuses applied to weapon groups would significantly increase their effectiveness.

>>52027135
The problem is that the fighter as its original concept is entirely outdated. The only way to fix the fighter is to remove it, and replace it with a class that isn't called fighter and has an actual specialization.

>>52027154
>replace it with something that has an actual specialization

but that's how we got five million fucking shitty fighter spinoffs, you fag

>>52027135
>having their weapon training bonuses applied to weapon groups would significantly increase their effectiveness.
You DO realize that the weapon groups exist solely as a thing for the weapon training to apply to, right?

>>52027164
Congratulations on repeating exactly what I said. The "fighter" is outdated, because the barbarian is already a better pure beatstick, and every other weapon swinger has an actual role. The fighter's only gimmick is "I can use weapons good", which is no longer a unique class feature.

Same reason the ranger got a big overhaul in 5e, because it was old and busted and did shit everyone else could do better.

>>52025187
It still needs more than the weapon; currently if you're not the right race, you won't be able to optimize for damage even for =CR despite giving up your effects to overcharge.

Focus won't work with it either and infusion is situational at best and a waste of actions most of the time.

What about a rend-like feat? If at least two beams hit the target, they take an extra bit of damage, adding a little more if there's a third and fourth hit? But without an entire +1 beam?

File: just kill me now.png (202KB, 863x431px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 863x431px

>make my self avowed last night
>wake up
>Find it's all nerfed to shit in under 24 hours
>Being one is no longer helping my AC or even really helping me deal damage

Is Mithral current good? It feels like it won't function very well without greater quick draw or multiple sheathed weapons. There is this stance that lets you put your weapon back but it seems to be a terrible thing to commit a stance to when its level 1 stance is a straight Xd6 damage boost to all melee attacks.

File: RATTLE ME BONES.gif (1MB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 360x360px

>>52027216
>yo bro I heard you wanted to be an unarmored punchdude
>would be a shame if we removed that, and this, and that other thing

4th level ability is definitely getting either removed or nerfed down to only be one save at a time so you have to take Who Help Themselves.

>>52025989
>>52026095
Making it movement is bad. So is "charging range". You gave the missile a speed anyways right? So, Full-Action that gives you a debuff = to the charging penalties, but without being charging penalties or anything of that stuff. I forget the numbers but if it was -2AC, just give -2AC. Have the missile just do the melee attack and damage from 10ft no matter your real range, calculated *AS IF* you'd hit in melee with an aether lance charge with all the appropriate bonuses. The beam goes on of course but it's all kept a lot simpler.

Keep it from being some strange hybrid, just "take the numbers".


Rename Inferno ... I'm gonna take a guess here from Tornado/Trebuchet and say Helios? That was the biggest boom there anyways? Should pick A shape when you take the feat between a few like Blast and Well. Taveena can decide which ones are compatible to avoid future issues. To avoid strangeness, you also only fire one per target with this, but it packs the AoE as if you'd cast that normally and deals the lower damage of the two (so if you didn't upgrade your blast, sorry)

>>52027100
What do you miss

>>52027271
That would just be worthless. Seriously, don't even joke about that.

>>52027216
I'd say the bigger problem is the disconnect: Is it supposed to be unarmed, or a weapon user? Why are you using channel or blade when you're supposed to be using unarmed strikes, or vice-versa?

Defensively, the attunement does basically give toughness and a very small speed boost. But offensively, it needs something actually connecting the attunement and the intended pulse usage. Shouldn't it at least let you channel your fists? Which would make the 2nd selection a lot more valuable (it's saving you the cost of the damn amulet).

Are you expecting anything from Ironfang Invasion or Ruins of Azlant?

>>52026472
Level 3 Aether Rounds, does that generate black powder too for firearms, or ONLY bullets? Because it says ammunition.

Same question goes for laser charges I guess too.

>>52027359
Ironfang sounds like another Hell's Rebels
Azlant sounds like another massive dungeon crawl

I have been reading about this issue and it has been a point of contention for some and would like your guys' opinion.

Can you combine fighting defensively and aid another? What happens if you throw in combat expertise into the mix?

>>52027359

Ironfang Invasion looks like the Giantslayer we were hoping for, but never got.

Once again, Crystal's hitting this one out of the park!

>>52026431
Doesn't it work on anything you do that causes a shaving throw? Clauses include modulations right? So if Frostbite Pulse gets saved against, they take the damage. If they saved against Eruption, they take the damage too.

I'd say where it's lacking is that apparently you only do this once per round rather than once per creature per round, so if fifty kobolds all evasion your fireball, only one of them dies.

>>52026483

Sadly Monstrous Mount is pretty damn terrible. Almost all Paizo mount options are pretty bad outside 'Just get a horse/dog'

If you are willing to retrain to Paladin, there is a rather nice Pegasus Knight homebrew someone here did. It's also spell-less.

