|
Thanks so much guys, those are all excellent  One of the main bad guys is a necromancer (with an evil spirit taking physical form to replace his lost arm) who has a badass sword based on a nine lives stealer. It was a regular 9 lives stealer until the party leader decided to stab the main plot - heavy evil dragon with it, rolling 2 20s in a row and stole part of its soul. I had major dm panic moment as I never imagined shed stab it AND roll 20 to steal it's soul. Anyway evil necro guy got ahold of the sword recently and has been doing great evil, been planning on killing him off so party leader could reclaim their sword, but I really like the idea of visiting god of death and bargaining with him for the sword, so I'm going to nab that idea and repurpose it thanks :p In my mind I imagine it being like the scene in the exorcist or something, but I just know with this party it's going to be more like robot hell! Regarding the milk. I think I'm going to comprise with finding milk from a direct descendant of one of the deities, milk that never goes off. Then evil necro fella can be wickedly dastardly by spoiling all the milk in the land so nobody can have tea. My group will find that the most evil of acts. Cheers chaps
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:51 |
|
|
I've heard it said that while the Combat Maneuver Bonus and Combat Maneuver Defense stats of Pathfinder are a simplification, since you're making rolls against a static number instead of opposed rolls, but I've also heard it said that it's a massive nerf to actually performing combat maneuvers. 1. What did Pathfinder do that was such a nerf? 2. How would you do CMB/CMD in a way that's just purely a conversion?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've heard it said that while the Combat Maneuver Bonus and Combat Maneuver Defense stats of Pathfinder are a simplification, since you're making rolls against a static number instead of opposed rolls, but I've also heard it said that it's a massive nerf to actually performing combat maneuvers. CMB/CMD gets astronomical for high-CR monsters since they scale off BAB (and monsters have bajillions of HD), unlike the 3.5 equivalent combat maneuvers just being opposed ability checks. Also, PF breaks up the combat maneuver feats into even more feats that are basically just "take this so you don't suck at doing a single thing that's not just damage" feat taxes for martials.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
I was thinking of making a Psychic Warrior character for a game I might be playing in because I want to play with the Psionic system, because a Fighter-but-can-do-stuff sounds cool, and because it's set in Eberron so I should have some background options. I had some questions: 1. How does the Psychic Warrior stack up? Obviously I'm not going to be a CoDzilla, but is it as bad as, say, a Samurai or a Knight? How much better am I than a Fighter? 2. Why the deuce doesn't it have a full BAB? Is that going to hold me back? 3. Any decent homebrew/remakes/improved-versions of it? 4. Any general tips? I've scouted around for the class handbook and so have some idea of how I'll shape him, but more ideas always helps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Psychic Warrior looks pretty bland, but a lot of people consider it to be one of if not the best balanced class in the game. It's pretty much the platonic ideal of a tier 3 class. It's a class that can be taken in basically any direction so there aren't a whole lot of "general" tips. You'll want one of Hustle or Psionic Lion's Charge ASAP, depending on build and preference. There's the psicrystal/share pain/vigor combo that gets detailed in the handbook, some magic items that are mentioned in the handbook (torc of power preservation, for example). It combos really well with Incarnum, which isn't mentioned. Beyond that, most advice will be tailored to fit your vision of a character. If you want to play it monkish, pick up Tashalatora, if you want to play an archer, grab Dissolving Weapon, etc. It doesn't have full BAB because it doesn't need full BAB. A lot of Psychic Warrior builds rely on Natural Attacks, anyway. It doesn't need a buff or anything although I suppose you could ask your DM if you can use the Pathfinder version of the class. There's also some interesting material in the Mind's Eye Archive Nihilarian fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I was thinking of making a Psychic Warrior character for a game I might be playing in because I want to play with the Psionic system, because a Fighter-but-can-do-stuff sounds cool, and because it's set in Eberron so I should have some background options. I had some questions: You sniped my class idea!!! Here's what I've learned from reading up on them - 1. excellent balance and utility - can be a good damage dealer or excellent tank, and a little splash of utility included. 