Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mephisto]

TL:DR of it is that some ShadowRun players filled water-guns full of chemicals and a compound that allowed chemicals to be absorbed through the skin, rather than whatever original contract method was.

It quickly became an arms race between the players and the GM to try and thwart the water-gun method/keep the water guns useful.

By Spoony. Some of his stories are great.

If only I knew about that back when I played Shadowrun.

[Emma]

I just dm'ed the first session with a different group and I have to say that these guys might be better than my first group even though they've never played before. This may also be a result of the fact that I'm running a far less serious campaign and we have much shorter sessions, only 30-60 minutes, rather than several hours.

[94dima94]

So, I recently started playing Pathfinder, and I need an advice:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

First, some backstory:
I started GMing a campaign with my friends; we are having fun, I'm basically introducing them to the game, even though this is my first game too; but we are learning, and it's going fine.

After a few games, though, I want to try a game where I play a character, so I join a new group with other people I know, who want to start a new campaign.

So, when we meet, I already have my character (a wizard); 2 people need to make their character, so we start helping them and explaining things they don't know.

As soon as we get to feats, the GM speaks up: "No matter what, I want to see EVERY MAGE with Combat Casting; otherwise you are screwed".
My character (in story) has no reason whatsoever to learn that feat, is not supposed to fight enemies in close range, and actually before the start of the campaign has never actually BEEN in a fight. But still, I had to pick that feat. It was one of many changes that the GM made me do, but every other one actually made a lot of sense, was the logical thing to do, and didn't change anything in my background; this was the only one I didn't understand

As I said, I just started playing, so I need an advice by someone:
is every mage in the game really supposed to learn this feat, at the cost of "ignoring" the story, to have a chance to survive? Or was this a bad call from the GM?

I should point out that we have 5 player in the group; one of them is a cleric, EVERYONE else is some kind of spellcaster (one of them is a Magus, and he is the "warrior" in the group; had I learned about this before, I would have changed my character; probably I will do that anyway)

[BlackFlyme]

You are adept at spellcasting when threatened or distracted.

Benefit: You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting on the defensive or while grappled.

When you make a concentration check, you roll d20 and add your caster level and the ability score modifier used to determine bonus spells of the same type.

If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you're casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.

Not completely necessary, just really good early game or for characters that do not have the best casting attribute. For example, an Inquisitor doesn't need an Wisdom higher than 16 to be able to access all their spells, since they only get up to level 6 spells.

You will probably need to cast on the defensive at some point, though. Just about every spellcaster will find themselves in such a situation at least once. Though again, it isn't 100% necessary to take; it just helps.

Full Arcane Spellcasters (able to cast spells level 0 to 9) typically won't be hurting for feats, since all they really need is their spells, and they don't have the Base Attack Bonus to be able to perform other forms of combat as effectively as other classes.

Clerics are still casters though. They get up to level 9 spells and all. They just have the Base Attack Bonus and Hitdie to be able to be more combat-like than full Arcane or Psychic casters.

And Magus is a funny one. It was a Hybrid class before they were cool.

[Tack]

Pathfinder advice, you say?

I wish to make a sniper-slayer who uses a firearm.

This whole build seems to revolve around Sniper's Goggles (Can make sneak attacks from >30ft), which'll be a cool 10k.

However the only decent sniper option I've found seems to be the Slayer.
Was wondering if there was an acceptable way to make a Rogue Unchained, Ninja or Gunslinger sniper with the same sort of sneak-attack mechanic dealio that my current idea has.

It's being a mild pain, I'll say that much.

[94dima94]

I know about the feat; my problem is: "was it worth it to ignore everything about my story for this feat? Is this that important?" (A major part of it is that this wizard never fought anyone, and never wanted to; he was learning magic for different reasons, and he knows mainly support spells for now; later he will learn how to craft magical items).
It seems like this WAS something I should take early, but still, it looks like the GM just didn't care that much about roleplaying.

[BlackFlyme]

Yea, a lot of groups seem to care more about combat than roleplay. Or min-maxing skills high enough to bypass roleplay as quickly as possible.

It's a bit of a shame, since player-driven stories can be pretty good. There is even a line of Story Feats to drive the characters towards their respective goals, though completing the Story tasks is impossible without the DM's cooperation.

As for Sneak-Attacking, there is a Rogue Talent to increase the range by 10ft each time you take it, and the Sniper Archetype for the Slayer can always sneak attack while in their weapon's first range increment. The Rogue Sniper Archetype, on the other hand, loses Trap Sense to increase their SA range by 10ft at level 3 and every 3 levels after.

[Tack]

Weeeell. My guy's gonna start with a musket
|40ft|1d12|
And eventually move up to a double hackbut
|50ft|2d12|
As it's the best range you can get on an early firearm.
Doesn't really stack up to the 100ft of a longbow or 80-120ft of a crossbow sadly.

