Pathfinder General

You are not going to fire it every round. Blood Money is a thing.

>8th Caster's Bane - As an immediate action, a fighter may move at half his movement speed to make an attack of opportunity against an enemy casting a spell or a spell-like ability. This movement does not trigger an attack of opportunity. This counts towards the fighter's normal number of attacks of opportunities.

This is a great idea, but it's a bit too strong.
Imagine an NPC fighter having this and a caster on your side trying to escape it.
Also, how does it interact with defensive casting?

Change Burn into pool points. More support/options for early level, right now there is only 1 good choice for each element at level 1-7.

If you don't want burn, there is overwhelming soul?

>Also, how does it interact with defensive casting?
As it says in the rules, casting defensively doesn't trigger an AoO, so Caster's Bane won't trigger.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

Do you want to break things at low level?
Because that's how you break things at low level.
>Lvl1 human fighter with 18 int
>3 fcb+7 ranks+3 skill focus+4dex= +17 stealth
>Meanwhile everyone is running around with +0 to +8 perception
>At level 2 you put your next 7 ranks into stealth and have +24 while everyone else has +0 to +9

etc

Oh wait, skill focus will trigger early because you'll have 14 ranks in stealth at level 2, so you'll actually be at +27

That's not just low-level, that's at all levels.

Imagine if he just said 'fuck it' and put ALL HIS RANKS into stealth.

That'd be what, +140 stealth at level 20 from ranks alone.

We have a lot of these rules for a reason.

>pastebin.com/bd67UHgY

I don't get the dabbler concept from the fighter, desu. To me it is the weaponmaster class. My issue with it is that it does not do that well enough. To paraphrase 8-bit theater, the fighter knows weapons - and knows them better than anyone else.

My idea was to empower its core features and bring in some tricks from the hero point system. Presuming Combat stamina is allowed for all martials:

- 4+int skill points or use skill groups from Unchained. I'm not giving them as many SPs as stalkers or rangers, because these classes' core concept is more inclined to certain skills, but fighters should have at least as much as cavaliers/barbarians.
- Bravery gives 1/2 class level to saves vs fear and combat stamina pools. You can also spend stamina up to your bravery bonus as an immediate action to get a bonus to any save.
- at higher levels, you can spend stamina to get the effects of a hero point
- weapon training bonuses also apply to any CMB/CMD rolls with this weapon and as an insight bonus to AC vs attacks with those weapons. The bonus to damage is doubled.
- Armor training includes options to actually raise AC and DR (I have not read the armor master handbook, maybe it has that).

I was also thinking about some mid-high level features to patch fighters at that phase of the game.
- Regaining stamina with crits or defeating an enemy
- Can use stamina for temp HP or to lift some conditions.
- Can apply the effects of a coup de grace on critical against a foe with notably lower level or HP
- have a feature or a feat that (a bit like spell perfection) doubles bonuses with a particular weapon (or it could be coded into greater weapon focus/specialization)
- Reroll a missed attack 1/round, possibly as capstone.

Basically, a fighter should be freaking scary to ever be in a fight with and in range of.

I sort of like the option to have a dabbler fighter, but you can do it with the VMCs, the fighter has enough feats to spare 5.

How to make a crossbow-using character with PoW?

Rate my rules draft for an upcoming campaign, /pfg/.
pastebin.com/bw5819PN

Are you aware that weapon training does already add to CMB when using that weapon?

>pastebin.com/bw5819PN

Would Vital strike get something extra to compete with itirative attacks? If going by the feats themselves, it falls somewhat short.

Some vital strike builds are good enough as is. I'm wary of making them even stronger.

In some games I was in, it was generally assumed that it does not. I wanted to state it upfront.

It DIRECTLY does, because it's a bonus to your attack roll.

ALL bonuses to attack rolls also apply to CMB, provided the bonus is applicable to the weapon being used.

If anyone says otherwise, they are wrong or lying.

Hello, fellow elegan/tg/entlemen, I am in dire need of your advice.
I seek your wisdom because I want to spice up my currently under construction campaign by tossing out of the window the regular feat tree/progression and pulling in the system explained in great detail within this masterpiece (which was originally intended for D&D 3.5 but whatever).
gitbook.com/book/lokathor/supertome/details
Any advice?

