Pathfinder Pathfinder: Kingmaker Builds and Strats Thread

[moraes]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

 

[Shadenuat]

Stun 1 round, if Fortitude > Shaken sounds (getit. sounds.) reasonable to me

Thing is though, anything which is good Fortitude CC is a hard counter for endgame enemies and Fey in general. They all have naturally high Will and Reflex but that is their major weakness.

Also Shout seems to ignore MR completely.

 

[Shadenuat]

No man come on. It basically find group of enemies: do the thing > murder

Friendly fire, come on lol, same for prismatic spray or whatever. set your dudes ai off with a click and Stop, buff haste and run around disabling anything > click ai on and drink tea.

 

[panda]

The spell is not all that broken for the following reasons:

1. Limited uses.
2. Very high level slot. It should be quite powerful.
3. Tactically limited due to friendly fire.

It is nothing to sneeze at, sure. But it is not completely out of place.

Well, technically fucking Linzi can cast it maximized 3 times at lvl16, so it is not that limited. And you can remove stun from your grunts with heal.
This spell is "lol i win" button right now.

 

[Shadenuat]

My Evoker can do it a lot better than Linzi, hohoho
oh, and Linzi,

Spoiler

don't be too happy about Linzi and don't rely on her too much

 

[Luckmann]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Focusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

 

[Cael]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Docusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

Problem is, dude, it was marketed as a faithful adaption of the PnP modules to a computer game. That makes the criticism valid. Not that there is all that much that is faithful. The lazy stat bloat on mobs is a prime example.

 

[ArchAngel]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Docusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

Being stunned is very powerful debuff, just one round is usually enough to murder that target with your party. Also the spell still has big AoE and does sonic damage that basically nobody has resistance against.

 

[Lawntoilet]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Docusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

Problem is, dude, it was marketed as a faithful adaption of the PnP modules to a computer game. That makes the criticism valid. Not that there is all that much that is faithful. The lazy stat bloat on mobs is a prime example.

The stat bloat is dependent on your difficulty settings, though. Lower-difficulty enemies are a more faithful PnP interpretation.

 

[hell bovine]

Hm, what about the thundercaller bard then? They get an aoe sonic stun as their song at level 3. It's one round only and offers a fortitude save, but bards get an awful lot of performances.

 

[Elex]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Docusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

Problem is, dude, it was marketed as a faithful adaption of the PnP modules to a computer game. That makes the criticism valid. Not that there is all that much that is faithful. The lazy stat bloat on mobs is a prime example.

The stat bloat is dependent on your difficulty settings, though. Lower-difficulty enemies are a more faithful PnP interpretation.

and lower level difficulty is comically easy even with non optimized party.

when the baron and the NPC have some level and you know what feat select you start to outclass any enemy even at normal. no need to use strange build or multiclassing NPC or use mercenaries.

low levels are a little challenge, because party lack resource and a random crit can destroy even a warrior, but the end result is simple "i actually use the potion/wands instead of stacking them until the end of the game"

 

[PrettyDeadman]

If they really want the spell but can't make a faithful implementation they should just set it to 1 round of stun/Fort. neg. and forget about deafness.

So, completely fucking useless since you cannot in any way depend on it to do anything, and even if it would, it'd just be a single round of Stunned? Also, "faithful implementation" is completely meaningless. Docusing on mirroring the PnP on principle is retarded.

Problem is, dude, it was marketed as a faithful adaption of the PnP modules to a computer game. That makes the criticism valid. Not that there is all that much that is faithful. The lazy stat bloat on mobs is a prime example.

The stat bloat is dependent on your difficulty settings, though. Lower-difficulty enemies are a more faithful PnP interpretation.

and lower level difficulty is comically easy even with non optimized party.

when the baron and the NPC have some level and you know what feat select you start to outclass any enemy even at normal. no need to use strange build or multiclassing NPC or use mercenaries.

low levels are a little challenge, because party lack resource and a random crit can destroy even a warrior, but the end result is simple "i actually use the potion/wands instead of stacking them until the end of the game"

Game being comically easy with standart pnp rules is the consequences of lack of permadeath and human person controlling monsters.

 

[Luckmann]

Problem is, dude, it was marketed as a faithful adaption of the PnP modules to a computer game.

Two things:

1. 'Faithful' does not mean carbon-copied in any way. Especially when there's a change of medium, the objective of staying faithful to something has little to do with recreation and everything to do with interpretation.
2. When?