>>52027400
Aid another? I haven't seen it used before unless doing skill checks. I had to read up on it. Does anyone here even use aid another:combat in their games?

From what I can tell it seems doable.

File: Bloodborne Laughter Stops.jpg (56KB, 313x254px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 313x254px

>>52027342
>Seriously, don't even joke about that.
Anon, I already did jokes about shit like the AC bonus by virtue of making a shitty memebuilds based off them and look what happened. I've thrown up my hands and decided to just ride the wave to see how strong my disliking of the class is by the end of the playtest.

>is it supposed to be unarmed or a weapon user
It was originally very clearly supposed to mainly be "Not!Monk that can optionally use weapons", but that has been so gutted by changes RIP Ghetto Flurry at this point that who the fuck knows. Aether Channel is also OBVIOUSLY intended to work with unarmed, but they probably keep forgetting that the wording fucks it up.

Of the currently recruiting games, which seems to be the most high profile?

>>52027185

The 4e Fighter was good BUT the reason it was good was because they gave it a coherent theme/specialisation. It was the fucker who got up in your face and prevented you doing things to his friends. If you tried to escape he'd hit you with his spear and push you flat on your ass while shivving you for a heap of your HP.

File: sweating ek.png (63KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 225x225px

>>52024244
>mid-sunday
>it's already 8AM
Ahhh, where do I send the sheet to?

>>52027185
You know what else this basically applies to, albeit in the other direction of balance? Wizard. The fucking Wizard is a boring shitty class whose only real gimmick is "I have spells good".

File: LinkTP.png (1015KB, 877x1462px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 877x1462px

How do I Link, /pfg/?

File: Bralwer girl 42.jpg (2MB, 1024x1448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1024x1448px

Yo, been having some slight issues with my wrists, so I've been MIA for a while. Hopefully I'll get it all checked out soon and be back to regular posting. SoM is moving along well, got some other work to do along with it, but we're slowly working our way towards a class/sphere playtest.

>>52027515
Occultist with the Trappings of the Warrior Panoply

>>52027400
Aid another says when you attack and fighting defensively is also a special attack? From what I can see though is that if you want to do this combo you can only do this as a single attack. I think this is to prevent someone with multiple attacks somehow stacking bonuses.

>>52027512
Pretty much. The wizard and cleric are both really boring because they're just walking spell lists. The sorcerer and oracle are more interesting versions of them respectively because:
>They have to make actual choices in spells
>They have unique themes
>Feel far less cookie cutter in build variety
and of course
>have actual fucking class features

File: Aliza_A.png (114KB, 960x800px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 960x800px

>>52027522
Stop two-handed masturbating to punchgirls, Jolly.

>>52027522
Good luck fag, you'll need it after the collective ass-blasting we've had over the past few weeks.
Still waiting for something in SoM to actually catch my attention while waiting for the gish playtest.

>>52027531

Aliza is adorable!

>>52027524
>Link
>Int-based class

Link's more like a unique Cha-based class with Cha-to-will, desu senpai.
He also probably has a ridiculous PB, and would need to be Gestalt to actually be able to do all the things he's capable of.

>>52027263
You want to be a Bushi to get the most out of it. They can sheathe without provoking at level 1, and then sheathe as a free action and threaten their reach with sheathed weapons at level 6.

>>52027531
She looks like she floats real well

>>52027573
What about other non-bushi classes like hidden blade? I'm just thinking about trading it away via martial tradition or unorthodox method but it seems to be partially the point of the class.

>>52027604

I'm not sure about that! Aliza's got massive tits and obvious padding to her figure, but the girl's got muscle and hits like a freight train.

>>52027263
Mithral Current is sorta unique in that it needs a two feat tax (Quick Draw and Mixed Combat) to get the most out of it.
It's much more reliant on this mechanic than say, Elemental Flux is on having an Animus Pool.

However, if you do invest, it's very strong.
One of my problems with it is that anyone who goes into Mithral Current hyperfocuses on it to justify their feat investment

File: pre_order_cancelled.gif (786KB, 365x251px) Image search: [Google]

786KB, 365x251px

>look up that Non-Destructive Testing thing an anon mentioned in an earlier thread
>The cost of our Nondestructive Testing Technologies Certificate Program is $9,995.00.

I've got 1050 gold to spend, what should I buy? Already have a magic weapon

>>52027726
Nigger, education ain't free. Take out a loan

>>52027747
Handy Haversack

File: paying student loans.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>52027747
>Take out a loan
Oh yeah, cause what I really want to do is pay $700,000 for a $10,000 class. I ain't fucking going to fall for THAT trap.

Zenric Vilanus is for /STRAIGHT SHOTA/!

File: huuuuh.gif (47KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 374x347px

>>52027787
W-what?

>>52027797
The latest applicant for that Crimson Throne game

>>52027747
>education ain't free
I would post a europepe, but even my autism doesn't allow me to frogpost, so just imagine some clever depiction of how Europe>America in a .jpg format.

