Pathfinder Pathfinder: Kingmaker - Enhanced Plus Edition - now with turn-based combat

[The_Mask]

If you want to maximize your Regent you need maximum charisma, not a modicum. There's no other class that would be maximizing Charisma aside from Sorcerer/Bard (awful for already stated reasons of spell progression not stacking). If you are just leaving their stats at +2 charisma bonus rather than leveling to +7-10 then its still an awful choice to have them in the regent slot.

At the start of the game, the difference between +3 and, say, +5 is not really a big deal. And by the end of the game, you can make up the stats. There are also kingdom... things... that can help with that problem.

Believe that the weaknesses of this game are not in this.

But, your instincts are right, I guess. Most of my playthroughs have had an NPC as a regent.

 

[Average Manatee]

I assumed that there would be some NPC I'd find eventually (if I haven't missed something already). Just seems silly that the devs would put two decidedly non-charisma based characters in your charisma spot. Regongar or even Jaethal have more reason to level charisma. Seems like if you wanted to min-max you'd just not have one of Octavia/Valerie in your party and level them in something that is useless but maximize charisma. Basically intentionally sabotaging one of your party members to make them a good regent.

 

[Desiderius]

Val is the obvious Regent, and there are all sorts of uses for CHR even if you keep her in her base class.

Kineticist is better left for once you’ve got a good handle in the game, but yes all the information you need is there in game. Most of the important things you learn about a class you pick up by playing it through the levels.

There’s a counterintuitive configuration of advisors with Val as Diplomat that I discovered late which leaves Octavia as Regent. She doesn’t have quite as much CHR (tho you can give her a + 4 headpiece by midgame for KM) but her personality fits better with the job, and Val as Diplo.

The (outstanding) itemization is gated behind kingdom ranks. That’s why they’re important, and artisan quests give decent EXP/cash as does selling better artisan items.

 

[Desiderius]

I assumed that there would be some NPC I'd find eventually (if I haven't missed something already). Just seems silly that the devs would put two decidedly non-charisma based characters in your charisma spot. Regongar or even Jaethal have more reason to level charisma. Seems like if you wanted to min-max you'd just not have one of Octavia/Valerie in your party and level them in something that is useless but maximize charisma. Basically intentionally sabotaging one of your party members to make them a good regent.

Assume makes an ass out if u and me.

Val is the most CHR-based companion. She even has a special weapon that gives her +6. You don’t know what you don’t know yet.

 

[Yosharian]

Just respec her to a CHA caster using Respec mod, or use Bag of Tricks to change her ability scores to something less retarded and use someone else as regent

 

[Desiderius]

You can’t even figure out how to unlock shit. Who cares?

 

[Yosharian]

Sooo butthurt lmao.

 

[Salvo]

Just respec her to a CHA caster using Respec mod, or use Bag of Tricks to change her ability scores to something less retarded and use someone else as regent

Everyone is free to play as they wish, but I think that companion classes are integral and crucial to their character. Try picturing Amiri as a wizard. I know you can give her Wizard levels, but it's stupid and doesn't fit.

 

[Average Manatee]

I'm not a fan of respeccing characters in a game like this. It feels too cheesy even if its technically officially sanctioned. No in D&D is allowed to respec characters unless they both majorly fucked up like making a STR wizard and they also get on their hands and knees and offer the DM a blowjob. Though I agree that Octavia's personality really makes it seem like she should be charisma-based (she's definitely not that smart of a person).

Incidentally is there any mod that allows Sorcerers to swap a known spell for another spell on level up? From what I can tell this should be allowed by Pathfinder rules. Really pissed me off when I found an item giving 3 casts of Color Spray per day and then I learned I couldn't swap it out.

 

[Mortmal]

I'm not a fan of respeccing characters in a game like this. It feels too cheesy even if its technically officially sanctioned. No in D&D is allowed to respec characters unless they both majorly fucked up like making a STR wizard and they also get on their hands and knees and offer the DM a blowjob. Though I agree that Octavia's personality really makes it seem like she should be charisma-based (she's definitely not that smart of a person).

Incidentally is there any mod that allows Sorcerers to swap a known spell for another spell on level up? From what I can tell this should be allowed by Pathfinder rules. Really pissed me off when I found an item giving 3 casts of Color Spray per day and then I learned I couldn't swap it out.