2. As Nihilarian said, they rely on natural attacks a lot, but also medium BAB can be offset by using Expansion (and augmented Expansion at later levels) for big STR bonuses. Also, Strength of my Enemies is an awesome power to help with this. 3. no idea 4. they're starved for PP, so anything you can do to improve on that is good (Earth Sense -> Earth Power from Races of Stone). Also buffing takes a long time, so look into Linked Power feat (Complete Psionic). Fun with Psicrystals is awesome for utility and tanking. If you wanna be really awesome play an Elan, they're an abberation and qualify for Rapidstrike-> Improved Rapidstrike for high damage. Elans also have great defensive racial abilities, so you can be very tanky too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Another thing I've been working on lately is a chart of ballpark monster stats (although these are probably really low if you CharOp a lot), but I don't really know how I should be scaling the damage. Is there some sort of basis I could lean on?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Hey so one of the players in my game had his character die. Anyway, when he rolled up his character he ended up with a rather mediocre set of rolls. HIs stats are: 15, 12, 11, 10, 10, 10. So my question is, what is a good race/class combo for these aggressively average stats? The player's original character was a Human Factotum gunning for the Chameleon prestige class, and I have a feeling that same sort of knowledgeable/skillful class is what he wants. Currently our party has: A Half-Elf Druid A Human Binder and me A Human Cleric (Rebuke/Inflict Spontaneity). I should mention, this is a Greyhawk campaign, and anything that is specific to another setting is off the table. Otherwise just about anything goes. Madmarker fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Archivist with academic priest feat (bonus spells based on INT instead of WIS) is single-attribute dependent, so you could go 15 INT 12 CON 11-10 whatever, and do pretty well. Or just have him reroll stats
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
The Mandingo posted:Archivist with academic priest feat (bonus spells based on INT instead of WIS) is single-attribute dependent, so you could go 15 INT 12 CON 11-10 whatever, and do pretty well. The dm is pretty hardline on the stat roll thing. He has a very permissive roll but once you roll it is set in stone. His roll rule is 4d6, drop the lowest and do this 6 times to create a set. Make 3 sets of stats. Choose the set you want. And sadly for my friend, this was the best set he could get. That being said, I will definitely have him check out the Archivist. Maybe have him take Faerie Mysteries Initiate so his hp can also be based on his int? Unfortunately cannot use Academic Priest, it is Dragonlance not Greyhawk. Madmarker fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Make a Jermlaine monk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
A second Druid and pump WIS, get all other stats from shapeshifting? Really any caster can be effective with those stats, if you avoid spells with DCs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:The dm is pretty hardline on the stat roll thing. He has a very permissive roll but once you roll it is set in stone. His roll rule is 4d6, drop the lowest and do this 6 times to create a set. Make 3 sets of stats. Choose the set you want. And sadly for my friend, this was the best set he could get. what level are you playing at? caster is always the right choice, but especially with mediocre base stats, a caster can circumvent a lot of the problems that another character type would have to deal with. things like poor HP or saves or attack bonuses don't matter so much when you basically never spend time adventuring in your natural form. have him play a druid or transmutation wizard and unless you're playing level 1 dirt farmers, after even a few levels he should be able to pretty much forget the fact that his base stats are crummy. a headband of INT or equivalent will basically take all of the sting away. just don't take feats that are meant to buffer his crap stats. it might seem like the obvious thing to do, but it'll gimp your long-term usefulness. taking a feat to base your HP bonus off your INT mod sounds nice at level 1, but by even the mid-single digit levels, a caster would probably wish they'd have taken something else that actually helps them cast better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
