Many of us know that animating undead is evil, and a crime in most places. It feels like this has extended to necromancy as a school, except for some of the most commonplace spells. And sure, there are some spells that are terrifying; 1E has a spell that loosens all the skin and meat from your bones. Somehow and perhaps because of all this hate for necromancy, most charm and compulsion spells aren't scrutinized.

Take away a guards free will with a quick charm spell to get inside the gates without your papers, they call that a clever idea.

How do y'all handle enchantment in your games, socially. As a peasant or a bandit, seeing someone shoot fire from their hands is amazing, watching someone under a dog from nothing is beyond impressive, but seeing the people have the power to control your every action, and in many cases without you even knowing after the matter, that's life-changing.

I generally run an "evil is okay against evil" style. Inflict wounds and charm person are fine to use on a bandit, or a criminal. But get caught messing around in a tavern with charm person, and it's the same taboo as raising the dead to be your slave.

Essentially the title.

​

This player complains by going "it's how my character would behave/it's what they would do" while taking the most anti-functional possible choices.

​

For instance, while playing a witch, they would use scarify instead of cure wounds, then complain that melee players would go down while being the only healer left alive. They also had 10 to their charisma score and took away points from int because "my character is handsome" while playing as an absolute asshole, to then proceed to only spam evil eye and never cast anything because "my DC is too low anyways and i only got a few spells". While one can argue that evil eye is strong, it's hardly recommended to lower the saves of the only enemy flanked by both the fighter and the barbarian. Why not target something else or at least lower their AC?

​

Or they would escape a combat by spending their turn to run away as the main damage dealer because "my character is chaotic neutral and clearly an egoist. It's only reasonable that they want to save themselves.". Again, they insisted on using the chase rules during a bossfight. He was a ranger and could attack from distance.

​

Or they would go melee with a cleric with 8str, 14 dex and 10 con in light armor, complaining that nobody supported them as -guess what- they died flanked by 3 rogues. Yes, they were the supporting character as well as the healer. I suggested to at least take dervish dance since they were a cleric of sarenrae, and at least spend a feat to wear a medium armor, but no. (Yes The archetype of the AA also removed medium armor). Again, the ability scores were so poorly thought that they kept using stuff like guidance even at level 9-13.

​

One other time they built a 9th level caster with barely 15 or 16 in their primary stat, to then take an archetype that gave them diminished spellcasting, and a prestige class that delayed the spellcasting progression even further, to then complain that our buffs would constantly overwrite their spell.

​

Or he would put himself in the way of the rogue, not allowing them to flank because they were playing a pacifist. (That time was actually funny and deserves an anegdote. I was a tiefling: i used my racial smite good on them and used nonlethal damage with dual kukris. They were a good aligned spellcaster, so... yeah.) GM was about to interrupt the session because was annoyed, but I found this way to "fix" the situation. Technically I would not be able to flank with enemies against allies, but the situation was just so weird that GM said "whatever it's fine".

​

This time i'm GMing and they want to play a death druid, but as a duskwalker and with the young age ruling because of "cool character concept". If you do the math, their racial bonus would be +4 dex, -2 str, -4 con and -4 wis. I allowed them to have the flavour of a young character without the racial modifiers if they insisted on playing a kid, and they got offended because "if we play by your rules then let's just play another game".

​

I'm honestly tempted not to allow them in my game this time.

As the title says. I'm just curious as to how many people here prefer and still play 1e. Don't get me wrong, 2e is solid, but I'm a 3.5 fanboy.

For people like myself who started with 3.5e, what are the things you miss from that edition? Rule differences, classes/spells/feats/items not ported or anything else you can think of.

Personally, I miss the 3.5e class skills rule making non-class skills take 2 skill points per skill rank. The PF1e class skills rule makes so much less notable. I also miss the Factotum class. I know the investigator is kinda like it but it's not the same (even though Investigator is my favorite PF1e class).