 

[Lawntoilet]

and lower level difficulty is comically easy even with non optimized party.

when the baron and the NPC have some level and you know what feat select you start to outclass any enemy even at normal. no need to use strange build or multiclassing NPC or use mercenaries.

low levels are a little challenge, because party lack resource and a random crit can destroy even a warrior, but the end result is simple "i actually use the potion/wands instead of stacking them until the end of the game"

I agree, but Cael keeps harping about stat bloat being "unfaithful to PnP." The PnP stats are there and are accessible to you. It's the same as the Steam reviewers complaining about how hard the early levels are instead of just changing the difficulty.

 

[Ziggy]

the original pnp path is made for party of four with 20 point buy, not party of six with 25 point buy and more, that can also savescum

 

[J1M]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

 

[Serus]

the original pnp path is made for party of four with 20 point buy, not party of six with 25 point buy and more, that can also savescum

You have a point about savescumming but I'm not sure about that other part. I would suspect that the devs have increased amount of enemies to match increased size of party and assumed size of 6 by default. There are general rules for that in pnp already and I would assume some additional pointers in this particular pnp campaign - suggestions for adjusting difficulty to different party sizes.
In addition you probably aren't playing 6 characters with 25 point buy. Your main character is 25 point buy but the mercs have 20 point buy and they are the only one you can customize fully. Even most recruited NPCs are 20 point buy surprisingly enough. Linzi, Amiri, Harrim, Jubilost, Tristiania, and funnily enough Nok-Nok are all 20 points. The others on the other hand are over 25 but the fact that they're not fully customizable negates some or all of this advantage. Especially in case of Valerie.
The most important difference is that the original pnp path is made for party that faces enemies led by human intelligence in the person of a DM.

 

[Serus]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

"Bug" means something unintended. There is a possibility this was intended considering that the original effect of the spell wouldn't make sense. I'm not fully convinced myself either way. Might have been intentional or not. Either way, it would be best it it was toned down quite a bit.

 

[J1M]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

"Bug" means something unintended. There is a possibility this was intended considering that the original effect of the spell wouldn't make sense. I'm not fully convinced myself either way. Might have been intentional or not. Either way, it would be best it it was toned down quite a bit.

Unless you have a developer quote stating it was intended, it is clearly a bug. Not clear on why this basic truth is hurting your feelings so much that you feel obligated to embarrass yourself by pretending otherwise.

 

[Luckmann]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

If you took some time to actually see what everyone is saying, we all know that it's fucking crazy. This doesn't make it a bug in any way whatsoever. Literally nothing suggests that the implementation of Greater Shout is a bug. It seems to work exactly as advertised.

 

[J1M]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

If you took some time to actually see what everyone is saying, we all know that it's fucking crazy. This doesn't make it a bug in any way whatsoever. Literally nothing suggests that the implementation of Greater Shout is a bug. It seems to work exactly as advertised.

It is very obvious that the bug is "developer entered the wrong status effect" which is why it doesn't have a save.

"Literally nothing"

 

[Luckmann]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

If you took some time to actually see what everyone is saying, we all know that it's fucking crazy. This doesn't make it a bug in any way whatsoever. Literally nothing suggests that the implementation of Greater Shout is a bug. It seems to work exactly as advertised.

It is very obvious that the bug is "developer entered the wrong status effect" which is why it doesn't have a save.

"Literally nothing"

"Entered the wrong status effect".

You really are this fucking retarded, aren't you?

 

[Lawntoilet]

Greater shout is obviously a bug and I don't understand why some of you are so apologetic about it.

If you took some time to actually see what everyone is saying, we all know that it's fucking crazy. This doesn't make it a bug in any way whatsoever. Literally nothing suggests that the implementation of Greater Shout is a bug. It seems to work exactly as advertised.

It is very obvious that the bug is "developer entered the wrong status effect" which is why it doesn't have a save.

"Literally nothing"

They didn't implement the Deafened status effect in the game, so it's not a bug. I think, as has been suggested in the thread already, it would make more sense to substitute Shaken for Deafened instead of substituting Stunned for Deafened, but it's pretty clearly not a bug, just a questionable design choice.

 

[J1M]

I understand all of your points. It's a bug.

 

[Yosharian]

Who gives a shit whether we define it as a bug or not. Jesus christ guys, move on