In d&d its allowed if the DM allows it, what kind of DM would forbid it when its reasonable or when someone is really not having fun anymore, guess i am doing it wrong, not only i dont get paid for it, but i dont get any blowjobs for respecs. By the way i only noticed the respec character after reading forums, as the options only appears at normal difficulty or below. Still its not complete respec they still keep their stats and first levels.

 

[Average Manatee]

In d&d its allowed if the DM allows it, what kind of DM would forbid it when its reasonable or when someone is really not having fun anymore, guess i am doing it wrong, not only i dont get paid for it, but i dont get any blowjobs for respecs. By the way i only noticed the respec character after reading forums, as the options only appears at normal difficulty or below. Still its not complete respec they still keep their stats and first levels.

"Not enjoying the class, can I make a new character" did happen in the group I used to play with, which would be more equivalent to how mercs work in PFKM. "let me respec because I want to min-max better" would be pretty well frowned upon and I don't think anyone ever asked for that. A lot of the stuff in D&D is pretty much based on characters not being able to respec at any time, otherwise stuff like the whole wizard vs. sorcerer balance gets thrown out the window.

 

[Mortmal]

In d&d its allowed if the DM allows it, what kind of DM would forbid it when its reasonable or when someone is really not having fun anymore, guess i am doing it wrong, not only i dont get paid for it, but i dont get any blowjobs for respecs. By the way i only noticed the respec character after reading forums, as the options only appears at normal difficulty or below. Still its not complete respec they still keep their stats and first levels.

"Not enjoying the class, can I make a new character" did happen in the group I used to play with, which would be more equivalent to how mercs work in PFKM. "let me respec because I want to min-max better" would be pretty well frowned upon and I don't think anyone ever asked for that.

OH i was asked that few times , and allowed it but i said sure you can, but my encounters will be min maxed too .

 

[ELEXmakesMeHard]

If you're Lawful Evil, will your capital become bipolar and shift between "glorious righteous music" (Order) and "nefarious villain music" (Evil)?

I think that's how capital music works, but shifting between those two tunes seems very jarring.

 

[The_Mask]

No. If you're LE, it's Rule of Evil. Rule of Order is for LN.

I... play monks a lot, so I know. *tiny cough*

 

[ELEXmakesMeHard]

No. If you're LE, it's Rule of Evil. Rule of Order is for LN.

I... play monks a lot, so I know. *tiny cough*

Thanks. When I played LN the music cycled between Order & Balance, then when I became LG it cycled between Order & Good. Those combos worked well, but I'm glad it's consistently Evil for LE.

 

[Average Manatee]

That reminds me, alignment in this game is so fucked up. I'm playing lawful good but my alignment is slipping towards chaotic because on average most of the good choices available seem to be either chaotic good or neutral good, but generally mostly chaotic good. It strikes me that I'll need to start doing some lawful evil actions to balance out my chaotic good actions. It also strikes me that if I was playing a Chaotic Evil character I'd need to do chaotic good actions to balance out my lawful evil actions. So there you have it, proof that chaotic evil is the same as lawful good.

It'd be better if dialog responses were just good/evil or law/chaos, not both. As it is there's just too many gaps both in options for the player and in interpretations of what's written. I'm chaotic good because I want to speak to the head troll? Why am I not instead lawful, recognizing his claim to be king? Why not Evil because I want to assassinate him on the spot (which sadly you can't do due to cinematic immunity)? Other CRPGs have had issues with alignment but I think PFKM is the worst by far.

 

[The_Mask]

This is a topic that is contested a lot, but the more you play the game (and by this I mean to the thousands of hours), you will notice that you can get punished if you don't roleplay your alignment. Especially when it comes to your companions.

It's a game of smoke and mirrors and P:K keeps track of when you don't roleplay your alignment. Sometimes it lets you go, but sometimes it remembers, and it can even punish you. So... don't get lax.

 

[Average Manatee]

I literally can't roleplay my alignment because lawful good as an option comes up in maybe 10% of alignment check conversations. Neutral good and chaotic good options that I want to do come up in the other 90% where there is most often no clear law vs. chaos distinction.

For example if you get a conversation with a person drowning in a pool that says "no swimming", and your options are:

(Chaotic Good) Help them
(Lawful Evil) Point and laugh

Which is the option that lets you "roleplay" lawful good?

