The Gaming Den

Mummy's Mask has a trait called Trap Finder which obsolete's the Rogue's one remaining niche. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/campaign ... rap-finder

If you have access to this trait you can handle traps about as a Rogue can. The Paizo forums are buzzing about this and some erratas recently. They where cluing into the fact that the Rogue sucks before this trait cane out and it pretty much serves as confirmation that the devs don't like Rogues either.

Longes wrote:Are pathfinder iconics any good? By "any good" I mean "well optimised" and "showcase the features of the class".

I think the goal was to have mechanical support to what you see on the WAR image. Mechanically, they are horrible, but the match the pix.

malak wrote:

Longes wrote:Are pathfinder iconics any good? By "any good" I mean "well optimised" and "showcase the features of the class".

I think the goal was to have mechanical support to what you see on the WAR image. Mechanically, they are horrible, but the match the pix.

Bleugh. IMHO, the point of "iconics" in an RPG should be the demonstration of key features of class, and of the most straitforward builds. "Look, this is Bob the Fighter and in the intro fiction "I, Bob" he fights things. Look, this is Tim the Enchanter and in the intro fiction "I, Bob" he buffs Bob, so that Bob wouldn't die horribly." If a developer can't build a functional character in a system he developed - he should be banned from future developing.

Longes wrote:Bleugh. IMHO, the point of "iconics" in an RPG should be the demonstration of key features of class, and of the most straitforward builds. "Look, this is Bob the Fighter and in the intro fiction "I, Bob" he fights things. Look, this is Tim the Enchanter and in the intro fiction "I, Bob" he buffs Bob, so that Bob wouldn't die horribly." If a developer can't build a functional character in a system he developed - he should be banned from future developing.

I think it's quite reasonable to assume that Pathfinder art sold way more books than anything they ever did mechanically. So it makes sense that they focus on that.

malak wrote: I think it's quite reasonable to assume that Pathfinder art sold way more books than anything they ever did mechanically. So it makes sense that they focus on that.

Indeed. Pathfinder has already published the second equipment guide and the NPC codex - they're nearing the end of the supplement cycle. They've started redoing their very first area books (People of the Sands pretty much covers stuff they've already done), and when they're doing second edition, they should probably just rip a random fantasy heartbreaker off the net and tell Wayne Reynolds to illustrate that shit.

Juton wrote:This is from the Samsaran race entry on the d20pfsrd.

Rogue The rogue gains 1/6 of a new rogue talent.
Wizard Add one spell from the wizard spell list to the wizard's spellbook. This spell must be at least one level below the highest spell level the wizard can cast.

When pathfinder first came out I thought the designers where more toadying and inept then vindictive and malicious. Shit like this, Mummy's Mask and Crane Wing are making me think that they really, really dislike mundane characters.

It's not that they dislike mundane characters... mostly, they just like making them jump through hoops for shit and hyper specialize for some damn reason.

But anyway, that Wizard bonus really isn't even that good though, that's just saving them the money of buying and scribing a scroll at best, a better example would have been Humans, who get the same piddly 1/6th of rogue talent or an entire fucking extra spell known as a Bard or Sorcerer.

I kind of wonder how hard it was for the guy who wrote the Samsaran description to resist just writing down "They're the Deva from D&D 4E but with the serial number filed off, now move along I have to go write the entry for the TotallyNotGenasi race"

Their srd is also filled with links to 3rd-party splats that specifically cater to one thing, selling for a dollar each. That's... a pretty decent way to go, I guess, but it does also make the whole thing look very bloated and ready to topple.

Juton wrote:Mummy's Mask has a trait called Trap Finder which obsolete's the Rogue's one remaining niche. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/campaign ... rap-finder

If you have access to this trait you can handle traps about as a Rogue can. The Paizo forums are buzzing about this and some erratas recently. They where cluing into the fact that the Rogue sucks before this trait cane out and it pretty much serves as confirmation that the devs don't like Rogues either.

We discussed the trait 4 or 5 pages ago.

