Pathfinder 1E RECALL - TIDERULER OF MARAN

[MetaVoid]

here, we have highly intelligent and semi-diplomatic character...and a rogue to boot.
I thought about taking Student of Philosophy (to make Diplomacy and Bluff Intelligence skills), but +1 to all saves + some extras was too much to pass on.

Rules question: if I have 3 points in a skill and get +3 from that skill being a class skill, do I meet 5 ranks requirement?

 

[Jago]

Rules question: if I have 3 points in a skill and get +3 from that skill being a class skill, do I meet 5 ranks requirement?

Negatory, amigo: 5 Ranks means 5 actual ranks, as in you yourself have put 5 skill points into the skill in question.

 

[Archon Basileus]

Tx for that, Jago!

Enviado de meu GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk

 

[Jago]

Not problem. The wording is generally there just to limit things to certain levels (as you cannot have more Ranks in a skill than you have Character Levels in Pathfinder), so instead of saying "Cannot take before 5th Level", they'll do the "Needs 5 Ranks in ______"

It's an older phrasing, but it checks out.

 

[Neurotic]

The difference here is that in 3.5 you didn't get auto +3, but had limit set at level +3 IIRC. So you could put 4 ranks at level 1. But the rules are the same, it would just mean the rules would say you need 8 ranks in a skill (for level 5 limitation).

This is one simplification that I don't find helpful.
If I wanted more skills at level 1 I could spread the choices and only then put additional points in later levels (so I could have level +1 or level +2 skill) and it would be my choice to NOT max it.

 

[KahlessNestor]

Never played 3.5. Hear it's broken as hell, hence Pathfinder.

I do have the 3.5 PHB I found lying around somewhere, though...

 

[Jago]

Pathfinder is broken as hell too XD and it's basically 3.75, so.

Any game is "broken" once you have this many books/options/rule interpretations. It's difficult to keep everything balanced once you have literally thousands of different options for characters/items/spells/skills, etc. Even the GunMonk I built for this game I realize is preeeetty chincy once I dig into some of the abilities and the way class features interact, but I think that's some of the inherent fun in 3.X: finding cool and interesting ways to take all those options and make a unique character, Story and Mechanics-wise. Plus, GMs are always within their right to say like "Core Classes Only" and such, which mitigates a lot of the bloat and crazier things that are out there.

It's honestly probably why 5E is being very careful and slow about rolling out new Character Options and puts a huge de-emphasis on Magic Items: there are far less ways to "break" something if your options are limited to start with and have been playtested to death.

And yet I still managed to hit 90+ damage in one round with a 6th level Ranger on a game here, soooooo. Though even that was using an Unearthed Arcana unofficial option.





Back to our game for a bit here: the Dagger, our super special item thingy. Are we going to follow Arvana with this because she "knows a guy" or so to find Adalous, or what is the consensus on our next step?

 

[Neurotic]

I think this is cooperative game. As long as no one goes overboard with cheesy rules or blatant abuse, we will be fairly balanced. With limited options comes another problem. Everyone wants to be useful and some classes need extra support

 

[KahlessNestor]

Lol I have pretty much all the PF hardcovers except Strategy Guide and some bestiaries, but yeah, I have yet to use much outside of Core. I have a shaman and an Unchained barbarian and that's it. Not much of an optimizer. Don't have the patience or inclination, and tend to play support rather than dpr anyway. I plau Society, though, and it's fun.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[Neurotic]

I enjoy small optimizations, but always do the story first. It keeps me from going full out on optimizing. Besides, the character needs to make sense, not have several classes and features and all packaged just right. You know, those builds that "come online" at level X - that implies you have full build mapped out and you will do it regardless of how the story goes. Not my cup of tea. Even in 4e, I had small things (multiclass bard warlock in 4e, bard covered in the story, but pull power was the critical part. Not big optimization, but for controller warlock, godsend), but never optimization board material.

As I see it, pathfinder optimization is harder simply due to my lack of experience with it. It doesn't lack options, just me knowing them.