Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder: Weird Frontiers (online, OpenRPG, Wednesdays)

Colette

First Post
I would be interested in participating in this campaign. Would there still be a position left?

I would like to play a bard of some kind, so as to cover the role of a scholarly character and a social character. Would there be any psionic archetype (perhaps a thoughtsinger?) I could take to give my bard some psionic flavor?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Arkhandus

First Post
Yes, the group still has an open slot. I can't think of any psionic archetypes or prestige classes or the like for bards and such, though. I couldn't find "thoughtsinger" anywhere though it vaguely rings a bell. The Tactician class in Psionics Expanded is sort of the psionic equivalent of a bard, with various abilities and powers that enhance a group, improve communications, and such.
 

Colette

First Post
The thoughtsinger was a psionic bard variant by Keith Baker for the Eberron setting. It was never updated to Pathfinder though... but you can Google "thoughtsinger" if you are curious.

The Tactician does not appeal to me as much, since it lacks the knowledge and social skill bonuses of the bard.

Will there be any issues if I play a bard? The party currently lacks a dedicated psionic manifester, so would the party be better off with a psion, or a psion/Thrallherd?

What would you recommend?
 

Arkhandus

First Post
There's no problem with playing a bard, it'd still be fairly useful in the group. Though it should be noted that most of the campaign takes place in Azagan, where the Common tongue is only spoken in a few regions besides a few merchants or leaders elsewhere, and nonhuman or regional languages are more prolific. Most languages of Rhivia are unknown or little-used on Azagan, though some of the racial tongues are still widely used there.
 

Colette

First Post
I have a question about the Sound Striker bard archetype's Weird Words ability.

"Each sound targeting one creature"...

What does this mean? Can you target a creature with more than one sound, ala Scorching Ray? That would be incredibly potent.

Do you have to spread out your sounds across possible targets? That would make the ability nearly worthless by 10th-level.

Also, I was planning on using part of my starting wealth to buy Wings of Flying for 54,000 gp. Would that be acceptable?
 
Last edited:

Arkhandus

First Post
I couldn't find anything in the archetype or the Magic chapter of the PRD or elsewhere that clarified anything about choosing targets for stuff like that, so I'm gonna say that the ability must target a different creature with each damaging sound. 10d8+50 sonic damage (assuming 20 Charisma) to one target at 10th-level (even with Fortitude saves allowed for half damage) at the cost of one measely Bardic Performance use for the day is just excessive (45+ damage even if they pass every single Fort save!). 27 times per day at 10th-level? Yeah......no.

While Synjin can deal around 80-100 damage with a full-attack action when using all his archery feats........he has to score 4 hits at an attack bonus around +4 to +10 per shot to do so, against regular AC, not touch AC. Which at these levels is typically between AC 22 and AC 30. Or he has to score a critical hit (confirmed with that lowered attack bonus from Deadly Aim and Rapid Shot) and a regular hit. He accomplishes this maybe once per battle on average, sometimes twice. And it's typically offset by the number of misses he gets when using all those feats together (though luck tends to favor him on attack rolls, so it's not entirely offset).

If the Weird Words performance had some higher cost per use it might be acceptable for its level (though the fact that sonic resistance/immunity is less common than other energy resistances/immunities, and that sonic damage ignores object hardness, makes it more advantageous than a cold-based or electricity-based attack), but as it stands.......I think not. A 10th-level Bard with Charisma of 18+ would have 2 spell slots of 4th-level. He could cast Shout twice per day for 5d6 sonic damage in a 30-foot-cone (average 17.5 damage, half on a successful Fort save)...........much weaker and much more costly to the Bard, though Shout would at least affect multiple targets (partly balanced by the fact that it has to be carefully aimed or timed to avoid catching allies in the blast). The Bard could've used his 4th-level slots to cast Dominate Person, Hold Monster, or Greater Invisibility instead of Shout, so there's a definite opportunity cost involved (10th-level Bards know 2 spells of 4th-level, so it's likely they'd know at least one of those very-useful spells). But spending 1 out of 27 Bardic Performance uses for the day to inflict a bunch of damage? That's a pittance.

So.........while Weird Words is relatively weak under my decision regarding its unclear targeting choices, at least it can be used to help mop up a bunch of weak or already-injured enemies over a few rounds, and at least it isn't overpowered this way. For the cost of 1 round worth of Bardic Performance use each time, that's about all you can expect. For a 6th-level ability, it's better than the Sound Burst spell anyway for damage output and precision (aside from the minor chance of stunning that Sound Burst has). Wordstrike deals 1d4+15 damage to a single target at 10th-level for the same cost (assuming 20 Charisma again, as a likely average for mid-level bards), which is still weak at 10th-level but also still very cheap in terms of daily resources.

As for the Wings of Flying, no, you cannot spend more than half your starting gold on a single item. You could get around this to some degree if you had the means to craft the item yourself (meeting the prerequisites, passing the appropriate skill checks, paying the item's creation cost), so long as the item's creation cost was no more than half your starting gold.
 
Last edited:

Colette

First Post
Can I take 10 on the Spellcraft checks needed to enchant magic items, or do I have to manually roll each check somewhere?

If I wanted to use the rules for adding new abilities to magic items, do the abilities have to come from magic items from the same slot, or can I add the benefit of Sleeves of Many Garments to Wings of Flying?

Also, I just noticed that two of the other player characters were 11th-level two months ago, while new players entering right now would start at 10th-level. Is this actually the case? If so, would this not severely discourage new players from entering the game, due to lagging behind simply from having answered a call for replacement of a player?
 