Wrong link, here it is, sorry everyone
github.com/Aktariel/awesometome/releases/download/v0.7rev164-final/Tome.Print.rev164.pdf

There's one hell of a lot of good stuff in the Kineticists of Porphyra series. Non-setting dependent despite the name, all the support material Kineticist should have gotten in the first place, and lots of new choices. Only things I add to that are the "d12HD, Burn is a pool, and Kinetic blast has iteratives".

IMO kineticists would work better if the buffer simply started full every day, instead of having to fill it before you go to bed or whenever you remembered telling your DM you did it.

I actually like the burn as a balancing mechanic, it reminds me of how bright wizards did in WAR Online. However, you definitely need a, well, buffer of burn points to work with.

But yeah, KoP sounds great and kineticist really needed more support and a few tweaks. I like it conceptually and am fine with it being a relatively simple "striker"class, it just can really use a bit of polish. I wouldn't even care if it stayed d8, you don't have to have a huge HD.

Kineticist is actually doing OK damage (though not amazing).

rpgwillikers.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/bench-pressing-character-creation-by-the-numbers/

They actually stay around green throughout there career. The bad part is that, the class has a really low ceiling (it was intentionall designed to be that way). No matter how you try to optimize the class, you will never reach blue.

Does KoP make any changes to the base class itself? I'm sure I can get my GM to OK anything I'd suggest, but I'd have a much easier time doing so when it's in a book.

As someone who ran a long-lasting Tome game, here's the advice I have to give:

1. Don't allow too much optimisation using non-tome sources. Tome is crazy enough as is and is designed to be roughly on par with super optimised SRD characters and you will rapidly go into crazy town if you allow them to use every other splatbook as well.

2. Use multiple enemies in fights - Tome characters will demolish "boss" enemies with ease, but they have a lot more fun when they have to deal with large numbers of enemies. This doesn't mean you can't use dragons or whatever, it just means that they should have a bunch of minions (and that means actual monsters, not the 4e style).

3. Include a lot more fights in dangerous/exotic environments or with victory conditions that aren't "clear the room of orcs".

4. Don't throw the party against mirrors of opposition/other adventurers unless they've got access to resurrection effects (or they don't mind re-rolling). Tome characters are exceedingly lethal and this is great when fighting monsters, but not as great when fighting players.

5. tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=54924&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=1c8945aea7f91f03d7432842eb027fea Use this thread for monsters, there are some good ones in there and they're designed for Tome characters.

6. Have fun - Tome characters are powerful and you shouldn't ruin the player's fun when they come up with an idea they like. Find a way to give them challenges along the way rather than just pushing them back onto the railroad tracks.

Kineticists use Stamina instead of Burn. What that gives you is:
-A naturally scaling resource that also improves with more Con, but doesn't require it to function
--Also you can boost your pool with a feat if you want to go hard on it
-A resource which renews on a per-encounter basis, though not if encounters come too quickly
-A resource that, when used, doesn't completely destroy the Kineticist's ability to exist for the day
-A resource that retains the thematic idea of pushing one's limits and risking exhaustion
-The ability to gain bonuses from combat feats if the character wants to build that way
-The ability to boost their attack rolls naturally since you can't enchant blasts

... Wow. That actually solves a shitload. Well done.

What if paladins followed the Sikh bro-code?

They'd be fully sikh.

You mean they don't already?

Sikh maaaate

>Buy a wand
>he thinks Fighters can UMD

Do they follow this code?
Be Lawful Good.
Get a manly beard and a glorious turban.
Never go anywhere unarmed.
Don't get drunk.
Don't be a dick.
Give any loot you don't need to the poor who need it more.
Don't go around trying to smite the heathens all the time, since that's being a dick.

Yeah, for me one of the big issue with kineticists is the lack of support options. That is sort of to be expected, since they are a new class and had to divide page count with 5 other ones, but it can be annoying how they are hemmed in in so many ways.

It needs this movement counts against the fighters total movement for the next round. Also it should provoke.

Anyone can UMD if they put enough point into it.

Implying fighters have skill points

>martials getting nice things
Not even once

They are shit
>Some classes might be disallowed for thematic reasons on a case-by-case basis, unless a major refluffing is performed.
Doesn't tell the player anything other then you will just arbitrarily ban a class because 'thematics' if you are going to do something like that you need to list the classes.

>Paragon surge is banned. Forever. As is blood money.
But false focus and Psionic Reformation are okay?

