Crown Wars (3.P DnD, Forgotten Realms) (recruitment open)

[NicciKotor]

Horray! Ghaele time!

[Kunoichi]

Hmm.  This does look pretty interesting, and I've been curious about Pathfinder for a little while, now...  My lack of familiarity with the system is making me hesitate, though. ><; I'm thinking a Summoner could be fun to try, but I'll need to read up on those links you provided and see if I can come up with a character concept...

[kckolbe]

I am interested in playing a male Sun Elf Warmage, perhaps as a noble.  Still reading up on lore, though.

EDIT:  I am actually fairly flexible on commoner/noble based on who wants to be what.  Might be better as an uppity commoner.

[Re Z L]

I have an idea for a Synthesist Summoner Dark Elf who eventually goes into Darkfire Adept... 

[TheGlyphstone]

Hmm.  This does look pretty interesting, and I've been curious about Pathfinder for a little while, now...  My lack of familiarity with the system is making me hesitate, though. ><; I'm thinking a Summoner could be fun to try, but I'll need to read up on those links you provided and see if I can come up with a character concept...

Are you going to play a character that specializes in Grappling/Bull Rush/Tripping?

If not....congratulations, you know the Pathfinder rules! Just with different numbers being added up.

[Kolbrandr]

Expressing some interest, though, er, expressing also some dubiousness at what is honestly the most notoriously broken summoner archetype being a play option, not for nothing.

That aside, notionally pondering an Illefaran elf noble likely to increasingly chafe at his nation's neutrality as the crown wars get worse and worse and potentially do something stupid reckless heroic

[TheGlyphstone]

Expressing some interest, though, er, expressing also some dubiousness at what is honestly the most notoriously broken summoner archetype being a play option, not for nothing.

That aside, notionally pondering an Illefaran elf noble likely to increasingly chafe at his nation's neutrality as the crown wars get worse and worse and potentially do something stupid reckless heroic

You mean Synthesist? Summoner is a class, Synthesist is the archtype that's famously OP.



EDIT: Zaer, would you make the Falling Star discipline available for Martial Adepts?

[Kolbrandr]

That's the one, and yeap, hence the reference to it as summoner archetype, yeah.

[TheGlyphstone]

Best to name it explicitly then, so Zaer knows he might want to restrict/ban it.

[Kolbrandr]

I mean, it's sort of a thing with games like this, I don't really optimize so much as build to shtick (I'm pondering something like rogue 4/fighter (two weapon warrior archetype) 5/paladin 3 as far as the concept I'm notionally piecing together, which will no doubt be super effective), and the lag that creates is fine really, but something like the synthesist summoner is beyond even lag.

So, yeah, to outline to Zaer then: synthesist summoner is notoriously overpowered. The Creative Director of Pathfinder has expressed regret and hate for it existing.

[NicciKotor]

Zaer and I have already thought out my character, which is going to be a Ghaele on vacation. Ghaele are CG outsiders, as mine has been working for the past ten or so eras and has earned herself a lovely vacation on the material plane for a short time, maybe 3000 years, who knows, depends on how much fun I am having. Learning about mortals and how they do food and culture and sex and other important things. Getting caught up in all of these fun wars and bloodshed and how cute children look!

I am also going to assume that this is okay and run with it. Someone homebrewed a pathfinder varient of the Ghaele Savage species from 3.5. Since this entire game is a orgy of the two systems, then it should be fine:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kpeq?Savage-Species-Ghaele-Monster-Class

[Kunoichi]

Are you going to play a character that specializes in Grappling/Bull Rush/Tripping?

If not....congratulations, you know the Pathfinder rules! Just with different numbers being added up.

Really?  Because I was under the impression that a number of spells also functioned differently, and all the different class options and archetypes and so on look a little overwhelming to someone who isn't familiar with them.

[NicciKotor]

Really?  Because I was under the impression that a number of spells also functioned differently, and all the different class options and archetypes and so on look a little overwhelming to someone who isn't familiar with them.

Pathfinder classes are far more powerful, it's not even close. A PF fighter would maul the living shit out of a 3.5 fighter given equal level and items.

[TheGlyphstone]

Really?  Because I was under the impression that a number of spells also functioned differently, and all the different class options and archetypes and so on look a little overwhelming to someone who isn't familiar with them.

Pathfinder classes are far more powerful, it's not even close. A PF fighter would maul the living shit out of a 3.5 fighter given equal level and items.

While this is true, the core mechanics are otherwise identical to 3.5. Saves, BAB, attacks, spellcasting....everything is the same in general rules, it's only the specifics and particulars that got changed. So while a PF Fighter might be more powerful than a 3.5 Fighter, if you knew how to play that 3.5 Fighter, you will be able to play the PF fighter without any difficulty at all, you just get bigger numbers.

