Pathfinder General /pfg/
Friendly reminder to tell us what 3pp your game allows if you need character building help.
Ulfen Edition
Unified /pfg/ link repository: pastebin.com
Please search for the unerrata'd content here:
web.archive.org
Horror Adventures: imgur.com
imgur.com
Previous Thread: →
Other urls found in this thread:
knowdirectionpodcast.com
docs.google.com
youtube.com
d20pfsrd.com
archive.4plebs.org
twitter.com
Reposting here:
Swashbucklers are a good concept hampered pretty awfully by a) being stuck with a shitty fighting style, b) having to use panache for just about everything they do, and c) being ridiculously swift action dependant.
In my experience, people who think swash is strong or OP don't realize C and don't have a good base of reference for A.
The swift action glut is a real issue with the class, particularly since they have offensive and defensive abilities both fighting for the economy. Do I want to actually have a chance to make a Fort/Will save this round, or do I want to deal something resembling halfway decent damage?
But how is it different from, say, a Warlord having both swift gambits and a fuckton of boosts and counters?
What classes have you used to play an Ulfen character, both 1pp and 3pp?
The trade is fair for a warlord and less so for a swash.
Because the warlord's base setup is better. You have a passive boost to saves from Force of Personality, Presence, and stances (which can also boost damage, accuracy, mobility, or utility), you have strikes on your standard that can provide the damage, and you can use a shield if you want because your method of Dex to damage doesn't turn off when using one (or just two hand your weapon).
And you're not limited to whatever your panache pool can afford to pay for
Warlords don't have to take boosts, freeing up more of their maneuvers known/readied for a bunch of strikes.
1) The Warlord has the option to select how much of his loadout uses swift/immediate actions, and can customize a balanced load. The swashbuckler's reliance is hardcoded into the class.
2) The Warlord doesn't need to spend swift/immediates to deal decent damage. He can use strikes as standard actions and leave his immediate/swifts open for defensive options. He's not forced to cover two different bases out of the the same action economy.
3) The Warlord gets free teamwork feats and can actually increase group action economy through teamwork feat sharing, raising total group action economy instead of fighting against his own.
New Starfinder info! Classes announced!
>Soldier – Fighter++, Heavy weapons, ranged or melee, focus on a weapon specialist.
>Operative – Specialize on a subterfuge role, spy, snipper, infiltration, etc, heavy skill focus, master of skills.
>Envoy – Helps everyone else out. Han Solo & Princess Leya. Space Bard, or Spaceship Captain, etc…
>Mechanic – Fixes things! Has a robot companion or AI Companion.
>Mystic – Similar to the Oracle. Channels the magical energy of the universe. Not only from gods. Psycho, head exploder, the force etc…
>Technomancer – combines magic and technology. Magic is thought if like programming code. Figure out the laws of the universe, bend and break them.
>Solarian – Balance of the universe between Energy and Entropy. Embraces two sets of powers for each, using them effects the power of the other. Light and Heat, vs Gravity. Could make a Jedi with this class, mystical melee. Has a mote of stellar energy that can be used to form energy weapons or armor.
>SpaceFighter
>SpaceRogue
>SpaceBard
>SpaceDruid
>SpaceSorcerer
>SpaceWizard
>SpaceKineticist
Kinda boring.
Outside of the Soldier, they all do sound very different. The way they spoke about it at Gen Con is that magic is taking a major backseat in Starfinder so we're seeing more martial classes than casters.
>more martial classes than casters
>inb4 tech uses vancian casting with widget and gear components and doesn't work in the new antimagic fields
Were I an uncharitable person, I'd think they meant 'oh magic is rare so we have to make it super strong'.
Oh wait, yes I am uncharitable.
The absolute best classes to use for an Ulfen character are;
>1pp: Hunter, Barbarian, Slayer, Sorceress
>3pp: Warder
knowdirectionpodcast.com
More info here if you'd like to hear it from Paizo yourselves.