>Craft skill generally uses the “Making Craft Work” rules. DC’s and craft times will be specified by the DM on an item-by-item basis.
This is arbitrary, the rules are already in place for this.

>No companions of any kind (‘any’ kind includes animal companions, familiars, and whatever other similar things there may be) may advance to a higher level than the character’s total character level. Even if the abilities seem to suggest that RAW. Even if that is stated explicitly. No exceptions.
Here lose class features and make specific archetypes literally unplayable, with no return.

>Weapon finesse is a weapon quality rather than a feat. All melee dex-to-damage feats are replaced with DSP deadly agility. Ranged characters without such a class feature may get dex-to-damage in a way specified by the DM on a case-by-case basis.
You are right str needs to be made even worse then dex.

>Combat expertise is given for free as a combat option to any character with at least +1 total BAB (e.g. a wizard would get this at level 2) the same way as drawing a weapon as part of a move action.
Fighting defensively would like a word with you.

>Vigilantes are to be refluffed with second identity class feature removed (no replacement) in most cases (except if a reasonable argument for keeping it is made), if someone wants to play as one.
If you are going to take away the core feature of a class you should just not use the class.

(1/2)

It offers class "Mutations", which are extremely narrow archetypes that affect some of the problem bits. One halves burn damage in exchange for a slight damage nerf, one gives more skill points in exchange for losing the longer gather power functions, and two others I don't remember. There's also the Elemental Scion, which limits you to one element but gives everything at an increased rate. No flat improvements to the class, though.

>Non-core races with 8 or less RP receive a racial Feat as a bonus Feat.
>Races with 20 or more RP will only be allowed on a case-by-case basis after a thorough review and with LA applied as seen fitting for the race in question. Wyrwoods enjoy a blanket ban.
RP is shit, and Wyrdwoods are not even that good, construct traits is literally all they get, that means at 0 hp they die, they can not heal naturally, which means they need magic to heal, and with no con score the only way they get more then their class hd hp a level is to use FCB for one bonus, or toughness.

>To gain ranks in the autohypnosis skill (yes, I'd allow it after some thought), at least half your total character levels have to be in a class capable of manifesting psionic powers. Levels in a prestige class that advance your manifesting ability count as levels in that class
Limiting a skill like this why?

>Psychic (occult) characters will be heavily reviewed and altered as seen fitting so as to prevent abusing mechanics which aren't compatible with non-psychic classes.
Occult classes are largely shit, what is this mechanic abuse you are trying to talk about?

>Psionic races are not allowed, period. Their FCB's might be allowed for Paizo races at my discretion.
Stupid and arbitrary.

>Psionic traits are allowed in general, but the DM reserves the right to not allow particular ones.
Shouldn't this be all traits?
(2/2)

>Because the other martials protecting their caster should be meaningless unless they make a big cube surrounding it.

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
What worries me the most is that my players actually *expected* me to railroad them in our last short adventure ("where should we go from here? "), so I'm still trying to figure out how to make them discover their freedom as roleplayers.
I have never allowed anything that isn't in the official sources (i.e. Paizo only), hence my worries about including part of the Tome.
I know all too well a couple of them are filthy minmaxers, but their characters turned out pretty interesting anyway.
As for the environment I was thinking about setting them up in a world where arcane magic doesn't quite work anymore (wild magic rules), and deities are very busy fighting each other to figure out whose fault it is. So divine magic isn't guaranteed to work either.
This turns warlords and bandits into much bigger threats.
Now, if only I could come up with a cunning plan to make the players have legitimate reasons to work together...

> players simultaneously "wake up" in a cave each of them went into to kill a Medusa
> none of them knows each other, in fact they entered the cave years apart from each other (might go for 1d12 years between them)
> they might want to find out how their village(s) is fairing, if their loved ones are still alive, and maybe what caused the permanent petrification to end

Does it sound as a decent adventure hook?

>casters
>needing protection

>Doesn't tell the player anything other then you will just arbitrarily ban a class because 'thematics' if you are going to do something like that you need to list the classes.
We had this for several campaigns with different DM's already. (but this is the first time ever we run with DSP content allowed)
In a nutshell, this means that the players have to justify their fluff rather than just taking whatever.
If they come up with a good explanation, anything is allowed.
If they can't come up with a good explanation, some things may not be allowed.