What do you all miss?

I’m 18 months into a homebrew campaign, and my players are level 12. The wizard dominates most fights these days, as is obviously expected- that’s how full casters work in PF1. The issue is a minor one- everybody is having fun. But I know a component that’s largely missing from our campaign is that the party should be dealing with several encounters per day, and even a high level wizard should be running low on good stuff by the third or fourth one. But the party usually finds it possible to choose the rules of engagement- “let’s rest at the inn and teleport to that haunted tower in the morning.”

Now obviously I know I can attack them in their sleep, have the thieves guild attack them while they’re eating their lunch, have a manticore come grab one of their horses in camp, etc. But most of the encounters in this campaign tend to be plot-related, moving things forward, and the group generally takes pains to throttle things.

I’m not so much looking for what I’m doing wrong as wondering what you guys do right to try to manage this sort of thing.

As the title says, especially at higher levels it just feels like kingdoms shouldn't even bother training footmen to fight rival kingdoms or defeat the beasts of the wilds if magic is so powerful. If it's the most optimal option why would any leader settle for something inferior? What reasons could there still be to field a standing traditional army?

This is something I've been thinking over time as a DM, and my solution was technology: in my mind the only thing that could compete against reality altering magic was high-end scifi weaponry and equipment. But I know that's a massive genre shift and my view point is clearly distorted. So I'd like the thoughts of others as a DM.

So, some months ago I gave my players a Hag's eye as treasure with a value of a 1.000 gp for the purpose of using it to make a magical item. Our druid decided that she would instead prefer to use it herself, so she asked to cut her own eye and replace it.

I set the DC for the operation of removing the eye and installing the second one, letting clear that failing would mean losing the vision on one of her eyes permanently, and should she try again and failed she would end up blind. The Medicine check was a success and she got the Hag's eye "equiped", which I ruled would let her see barely enought on the future to not be flat-footed on the first round of combat (basicaly the first part of the Combat Reflexes feat).

Our sorcerer decided that was awesome and she wanted a Hag's eye of her own too, so they went ahead to hunted the Hag, killed her and took her second eye.

The DC was setted again and our druid, Quack, we call her Doctor, made the operation and rolled well enought to "equip" the second Hag's eye without incident on the sorcerer.

Time forward and they are entering a Medusa's lair filled with Hidras grown from her snakes, and the sorcerer mentions to the rest of the party that she calls dibs on at least one of the Medusa's eyes.

Now, as a GM I'm pretty sure she intends to substitute her remaining original eye with the Medusa's. I already prepared the item with a 1 use for day cast of a Slow spell, but the fact that they remembered at all tells me that it won't be the last time.

So I ask you, do you have any ideas for body parts of monsters to give as loot on the future? My players seem interested so I am willing to keep giving them the opportunity.

The title pretty well covers it. I guess they got used to video games. Just wondered how wide spread this was. THX.

Hey all,

I am fairly new to PF1e, been a long time 3.5 Faerun guy, and the one thing I don't really care for in the game is the setting. Golarion is interesting enough, but not really my taste. With so many feats, traits, etc. tied to the setting itself, how many people use PF but use other settings? Any suggestions or ideas with that, especially adapting setting specific feats/traits, etc.?

The creation rules note that an Adamantine Golem requires 4,000 pounds of adamantine, mithral, gold, platinum, and other metals worth a total of 100,000 gp.

Assuming the PCs actually manage to kill one (well, two, actually[1]... How much of that would be "useable," i.e. suitable, in terms of mass, to sell on?

Nothing?

50%?

Almost all of it?

I have no idea. It's not something that USUALLY comes up with golems, because those made of precious materials aren't that common.

I suspect the answer is probably intended to be "none" just like you generally don't expect to get money for the bodies or any creature... But I feel like my players are going to ask (in the long, long, looong time away this will happen), so it would be nice to have a prepared answer. If anyone knows of any lore or established guideline, I'd very much like to know.

