Classes in the APG

[ShinHakkaider]

I'm running modules designed by Paizo games.

So how do you do xp if you don't kill stuff? Toss out the bestiary and not bother to use any monsters? Like I said before, you have to design special cases for such campaigns. I guess for the past 10 years your group has avoided combat altogether in favor of skill based games with tons of rogues I imagine. Is that what you're trying to imply?

I think the question that I have is: Youre running these AP's? But are you actually READING the AP's? Because I'm pretty sure there are options in the modules themselves that give options for giving XP for non-combat encounters.

I'm running Curse of the Crimson Throne (Edge of Anarchy), our last two sessions have been combat free but the party has gotten XP for for achieving the goals at hand.

The first goal was convincing the Spider-King (a local vice lord) to help the party with a delicate situation. In the mod on page 42 refers to "Ad Hoc Experience Award: If the PC's do x award them experience as if they had defeated a CR Y creature." This refers to them completing the mission at had which could be achieved by fighting or by negotiation. Having been warned by several other NPC's about the Spider King, the PC's chose negotiation and despite and effort by one of the other PC's to sabotage the parley (she felt that the Spider King was to odious to deal with and wanted to fight him and his minions. Her effort was thwarted by an AMAZING diplomacy roll by one of the other PC's...) they successfully negotiated a deal with him to get what they needed.

The ad Hoc Award is there in the actual book so that they get XP for completing the mission whether they fought or negotiated.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Also, and I mean it's been a while, I don't remember in Basic, AD&D or AD&D 2nd edition the classes EVER being perfectly balanced against one another.

I remember friends of mine playing Thieves / Rogues and being the one's to pick locks and check for traps. I remember in combat them skulking around the edges of combat waiting for an opportunity to backstab the crap out of some unsuspecting monster or NPC. I distinctly remember them NOT being in the forefront of combat otherwise they'd get fricking MURDERED.

I more often than not would either play a Ranger or a Cleric. On average (IIRC) the party fighter was better than I was at dealing damage. But when it came time to fight Giants or Ogres or Orcs? D00d by 8th level it was automatic +8 to damage to those creatures whether I was using a dagger or a bastard sword. I was a Goblin/Giant/Orc killing machine. I was so upset that they took that away for 2nd Edition D&D...

I also notice that part of the problem has to do with lazy GMing. This isnt a direct indictment of anyone in this thread. Even if you're running an adventure from a pre-written source it's your responsibility to make the adventure relevent to your players and their PC's. It may take a few sessions for things to gel, but ultimately you have to help your players and their PC's shine. If there's a rogue in the party you have to give him/her something to DO and it does not have to directly be combat related.

Case in point, one of the players is playing an Gnome Oracle in my COTCT game. Combat wise? She's the weakest member of the party. But she's also the one with the highest Diplomacy and Knowledge ranks so when in combat when that Otyugh crashes up through sidewalk from the sewers and starts eating people and the rest of the PC's are like "WTF?!?" she can offer insight as to what it is and what they can possibly do to either get away from it or beat it or why it's in the city at all to begin with. If they beat the Otyugh, she was still part of the encounter and contributed to it's defeat and gets the experience from it. If the part tries to fight and then has to flee I still give them half XP for the attempt. After all they did "encounter" the threat but didnt defeat it.

She was the point person in the aforementioned negotiation with the Spider King and made such an impression on him that he's kind of taken a liking to her. She doesn't know this yet though.

As a DM you have to work to make it so that NO member of the party is useless. You have to give each character their "The Zeppo" moment (Buffy reference). You may not be able to do it EVERY session but then again none of the players or their PC's can be AWESOME every second of every session.

 

[Glade Riven]

See, now I want to play a rogue just to see if I can powerbuild one effectivly. I'd probably need a slight rule-break and have Combat Trick allowed multiple times to do it, though.

Now, on to the AGP classes. I've never had a chance to play them, but...

Cavalier: I like the theme, but it'd have to be the right type of campaign
Inquisitor: Again, I like the theme, but it'd have to be the right campaign. I could see playing it in a Ravenloft setting, or a campaign where investigations were importaint. And remember...nobody expects the inquisition!
Oracle: Not really my cup of tea, but it makes sense as an alternative to the combat cleric.
Alchemist: The "artificer" of Pathfinder. The class grew on me once I figured out an angle I could pursue (snakeoil salesman!).
Summoner: I like the edielion concept, but not so much the summon monster spells - mainly because it slows down combat.
Witch: I can think of some fun foes (as a DM), but the class doesn't appeal to me as something I want to play.

As far as builds go, I have a tendency to make odd combinations work. I also haven't played any of these, so I don't know how well or poor they work.

 

[Kaiyanwang]

Inquisitor: Again, I like the theme, but it'd have to be the right campaign. I could see playing it in a Ravenloft setting, or a campaign where

About the inquisitor, perhaps this thread could help.

You can re-think classes in the same way. As an example, for an oriental themed campaing, Paladins are excellent Sohei and Cavaliers excellent Samurai, and so on.

 

[Mojo_Rat]

cavaliers make excellent group leaders. they also have a lot of skills for a full BaB class and a good skill selection. you could easily do one as a party face.