homeless poster posted:what level are you playing at? caster is always the right choice, but especially with mediocre base stats, a caster can circumvent a lot of the problems that another character type would have to deal with. things like poor HP or saves or attack bonuses don't matter so much when you basically never spend time adventuring in your natural form. have him play a druid or transmutation wizard and unless you're playing level 1 dirt farmers, after even a few levels he should be able to pretty much forget the fact that his base stats are crummy. a headband of INT or equivalent will basically take all of the sting away. Currently we all are at level 5, and his new character will be entering at the same level. Fair enough on the stat coverage thing. I'm pretty sure he won't be a druid or cleric, since we already have one of each of those, just the way he is I guess. But other caster classes seem good. Do you count the Dragonwrought Feat for Kobold's as a stat patch feat, or is that one just good enough as a straight +3 to your mental stats?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
He could play another Factotum. Or maybe he'd enjoy playing a Psychic Rogue, or an Incarnate? But honestly, he's probably best off with a caster
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:Currently we all are at level 5, and his new character will be entering at the same level. Fair enough on the stat coverage thing. I'm pretty sure he won't be a druid or cleric, since we already have one of each of those, just the way he is I guess. But other caster classes seem good. Do you count the Dragonwrought Feat for Kobold's as a stat patch feat, or is that one just good enough as a straight +3 to your mental stats? Dragonwrought gives +3 to mental stats AND effectively makes you a dragon, so it's very good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Anyone have a recommendation for Monk fixes or have a re-done/homebrewed Monk? The Swordsage isn't quite exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
I finally found the actual rules text for the original Quicken Spell feat in D&D 3.0:quote:QUICKEN SPELL [Metamagic] Which then interacted with this section of the rules on metamagic feats: quote:Sorcerers and Bards: Sorcerers and bards choose spells as they cast them. They can choose when they cast their spells whether to use metamagic feats to improve them. As with other spellcasters, the improved spell uses up a higher-level spell slot. For instance, a still invisibility spell cast by a bard counts against his allotment of 3rd-level spells as if the spell were 3rd level. Because the sorcerer or bard has not prepared the spell in a metamagic form in advance, he must do so on the spot. The sorcerer or bard, therefore, must take more time to cast a metamagic spell (one enhanced by a metamagic feat) than a regular spell. If its normal casting time is 1 action, casting a metamagic spell is a full-round action for a sorcerer or bard. For spells with a longer casting time, it takes an extra full-round action to cast the spell. Now, I can no longer find the original Sage Advice by Skip Williams on 3.0 metamagic and Sorcerers/spontaneous spellcasting, but this is what Quicken Spell looks like in the 3.5 edition of the PHB: quote:QUICKEN SPELL [METAMAGIC] It's amusing/interesting that they took a misreading of the rules like that, and made it entirely codified.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
In a game where I'm expecting to teach newcomers/beginners, I was thinking of the Favored Soul instead of a full-on Cleric since it doesn't have to deal with Domain spells or Turn Undead or all that other stuff, and spontaneous spellcasting is easier to track. The power of the 3.5 Cleric spell list should still make this a powerful class even if I'm losing things like converting spell slots to healing spells on-the-fly and being limited by Spells Known. One change I am considering is making all of its spellcasting go off of WIS instead of a split between CHA and WIS. Would that be okay? Are there any other aspects of this class I should be thinking about? The Healer was my other idea but I think their spell list is way too limited to be interesting for a player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Split casting is a minor annoyance and doesn't affect too much so that won't be appreciably more powerful than the base version. Your players will be a bit more durable, and maybe get a couple of ability points to put into luxuries like Int. Edit: "power" is probably the wrong way to come at this. A spontaneous caster would probably be easier to start with, yes, and making it SAD clears a minor headache. It's fine. Nihilarian fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Jul 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