Space Kineticist sounds cool though.
I'm concerned that Mechanic may become Starfinder's artificer, because the big problem with primary crafter characters is the fact that they can get access to WBL-mancy.
That said, given Artificer was my favorite 3.5 class, I enjoy the hell out of techpriests in the 40k games, and I play a shitload of pet classes because I love having extra bodies on the field, Mechanic definitely looks like my jam.
No, I believe that they think they're going to make magic take a backseat, but I don't believe they have a good way of pulling it off.
Is there any mechanical difference between an Ulfen and any other kind of human that makes those classes better than others for them than others?
What are the odds that Starfinder is a more compelling, martial-fair and balanced game than Pathfinder?
0
>martial-fair and balanced game
Not really happening while they're still working on the same system as Pathfinder.It won't be goods, but i do expect it to be minorly better than Pathfinder itself in that respect, if only because martials will have access to all the snazzy tech that allows them to do cool shit.
I'd listen if I was inclined to believe a single word said by anyone at paizo.
So for how long are we just going to ignore that there's already another thread started?
this is about the OP pic; isn't it
Low
No, but the Land of the Linnorm Kings and the typical cultural upbringing of an Ulfen does not encourage certain classes, or forces you to work around them.
You're going to have trouble explaining how you've got an Ulfen wizard from Jol when the Ulfen don't have a strong arcane tradition.
An Ulfen is a type of human, just one from the northern lands with a focus on being badass. Think Beowulf and you have their ideal.
Didn't this guy also try to justify eating an Invisible Stalker at a banquet?
>tfw Ulfen Samurai are Tienboos who spent too much time in the Jade Quarter
Better than most want to get their hopes for, probably. It sounds like the gods are playing less of a role and traditional spellcraft has been edged out by tech, so if they really use this as a chance to build from the ground up, there's a good chance for them to lower ceilings and raise floors to meet in a comfortable and asymmetrically balanced middle ground.
Of course, worst case scenario we get 4E: The Repeat.
Alright, that makes sense. I'm not very familiar with Golarion, so discussion of official ethnicities usually goes over my head.
If you hate Paizo so much why do you play Pathfinder?
It was in Hell's Rebels, so it was a Chaotic act.
>Of course, worst case scenario we get 4E: The Repeat.
Don't you mean best?
Not that I'd trust Paizo to make a 4e clone.
The Fighter (Viking) is actually relatively decent, on the upper end of Fighter options.
Skald is obviously made for the Ulfen.
DSP Warlord makes a great Ulfen warleader.
Dominion and Wrath Daevics fit the bill for Ulfen warriors pretty well also, and you can refluff their veilweaving as drawing on spiritual/ancestral power to knit the theme even tighter.
docs.google.com
Please tear apart my homebrew, /pfg/. I want any criticism.
I'm playing an ulfen witchwolf Fighter (Viking, Myrmidon)! And will hopefully play it again this week!
What is that thing and when can I cuddle it?
You seem to be implying I use paizo content in my games. Why would I do that when we have DSP, DDS, Radiance House, Ascension Games, the company the Jolly works for whose name I forget, and all the other great 3pp
I mean, I was thinking the same thing, but consider what they did with their 3.5 clone: they started from 3.5's core, and never ported the later (good) content. And from all I've heard of 4e, it had a really bad start but got amazing later on in the life of the system
>Ulfen wolf-man
I thought Skinwalkers were more an Andoran thing.
Legendary Games (also thanks). Although to be fair, I'm pretty mercenary about where I work.
Well you're using the Pathfinder system, so yes you do use Paizo content.
As long as it takes.
I played a skald in rise of the runelords. He basically spread the legend of our hero-paladin to the point where he started getting supervillians.
Id call that a success.
Looks like a baby cuttlefish.
Cuttlefish have w-shaped eyes.