>Occult classes are largely shit, what is this mechanic abuse you are trying to talk about?
The wording is a bit awkward, but the issue is that occult classes have mechanics often incompatible with non-occult classes. I dislike that part.
>Limiting a skill like this why?
Thematic reasons as above.
>Shouldn't this be all traits?
It's a clarification that they're allowed in the first place.
>Stupid and arbitrary.
These races don't exist in our homebrew world and haven't existed so far, I don't see allowing DSP content as a reason to make them exist. Since we have an active rules lawyer in our group, I felt that should be openly stated.

Anyhow, here are updated rules:
pastebin.com/jXWCuT2E

That sounds interesting and I'd love to see how it works out. If anything, the idea of using stamina in place of burn as suggested above could work out really well and I can easily see my DM allowing that as it gives him an excuse to use the stamina rules for once.

>I have never allowed anything that isn't in the official sources (i.e. Paizo only),
Ya do realize that Paizo is unbalanced right from core, and that the company couldn't balance a grape on a plate?

>The wording is a bit awkward, but the issue is that occult classes have mechanics often incompatible with non-occult classes. I dislike that part.
Also, as a note, in our previous games there was simply a blanket ban on occult classes. This is an experiment of sorts.

>Here lose class features and make specific archetypes literally unplayable, with no return.
Also, care to elaborate?
You can have companions, they are just capped at your total character level, if you misread that bit.
This is mostly because one of our players constantly argues about how he should be allowed to get a level 30-ish animal companion by level 16. That kind of rules lawyering gets old fast.

Which is why I'm worried that including 3rd party rules would make it even more f***ed up instead of improving balance.
It's far from perfect, but trying to fix it could turn out to be making it much worse than it is

>These races don't exist in our homebrew world and haven't existed so far, I don't see allowing DSP content as a reason to make them exist. Since we have an active rules lawyer in our group, I felt that should be openly stated.
Seems weird to have all paizo races in one setting, then not have stuff like blues, half giants, elans, ect.

I just reread it and apparently I misread it the first time through my bad.
That also doesn't need to be a house rule it is already literally a rule, that is where the confusion came from.

First of all, Tome does not need optimisation knowledge/skills. If you make a tome character and just pick things that look cool, you'll be as strong as someone who knows what they're doing using the core material (plus a few splatbooks). You can just hand someone a Tome Barbarian and they get to make some choices about their character but they won't have to worry about being underpowered compared to other players.

As for the adventure hook, I find that the best way to give players that kind of freedom is to give them a goal that's going to require lots and lots of work/planning. A lot of the time this means working with the players and discovering what they want to do. "I want to become a member of the landed nobility, with a castle, lands and a wife" is something that you can work with. Otherwise, you can always have a look at old classic dnd adventure paths that were highly regarded and see how they handle things. Having the players all wake up together and discover that they're from different times is a neat hook and could give them a reason to work together - if you want to make things a bit more interesting, multiply the number of years by 10 or more. If the players are all victims of some strange effect, then they have a reason to stick together. If they still just want to fuck off, then you can give them some kind of condition that requires healing/restoration of the kind that requires a quest to earn (if you tell the players they need to amass a big sum of money then they will suddenly become endlessly creative) - and "displaced in time" is incredibly easy to turn into some kind of life-threatening condition that requires powerful magical healing/fixing. You can even have NPCs ask them about what they want to do in-game, and suggest courses of action/point out possible conflicts. A big part of more freeform DMing is the ability to create and come up with neat obstacles for the players to have fun overcoming.

>That also doesn't need to be a house rule it is already literally a rule, that is where the confusion came from.
That rules lawyer constantly argues that it's not how it's RAW. The line is literally written only for him and him alone.
If you can find a RAW passage banning that, I'd be thankful.
>blues, half giants, elans, ect.
Blues or elans are much less generic fantasy than elves or dwarves.

It is usualy in the option they are using what is he doing to try to cheat the system?
Most stuff has wording like this
> The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were 4 levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit. If you lose or dismiss an animal companion or familiar that has received this benefit, you may apply this feat to the replacement creature.
>to a maximum effective druid level equal to your character level.
So it really depends on what he is using.

Take, for example, Diabolist.
>This is the diabolist's class level plus her highest caster level. This does not stack with class levels that grant an animal companion.

He argues that if he's a sorcerer 6/diabolist 10, his imp should be as for level 26 (16 caster level + 10 diabolist level).
I disagree with that reading, strongly.
And it's not the only such class, he found like half a dozen other obscure options for this.