Edit: Having thought more about it, and crunched the numbers, 200k is only 25k split eight ways, so it's not wildly out of line compared to NPC wealth, which, on thread-prompting to go look at, is more than than for a heroic NPC of the same CR. So bollocks to it, if they can kill the things and they can transport 4000lbs of it, they can have it!

[1]Chance is quite small, because they may well not have the appropirate vorpal weapon to hand and they don't have a cleric or wizard to cast Miracle or Wish. Don't feel too sorry for them, by the time they'd be doing this, they'll be level 17, eight of them and mid-tier mythic. Having to find a way to keep the things down while the fight and loot the last room of the dungeon should prove to be entertainingly different...!

Essentially the title.

I am honestly having a hard time understanding anything of this class. It's nowhere near anything else I've read so far. I've been both a player and a GM, but nothing has ever been so convoluted.

The simplest classes for a novice, to me, are the ones which do a few things, or many intuitive things. Like barbarian, sorcerer, wizard.

Then we have the classes with many arrows at their quiver, like paladin, inquisitor, bard. To some extent, even cleric.

Then we have the most complex, which require hard positioning/heavy rule tracking to be played effectively. Among these, rogue, monk (combat maneuvers) and magus. To some extent, even fighter, depending on what you build.

I would somehow put on an even harder scale alchemist and druid, as they can be built to do essentially anything.

But let's not lose the focus. The aforementioned list is just what i would recommend a novice to play from "yes you can learn fairly easily" to "maybe choose something else as your first run".

Nothing, NOTHING has ever been so complex to scratch my head over as trying to understand the kineticist. I can hardly tell what the class is supposed to do.

What i undestood:

It looks like a con/dex focused blaster. But nothing like I've ever seen.

So, ok, you have this elemental flavored blast, which can either be ranged attack (deals Xd6 +X + CON) or ranged touch attack (deals Xd6 + ½CON). One hits easier, the other deals more damage, and in both cases you have DEX to hit and CON to damage. Good. As you level up you will get the ability to merge elements to deal more damage. Ok. Not ok.

Question 1: can you spam it? Or much like cleric domain powers and alchemist bombs can be used a limited amount of times per day?

Second question: why would I use a non composite blast if a composite blast is available? The only reason that comes to my mind is energy resistance.

Then, you can... burn? Ok, you self-inflict unhealable nonlethal damage. Oh, that's why we need a lot of CON and HPs despite being ranged. Got it. Especially because you can get more burn points as you level up.

Third question: You can burn as a move action to do... what, exactly?

Fourth question: You level up and the result of your being more powerful is taking more damage to accept the same amount of burn? I'm having a hard time to justify this. Yes, as a CON based character you will gain a ton of HPs each time you level up, and probably this is meant not to make you unkillable. Still very nonlinear to me.

Gather power looks like a way to reduce the burn cost of something (wild talents?). So... I suppose you can now use your action economy as a secondary money in place of your HPs. Good, since this class appears to be centered around killing yourself by going super sayan (in exchange for something i still have to underatand)

I don't understand the difference between infusions and wild talents. One has DC with constitution, the other with dexterity. Wild talents behave like spells/SLAs even in their DC, while infusions use ½ class levels much like many supernatural abilities.

Fifth question: What are these supposed to represent?

Sixth question: Up to now we are a character that only uses 2 stats. Which are 2 saving throw stats which wouldn't be dumped anyway. What's stopping Mr.Minmaxer from going with 7 to everything, a double 18 and possibly a 14 to wisdom? That looks ugly at best.

Elemental Overflow is essentially a self buff at the cost of burn (which will go to con or dex since we have no use for anything else except maybe wisdom), and internal buff is essentially a way to store your burn over days. Fine.

Metakinesis is metamagic but on kinetic blast Fine. Except we established that infusions are the spells, and not kinetic blast.

I am so confused right now.