I believe it is an octopus and you can cuddle with them. They're not easy to take care of however and typically have very short lifespans.
pls reply
Not without significant modification.Like, seriously, i've gone over the sheets from the last game I ran, every feat was modified, the skill rules were modified, no one was using a paizo class, no one was using a vancian caster.
>check the comments
>the octopus only lived for a year
;_;
Despite being considered an awful class, i chose to play a ranger, starting lvl 1.
Now how do i make it not suck, considering that i want to give him the two handed weapon fighting style?
Tis gonna be a melee ranger build
That's always something I really enjoy when playing bards; hyping up my party members as heroes worthy of story and song. Less rockstar, more Dandelion, and like Dandelion you're using the exploits of your friends to get them famous while getting yourself very famous for recounting them.
Ask your GM what a good favored enemy for the campaign is, outside of that Ranger is pretty good.
Are there any easy way to get tentacles that you can use to attack with? I'm looking to make a grapple focused Vigilante and like the idea of using tentacles with Pull Into the Shadows to grab someone and drag them out of a window or down a dark hallway.
I know there's the Kraken Caller, but it would take four levels before I could do anything.
Reroll as a hunter, it's similar conceptually but can be made to not suck. A ranger can't.
What are your favorite Pathfinder / D&D podcasts Veeky Forums?
Rangers aren't that that bad in PF. I'd suggest (if you have any interest in ranged combat at all) going archery over two-handed and just grabbing quickdraw and power attack, since archery is a lot more feat intensive.
The beauty of two-handing is that you don't need a whole lot of feats to make it work.
Takes to do what?
1 level in Aberrant Aegis.
Not everybody wants your DSP shit.
/pfg/ simply can't fathom that people don't play the way they do, don't take it too personally.
Then take enough levels in druid to become something with tentacles.
I need some help has anyone ran CoCT Skeletons of Scarwall?
I am having a bit of problems finding maps that would of use while running through Roll20
Ask what the Favored Enemy is, choose Companion as your Nature Bond, take Mounted Combat and either lance pounce or move around like an Abrams tank
Use the Archery Style instead so you can Switch hit, and because 2handing doesn't require a lot of feats.
Aberant Aegis or Synthesist Summoner
Read the damned OP. unless you tell us what 3pp shit you have available (if any at all) then we'll just let you know the best thing that is available, even if it's third party.
I'm not that poster, I'm just sick of DSP shills and tripfag worship.
And that's a reason to rag on a reasonable answer? there's literally only three ways to grow tentacles in Pathfinder; one's terrible, one's mediocre, and the last is actually decent. The decent one just happens to be 3pp, so yeah we told him to go for that one.
Pull yourself together man. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean it isn't relevant to the current topic.
A lot of people use 3pp. Some of it's DSP, some of it's other companies. Get your panties out of your spleen, take a deep breath, and focus on yourself, not venting your unfocused rage on the first person in the thread to touch your pathetically raw nerves.
>stop liking things I don't like!
>even if it's a conversation I'm not involved in!
Quick, someone post the tantrum gnome.
You mean when can you cuttle it.
>tfw going to end two campaigns soon
>both ending at level 14
>both playing 3/4 BAB
>tfw no third attack, or fourth attack with haste
You're still using the base PF chassis, you mong.
Are there any good neutral summonable monsters out there?
I'm planning on making a wizard who specializes in summoning and well.... I want something more in his alignment for him to summon, not just Devils.
You mean the d20 system? Good to know that 3.5 used the Pathfinder base system.
Jesus christ, how long did someone spend on this?
just... goddamn.
>some panels don't change at all
it kinda ruins it desu.
sort of has a point. If none of Paizo's 1pp-specific content is being used, it's the OGL d20 framework.
Of course, if you're using the core bestiaries, there's enough changes to the basic beasties (goblins, for example) that they could be considered Paizo content.
How Paizo lays everything out and the slight mods it has introduced.