Last edited:

Arkhandus

First Post
Yes you can "take 10" on the Spellcraft checks to create magic items.

I don't think that adding abilities from items of a different slot would be acceptable in Pathfinder, given how it handles magic items in the core and the lack of guidelines for such a thing as far as I can find in Pathfinder. The designers clearly wanted all items of certain types to use the same slot, and it's supposed to be part of Pathfinder's balance, insofar as Pathfinder has any balance whatsoever.

And as for new-character levels, I never start new characters at quite the same level/XP total as active PCs. It would be unfair to those who stick around if every random new PC (who usually drop out without a word after wasting a lot of the GM's time and briefly entering play before they decide to just disappear) entered the game exactly on-par with the long-running PCs who have earned their treasure and XP through active participation. I do tend to give a slightly greater amount of bonus XP to active PCs of lower level than the others, when they actually participate and all, so they can gradually catch up in level. My general policy is to start new characters at one level or half a level behind the rest of the party (in XP and wealth), or at the same level (with minimum XP/wealth for it) as the lowest current PC only. Only serious munchkins and similarly-obsessed powergamers are unwilling to accept such a handicap at character creation, and those sorts tend to only cause trouble for the GM and other players anyway. While my games tend to have a larger proportion of combat to RP, I still run some sessions of pure roleplay, exploration, and/or investigation (with skill checks where appropriate) as well. There's usually one or two players in any group who won't do much during RP sessions, but that's okay as long as they're not being disruptive.
 

Colette

First Post
The other characters were at 11th-level two months ago. They are probably 12th-level by now, unless the game has quite a slow leveling pace.


You are asking me to start at 10th-level to trust you to give me bonus XP that may or may not close the gap. It is not that bad a power gap, but the principle there...


I am sorry, but that principle does not bode well with me, because it does not build trust, the most important facet of a player-GM relationship. You are assuming the newcomer to be untrustworthy unless proven otherwise, thinking that they will "drop out without a word after wasting a lot of the GM's time and briefly [enter] play before they decide to just disappear."


It also comes off in the same vein as bragging about join date or post count on the forum: seniors should be given privileges simply because they are seniors and they have stuck around for a while, whereas newcomers should not be given quite as much. It makes sense in a workplace with formal positions and promotions, but in a gaming group wherein all of the players are supposed to be given equal amounts of respect and trust? I do not quite think so.


Leisurely clubs, say, a local book club, do their best to make newcomers feel welcome and fit in. They do not impose restrictions on those newcomers like "You cannot come near our books, because we do not trust you not to steal them," or "You cannot talk as much as the seniors, because a newcomer like you should have less privileges than the seniors." When you join a chess club, you do not get told, "You cannot move your rooks, so as not to make the loyalty of the senior players meaningless."


In short, your principle there has done a poor job of building trust and making me feel welcome. It assumes that I, the newcomer, am untrustworthy unless proven otherwise, and it imposes the "newcomers should be on a lower rung than seniors" policy in a leisurely environment wherein players should see each other as equals.


You do not want newcomers to drop out, and yet you do not give them the trust and warm welcome they need to be motivated to stay.


I apologize, but I cannot join a game when you harbor such a principle. Also, preemptively shielding yourself from counterarguments by declaring "And anyone who disagrees with me is a [negative stereotype]" is not very fair to people who might disagree for other reasons.


I do not think I will be joining your game. I apologize once more.
 
Last edited:

Arkhandus

First Post
No, the group is still a mix of 10th and 11th level PCs right now. Progress has been slow in the past month or two due to a few factors.

And I am not assuming newcomers to be unreliable necessarily, it is just, frankly, a great deal of experience that they usually DO drop out shortly after wasting my time. And again, it is more that I prefer to reward reliable players than anything else. It's not a matter of seniority; less-active long-term players get less bonus XP than active newcomers (there's more to participation than just showing up, and the amount of bonus XP given reflects that).

I don't see how you equate it with a lack of trust or some preferential treatment; you're basically saying that I should start newcomers off at exactly the same power-level as long-lasting players simply to show a measure of trust? That's a non-sequitor argument. And when a character dies or gets retired, any replacement character their player makes has to follow the same char-gen guidelines as a newcomer would. D&D usually involves some PCs losing a level or falling a level behind due to death and resurrection or other such things (or simply being more fragile due to a template's or race's Level Adjustment).

If I were running a casual adventure, a one-shot or the like, it would make sense to just have every PC enter at the same level as the rest of the group. And with printed Adventure Paths where each module is made for characters of a specific level and is likely to end badly for any lower-level characters, it works too (my Jade Regent campaign works that way since I don't want to leave anyone crippled against the dangers of the Adventure Path as-written). But it has less bearing on a homebrewed campaign, which is more flexible.

Very few have ever complained about my policy regarding newbies starting half a level or one level behind initially, except for some obvious powergamers who were talking about some min-maxed builds they were considering beforehand. But then, most of the folks I've played with have actually played D&D before and are used to the occasional lower-level PC (and used to older PCs dying occasionally and ending up a level lower that way as has basically always been the case in D&D).

Also: you only prove my point by dropping out NOW, after I've spent a few hours or so this week responding to character ideas and rules-matters with you, as so many other flakey newbies have done in the 13 years I've been DMing. I always present my campaign concepts, character creation parameters, and any houserules up-front or as soon as possible, so I don't waste people's time before they learn the specifics. I'm open to discussion and open to changing my mind when someone gives a good argument supporting their point, because I try to be as fair and reasonable as possible. But that does not mean being a pushover for munchkins and powergamers.
 

Remove ads

Top