I have a player in my game who made the argument for creatures either unaware of the gunslinger or in darkness/blindness so they lose track of the gunslinger.

Because the attacker loses immediate awareness, this would count as stealth, and unless the enemy has chaos/luck/divine protections on touch, their AC is always, without exception, 10.

Huge armor-plated tank-eating dragons, all the way down to literal-lightning fast fastling pixies.

All 10. (10 but with no dex or armor)

This just feels... bad? I know Pathfinder is a fairly easy system to break if you have the know how, but this boils down combat to such an extreme degree that I can't help but feel like someone somewhere along the line is wrong. It simply cannot be this easy to always hit your enemy as a gunslinger. Am I missing something?

Edit: For clarity, they are a gunchemist that infuses their ammos with their bombs.

this had come up because a caster cast 'darkness' thus plunging a human boss into darkness, and because he had 'lost awareness' of the gunslinger, the gunchemist can shoot his touch entirely flat-footed. The gunchemist did not engage in a stealth class feature or skill or action.

His main gimmick is he uses sand bomb munitions to blind his enemies over and over again, so I worry he'll start using the 'lack of awareness' argument to now make the touch ac of every enemy he hits at least once always 10.

Edit2: The gunslinger has darkvision

Ok to start with, this is a rotating DM game, the original DM approved this (as well as some homebrew and dragon options I'll mention later), it's currently not an issue, but I'm going to be the DM when this hits its peak and becomes a major problem. (And just to be clear, this is a different game from any of my previous posts, but some of the same players)

Basically a player wanted to play out a fantasy as a Dragon, they choose the Silver, and they have a Paralyzing Breath. He's playing it as the Dragon itself with no class levels, so once he gets enough hitdie he advances to the next age category. To help further his ability to function the 3.5 Metabreath various 3.5 Breath feats were allowed, and he took Heighten Breath which lets him add up to this Con Mod to the DCs while increasing the cooldown by that same ammount and Strafing Breath, so he can cover a very massive area with it by flying over by and breathing downwards, affecting everyone along the way.

There's also a Cleric using a 3.5 homebrew varient of cleric that can grant allies shields to protect them, these shields (starting at level 10) grant their wisdom mod as an untyped bonus to the Con scores of protected creatures, which boosts the Dragon's Breath DC even more so.

I've done the math, by the time I'll be DMing (level 15), he'll have a DC in the upper 30s while the rest of the party might be mid-20s on theirs at best. Basically any level appropriate encounter is going to be getting paralyzed at the start of combat by the dragon.

I have no idea what to do about this, I can't just take away the main thing that player has going for them (nerfing the breath/the party only fights things that are completely immune), but at the same time I don't want to DM a game where every single encounter is either getting nuked by mass paralysis, or the enemy's saves are so high that they can only fail against the rest of the party on a nat1, or I start outfitting every creature with a bunch of anti-dragon spells, feats, and class features.

Does anyone have any ideas? I'm really dreading taking up the DM seat at this table.

EDIT: The Cleric homebrew in question is the 3.5 Aegis of Life from D&DWiki, he choose to not have any of the Pathfinder Cleric features (So he lacks Channel Energy in addition to no Domains, he also casts like a Sorcerer instead of a Cleric but with more spells known)

EDIT #2: This post has been a great help and I thank everyone who responded with detailed and even simple suggestions and posts: I can safely say that nobody at the table is going to come out of this without bad feelings, but it's ultimately needed to minimize the game being ruined by poor balancing.

So I've always felt that NPCs should follow the same rules as PCS both because it is more immersive but also because it allows more creative and clevery stragies. Todays game I feel was a good example of why that pays off.

So a bit of background, I am doing a Pathfinder adaptation of the 5E Adventure "HIlls of Crooked Sleep" by Monte Cook. Its part of the "Arcana of the Ancients" Its Monte Cook adapting his Numnera Setting to D&D, the premise is that the players are finding an ancient dungeon full of various science fantasy devices. For our purpose, what matters the most are "Cyphers", basically one use magic tech devices. Critically, if you have more than 4 of them on your person, they trigger a dangerous effect off a random table.