It's probably half elf oracle

>Doesn't tell the player anything other then you will just arbitrarily ban a class because 'thematics' if you are going to do something like that you need to list the classes.
Also, a bit more on this.
Our group generally has a tendency of allowing almost anything if the fluff provided by the player is sufficiently cool.
E.g. I already greenlighted Fool's Errand despite it still being in early preview for a player who came up with a cool backstory for it.

paizo.com/threads/rzs2q9f7&page=3?The-ARG-race-restriction-and-favored-class#141

> A character’s effective druid level for determining the abilities of her animal companion (based on Table 3–8 on page 52 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook) cannot increase her animal companion’s Hit Dice above her actual character level + 1.

Your HD+1 is the limit.

user, that's the PFS forum. Compton's rulings are only official for PFS play.

That still allows a 16th level character's animal companion for a 12th level character, so I'd prefer keeping to this houserule.

Which is the only one that matter.
If you are playing a Home game then the GM can rule however he want anyway.

Why couldn't Paizo just have done this instead? It makes so much more sense.

That would require competent game design.

That's exactly the kind of feedback/advice I was looking for.

So now I'm thinking: which parts of the "standard" rules should I keep, according to your experience? Because honestly, I'm very tempted to go full Tome.

Also, I'm writing down a short questionnaire with some questions their characters will have to answer in first person well before the first session. This is mainly to get rid of crappy backgrounds and have some more elements to work with, and will include a question about their goals and individual honor codes.

Jason is trying to bully Mark.

It is just shitty wording, if your rules lawyer is actually using shit like that you should tell him to fuck off. "It's in the book" Is not a valid argument.
The obvious RAI is it is supposed to be your highest Casting level class plus diabolist levels incase you took multiple classes, paizo just does not know how to words.
But really your Rules Lawyer sounds like a fucking twat.
If he wants to use vaguely worded rules to do that kind of shit you brain him with the book.
Finding it, laughing about it, is one thing, using it to maximum benefit is just being a shit.

what if an anti-paladin does?
are they wicked sikh?

>If he wants to use vaguely worded rules to do that kind of shit you brain him with the book.
Unfortunately, we play online.

You could dip into a spellcasting/skillmonkey class.

Outside of that traits like Dangerously Curious or Pragmatic Activator could work out for a Lore Warden. If you don't have the stats you could bite the bullet and pick up SkillFocus/MagicalAptitude.

Never seen "Avant Guard", and googling it isn't giving me anything. Link, description?

When you handwave things saying "thematic reasons", all anybody sees, reads or hears is "completely at my whim for whatever I like or don't like, but if they know ahead of time they can't be "wrong" for me to call out on".

You aren't putting parameters of what makes a good or bad explanation, which leads one to believe that you'd allow the worst drivel if you liked the girl asking it for example, and would disallow a masterpiece from the guy she's eyeing instead of you at the table.

Seriously, that is mostly for edge cases on stuff that isn't otherwise established as part of our setting already.
E.g. guns are very rare, so a gunslinger should have an elaborate backstory on how they got those guns in the first place.
It's essentially "pls don't do stuff not compatible with our setting, guys".

- Paizo are imo really scared of at-will stuff.
- Paizo are also imo scared of constitution-based casters. See: Witch Doctor, ork.
- Burn was meant to be a serious tradeoff resource. Combat stamina is a pretty much a direct buff to most martials who get it. "If you go to 0 stamina, you are fatigued" is not a huge drawback for pushing your powers. Burn actually requires you to balance how much you get, stamina is just a powerup as long as you start the fight refreshed.

Burn was imo supposed to go with the constitution-based class so you could not pump con up the roof and play an insane HP tank without losing any offense. Maybe Paizo did it wrong, but this is the vibe I am getting off this.

If Kineticists worked off stamina, the benefits they would get from it would be lower. Heck, if combat stamina would apply to their ray attacks, I would say it would be a Tier 1 feat for any kineticist aiming to do damage.

Kineticist was meant to tbe the 70-80's type psychic that caused damage to themselves for spectacularly devastating TK/PK/Pyro attacks (c.f. Carrie, Firestarter, Scanners, The Power, et al). It wasn't meant to be run with standard games.

docs.google.com/document/d/19y_V3-_cKBzTYiFwt5M3Tij7ahQoPPt9XLTE1wreV68/edit#heading=h.d6k8i1ul1jjg

It's part of the Psionics Augmented: Occult playtest. Someone more qualified than I would have to tell you more about it, as I haven't really looked into it too much.

