Spell Focus helps all your evocation, and as a crossblooded Sorcerer, let's be honest, you're going to have a lot of evocation. Spell Specialization means a lot more for a Sorcerer as you're going to need that CL for penetrating SR and dealing 11 extra damage average on your d6 per CL aoe spells.

Remember, my point is not that sorcerers are better than wizards in general, just that they can function at the same level for helping the party (I can cast haste and dispel and glitterdust, and that is 95% of what my party needs from me) And they have different things they can do better than the wizard. They are better blasters. Having a blaster is not necessary, but can be a fun role to play, and you can still function as good enough. You won't be as good as a Wizard overall, but not all spellcasters from fiction should be intelligent researchers of Arcana. Some of them should be troubled youth granted powers beyond their control. Or whatever else you can fluff a sorcerer into as opposed to a wizard.

That last comment was really more in reference to the guy I used to play with. I haven't talked with you enough to get a fair picture of your playstyle, so I'm not at this point going to pretend that I can accurately guess the reasoning behind your decisions. Just saying that this guy I used to play with, that was exactly how he played- coming up with the numbers first and only later trying to wrap a character around them.

I'd still like to point out the point buy system and the fact that it's more fair- running the two sets of ability scores that have been generated so far, we have one character who's abilities total 19 points, and one who's abilities total 36 points. It's a pretty massive power discrepancy, and situations like that are why most groups I know have gone to point buy.

Omega said
Most GMs I have run across require a lot more than that kind of tactic, they generally try to push their players more and make people think outside the box while also having the core bases covered. That is why I am giving us basic caster support and a meat shield with either class I picked as we lacked both.

Same for me, and I think that's part of the reason I like wizards more- usually, if our party just got into a routine for "do stuff this way, you win again", our DM would come up with ways that forced us to do something differently. Spam haste for most fights? He'd find some way to make that stop being optimal. It's no fun if it's just routine.

You'll note the one at 36 points also chose to be a monk who multiclasses into a casting class. I think I've got the power discrepancy handled, except that my build has a spike at level 2.

~~

Yes, I've seen a GM change things up once or twice to shake things up, but generally, the meat and potatoes fights progress the same, with one or two fights like that per adventure. Generally, Haste is your best buddy.

Just saying, point buy is the more fair and balanced system. And with our GM, it wasn't "let's shake things up", it was "If you keep doing the same damn thing over and over I'm going to do something about it".

Haste is all well and good until your abuse of it draws the attention of a subset of the Inevitables from Mechanus who have come to stop someone from bending the flow of time. Also not fun contracting a magical illness that accelerates the aging of your character.

Personally, I like doing the old "roll down the line" where you don't pick which score goes in which stat, and you have to figure out a character and a class that fits the scores you rolled.

The 42nd Gecko said
Personally, I like doing the old "roll down the line" where you don't pick which score goes in which stat, and you have to figure out a character and a class that fits the scores you rolled.

I like the idea of that, but I've never seen it actually work. Every time I've seen a group try it, it's always resulted in a hilarious bunch of cripples.

EDIT: except for that one ex-friend of mine who fudged his rolls.

The 42nd Gecko said
Personally, I like doing the old "roll down the line" where you don't pick which score goes in which stat, and you have to figure out a character and a class that fits the scores you rolled.

I have always wanted to try that but nobody ever likes it.

Primal Conundrum said
Just saying, point buy is the more fair and balanced system. And with our GM, it wasn't "let's shake things up", it was "If you keep doing the same damn thing over and over I'm going to do something about it". Haste is all well and good until your abuse of it draws the attention of a subset of the Inevitables from Mechanus who have come to stop someone from bending the flow of time. Also not fun contracting a magical illness that accelerates the aging of your character.

ya I run into similar things. You spam haste all the time, turns out there was either like a caster on the other side ready to counterspell you all day or even something like a spell thief who is going to muck up that plan.

Eh, I was talking more like an event where a crumbling dungeon means the players need to keep moving and can't full attack. (Except, for that example, the speed boost still rocks.)

Having a bunch of NPCs decide to hose you for using a plain game mechanic seems like the relationship between the players and the GM is adversarial. I'm fine with 90% of the fights being formulaic cakewalks. Means everyone doesn't have to pick the absolute best classes and options in order to be a part of the action.

The 42nd Gecko said
Eh, I was talking more like an event where a crumbling dungeon means the players need to keep moving and can't full attack.Having a bunch of NPCs decide to hose you for using a plain game mechanic seems like the relationship between the players and the GM is adversarial. I'm fine with 90% of the fights being formulaic cakewalks. Means everyone doesn't have to pick the absolute best classes and options in order to be a part of the action.

We were always of the thought that if the fights were boring and formulaic, then there was no point to them. The main DM I had is actually a scriptwriter now, his adventures were great- the stuff he did wasn't adversarial, it was things that would set up chances for a new adventure. A crumbling cavern is a sidenote to something else that's already happening- pissing off an extraplanar faction or contracting a disease gives the players a chance to go do some new quest.

The 42nd Gecko said
Eh, I was talking more like an event where a crumbling dungeon means the players need to keep moving and can't full attack. (Except, for that example, the speed boost still rocks.)Having a bunch of NPCs decide to hose you for using a plain game mechanic seems like the relationship between the players and the GM is adversarial. I'm fine with 90% of the fights being formulaic cakewalks. Means everyone doesn't have to pick the absolute best classes and options in order to be a part of the action.

I dislike the campaign being formulaic cakewalks. After a few levels you should be doing stuff to gain some notoriety given the following even a CHA 10 fighter gains from leadership so your enemies likely know who you are and how you operate.