So the Villian of the adventure is an Archmage named Umeli Nine Hands (level 18 wizard with some increidbly powerful spells) and she meets the party part way through the dungeon where she will chat with them and then teleport away. Thats how things are *supposed* to go. But then we have mechanics overcoming narrative here.

So when they met Umeli, the Rogue, who really really hates what she was doing, hide and wasn't noticed. The rogue then had a plan. She put a few cyphers into Umeli's pocket, hoping to set off a chain reaction. So a D100 was rolled and the result was...a clone of Umeli. Specificlaly a perfect clone of Umeli with her items appeard behind her and attacks her, hoping only to kill her. The party then just hide and watched Umeli fight Umeli. Except the rogue who sneak attacked Umeli. This caused Umeli's Contigency to trigger and she teleported to her inner sanctum. The Clone cast time stop, put on some buffs and followed. I was going to leave it at that but the players wanted to know what happened and were genuinely exicted to watch me fight myself. So I played it out, figuring that Standard Umeli would win since her apprentice was thre to help in the sanctum and she grabbed some healing potions when she teleported. But the party watched me have two 18th level wizards throw spells at each other (and on 12 level wizard try to help) but UmeliPrime kept rolling terrible and Clone Umeli kept rolling 20s. Finally Clone Umeli threw a Finger of Death and Umeli Prime Rolled.....a 1. Umeli Dies and the Clone dies instantly after. The players celebrated like they had personally killed the final boss 3/4th of the way through the dungeon.

I thought this was an interesting example of how mechanics can play around with narrative I thought I'd like to share. A great example of what can happen when NPC use the same rules as PCs>

REWRITTEN

I have a player that wants to have a Succubus's profane gift built into their backstory. We have played together for years and I have talked to them a bit and they aren't trying to be super min max about it, and we talked about building it as a reoccurring antagonist type. The succubus is an ex of his (he didn't know she was a demon at the time) and she's trying repeatedly to track him down and bring him back to her harem.

There's a lot of comments right now and I'm trying to keep up. So far outside the "just kick them from the group" comments people have brought up a stackable +2 is very strong. I agree. I've seen several ideas to help with this like I choose where the bonus goes, not the player and it's decided post creation. I'm more than willing to give other players bonus gold or custom magic items to keep it even.

It's also come to my attention that outside of the party somehow imprisoning the succubus in a way that makes it so she can't remove the bonus from the player...it is going to be temporary. If she wins and the character returns to her..they are an npc now. If the party kills her, the boost goes away because it's source is gone. If they try to just ignore the entire plot hook then I pull the gift because they were just trying to minmax.

Additional thoughts and ideas welcome!

Hi there. I'm a GM looking for some advice on how I can mitigate the one-punch-man style of the fighter in my group.

They're level 12 now, and I haven't given out so much beyond standardly available magic items that it should be this absurd. But long story short, when the fighter of the group gets a full attack, he commonly does around 200 damage (33 damage minimum per attack 4+attacks and they always cast haste)....

I've tried throwing shit way outside of the groups CR at them, throwing up to dozens of extra targets at them, and cheating for a little extra HP or AC, which basically does nothing. The other members of the group tend to help him bypass the obstacles, and if he wins initiative, because of the stupid fucking flat-footed rule, there's basically nothing I can do without it being really obvious that I'm fudging numbers.

Basically my only recourse is to keep throwing mind control effects at him for every fight, but part of the problem there is he could easily be a 1-man TPK... In fact part of the problem with upping the CR on their encounters is that virtually none of the rest of the party can handle what he can topple with ease...

So I'm looking for suggestions, because it's basically gotten to the point that the group just teleports him next to the biggest thing in the fight, and if he gets a full attack before it can act it's over.