The history of trapfinding rogues from 1E to Pathfinder goes:
(a) only rogues (thieves) get a find/remove traps skill (1E)
(b) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue can find/remove magical traps (3E)
(c) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps (Pathfinder)
(d) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps without taking a particular trait (Pathfinder with this new trait)

Going from (a) to (b) is a huge kick in the nuts to the rogue, going from (b) to (c) is a smaller kick in the nuts, and going from (c) to (d) is even smaller to the point where it barely even registers. So I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

hogarth wrote:

Juton wrote:Mummy's Mask has a trait called Trap Finder which obsolete's the Rogue's one remaining niche. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/campaign ... rap-finder

If you have access to this trait you can handle traps about as a Rogue can. The Paizo forums are buzzing about this and some erratas recently. They where cluing into the fact that the Rogue sucks before this trait cane out and it pretty much serves as confirmation that the devs don't like Rogues either.

We discussed the trait 4 or 5 pages ago.

The history of trapfinding rogues from 1E to Pathfinder goes:
(a) only rogues (thieves) get a find/remove traps skill (1E)
(b) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue can find/remove magical traps (3E)
(c) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps (Pathfinder)
(d) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps without taking a particular trait (Pathfinder with this new trait)

Going from (a) to (b) is a huge kick in the nuts to the rogue, going from (b) to (c) is a smaller kick in the nuts, and going from (c) to (d) is even smaller to the point where it barely even registers. So I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

You forgot the trap progression from
(a) ERMAHGERD GIGAX!
to
(d) Meh. There's a couple traps lying around. Just summon a kitten into one of them.

And the progression of trapfinding is a good thing, because "You must have Rogue to begin playing" sucks.

Juton wrote: When pathfinder first came out I thought the designers where more toadying and inept then vindictive and malicious. Shit like this, Mummy's Mask and Crane Wing are making me think that they really, really dislike mundane characters.

You'll find comments like: "of COURSE magic is stronger, that's why I play UNDERDOGS!" and "I don't want DBZ in my RPG" all over the paizo boards.

and half of the "improve fighters!" discussion is "yeah he needs to do more damage!"

hogarth wrote:The history of trapfinding rogues from 1E to Pathfinder goes:
(a) only rogues (thieves) get a find/remove traps skill (1E)
(b) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue can find/remove magical traps (3E)
(c) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps (Pathfinder)
(d) everyone gets a find/remove traps skill, but only a PC with one level of rogue (or several levels of certain non-rogue archetypes) can remove magical traps without taking a particular trait (Pathfinder with this new trait)

I actually think this is a good thing. Trapfinding and healing where two of the most resource consuming chores from before my old group new how to optimize. Even in Pathfinder Society everyone everyone has figured out that a wand of CLW frees up the Cleric to be more than a band aid. There should be a wand that makes traps go away, I don't know what the Rogue could better spend their resources on, but there has got to be something.

Going from (a) to (b) is a huge kick in the nuts to the rogue, going from (b) to (c) is a smaller kick in the nuts, and going from (c) to (d) is even smaller to the point where it barely even registers. So I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

I think most of the fuss isn't that the Druid can now handle traps well, it's that the Rogue is no longer special. Some people rationalized that trapper Rangers and archaeologist Bards where basically Rogues anyways. But now every single thing a Rogue can do another class can do better, and in some cases it can be done better by a non-Rogue class.

Juton wrote:I think most of the fuss isn't that the Druid can now handle traps well, it's that the Rogue is no longer special.

The thief class lost 90% of its specialness 13 years ago, and 9% about 4 years ago, so complaining about the remaining 1% seems like it lacks a sense of proportion.

And I agree: to hell with the rogue.

Juton wrote:I actually think this is a good thing. Trapfinding and healing where two of the most resource consuming chores from before my old group new how to optimize. Even in Pathfinder Society everyone everyone has figured out that a wand of CLW frees up the Cleric to be more than a band aid. There should be a wand that makes traps go away...

How about this?

Longes wrote: You forgot the trap progression from
(a) ERMAHGERD GIGAX!

It's not like you could really detect Gygax traps, if you could detect them you often couldn't disarm them, if you could disarm them the disarming procedure was often a trap in itself which you couldn't detect.

Sending something in to trigger everything (preferably from several miles away) has always been the best approach if you didn't need to be quiet.

Damn, I want to play Void/Madness cleric

Juton wrote:This is from the Samsaran race entry on the d20pfsrd.

Rogue The rogue gains 1/6 of a new rogue talent.
Wizard Add one spell from the wizard spell list to the wizard's spellbook. This spell must be at least one level below the highest spell level the wizard can cast.