(I'd disagree with the given assertion specifically,though...+5 hit/damage at level 20 from Weapon Training is hardly an overwhelming advantage. It's classes like Rogues, who got actual class features aside from number boosts, that outstrip their 3.5 predecessors by noticeable amounts.)

[Re Z L]

Really?  Because I was under the impression that a number of spells also functioned differently, and all the different class options and archetypes and so on look a little overwhelming to someone who isn't familiar with them.

It's extremely similar to 3.X, if you're familiar with those rules then you're pretty proficient in the rules for Pathfinder.  There's some marked differences with how things function, but the basic mechanics are all basically the same.

[NicciKotor]

The only reason difference is CMB vs. CMD. The combat maneuvers like trip and sunder and steal have been vastly improved upon and have greater feat trees. So on top of improved trip, you can get greater trip, which makes a person you trip provoke AOO, which is very powerful.

[NicciKotor]

While this is true, the core mechanics are otherwise identical to 3.5. Saves, BAB, attacks, spellcasting....everything is the same in general rules, it's only the specifics and particulars that got changed. So while a PF Fighter might be more powerful than a 3.5 Fighter, if you knew how to play that 3.5 Fighter, you will be able to play the PF fighter without any difficulty at all, you just get bigger numbers.

(I'd disagree with the given assertion specifically,though...+5 hit/damage at level 20 from Weapon Training is hardly an overwhelming advantage. It's classes like Rogues, who got actual class features aside from number boosts, that outstrip their 3.5 predecessors by noticeable amounts.)

PF monk is also leaps and bounds above 3.5 monk. It's just day and night from how buffed monks got.

[PaleEnchantress]

I'm Very interested in the Fey'Ri

[Kunoichi]

...Yes, I'm well aware that the core mechanics are mostly unchanged and that the base classes in Pathfinder are generally stronger than their 3.5 counterparts.  That's not what I was talking about in the first place when I talked about all the options available being a little overwhelming to someone who is unfamiliar with them.

Did you know there are 29 different archetypes for the Fighter class, not counting racial archetypes and third-party material?  I do, because I specifically counted how many there are in order to use that number as an example.  I have no clue which of those archetypes are good choices and which ones are bad, or which ones fit certain combat styles and which ones don't.

Having such a large amount of choices available can be very overwhelming when you don't know what any of the choices actually mean.

[Anon315]

Having such a large amount of choices available can be very overwhelming when you don't know what any of the choices actually mean.

I'd be glad to help you differentiating which styles and archetypes fit what style of play, and help you make the character you want to play or at least guide you away from "terrible-ness".

[TheGlyphstone]

PF monk is also leaps and bounds above 3.5 monk. It's just day and night from how buffed monks got.

Yeah, but considering how far into the pit 3.5 monks started, that's still not a great thing...and even PF Monks as they are now are significantly worse than PF monks when the game first printed, mainly because they keep letting SKR out of the basement and near a computer. Monks are actually playable in PF, and can be downright good if you select the right archetypes, but they're hardly overpowered engines of destruction.

Also, I see what you did there.

[Anon315]

Actually, my 3.5 Monk build is insane. Though granted, it only takes 2 levels of monk.

[Kunoichi]

I'd be glad to help you differentiating which styles and archetypes fit what style of play, and help you make the character you want to play or at least guide you away from "terrible-ness".

Nah, that's alright.  I think I'll probably learn the system faster if I look things up on my own, and I'm sure there are plenty of handbooks out by now for helping people build characters.  I only got onto this subject in the first place because I wanted to make it clear that this isn't going to be as simple for me as people seem to think it should be, and that all my 3.5 knowledge isn't going to magically give me instant mastery over Pathfinder.

[TheGlyphstone]

Actually, my 3.5 Monk build is insane. Though granted, it only takes 2 levels of monk.

Well yeah...the fewer levels in 3.5 monk you had, the better your 'monk' actually was. That was a well-known truth.


In PF, though, Quigong, Manuever Master, Hungry Ghost, and Zen Archer Monks are all remarkably good at what they do. Quigong in particular is amazing in the flexibility it can add, Maneuver Master takes the Monk's one real shtick and turns it up to 11, Hungry Ghost turns the monk into a near-infinite ki machine with incredible endurance, and Zen Archer is one of the best ranged damagers in PF.

[Re Z L]

...Yes, I'm well aware that the core mechanics are mostly unchanged and that the base classes in Pathfinder are generally stronger than their 3.5 counterparts.  That's not what I was talking about in the first place when I talked about all the options available being a little overwhelming to someone who is unfamiliar with them.

Did you know there are 29 different archetypes for the Fighter class, not counting racial archetypes and third-party material?  I do, because I specifically counted how many there are in order to use that number as an example.  I have no clue which of those archetypes are good choices and which ones are bad, or which ones fit certain combat styles and which ones don't.

Having such a large amount of choices available can be very overwhelming when you don't know what any of the choices actually mean.

Sorry, guess I misunderstood  :(

Well if you need any help I'd be glad to lend a hand