 

[Rean]

Alignment is roleplay?

 

[The_Mask]

You're right. Just do your best. Hope you have fun. It's a good game. Also appreciate you for writing your thoughts here. Seriously.

 

[Zeriel]

I literally can't roleplay my alignment because lawful good as an option comes up in maybe 10% of alignment check conversations. Neutral good and chaotic good options that I want to do come up in the other 90% where there is most often no clear law vs. chaos distinction.

For example if you get a conversation with a person drowning in a pool that says "no swimming", and your options are:

(Chaotic Good) Help them
(Lawful Evil) Point and laugh

Which is the option that lets you "roleplay" lawful good?

Sometimes their idea of what is a particular alignment is dumb. If you just want to be able to choose options you consider to be your alignment without changing alignment though there are mods for that.

 

[Desiderius]

That reminds me, alignment in this game is so fucked up. I'm playing lawful good but my alignment is slipping towards chaotic because on average most of the good choices available seem to be either chaotic good or neutral good, but generally mostly chaotic good. It strikes me that I'll need to start doing some lawful evil actions to balance out my chaotic good actions. It also strikes me that if I was playing a Chaotic Evil character I'd need to do chaotic good actions to balance out my lawful evil actions. So there you have it, proof that chaotic evil is the same as lawful good.

It'd be better if dialog responses were just good/evil or law/chaos, not both. As it is there's just too many gaps both in options for the player and in interpretations of what's written. I'm chaotic good because I want to speak to the head troll? Why am I not instead lawful, recognizing his claim to be king? Why not Evil because I want to assassinate him on the spot (which sadly you can't do due to cinematic immunity)? Other CRPGs have had issues with alignment but I think PFKM is the worst by far.

Owlcat doesn’t have a real solid grasp on Lawful, especially Lawful Good, so you need to take your Lawful choices when you can or you’ll end up Chaotic.

Wrath is a little less bad on this and quite good on Regill, though he inevitably ends up more LN than LE.

 

[Desiderius]

That reminds me, alignment in this game is so fucked up. I'm playing lawful good but my alignment is slipping towards chaotic because on average most of the good choices available seem to be either chaotic good or neutral good, but generally mostly chaotic good. It strikes me that I'll need to start doing some lawful evil actions to balance out my chaotic good actions. It also strikes me that if I was playing a Chaotic Evil character I'd need to do chaotic good actions to balance out my lawful evil actions. So there you have it, proof that chaotic evil is the same as lawful good.

It'd be better if dialog responses were just good/evil or law/chaos, not both. As it is there's just too many gaps both in options for the player and in interpretations of what's written. I'm chaotic good because I want to speak to the head troll? Why am I not instead lawful, recognizing his claim to be king? Why not Evil because I want to assassinate him on the spot (which sadly you can't do due to cinematic immunity)? Other CRPGs have had issues with alignment but I think PFKM is the worst by far.

It’s not the worst and they in fact have some great takes on different varieties of evil in the Tsanna and Nok-nok quests and the importance of mercy to good in the Tristian line. Harrim’s Chaos as Entropy is also thought-provoking and they pull no punches with Jaethal.

I appreciate your thoughts too but think you’ll get more out of the game if you just play it then judge things once you’ve got a bigger picture.

Basically it’s pretty obvious that the designers are strong CG themselves so judge L as kind of an alien concept (literally in Wrath Aeon Mythic). Ekun’s duty to his family is probably the highlight but there’s definitely some cringe in the regular dialogue where they seem to mistake L for merely cruel or xenophobic.

 

[Average Manatee]

Basically it’s pretty obvious that the designers are strong CG themselves so judge L as kind of an alien concept (literally in Wrath Aeon Mythic). Ekun’s duty to his family is probably the highlight but there’s definitely some cringe in the regular dialogue where they seem to mistake L for merely cruel or xenophobic.

The devs are Russian so viewing LG as somewhere on a continuum between "doesn't actually exist" and "genocidal megalomaniac" is probably a realistic expectation on their part.

 

[Desiderius]

That's the Western view of which these devs have naturally drunk a little too deep. You don't get the world best literature without having a LG lodestar somewhere in there. The uncommon courage to see man as he truly is comes from nowhere but an undergirding of hard-won faith in the Good Lawgiver - a faith not unknown to the Rus and the people of their Empires.