When pathfinder first came out I thought the designers where more toadying and inept then vindictive and malicious. Shit like this, Mummy's Mask and Crane Wing are making me think that they really, really dislike mundane characters.

On average, a favored class bonus is worth about 1/4 of a mediocre feat. E.g., if a mediocre feat gives a +2 bonus to something, then a favored class bonus probably gives a +1/2 bonus to the same thing.

So for the rogue, you're correct that he's getting ripped off; he should be getting the equivalent of the Extra Rogue Talent feat every 4 levels, not every 6 levels.

But the wizard isn't getting a bargain either. No wizard player worth his salt would ever take a feat that said "you can add 4 lower-level spells to your spellbook for free".

hogarth wrote:On average, a favored class bonus is worth about 1/4 of a mediocre feat.

You know, I didn't even notice this until you said this. But it lines up pretty darn well when you think about it.

Is there anything special I should know about building a cleric? I currently have two options: cleric of Hastur (Chaotic Evil, favored weapon - rapier) and cleric of Black Butterfly (Chaotic Good, favored weapon - starknife). Domains of choice in both cases - Void (Stars) and Chaos (Protean or no_subdomain). What if I can bullshit diplomance the MC into making a different favored weapon? What if I'm an elf (for longbows)?

EDIT: also, is there anything good that can be said about a "Starknife"?

The good thing about a Starknife is that you don't have to use it. And it might look cool.

What sources are you allowed to build a character with and at what level do you start?

There are a lot of feats needed to go the archery route in PF.

And if you got the feats to spend you might want to consider picking up an animal companion.
Nature soul , a prerequisite.
Animal ally, the feat that gives you an AC at -3.
Boon companion, the feat that makes it equal to your level.

And if you grab a Ankylosaurus at level 7, you gain a companion that forces saves against daze on each attack (strength based). It gains an additional attack at level 9 and you can give it a third with divine power or something.

Give it a headband of Int so it can select more feats, ability focus (stun) a strength belt, and throw some strength boosting spells on it, so you can boost the stun save DC nicely (keep in mind you can share spells works differently in PF than in 3.5, you can throw personal spells on your AC and can ignore type requirements)

While your animal companion is dazing your opposition, you're just slinging spells yourself, since you're still a cleric.

Longes wrote:What if I'm an elf (for longbows)?

Well you're stuck with your deity's favored weapon it you want to use WIS for attacks. I can't recall if Pathfinder even has any decent deity choices for bows. The only one in the core book has a pretty poor selection of domains besides Animals, and an even lamer goody goody hippie god of nature, family, and communes motif.

I vaguely recall there's some cleric archetype where you claim that everybody gets what your god represents wrong and he's actually for this and that, allowing you to bullshit in a different domain choice. You might be able to use that to talk your DM into allowing a different weapon or pick a different god and still grab Void or Chaos.

Edit: Okay, there's http://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Sinashakti who has Chaos and Travel and short bows as a favored weapon

sake wrote:I vaguely recall there's some cleric archetype where you claim that everybody gets what your god represents wrong and he's actually for this and that, allowing you to bullshit in a different domain choice. You might be able to use that to talk your DM into allowing a different weapon or pick a different god and still grab Void or Chaos.

That archetype specifically does not get favored weapons. Why? It is a mystery.

I want to make a custom deity for an archer cleric planning to dip into necromancy. Are there any good starting points in Earth mythology?

... I seem to recall that in Aztec myth, one of the demigods of the underworld was an owl-headed archer. But I'm not sure of the details, and a basic google search didn't give me anything useful.

Nemesis? Did she use a bow in actual myths or was that just the old Hercules shows

Or instead of the farmer reaping the crops imagery, maybe Death as something like a hunter who culls humans so that 'the herd' doesn't get too over populated?

sake wrote:I vaguely recall there's some cleric archetype where you claim that everybody gets what your god represents wrong and he's actually for this and that, allowing you to bullshit in a different domain choice.

A godless cleric is better in every regard.

GâtFromKI wrote:A godless cleric is better in every regard.

Except that the developers of Pathfinder never fail to remind everyone that godless clerics are cheesy misinterpretations and have no place in Pathfinder despite being specifically called out as an option in the book they wrote.