A SAD Favored Soul is still going to be distinctly less powerful than a well-played Cleric, so go for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:In a game where I'm expecting to teach newcomers/beginners, I was thinking of the Favored Soul instead of a full-on Cleric since it doesn't have to deal with Domain spells or Turn Undead or all that other stuff, and spontaneous spellcasting is easier to track. The power of the 3.5 Cleric spell list should still make this a powerful class even if I'm losing things like converting spell slots to healing spells on-the-fly and being limited by Spells Known. are you teaching people who are literal children (like younger than 10 years old) or people who have no familiarity with the concept of games as a form of entertainment? even if they've never played d&d specifically, if they've played video games or other table top games or other board games, the idea of having to manage different stats and abilities isn't going to be as hard to grasp as I think you imagine it will be. I mean, you know the general competence level of your audience, but I'd be hesitant to have to teach 3.X to people who are so raw to games, or so averse to managing multiple pieces of a character, that you feel like you need to strip out large portions of the game. are you just worried they won't make the most optimal caster if they play a full cleric? I think people new to the game will likely ignore the parts that they aren't interested in on their own, which means there's no reason to artificially limit their options. if they pick bad domains or whatever that's not the end of the world, and clerics still spontaneously cast healing spells if you look at it that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
I'm willing to grant that maybe I'm direly underestimating the mental capacities of the people I may end up playing with, but I tried to make a Cleric myself and was put-off at how much excessive back-and-forth referencing I needed to do to get domain spells ready. It's page 32 to look up the table of D&D deities and which domains they represent. Most deities have 3 or more domains, but you should only choose two Then it's page 185 to look up which spells belong to which domains And then you have to cross-check if a domain spell is on the Cleric spell list or not, because if it isn't a spell that the Cleric can normally cast, then it can only be prepared in the Domain spell slot And then you have to cross-check which spells have keywords that make them belong to your Domains, because those are cast at a higher level If they're capable of following along, then fine, I'm not going to baby them, but I just wanted to keep my options open because it's not something I would choose to do myself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
3.5 is not the game for you if you have a problem with cross-referencing pages and books.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Anyone have a recommendation for Monk fixes or have a re-done/homebrewed Monk? The Swordsage isn't quite exactly the same. The Dungeonomicon has what you want, broheim. gradenko_2000 posted:The power of the 3.5 Cleric spell list ...is that you know all of those loving spells without exclusivity. The Cleric list is full of spells like Restoration, Locate Object, and Water Breathing that you only ever want to prepare after you learn you need them in particular, but comparatively lacking in spells like Color Spray or Ennervation that rule hard-core and that you want to be using all the time. Preparation is extremely more important to making it work. It is possible, with expertise, to develop a functional Favored Soul. But I dunno why people think handing a character class with a bunch of permanent choices, and a huge pile of trap options to make those choices from, is good for new players. People do this with Fighters, too. Makes the opposite of sense. If you're gonna hand that poo poo to someone you don't hate, here's the patch: -They prepare their spells known every morning exactly like a Spirit Shaman, except off the Cleric list. Same tables of spells prepared and cast per day. -In addition to the spells they choose, they also know the entire list of Healer spells. For free. You do not even give a poo poo, seriously. Still weaker than a cleric since it doesn't have Domains or a Turn Undead stipend, but it's not a dumpster fire, and actually starts to look like a class I would play voluntarily.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm willing to grant that maybe I'm direly underestimating the mental capacities of the people I may end up playing with, but I tried to make a Cleric myself and was put-off at how much excessive back-and-forth referencing I needed to do to get domain spells ready. it sounds like your concerns are more organizational than anything else, which is definitely a sore point for 3.X, but not something exclusive to clerics as a class, and probably not a reason that I would consider just removing clerics from the game on behalf of new(er) players. assuming you don't feel like reformatting / retyping a ton of stuff to put all of the relevant information for one class into one single section with a better flow, there's still things you can do as a DM to help a new character get familiar with a class that has a lot of options without completely removing the class, or deciding for them what they should be doing (trap option classes). 