Suggestions to Play a Cleric/Fighter with subpar stats in Pathfinder

[Arillius]

I rolled three 10's, an 11, and two 15's. I went human so I i ended up with Str 11, Dex 10, Con 10, Int 10, Cha 15, Wis 17.

If I went just cleric it might have worked out, but the heavy armor proficiency has turned out to be useful.

It means I'm moving at 15 speed, but I am rarely hit by anything non magical with the base of 18 AC Shield of Faith spells, and fighting defensively (They have me as a heals on wheels at the moment), and the DM I have seems to favor melee enemy's for the moment. There's an alchemist in the group, and though he'll charge me double for it, I can convince him to make me several potions of enlarge person so that when need be I can turn around and use that Falchion I have a weapon specilization in, thanks to my evil god, and do some damage and get out of that medium encumbrance.

Now given my experience with DnD is limited to all of one session for this very campaign I have no idea how much of this is actually useful. For instance, will a -2 dex mod from the enlarge person potion actually take 2 out of my AC as well? Would I be smart in trying to find a tower shield and a one handed weapon to use in those times where the potion of enlarge person is more of a liability?

[Eldariel]

Now given my experience with DnD is limited to all of one session for this very campaign I have no idea how much of this is actually useful. For instance, will a -2 dex mod from the enlarge person potion actually take 2 out of my AC as well? Would I be smart in trying to find a tower shield and a one handed weapon to use in those times where the potion of enlarge person is more of a liability?

Well, first of all, -2 applies to your Dexterity-score, dropping it to 8. That only drops your Dexterity modifier by 1. As such, it'll only drop your AC by 1. However, Large creatures have an inherent -1 to AC and attack due to size, so you'd end up with net -2 to AC.

Your attack bonus comes down at ±0 (+1 to Strength-modifier, -1 Size) and your damage increases greatly (weapon size increases as does your Str-bonus to damage). Your present role of tanking your To Hit for AC really suits a straight Cleric the best. Indeed, if that's the road you plan on going down, and DM has the enemies attack you in spite of your low offense, Tower Shield is a great idea (not just for Enlargement, but in general). Compared to Heavy Shield, it's +2 AC, -2 Attack so it's better than e.g. Defensive Fighting.


But yeah, Fighter-dip for Fullplate isn't out-of-question in Pathfinder. I'd avoid further Fighter-levels though as with those stats, you're frankly best off focusing on spellcasting.

Enlarge Person-potions aren't worth it, but it's worth noting that you, the Cleric, are capable of casting said spell if you have access to the Strength-domain. So...yeah. Something to think about.

[Arillius]

Strength wasn't on option. I have at the moment destruction and Animal. I hadn't planned on taking anymore fighter levels, and the potion is really the only way that I can get it. The wizard doesn't have enough lvl 1 spell slots to waist for a buff on me at the moment.

[Gnaeus]

There's an alchemist in the group, and though he'll charge me double for it, I can convince him to make me several potions of enlarge person so that when need be I can turn around and use that Falchion I have a weapon specilization in, thanks to my evil god, and do some damage and get out of that medium encumbrance.

You need to have a serious negotiation with that Alchemist. Most crafters give a discount to party members. Charging double is pretty rude.

Try explaining to him that someday he will be suffering con damage from some monster, and you will have the choice of casting Restoration, or nothing, or Poison.

[Rixx]

You need to have a serious negotiation with that Alchemist. Most crafters give a discount to party members. Charging double is pretty rude.

Try explaining to him that someday he will be suffering con damage from some monster, and you will have the choice of casting Restoration, or nothing, or Poison.

Expecting discounts or free labor is real metagame thinking, though. Maybe the Alchemist character is an antisocial selfish jerk, in which case the player having him demand compensation to the tune of double price is actually fairly good roleplaying.

In one of my groups, we had a Summoner and a Wizard - the Wizard is an item-crafter, and the Summoner wanted some scrolls made for him. The Summoner and Wizard famously didn't get along, but the Wizard agreed to do it for the base price of the scroll's materials plus a labor fee. Out of game, the Summoner's player got upset, because from a metagame standpoint there was no reason to charge the labor fee - but our Wizard's player insisted it wouldn't make sense for the character to spend hours of his time making scrolls for someone he doesn't like for no pay at all.

[AbyssKnight]

But it isn't necessarily metagame thinking. You both belong to a group that goes into dangerous situations together. Cooperation will be expected, if not downright required for survival.

If I can't depend on you helping me, you really shouldn't depend on me helping you either. Difference is, I am asking for a little assistance, you will probably need me to save your life.

The real metagame thinking situation I see is if two PC's hate each other so much, why doesn't one of them leave (answer, because the player doesn't want to switch characters).

[Gnaeus]

Expecting discounts or free labor is real metagame thinking, though. Maybe the Alchemist character is an antisocial selfish jerk, in which case the player having him demand compensation to the tune of double price is actually fairly good roleplaying.

