Retech

But he shared them with the party. IIRC, he gave/lent me a shapechanging cloak thingy. And weren't they elder gods or something?

More applicable song to heat wave: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE2fnYpwrng

Making countless ice sculptures and cloud-based "Goodyear" advertising blimps are definitely not example of grinding. :P And yes, it was completely necessary. One only has middling magical power with level 5 magic, and one does not become a powerful lich that has sacrificed her humanity in order to pursue the evil creature that she accidentally unleashed for her arbitrarily long lifetime with "middling" magic. Unfortunately, the game ended before I could unlock the secrets of even deeper ancient magic, which I'm sure would've been of some use. My experiments on it completely failed, although that was not an entirely surprising result, considering that my tests primarily consisted of freezing it and blowing it up. And perhaps I still have a little bit of that Runescape grinding determination and drive left in me, which is one of things that I am happy to have learned from the game. Now I am prepared for the tedious and repetitive work of today's modern economy! --------- I'm pretty sure there are rules on sundering objects and such, including walls, though I don't remember if they are only in 3.5 or if they have been updated to Pathfinder. If you're not sure, honestly the best approach would just be to ask the GM if it can be done, and then the GM will probably know the rules for that, or can easily look it up. Although, if you know that beforehand that your character is going to be a doorbreaker/wallkicker, it probably pays to look up the rule in advance and have a link.

1) You can break a hole in a wall, if there is something behind it 2) You don't have to fill out the non-mechanical details of the sheet. Personally, I do that in a separate descriptive paragraph thing. 3) Multiclass? 4) Because you CAN wield it, but it doesn't mean that you know how to. It's a decent penalty to how accurate the attack is, which makes sense It's mainly up to your DM though. There are some areas that rules do not cover, which the GM can just make a decision about. Break down this wall? Well, the hardness of masonary is *blank*, so you just need to be able to deal more than 20 damage and we can say that you can take twenty on it.

Hah, I could only manage three, and that was very stressful. :P

Isn't there a way to arrange that more efficiently?

Svishneblins are horridly overpowered (though not to the extent of Drow nobles past level 3). Here's an interesting one though, if you like the goblin but want more synergy with the mad scientist kinda deal. It's 3rd party but it really fits what you're going for, I think. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/3rd-party-races/alluria-publishing/boggle

I was going to guess that, except in real life, so at least not completely off the target.

yo reserved

THE FRENCH WIN?

Well, magic in Pathfinder seems to screw up most adventuring tropes in classical fantasy. For example, we don't even need to go through the mountains and fight the balrog, we can just fly over it. Or those ringwraiths, how about hold person? E6 might be a good idea as well.

Well, you're giving us many options aside from taking out some tar balls and blowing stuff up. Archi: The count that invited you to the party greets you at the front door. "Welcome madam, I hope you've had a safe journey." Retech: I reach into my bodice and take out an explo- *pauses* "Yes, I have had a safe journey, thank you for asking! And might I say, this is a wonderful gala you've thrown." ---- That was because we had no party structure. :P

I think you should probably learn a bit more about DnD before you make some judgements about it. If you have a good grasp on it, you can basically build ANY kind of character that you want. As long as you view class as purely mechanics and not actually roleplaying, you can do it. I'm sure between all of us, we can come up with a character that can do everything that you want in a character. Archi: Lots of DnD games are with completely unrelated characters that are undertaking a common quest. Usually, as long as the GM provides a common goal in advance, everyone can write a backstory about that. And monks can't be chaotic. :P

Would you happen to have a link with it? It seems simple enough.

I was referring to it in comparison to pregenerated, not FATE. :P But that's basically the whole system right there? Is the main difference that it is more GM-Driven as a system?

1. That's why I said that people who didn't spend time memorising the rulebook could ask the people who did to help build them a character, which is not a pregen. It could even be like: Player A: Hey Homie! Player B: Sup dawg Player A: Hey, I want a *insert race + random class* that can *ability X, Y, Z* Player B: Yeah, we can make that work. Why not try a *insert classes here* of the *archetype*? Player A: How about *ability Z*? Player B: Oh yeah, I'm not sure you can do that with the class you chose, but if you multiclass into *insert class*, then you could probably do that with *insert feat* Player A: Sounds cool Player B: Chill with ya lateeeer I don't see any imbalance here. 2. Like you do all the time? I was making a critique of your suggestions, which is what people generally do when one posts something in the back room. 3. I think you're mischaracterizing their positions. I believe it was to make reasonable characters, not pregens. (At least, if I remember from the last time we brought this up).