>>52027726

Well now you know! At least you recognize the price of the thing, now.

File: -chimera.jpg (768KB, 1500x2079px) Image search: [Google]

768KB, 1500x2079px

How do I optimize this /pfg/? A kitsune who's fox-form morphs into a chimeric monster. Been looking through SoP Shapeshifter's HB and I'm thinking large, draconic/demonic skin, spines, breath weapon, 2-heads etc. whatever. How can I build this? Should I go straight Shifter? Gish? Gestalt? Open to 3pp.

File: 「JUST」.png (169KB, 342x402px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 342x402px

>>52027787
>People are reading those
>People are reading mine
This makes me incredibly uncomfortable

>>52027830
>people are reading yours
>it's so unremarkable they don't even comment on it in the thread in a mean fashion

>>52027840
That's what makes me uncomfortable

>>52027830

>People are reading yours
>They start posting wild conclusions about your character you never intended
>But they're really good conclusions
>And then the sexualization starts

Wake me up

>>52027400
Hey guys, does anyone even use aid another in combat? This seems like an action or rule that most people tend to forget.

>>52027826
Synthesist?

>>52027840
>peopel read yours
>so many people commented on it it started it's own type of shitposting
IneverAskedForThis.png

>>52027904
It's VERY rarely of any use.

Think of it this way: For the grand majority of situations and/or character builds you could:

A) Attack
B) Aid Another

Now. Do you want to give a +2 to someone else?

OR, do you want to give the group an entire additional attack (possibly NUMEROUS multiple attacks), thus at the very minimum acting as an effective 'reroll' that could stack further?

>>52027939
But what if you're the shitty cleric armed only with a crossbow?

>>52027913
I did consider that briefly, anon. Thank you. I'm convinced Shifter might be the way to go, but I've never used SoP.

>>52027904
Early on generally or when the wizard doesn't want to use his slots so he just uses aid another if by some unfortunate happenstance he is forced to be next to the guy fighting a monster.

Could someone link an invite to the /pfg/ Discord?

>>52028032
Doesn't sound so crazy since it just might be better than casting daze or shooting a crappy crossbow bolt while he waits for the monsters to bunch up for a nice color spray

>>52027988
Then you're completely retarded and I can't help you

>>52027988
Get a longspear instead.

>>52027939
On the other hand, it's pretty great for monsters in a horde. Got a bunch of low-level shitters? Have them all aid another on a CMB check to dogpile a character, since all they need to do is beat a DC 10 to add a +2 to one of the other attackers.

So, I gather that Golarion is pretty much a kitchen sink setting. How would you make it more focused?

Is there any way to make a Biped Eidolon have 16 Dex and 12 Strength rather than 16 Strength and 12 Dex?

>>52028124
GM Fiat, or respeccing an Avian Eidolon to have arms

>>52027988
Slings hurt more
Bows are extremely difficult NOT to be proficient in and hurt even more.

I mean you could also declare that your action is "I tell them to go over there and fuck them, but with my standard I stay here and masturbate" but that doesn't mean Aid Another became good.

>>52028145
Well, let's see if Eagle cares much about it

Because I don't want to spend 4 of my 5 evolution points trying to get up to size with arms, when I don't actually want flight yet.

>>52028120
Probably have all of the major regions (tian xia, mwangi + most the southern stuff, LAND OF THE LINNORM KINGS + most of the northern stuff, the inner sea) as their own planets, connected by easily-accessible gates.

That way the weird abrupt theme shifts aren't as big a deal, and Paizo is free to focus on the Inner Sea as much as they like.

>>52028181
>different cultures should be different planets

hahahahaaaa what the FUCK anon

>>52028120
You focus on 'the inner sea', EG the Mediterranean and blend the cultures a bit more, make it the civilizations feel a bit more... well Mediterranean rather than generic Europe.

>>52028187
Not just different cultures, but completely weird thematic shifts.

It's not a good solution, I admit, but the only good solution would be 'fuck Golarion, scrap it'.

>>52028187

Don't you know, planets should only ever have a single culture in fiction!

>>52028231
and only ever also a single climate, don't forget.
and 95% of planets should only ever have a single sapient dominant species; the other 5% it's a plot-point or their culture hat though.

There any particularly helpful guides/resources out there for GM's? I'm going to run for some friends without real Player experience on my part- We're all new, so it's like the blind leading the blind.

File: Barney.png (509KB, 1067x800px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 1067x800px

>>52028187
Barney: I'm just saying that when we die there's going to be a planet for the French, a planet for the Chinese, and we'll all be a lot happier.

File: 1487520324506.jpg (26KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 680x383px

Is Undead Pact attunement getting nerfed?

New Thread
>>52028352
>>52028352
>>52028352
>>52028352
>>52028352

>>52028365
>page 3

>>52027787
He's a Halfling bro.

File: MMPR_Snizard.jpg (75KB, 623x685px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 623x685px

Stat a Snake Golem