Your mom is a summonable creature, but she may be too fat.
?????
d20pfsrd.com
Just use the list, all the monster without subtype description are neutral.
Not necessarily. Blink Dogs have no subtype but they're LG.
Hey, Forrest or any other Dreamscarred devs hanging around: does Thrashing Dragon Style work with standard action attacks like Cleave or Vital Strike? My DM found a post indicating that it wouldn't, but it seems like it might have been altered later since that post was from mid-2015.
We're all AFB or at work at the moment. You may have to wait a bit.
>vox
Get out of here you hussy!
That's cool, it's not urgent. Whenever people are around is fine!
You liar and swine! You're not the real Gareth!
Which is the stronger Arcanist archetype, Collegiate Initiate or Occultist?
>Once per round, when you make an attack as a standard action or attack action, you can make an additional attack with another weapon as a free action.
Yes, it works with attack actions like Vital Strike or Cleave. Your off-hand attack isn't gonna get the benefits of it, because it's a separate action, but it WILL let you Vital Strike into offhand stab.
Forrest my DM brought some questions (he is a normal faggot etc etc and he don't use much internet)
1: Do you plan to add items that add synergy with disciplines ?
2:When you plan to publish the errata 01?
3: The Archetype Warpath Follower my DM is concerned that you are giving way too much versatility to the Inquisitor throwing the class to upper T2, is that intentional or you guys plan to nerf it a bit?
What is the most optimal martial character you could build with Paizo only material? I'm thinking in terms of both survivability and reliable damage dealing, level for level. I'm thinking it's probably a two hander barbarian invulnerable raged with iron will and superstitious etc for defense and power attack, beast totem and reckless abandon etc for offense.
I'm talking about something that mostly accumulates as much +X to hit and damage, as well as to fort and will saves and has a ton of hp as a back up. Mechanically effective but without a lot of variation (mostly just "I pounce" and then "I full attack")
Am I mistaken in that assumption, given point buy generation and average WBL? Is human the most optimal race choice for the bonus feat and FCB to increase superstitious' bonus?
>3: The Archetype Warpath Follower my DM is concerned that you are giving way too much versatility to the Inquisitor throwing the class to upper T2, is that intentional or you guys plan to nerf it a bit?
Wat? 6th level maneuvers and reduced 6th level casting? That's not even low T2, much less upper T2
>1: Do you plan to add items that add synergy with disciplines ?
There are items planned for Steelforge when we get to it, but I can't say anything for sure.
>2: When you plan to publish the errata 01?
Though you likely weren't there for it, this was answered earlier today. Here's a link that won't go away.
archive.4plebs.org
>3: The Archetype Warpath Follower my DM is concerned that you are giving way too much versatility to the Inquisitor throwing the class to upper T2, is that intentional or you guys plan to nerf it a bit?
Thus far, in playtests and our own games, it's been good but not overly so, and while versatile, it often ends up worse than full initiators thanks to the sheer strength of higher-level maneuvers. There are no known plans to nerf it. Personally, I would argue that it's nowhere near tier 2 either, thanks to its lack of ability to either instantly delete encounters any more than another martial, and lack of ability to fuck too hard with the world. It's also much less versatile than, say, an aegis.
All right gonna send the answer back to him, thanks man
Glad to help. Sorry for the non-answers.
My DM is really defensive on that regard because of previous butthurt in the table because "Wah wah wah player is out doing everyone in party" so he is really autistic with "Hey can I use this fun system?"
Eh if its not forcing much, but could you elaborate the third answer just to try to cease his autism?
That sounds right, yeah.
So how good are the classes in SoP? People seem to like the system, but what are people's opinions of the classes?
I want to like them a lot but...
My biggest problem is that it's ridiculously dip-friendly so you'll have character sheets that look like something out of the 3.5 era.
I've also absolutely never seen anyone play a low- or mid- caster of any sort.