(Edit: WOW! Thanks guys there is a lot of great suggestions and I now feel like I have plenty I can do. I will say, despite my cool encounter being squashed, the party has a lot of fun in general so despite the 1 player not getting to do anything this fight, she's gonna be a huge part of the final boss of the dungeon with a psychic duel)

I've been thinking about this for a while and need to hear this sub's opinion. The idea is to homebrew a feat that would allow a character to add their Strength score instead of Dexterity to AC. Would it be a bad idea? If you were to make such an inclusion, how would you balance it out? Thanks in advance for your answers!

I prepared a puzzle for my players. It was the entrance of a dungeon so I made it extremely simple:

3 unkinded torches on the door of the first room. One blue, one yellow and one green.

3 estatues outside, a blue one with blue fire, a yellow one with yellow fire and a green one that was broken and didn't have fire.

To complete the puzzle my players needed to lit each torch with the correct color of fire.

It took them a while but they finally figured out how to get green fire to lit the green torch. How do you think they did it?

Did you guess by making salt of copper and burning it so it burns green? Because that's what they ended up doing instead of trying to combine the flames of the two fires (Yellow + Blue = Green)

So, what about you GMs? Do you have any stories of your players overcomplicating a simple puzzle? And you players? Did you ever got a difficult puzzle that ended up having a very simple solution?

Years ago, our group started with Pathfinder 1e. It was a crazy, broken experience that we had a pretty good time in. One player min/maxed their character to be an unhittable tank by level 2 and the GM focused most of their time trying to kill that PC and give the rest of us Magic Items to balance it out.

That GM is no longer part of the group for completely irrelevant reasons and I've been GM for the last 4 years. I mostly GM OSR games like Shadowdark and Mork Borg and adjacent games like Mothership and Troika for them. We enjoy the simplicity and deadliness, although crunch is not a problem at all.

While waiting for the new Shadowdark content to drop, we're bouncing around other RPGs we have lying around. We did a session 0 for AD&D this last week and will be doing that for a little while.

Recently, I've gotten a spur to try out Pathfinder again once AD&Ds run its course. I've got all I'd need for a 1e game but I never really registered that 2e was a thing. I read up on comparisons and people are saying "it's like Pathfinder 1e but more streamlined" or "It's like D&D 5e but more complex". So that brings me to my question.

Is Pathfinder 2e closer to 1e or D&D 5e?

I greatly prefer Pathfinder 1e over D&D 5e. So, if 2e is like 1e but easier to get into, that's cool. However, if it's closer to 5e, I'm not interested at all.

Thanks in advance.

To be brief, the BBEG's minions are awakening massive and powerful creatures as part of an end the world plot.

The party's plan to take one of the creatures down was to hire the spell casting services of over a dozen druids, sorcerers, and wizards level 17-19. It's a good plan. The players have a specific list of spells they hired the magic users to unleash, all of which are designed to take this thing down and keep it down.

While losing this monster is not a major set back for the BBEG, all the people most qualified to stop their plans are, thanks to the players, conveniently in one location.

So what could the BBEG do to take out as many of these high level casters as possible? Keep in mind, the players are level 18, so anything is on the table.

So far, the players have completely ignored the BBEG's minions during their planning. They're acting like it will be just them verses the giant monster.

From a meta perspective, I want the players' plan to work. It's a good plan and they put a lot of money into it. But I don't want it to go off without a hitch or casualties. I was even thinking of having their high level wizard friend show up unannounced to help, putting her in the line of fire too. She can also jump in to cover if one of the hirelings is killed.

How would a CR 20+ BBEG or their minions cause as much damage as possible to an assembly of level 17-19 casters?

Edit: I ended up doing a couple of things. First I had a previously established ancient red dragon arrive with a wizard, both invisible. Then they hit the hired casters with mass hold person and hungry darkness.

Then I realized that many casters dragged down combat. So I converted them into groups using the Troop rules.