Omega said
I dislike the campaign being formulaic cakewalks. After a few levels you should be doing stuff to gain some notoriety given the following even a CHA 10 fighter gains from leadership so your enemies likely know who you are and how you operate.

Especially with characters that have leadership, pretty quickly their enemies would learn their tactics if they expected to face them and be prepared to deal with their tricks.

But yeah, filler fights suck. The most enjoyable games I've played had pretty much no filler combat- I'd rather just not fight rather than have pointless fights.

Ah, I misread your statement. I thought we were talking about overpowering NPCs shutting down mechanics, not new quests.

I am not fond of the. "The CR 20 creatures shows up and tells you he'll kill you if you keep casting haste." "Is there anything I can do to convince you otherwise seeing I can't hope to fight you?" "Nope."

Avoiding formulaic adventures is the responsibility of the players in my opinion. For example, when I was GMing, my players instead of going up against the local tribe of Goblins instead hired the goblins to help them against their mutual enemy- the local kobolds. It totally messed up my story arc but it made for some awesome plot development.. Particularly when Maglubiyet, the God of Goblins, caught wind of a bunch of humans and elves civilizing one of his tribes.

The 42nd Gecko said
Ah, I misread your statement. I thought we were talking about overpowering NPCs shutting down mechanics, not new quests.I am not fond of the. "The CR 20 creatures shows up and tells you he'll kill you if you keep casting haste." "Is there anything I can do to convince you otherwise seeing I can't hope to fight you?" "Nope."

Agreed, that's stupid, but that's not how he handled stuff. It would be more like we get attacked by a few weak seekers, then as we are assessed they send out more agents, first to warn us away from disrupting the time flow and later to enforce that if we keep doing stuff- of course, we can try to avoid or outfight them, and it'll usually only be an issue if we're really just completely abusing an ability, but you get the idea.

Again, this guy is writing scripts for TV and movies now, his games were awesome.

Assallya said
Avoiding formulaic adventures is the responsibility of the players in my opinion. For example, when I was GMing, my players instead of going up against the local tribe of Goblins instead hired the goblins to help them against their mutual enemy- the local kobolds. It totally messed up my story arc but it made for some awesome story. Particularly when Maglubiyet, the God of Goblins, caught wind of a bunch of humans and elves civilizing one of his tribes.

It's everyone's responsibility. It's up to the DM to present interesting scenarios, and it's up to the players to come up with interesting ways of handling them rather than just brute force their way through the same way every time.

True, the GM has to be amenable to such changes and it helps if he or she provides alternate avenues of plot advancement but a GM can only do so much.

I once had a group that decided, instead of going to the King's castle to answer the call for heroes, elected to get jobs in town... Yes, they did. I had the Kitchen Help, Barmaid, Stableboy and Blacksmith's Apprentice. I just about strangled them. It's a lot more work to bring the adventure to such "heroes" on short notice :) NOW, if they told me ahead of time that they were going to be "ass hats", maybe by mentioning in their backgrounds that they weren't the adventuring sorts, I'd have come up with a murder mystery suitable to such a venue.

I think my table became much more interesting when I started putting in some crazy rules... like putting up their hand to speak out of character. Being human beings they were too lazy to lift their arms all the time so they got more used to talking in character :)

Just got off of work. Looking for one more player before I start. Pantheon is standard for Golarion, but I'll include other Pantheons if you want. I'm really not picky. Clerics of Real World religions are a favorite of mine. Even gods of other systems are okay with me. We can come up with a doctrine for you over PMs or OOC chat.

The Lizardfolk race looks fine. Nothing too powerful. The reason I use rolling is just habit. My RL group has always hated point buy in Pathfinder, and we don't worry about balance. Our reasoning is that the game's balance is all ready out of wack, so leveling the playing field on stats isn't going to help much. We had a GURPS game for a little while where everyone had an equal point buy, but it didn't last long. Power balance wasn't really much better. Some people will always be better at gaming the system. But a good game doesn't come from gaming the system, it comes from everyone feeling relevant, and you don't need equal stats to be equally relevant.

And correct, no gold, no equipment. However, there will be a sleight of hand roll at the beginning to see what you can smuggle past the guards. I know some of you may be tempted to put a point in Sleight of Hand for the first level, but try to make it make sense for your character.

List of players so far:
Omega-Necrosummoner
Mattmanganon-Unknown
Assallya-Diplomancer
The 42nd Gecko-Kirin Monk
Primal Conundrum-Unknown

I fucking hate the roll for scores system. Did it, my stats were within the zone where I'm not able to reroll, yet I'm effectively an 8 point character. Fuck that.

I've never had luck with rolling for scores, and I hate how it can kinda torpedo a character idea you had if your stats are too level across the board, or if you just don't have the scores needed to play them the way you wanted. If you want to do roll for stats that's your call, but I think I'm gonna duck out of this one then. Best of luck.

Maybe we can have a point buy if you get crappy rolls?

Okay then. 20 point buy if you didn't at least match that. I do enjoy rolling for my stats, but I'm not willing to lose a player over it. There are plenty of other things to disagree on. ;)

Goldmyr said
Okay then. 20 point buy if you didn't at least match that. I do enjoy rolling for my stats, but I'm not willing to lose a player over it. There are plenty of other things to disagree on. ;) I would ask the players who did roll higher than 20 point buy to ignore their stats and use the point buy, also.

I prefer rolling also but not everyone likes it, by giving both an option everyone is hopefully happy.

i plan to stick with my rolls.

edit: If I go cleric i will choose Urgothea as my goddess.