Except for the devastating part.

It's no less "meant to be run with standard games" than the Cleric, the Wizard, the Barbarian, the Bard, the Alchemist, the Fighter, the Monk, the Rogue, the Druid, the Paladin, the Ranger, the Swashbuckler, the Cavalier, the Summoner, the Ninja, the Gunslinger, the Oracle, the Sorcerer, the Inquisitor, the Witch, the Magus, the Vigilante and the antipaladin and samurai and arcanist and bloodrager and brawler and hunter and investigator and shaman and skald and slayer and warpriest.

You know what's in the setting and "standard game"?
ALL OF THOSE. All of those and rocket-generating laser scorpions with dual chainguns and forcefields hunting dragonwizards atop crashed starships before some reactor has a meltdown

You get more offense from Burn though... It's +2 damage per burn every 3 level.

>want to try GMing and introduce group to PoW
>the people interested don't want to touch it, and want to play stuff like base Paladin, Oracle, and Sorcerer
>If I use PoW whole hog, the Paladin will get rekt and the casters thoroughly bullied
>even dialing it down, I'll have to make more creatures evil so the Paladin has something to work with.

I haven't even started and already I feel like I've taken burn.

What's stopping you from introducing the party to PoW, even though none of them are PoW?

All you have to do is create a scenario - something quick - that highlights the abilities of Path of War without overwhelming them.

For example, have a quick campaign built around the worrying development in Ye Olde Kingdom that the bandits are becoming organized, and it's revealed some deserters are doing it. The party goes to investigate and they're tasked with wiping out the deserters. Most bandits are bog standard classes, but some of them have Initiating archetypes, and the deserters themselves are full initiators (as befitting a former member of the army.)

Start small with NPCs with Martial Training feats. Give them occasional allies that use PoW but are lower level than them. Befriend and Bro-ness are you friends, and have the PoW usage scale gradually with their comfort level.

>even dialing it down, I'll have to make more creatures evil so the Paladin has something to work with.
Black Saraph users
And encourage him in game even to learn the way of the Silver Crane to combat them.

He sounds like a dick either way.

Don't hide it from me, /pfg/.
Tell me about how your character's family feels about his adventuring career.

>his mom
Is proud of him, but hopes he comes back to show her the bride (or groom if he swings that way). So far he hasn't expressed open interest in /anyone/, and he's ten years older now than his parents were when they met.

>his dad
Is proud of him, but sometimes wishes the boy would stop worrying so much about how they're doing back home and just go kill a Linnorm or something.

>his siblings
Doesn't have any.

They don't know, they still think he's in Halgrim establishing himself as a merchant.

His uncle knows what's going on though, and so far he seems to understand my character's decision - after all, every Ulfen yearns to go on at least one viking!

Proud that he's still serving in military with distinction like his forebears

"Where did we go wrong" mostly.
Sure they appreciate that he still takes the time to craft things and sell them, but he's gone from "of course we teach our children that killing is wrong" to "annihilate all hostile forces on sector grid" and treating the literal gutting of ancient god heralds for parts as totally normal now.

You can't just watch what you still call "your little scholar" singlehandedly slaughter entire hordes with heavy weaponry and not wonder where you failed

What's the Triple Intensified Shocking Grasp Magus build look like?
Saw it mentioned earlier.

I still fully intend to put PoW stuff into it, I just have to be a little more careful now and can't just directly push things too hard.

Having mind controlled initiators in the spooky fey forest is more like a boss encounter, giving that band of elite kobold scouts levels in hidden blade suddenly becomes far more deadly, and having that half-dragon dungeon boss be a Brutal Slayer/Bushi turns into a much, much bigger danger. Workable danger, of course, but it'll have to be tuned as I get experience. Hell, I'm overreacting again and everyone's probably have a jolly good time.

Mender Vitalist DMPC in a party with three PC's Y/N? I'm wary of making a shitty DMPC and stealing the spotlight, but I feel they'll need at least a healbot to go through the AP (Curse of the Crimson Throne) smoothly.

Vitalist is exactly the kind of healbot that could steal the spotlight. They are REALLY. REALLY good.