I am not "demanding" a game. Anyone can create whatever game that they choose to GM. Whatever you choose to make is up to you, and whatever I choose to play is up to me. I've already said what I prefer to play, but it doesn't mean that you have to satisfy what I want to play when you make your game. A tavern game doesn't have to satisfy everybody and it doesn't have to include everyone. My rejection of pre-generated characters does not mean that you or one of the other GMs couldn't set up a game with pre-generated characters. I wouldn't play a game with pre-generated characters, but it doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of other people that are eager to play such a game. --- And clarification. Pregenerated is not synonomous to underpowered, as free-choice is to optimised. What people seem to be forgetting is that building an effective character is not the same as abandoning roleplaying. Adventures are designed for at least somewhat effective characters in the first place.

That's what I meant in the first place though. If you want to make your own character, then you can. And if you want help, you can also get that. Everyone is on the same power level, and everyone has input on their character. It's like when I helped Earth with his character. He told me what he wanted, I drafted a statblock, he made critiques, and we worked though it together. The only difference would be that there would be someone that knows how to make a monk, and it would end up better than it did. Edit: Barring fighter v Wizard, but relative to class strengths, on the same power level

It's interesting that you characterize it in that way, but if we are using your metaphor, why not help everyone get on a horse?

I think it's unfair to say that. I have no interest in give and take, but that does not mean that other people are not interested. I am only stating my opinion. I am not as desperate to play in games as I was before now that I've found the Paizo community, but I still want to play with the Tavern. I wouldn't do it if it was a slog using a pre-generated character, especially since I probably wouldn't connect with it. A normal Pathfinder game does not have pregenerated characters, so I'm not seeing where all this give and take stuff is coming from. I just want to play a normal pathfinder game.

Yeah, somehow I doubt that a character would be pre-generated that would be interesting at all. Usually pregenerated characters are extremely generic (wizard with fireball, cleric with lots of buffs, yippee), and if I were to ask the GM to generate a specific kind of character, I don't think that would be done (more workload + not really going with the whole pregenerated thing anymore). For example, say I wanted to play a non-charismatic cleric that was wise, but had difficulty in connecting spiritually with their god. What kind of pregenerated cleric would have a low charisma score? The main reason why I like Pathfinder (and 3.5 by extension) is that there are so many varieties of characters that you can make that don't fit the mold, but aren't horrendously underpowered as to be unplayable. If there were pregenerated characters, I would rather just move on to 4E or something. Also, if anyone is interested, there are usually many games running that you can choose on the Paizo boards: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/connection

I'll get the rules clarification/errata to you asap when it's released, but if you assume that every inconsistency is ruled against your favor, then when the actual errata comes out, it will only be positive for you. Personally, that's what I would do. The inconsistencies aren't that crippling and you should still be able to make a well-rounded character. ---- Also, vote in the Ennies and move up Pathfinder products, woooo! Please read the instructions, since the voting is kinda strange. http://www.ennie-awards.com/vote/

The Swallow whole quote is from the Eidolon Swallow whole 3-point evolution rule in the PRD. Yeah, that's the thing. No one has any idea exactly how the wording works or any specifics about it. IIRC, a developer was saying that they would be coming up with errata or clarification soon enough, after they complete their work on ultimate combat. To Nex: If I am not mistaken, that is only when the Eidolon's hitpoints would be reduced below zero. ------ Just pointing out, but usually when there is an inconsistency and the GM has not responded, it is better to assume that the inconsistency will be ruled against the player character. The Synthesiest is basically asking for a rules battle, so I would not be inclined to be part of that conversation and ensuing argument. It's more of a "ask your GM" kind of deal for the moment. ------ Also, Synthesiests wearing armor is another possible inconsistency. Eidolons are not usually allowed to wear armor, but it does not specify whether a fused Eidolon-Synthesiest can wear armor, which was also the subject of another thread. :P

The question was "FAQed" on the Paizo forums, but the developers did not get back to them on that. I shared the general consensus of the thread, but I believe there hasn't been any official developer word on that.

Swallow Whole (Ex) If a creature with this special attack begins its turn with an opponent grappled in its mouth (see Grab), it can attempt a new combat maneuver check (as though attempting to pin the opponent). If it succeeds, it swallows its prey, and the opponent takes bite damage. Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to one size category Smaller than the swallowing creature. Being swallowed causes a creature to take damage each round. The amount and type of damage varies and is given in the creatures Statistics. A swallowed creature keeps the grappled condition, while the creature that did the swallowing does not. A swallowed creature can try to cut its way free with any light slashing or piercing weapon (the amount of cutting damage required to get free is equal to 1/10 the creatures total hit points), or it can just try to escape the grapple. The Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. If a swallowed creature cuts its way out, the swallowing creature cannot use swallow whole again until the damage is healed. If the swallowed creature escapes the grapple, success puts it back in the attackers mouth, where it may be bitten or swallowed again. Format: swallow whole (5d6 acid damage, AC 15, 18 hp); Location: Special Attacks.