1. you can find free examples of Power Cards online (or make your own) which are basically just short-hand reminders for new players about what their class can do and how the given ability works. they don't have to be a verbatim reprint of the entire rule set and all errata for a specific thing, but just having a physical card with a few words on it can help people to remember "oh yeah i can do this thing if i want" 2. you could also try to help guide the character creation process, really be hands on, and see if some of those sections are even going to matter. does your friend who wants to be a cleric seem especially interested in picking domain spells and pouring over domain powers and finding the right theme to match his deity? let that guy go hog wild sperging out on which powers to choose, because he's going to do the leg work himself. does you friend instead seem reluctant to read through 300 pages of options and compare each of them objectively to try and figure out which fiddly bits combine in marginally more beneficial ways? maybe ask that guy for a general idea about what he wants his cleric to do, and then made educated picks for him, and then you will always just know what his domain powers are and what they apply to. this guy probably barely cares anyway, and if you pick them then you should be able to keep track of what spells need to be buffed or whatever. Eikre posted:It is possible, with expertise, to develop a functional Favored Soul. But I dunno why people think handing a character class with a bunch of permanent choices, and a huge pile of trap options to make those choices from, is good for new players. this is another really big thing to keep in mind. one of the best things about clerics (and druids too) is that outside of stuff like feat choices, their spell casting flexibility is nearly unlimited, because they automagically know all of their spells at every given spellcasting level. did you pick some dumb spells to memorize for tonight's session? no big deal, pick better spells next time! removing that, and putting your friends into a class where they have to make permanent spell choices that (at least rules as written) they can't just switch out if they hate, is actually more work for you, and less fun for them, and way more book work for them too. you think they'd hate having to bounce through a couple different pages in one book to learn how to turn undead? how much fun would they have reading, i don't know, 600 pages of total divine spell options across 6 different splat books every time they gain a new spellcasting level, just to pick the 5 or 6 spells that they can only cast for the rest of that character's life, and holy poo poo they better hope they don't pick something that sounds cool but is of limited usefulness, because that's more frustrating that just picking nothing at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
Okay, I was planning on being more liberal with Spells Known anyway, but based on this feedback it seems like I'm definitely overthinking this and am probably setting myself up for more trouble that I had expected to relieve. I think I'll just leave it be for now and let people play what they want, at their pace. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
I've played a couple years of pathfinder, never 3.5. I'm joining a campaign that's been going on a while, no divine magic and arcane/psionic is rare and attracts demons. I'm starting at 13, campaign goes to 20, 36 point buy, all official sources allowed, all non-super-monstrous races allowed. Optimization level of the group is a power attacking warblade would be at the top end of the party, so I'm not super sure what that means but I'm shooting for tier 3ish. For reference the non full progression caster characters I play in Pathfinder are a heavily optimized Bolt Ace, a heavily optimized for knowledge checks Alchemist, and a Sap Master unarmed Ninja. Any suggestions on classes, races and builds to look at? I've got until Wednesday to make a 13th level character.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:I've played a couple years of pathfinder, never 3.5. I'm joining a campaign that's been going on a while, no divine magic and arcane/psionic is rare and attracts demons. I'm starting at 13, campaign goes to 20, 36 point buy, all official sources allowed, all non-super-monstrous races allowed. Optimization level of the group is a power attacking warblade would be at the top end of the party, so I'm not super sure what that means but I'm shooting for tier 3ish. May god have mercy on your soul. What are other people playing? Offhand a Tome of Battle dude would be good, or a Swift Hunter ranger (feat lets you combine Scout and Ranger levels, it's a good skirmish ranged attack option).