Also sniper's goggles:
"The wearer of these goggles can make ranged sneak attacks from any distance instead of the normal 30 feet." invalidates the rogue option a bit.
Which Sucks, as I'd really rather play an unchained rogue than a slayer.

(Fakeedit: Nevermind, someone else claimed rogue.)

[BlackFlyme]

Always sucks when two players get the same character idea.

Had a game with two Necromancers once. Another with two Maguses. And two Paladins.

Sometimes, people even pick the same Race. Less of an issue, so long as they aren't any of the special-snowflake/rare races.

I've always wanted to play a Skinwalker, but races with multiple variants are banned because you basically get to pick-and-choose your starting attribute bonuses with them. And the Skinwalker variant names are kinda cringey.

A few other races are banned as well. If they aren't in the Advanced Race Guide, they aren't allowed.

[Cruxador]

TL:DR of it is that some ShadowRun players filled water-guns full of chemicals and a compound that allowed chemicals to be absorbed through the skin, rather than whatever original contract method was.

It quickly became an arms race between the players and the GM to try and thwart the water-gun method/keep the water guns useful.

By Spoony. Some of his stories are great.

Seems like a waste of the chemical. Better use would be to route it into the fire sprinklers, and then trigger them. As long as it only damages things like flesh, and not electronics, that would make for an incredibly easy run, after the part where you do that setup. Provided there aren't any knight errants in watertight armor, anyway.

[94dima94]

TL:DR of it is that some ShadowRun players filled water-guns full of chemicals and a compound that allowed chemicals to be absorbed through the skin, rather than whatever original contract method was.

It quickly became an arms race between the players and the GM to try and thwart the water-gun method/keep the water guns useful.

By Spoony. Some of his stories are great.

Seems like a waste of the chemical. Better use would be to route it into the fire sprinklers, and then trigger them. As long as it only damages things like flesh, and not electronics, that would make for an incredibly easy run, after the part where you do that setup. Provided there aren't any knight errants in watertight armor, anyway.

later in the story, that happens. Corporations start adding chemicals to sprinklers to fight the players, among many other things.

[Cruxador]

later in the story, that happens. Corporations start adding chemicals to sprinklers to fight the players, among many other things.

At that point though, you might as well just use explosives for localized destruction. The sprinklers are useful to runners because they use existing infrastructure to get a wide spread of effect, but the corporation doesn't want a wide spread, which could cause needlessly costly damage. What's more, it's an unexpected move; much of its utility is that it's unexpected. It can be countered by a raincoat if it's coated in the right stuff (wax is a good bet) if you know it's coming.

[Jimmy]

So, I recently started playing Pathfinder, and I need an advice:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

First, some backstory:
I started GMing a campaign with my friends; we are having fun, I'm basically introducing them to the game, even though this is my first game too; but we are learning, and it's going fine.

After a few games, though, I want to try a game where I play a character, so I join a new group with other people I know, who want to start a new campaign.

So, when we meet, I already have my character (a wizard); 2 people need to make their character, so we start helping them and explaining things they don't know.

As soon as we get to feats, the GM speaks up: "No matter what, I want to see EVERY MAGE with Combat Casting; otherwise you are screwed".
My character (in story) has no reason whatsoever to learn that feat, is not supposed to fight enemies in close range, and actually before the start of the campaign has never actually BEEN in a fight. But still, I had to pick that feat. It was one of many changes that the GM made me do, but every other one actually made a lot of sense, was the logical thing to do, and didn't change anything in my background; this was the only one I didn't understand

As I said, I just started playing, so I need an advice by someone:
is every mage in the game really supposed to learn this feat, at the cost of "ignoring" the story, to have a chance to survive? Or was this a bad call from the GM?

I should point out that we have 5 player in the group; one of them is a cleric, EVERYONE else is some kind of spellcaster (one of them is a Magus, and he is the "warrior" in the group; had I learned about this before, I would have changed my character; probably I will do that anyway)

Sounds like your biggest problem is between the DM screen and the DM chair.

I would usually ask to speak with the DM privately or send him an email to discuss building your character. I'd say that I really didn't want to take this feat since it's not something that suits my character, and while I appreciate his (or her) help for new and inexperienced players, I understand the downsides of not picking that feat and I'm really okay with the risk. I'd point out that at the end of the day, the DM has veto rights on anything and everything in the game and absolute control over every aspect of the world and the challenges the party faces. By contrast, as a player you have only one thing you control: your character. You'd like to be able to express that control by building your character your own way, even if it's not the most logical or powerful way possible.

[BlackFlyme]

If the DM's going by published Adventure Paths and Modules, you should be fine most of the time anyways.

Those are typically made with an expected party of four players who are inexperienced to somewhat experienced, and are not very optimized.

[Neyvn]

Anyone interested in playing some boardgames through that of Tabletop Simulator???
I am cool with anything...