[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.15472193 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

So yeah Ultimate Combat is supposed to be coming out this month. I myself as someone running two pathfinder campaigns and a long term 3.5 fan and now converted to pathfinder player am quite excited. Thoughts?

>> No.15472603

I'm not that excited. The samurai is pretty unimpressive and the Gunslinger still needs serious work. I hold little hope either will be impressive when they are released, especially after the selection of poor design even more poorly justified that was present in parts of Ultimate Magic (which is apparently an NPC design book now, according to /tg/ diehards, so I guess you have to credit Paizo with spin and a fanbase they can sell anything to).

I'll keep playing (well, running) Pathfinder for those in my group who enjoy 3.5e, but I hold no more hope for their products than I do for those of WotC. It's still supported, and for now that's reason enough to prefer it - in addition to the distinctive improvements they have made in one or two areas.

>> No.15472680

Op here, what I am really excited for myself is new feats, new weapons, etc.

I do hope the classes end up better then what we have seen in the beta testing.

>> No.15472715

Looking forward to it, all of my players are running combat characters.

>> No.15472724

I'm really looking forward to juicy new options for my rogue.

I will be disappoint if it lacks in that area.

>> No.15472756

It's bullshit that almost all of the classes have new options in this book where as Ultimate Magic ONLY catered to classes with spells.

I mean really, Gunmage for wizards?
More Druid and Cleric variant?

Can't they just let the pure melee have their spotlight>

>> No.15472768

OP here again, So I guess the real question is hardcover or PDF? I always choose Hard Cover not only for the ability to spread all my books out but also cause I like to support my local game store. Here in Eau Claire, WI we have a pretty good one.

>> No.15472785

Well on the other hand, there won't be a spell section.

>> No.15472793

Agreed. Non-casters always get the short end of the stick, no matter what. Even the current non-caster variants are generally lackluster.

>> No.15472797

There might be, for combat spells and what-not

>> No.15472798

Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic V2

>> No.15472808

OP here, This reminds me of something I was thinking about earlier.

As someone has played and run 3.5 and now Pathfinder I have always found the Ranger class to be a little fail.

I guess it comes from the fact that is is somewhat halfway between combat and magic but doesn't seem to do either well. Am I wrong and just need to give it another chance?

>> No.15472810


I always try to buy a physical copy of Paizo's books, I really like what they're doing and I want to keep them going with my precious cash.

Still, I haven't be able to afford Ultimate Magic yet, so I do have a pdf of that, but when I get the cash I'll be buying it, especially since a guy in my PF game is playing a Magus.

>> No.15472812


>> No.15472817

I'm excited for the airship combat (the upcoming campaign I'm running has airships) and for the alternate methods of tracking health. I always loved the vitality/wounds system from 3.5's Unearthed Arcana, and while I'm not using it, I do like to see alternatives to HP.

>> No.15472844


How is playing the Magus going for him?

Also whenever I hear Magus I think of Magnus from Santuary.

>> No.15472847


I don't know what you're talking about, the ranger in my 3.5 campaign was a beast, and he was using a ranged archer, which people always go on about being "sub-optimal" and shit. He saved the whole party more than once by going Legolas on all manner of enemies.

And in my Pathfinder game we have a halfling ranger who uses sword and board fighting style and is the best melee fighter we have, even better than the big power-attacking greatsword fighter.

>> No.15472864


OP here, What role does his magical abilities play in his character?

>> No.15472867

Wait he was a good archer?

That's... Very surprising actually. Archery has the least support of any of the fighting styles.

>> No.15472870

All that indicates is you don't really understand what the optimal options are in the system and do not gear challenges to them. Which is fine, there is no illegitimate way to play the game. In 3.5e archery Rangers were actually okay if you involved the Spell Compendium.

>> No.15472875


He likes it, its a little difficult for him to get his head wrapped around the concept, I constantly have to remind him he can cast a spell as well as attack in one turn, but once he realized he could stab something and shoot a magic missile at something else he started to get into it.

He's also using the Black Blade variant, so he's started roleplaying one sided conversations with his cane sword while we're walking around since we can't hear what the sword is saying, its actually pretty entertaining.

>> No.15472877


Every Archer should pick up the Feat Deadly Aim

>> No.15472881

Gunmage? Damnit I just made a gunslinger/magus hybrid

>> No.15472893

I just want to say in this thread that I absolutely hated the Magus.

It is one of my principal beliefs that a Gish should never be a prepared caster.

"Oh, I need to cast Bull's Strength/Enlarge Person before I wade into melee."

"Well there goes one casting of it prepared today, I hope we don't have anymore encounters."

And then there were more encounters.

>> No.15472900

Deadly Aim didn't exist in 3.5e, although you could get a power attacking bow if you could get access to a particular item. It was force damage too, so pretty god tier.

>> No.15472904


I'm so glad not to play with douchebags like you.

>> No.15472914

Then you can probably still go into gunmage.

>> No.15472927


Well in this game the magus' is in a party with an alchemist who prepares potions or extracts of all the buff spells he needs, so the magus just concentrates on offensive spells while the alchemist shoots him and the monk up with his "performance enhancers".

>> No.15472934


That's why you have spell recall, right?

No, honestly I don't know. I DM and one of my palyers wants to play a magus, it didn't seem that bad at a first glance. Anothr guy in my group is laready a wizard/fighter going into eldritch knight.

Is he better off then?

>> No.15472944

can somebody put up ultimate magic?
the only links on /rs/ are dead

>> No.15472947

Magus looks to be okay. Synthesist Summoner is a more impressive gish than the Magus, though, honestly.

>> No.15472950

I'd think that Spell Recall probably makes the magus better off

>> No.15472971


I fucking love the Synthesist Summoner!

I like to take the lightning energy weapon and elbow blade natural attacks so I can pretend to be the Guyver.

>> No.15472986

Is there a way to get that sonic chest cannon too?

>> No.15472987

You can honestly become a nice little combat monster depending on what you choose.

>> No.15473017


Yeah the easy choice is quadruped with pounce and 80 million natural attacks.

>> No.15473031

It can be, sure. If I were to do that I would make the eidolon something like a dire coconut crab.

>> No.15473252

i want to take a look at the ranger archetype Big Game Hunter

>> No.15474389

>Big Game Hunter
that gives me an idea for a character for Serpents Skull, A Chelaxian Hunter heading to Sargava and the Mwangi Expanse in search of big game

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.