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
What level of complexity are you comfortable with? Late 3.5 has some interesting systems available, but they can be hard to parse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:I'm joining a campaign that's been going on a while, no divine magic and arcane/psionic is rare and attracts demons. I'm starting at 13
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:What level of complexity are you comfortable with? Late 3.5 has some interesting systems available, but they can be hard to parse. I'm pretty comfortable with complex characters. Most complex was my Sorcerer who Polymorphed his animal companion, I carried around so many stat blocks ughhh RPZip posted:May god have mercy on your soul. The party as it stands is a ranged Rogue, a Swordsage, a Barbarian, a Ninja, and a Monk. I'll take a look at Tome of Battle and the Swift Hunter. I don't know much about the game world but the DM and the couple people I know about are pretty cool dudes, so we'll see. My current group is primarily a stable group of PFS players and too many of them are skeevy old guys Yawgmoth posted:Oh god why. I can only imagine the DM has been stripping the DR from monsters and dropping the save DCs on their attacks and all manner of other things to keep monsters from turning the party into a fine red haze on the wind because this kind of thing is the #1 "I don't understand the single most core facet of D&D" thing to do and people still do it so often. I honestly have no idea but hey hopefully I'll find out!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:I'm pretty comfortable with complex characters. Most complex was my Sorcerer who Polymorphed his animal companion, I carried around so many stat blocks ughhh A buffing character would go real well with all of those physical attackers; Marshal or Bard would be the easy paths, however you can also get Inspire Courage on a non-caster if you try hard enough. I'd avoid the Bard unless the DM's rules are less harsh on casters than it sounds; if it's there solely to give you guys a plot hook, giving him something to trigger that plot would be nice, maybe. and finally you could just say screw it and play another beatstick. Tome of Battle and Swift Hunter are both good options for that. If you're comfortable with learning a new system, I'll put in a good word for the Totemist from Magic of Incarnum. The Incarnum system is basically the art of creating unique, fake magic items and then divvying up your class resources to determine how powerful the effect is. The Totemist in particular uses those fake magic items (called Soulmelds) to mimic the abilities of monsters and animals; including all manner of natural attacks, a blink dogs teleportation, a girrallon's extra arms, a manticore's spike volley, etc. any of that sound interesting?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Given the anti-magic theming I'm guessing invocation users (Warlock, Dragonfire Adept), meldshapers (totemist/incarnate/soulborn) and Binder are all out which are some of the more fun/balanced classes, given your party composition I'd have probably recommended one of those. Anyway, Swift Hunter is good for a ranged skirmish character but would probably just duplicate (and crush the soul of) the Ranged Rogue. It's not amazing damage but it does fill the same kind of niche (skirmishy skillful character) without having to deal with the horror of trying to get sneak attack to actually, you know, work. On anything. Especially at range. On the other hand with a six person martial group there's going to be overlap, so you may want to just roll with it. Warblade is good and will give you another frontliner, and they've got some great stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
I'm no CharOp expert, but it seems like you could do a Crusader to round out the ToB classes while also giving the party a more defensively-styled character to complement the offensive classes. Really though the most pressing issue with a "low-magic" game is whether the DM is savvy enough to give you your weapon enhancement, armor enhancement, deflection bonus, natural armor bonus, saving throw bonus and ability score bonus when they say there's supposed to be a paucity of magic items. (or if he's willing to rejigger monster stats to attack the problem from the other end, but that's probably even more work)
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm no CharOp expert, but it seems like you could do a Crusader to round out the ToB classes while also giving the party a more defensively-styled character to complement the offensive classes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
Nihilarian posted:While this isn't a bad idea, I don't believe they actually have a Warblade? Most likely the DM or one of the players mentioned the Power Attacking Warblade to give him an idea where to stop. Yeah I asked the GM about what level of optimized to shoot for and he said that a power attacking Warblade as being the top, but there's no actual Warblade in the party. I asked on how Invocation users and Meldshapers fit into the world. If it's spell, spell like, psionic or psi-like, it's out. Su and Ex are fine, so I'm leaning towards the Totemist since they seem to be Su users they seem pretty rad. I really appreciate the advice yall it's been super helpful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Do any of these pass muster for "non-super-monstrous races"? Half-Minotaur template (prob not) Half-ogre template (prob not) Goliath If yes, can't go wrong with a dungeoncrasher build. If no, try the Vern build in the fear handbook. Are flaws allowed? Edit: a simple trip build would be pretty useful for battlefield control. JUST MAKING CHILI fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Jul 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:Yeah I asked the GM about what level of optimized to shoot for and he said that a power attacking Warblade as being the top, but there's no actual Warblade in the party. Dragonfire Adept stuff is actually all Su or Ex. And dragons aren't really magical (I mean... they are, but in a magical beast kind of way, not a horrifying wizard kind of way). Run it by the DM, they're a super fun class. Some of their invocations might or might not be acceptable depending on how closely he follows the 'no spell-like' stuff, but if you focus on the breaths you'd be fine. They're good battlefield control which is something your party could definitely use.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:51 |
|
|
sugar free jazz posted:Yeah I asked the GM about what level of optimized to shoot for and he said that a power attacking Warblade as being the top, but there's no actual Warblade in the party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 05:08
|
|