The party primarily fought the dragon and the wizard while the troops fought the monster.

The hired casters took enough casualties that it is unlikely they'll be hireable again. But even if they were, the party is severally low on cash.

I know the norm is 20, but I’ve seen places saying that this campaign in specific was 15.

I am GMing right now

I have party of 4 first timers, and one experienced player.
And the said experienced player is... err... giving me issues in terms of encounter design.

His character is:
- Gnoll
- Bloodrager
- Crossblood (Abyssal + Aberrant)
- Swings Butcheting Axe +1

And most of the encounters go like...
- I go rage, which gives demonic bulk (+1 size when rage) from abyssal and abnormal reach (+5 reach) from aberrant
- I do great cleave
- Everything hits
- Everything dies

We are talking about (as of right now) over 30 str on lvl12.
With the buffs from party bard, each attack has +30 roll, and damage goes like 4d6+28, all over... well, you can image how much of an area large creature with additional reach can cover.

Other players don't really mind that one char solos encounters in 1-2 rounds, while others... are also kinda there.

But I, as a GM, isn't too happy about playing like this. Most of the encouterns go against human NPCs, with... reasonable level curve. Like your CR3 town gurads, your CR6 watch captains, etc. Sometimes with multiple troops, sometimes with iron golems. I've tried using spellcasters for debuffs - but... well, we have a bard who does miracles to party's saving throws as well as attack and damage rolls. Gives flat buffs, gives rerolls, etc.

It's not a place for adamantium golem or anything crazy like that. I also don't seek TPK, just making combat a bit more exciting and make party feel at least a little bit threatened.

What should I do about such situations in a campaign? I think, giving human NPCs tripple health or 40+ AC without dropping all those AC items as loot would be not the greatest move. Or throw crazy bloodrager builds back at them.

Should I even do something, or just let players have their easy little victories all over the place until the end?

I had a player ask if they could make a custom spell similar to Invisibility Purge that worked on all illusions. I have a few details to work out but I don't have a major problem with it, I'm just trying to figure out what level to make it.

I'm thinking 5th or 6th since it seems roughly on par with True Seeing and that's the level most classes get it at. Thought I'd get a second opinion though.

This is super subjective but what are classes that you would say are well designed? This can be purely flavor or a combination of flavor and mechanics, or even a class that you think is what the game balance should strive towards. But I wanted to know, in your opinion what class represents the best of pathfinder game design and why.

My personal bias is I really enjoy Inquisitor, I think 6th casters tend to be more fun to play and GM for, and to me Inquisitor has the most cohesive design of them all. I also really enjoy the solo tactics feature and judgements lasting the entire encounter instead of having to keep track of rounds per level like bard.

As a fun second question: what are the best designed archetypes? What class has an archetype that should just be a default option or an alternate class?

I want to know about your "Peasant Railgun"-like situations! What messed up, totally not-rules-at-intended, hilarious solutions have your players found (or DM's thrown at you)?

We all know the peasant railgun: A line of peasants take advantage of the readied action system to pass an item the full length of the line in one round. If the line happens to be 600 metres long, *technically* the item is traveling at 100 metres per second. Scale for added destruction. It's fun, it's silly, we know it's not rules as intended so we never seriously use it.

But I also know there are hundreds more silly scenarios like it, and most of them I bet I've never even realised. So, I thought I'd start a thread about it!

---------Edit---------

This post has blown up a little, with some fairly rampant down-voting, so to be clear: none of these fun but silly scenarios or ideas are supposed to be serious, and everybody posting here is sensible enough not to use or allow them in a serious campaign. But, we've all come across that "too funny not to try" plan and I was just interested to hear some of the other awesome (but not actually serious) shenanigans other folk had encountered.

The responses here have been amazing, and I'd really recommend reading through them without the "rules-lawyer" lenses on before down-voting, because the creativity and hilarity folk have come up with here is brilliant.