Then you roleplay your in character response. Which can include explaining (in character) that if he is ever on the floor bleeding out that you have in character choices which include healing him, laughing and making sketches, and intentionally crit-failing your heal check by sticking your dagger into his wound. Which IN CHARACTER response you make, will be based on which IN CHARACTER choice he makes in choosing whether to give you a reasonable discount, market price, or charging you double. No metagaming about it, unless your cleric is so stupid in character that he doesn't realize that he is being overcharged.

Edit: Also, I didn't say anything about free labor. He has every right to make a profit. But price gouging your teammates is begging for retaliation.

Edit 2: Metagaming solutions might include: "Hey Bob, I understand that your character doesn't like mine, but this course of action is going to lead to one of our characters dying and one of us getting angry. Lets think of an in character reason to resolve this so that our characters can work together even if they don't like each other." or the less mature: "Hey Bob, you have every right to charge me 100gp for each enlarge potion, Thats fine. I'm going to charge you $2 for each of my Mountain Dew you drink, 25 cents for every dorito, and $10 whenever I give you a ride to the game. ($50 for the ride home)."

[Arillius]

My character is a, slightly crazy, human cleric who has been 'chosen' to serve a goblin god. The rest of the party is of the mind that eating him would be better then risking he might just be a fake. In the campaign world clerics are really rare to, so its still a possibility to them. As such giving me any potion that gives me an advantage over them is risky. So they charge me for that risk.

Another question. Can a cleric cast his spells while holding a heavy wooden shield in one hand and a longsword in another?

Can he cast spells holding a 2 handed weapon?

[tyckspoon]

You need a free hand to do the somatic components. Generally, a sword-and-shield character will not have that free hand unless he has some free-action way of getting rid of the sword or the shield (dropping it works, but has the downside that you have, you know, dropped your sword.) A Glove of Storing is the preferred technique once you can afford one. A two-handed weapon allows spellcasting normally, as you can hold it (but not swing it, which will usually only matter if somebody manages to provoke an AoO from you in the middle of your casting) with one hand while you cast.

[Eclipse]

You need a free hand to do the somatic components. Generally, a sword-and-shield character will not have that free hand unless he has some free-action way of getting rid of the sword or the shield (dropping it works, but has the downside that you have, you know, dropped your sword.) A Glove of Storing is the preferred technique once you can afford one. A two-handed weapon allows spellcasting normally, as you can hold it (but not swing it, which will usually only matter if somebody manages to provoke an AoO from you in the middle of your casting) with one hand while you cast.

Actually, a cleric can cast while holding a shield. Even a wizard can, though they have the ASF chance that goes with it. You can move the hand holding the shield enough to perform somatic spell components, which for a cleric are minimal (which is why ASF doesn't apply to them). The shield's ASF represents the difficulty of making the right gestures while holding a shield. The hand is considered free for purposes of spellcasting.

[tyckspoon]

Bucklers, sure. Light shields, maybe, since you can still hold things with those, although I would say the intent is to disallow it since it's also considered occupied enough that you can't wield a weapon in it. Heavy shields do not allow the bearing hand/arm to be used for any other purpose.

[Lycanthromancer]

My suggestion on playing a cleric/fighter? Ditch the fighter.

[Arillius]

The bucklers have it in there description that it doesn't block the somatic components. Since none of the others do I just wanted to make sure.

I only planned on getting one level in fighter anyway for the heavy armor proficiency. My idea now is to either go full on defense with 22 or 24 AC, and higher when I can afford a tower shield, and full on attack using enlarge person when needed.

[Arillius]

Is the weapon size increase the only damage bonus there is for going to large?

[Eldariel]

Is the weapon size increase the only damage bonus there is for going to large?

No, your strength increases too. But without decent base strength, it doesn't tend to be worth it.

[Arillius]

It actually brings me out from medium encumbrance. I've already got a MW weapon and weapon focus for it so the -1 to attack still leaves me with +3, and I have destructive smite to add another +1 to damage. So I can do 2d6+2, and walk at 20ft instead of 15. I plan on eventually stacking this spell with bulls strength. so I get +6 to strength. The +2 is from the size increase so the two should stack right?

Makes me wish I had a greatsword instead of a falchion. Falchion's are going to be a lot more common in the game because its the favored weapon of his god though, so the weapon focus is better there.

[Mongoose87]

Meh, the Falchion generally crits more, so it's usually worth it.

[Arillius]

That's because of the higher crit range? Its an 18-20 instead of 20 right?

[Arillius]

A thought occured to me. My defense/offense plan seems stable but it can be improved upon no? If I want to go completly defensive in certain instances, it strikes me that a potion of reduce person is as good as a potion of enlarge person is for offense. Topped with shield of faith, a tower shield. I can have 26 AC simply at level 2, and use fighting defensively or taking a standard action to defend to get that ac to 28 or 30.

Are there any thoughts on this addition?

[randomhero00]

Only that at level 2 you rarely need an AC above 24 or so.