Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Hoary Muntjac

AbsolutGrndZer0's page

880 posts (982 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 880 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Just found this and I am so happy to see official statement that it will be changed in a future printing.

Rynjin wrote:

I renders you immune to the curse, but immunity to something shouldn't do anything if you've already contracted it unless it has ongoing effects.

So, like, a guy gets poisoned. Before the poison has run its course, he gains immunity to poison. He stops taking damage from the poison, but any ability score damage isn't wiped just because he's now immune.

Same deal here, I would think.

Curse of Lycanthropy is specifically the Su ability that causes the curse to infect those a werewolf bites. Not the transformation itself. Once you're a werewolf, you're a werewolf.

Okay, that's what I thought, but wanted to be sure before I fully decided that I want to make her a Lunar oracle.

If you are a natural lycanthrope and you gain immunity to lycanthropy (for example of what prompted the question, I am making a werewolf oracle with the Lunar mystery which can take "Mantle of Moonlight" that makes one immune to Lycanthropy among other combat benefits vs. lycanthropes), does it not matter because you are natural, can you not take such an ability, or do you lose your werewolf abilities?

Scavion wrote:

The game isn't designed based on pvp.

Also if you're relying on flight alone to catch an enemy rather than some other means, it's already a pointless exercise and a pointless comparison.

Are you legitimately telling me that you couldn't catch someone within 15 minutes of flight time?

Especially since by 15th level, teleportation becomes common place? Or even the incredibly vast array of options a 15th level party has at their disposal to lockdown an opponent?

I'm not talking about PvP, first of all.

Second, we're comparing two methods of obtaining wings. Other things you can do sure, you can throw Wish spells in at level 20. Wish for permanent wings, why not (probably out of the scope of a wish I know)? But, in comparing the two wing abilities, I don't feel that "other options for locking down an opponent" matter because I am comparing flight capability of the two options. If you are making a level 15+ character, you're better off going for On Dark Wings because there are no limits.

pauljathome wrote:

In fairness, one place where people disagree greatly is in how much of the world/rules characters know.

Practically speaking it CAN'T all be reflected in knowledge skills since some characters just don't have the skill points to buy what their character "should" know. And what skill is "know in character what druid archetypes exist and what they look like?" anyway?

I personally handle the issue by giving significant circumstance bonuses based on character background. I'd likely give an oracle at least a bit of a bonus for knowing about oracles.

OH I agree somewhat, the fact that I even let him roll in the first place and didn't just say "You know nothing about black-blooded oracles" is because he was an oracle. However, seeing as he was a Kitsune oracle from Tian-Xia, I figured even as an oracle it was highly unlikely he knew anything about a curse that is rare outside the Darklands. I decided the difficulty would be 30 (the max) without knowing that he was one level away from being able to make it even with a 20.

As for what skill, it would for Druids I think be knowledge Nature (or maybe Religion, but I think more likely Nature for druids) For oracles, it's Religion. Arcane classes would be Arcana... Then if like say a player of a bard was like "Hey, can I roll knowledge arcana to know about bard archetypes" I'd probably let him too.

But, my problem wasn't so much that I didn't want him to know, as that he just assumed he knew it just because he was an oracle without even asking "Sounds like she's a Black-Blooded Oracle, would I recognize her as such?" when I hadn't even said that's what she was, all I said was she was cold to the touch and when she was cut black blood splashed on the cleric and she hissed in pain.

Another thing that annoys me is when players just assume they know something in character. Like for example, when the tongues cursed oracle meets a young girl and a cleric is doing some tests on her to see what's wrong with her and why her body temperature is so cold, the player is like "OH she's a black-blooded oracle, her blood is black runs cold and she's got a negative energy affinity as if she were undead" like being a level 3 oracle gives him an automatic 30 on all oracle related things. Then when I say he needs to make a roll and he gets a 29 (rolled a 20 and had a +9 bonus), as I decided that black-blooded oracles are DC 30 to know about outside of the darklands, he got even more mad trying to say no DC can be higher than 25, forcing me to pull out the book to show him the DC can be as high as 30. Which, yeah me being the GM should have made the 30 DC okay, but he thought he shouldn't have needed the roll in the first place, he's not going to accept an impossible at his level DC.

The Morphling wrote:

To start, let me preface this by saying this is meant to be a light-hearted thread to point out a few annoying habits of some players, rather than an attempt to insult or shame anyone. I've noticed a couple of recurring things players seem to not realize they're doing wrong.

There is no phrase in the world more aggravating to me as a GM (or even as a player) when the rogue at the table says "I go into stealth" while in the middle of a wide-open, well-lit chamber. How difficult can it be to understand that hiding requires, well, something to hide behind? Most players who do this are repeat offenders, too. They go "Oh, okay." when their mistake is pointed out, and then attempt it again while marching down the center of the next well-lit hallway, fifteen feet in front of the paladin in full plate.

I have a player that is like that (although he recently moved out of town for a new job, so we probably won't be playing anymore for awhile) I tend to let him get away with it just because it's easier to do so than to hold up the game for twenty minutes debating how Stealth works. But, he usually sets his rogues up to be snipers, maxes out his stealth, stealth feats, etc. Even takes the sniper archetype. The party just assumes he's following when they travel because he's ALWAYS stealthed.

James Jacobs wrote:
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:
Brandon Hodge wrote:
Same as traps: experience awarded once on survival.
Yeah, but then some haunts are just stupid "oh look some ghosts ran by you here have some xp" There is at least one haunt like that in Carrion Crown.

Think of that as "you learned some backstory to the adventure that may help you in the future or that may just make you enjoy the story more" rewards then.

It's not stupid if it adds to the player's immersion in the game.

Ah, yeah I see what you mean, kinda. I guess at the very least as long as they players don't think as I said, "oh look some stupid ghosts ran by us" but instead get the right idea that oh the ghosts are people who died in a fire here...

Hank the Bugbear wrote:
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:

Now, other than On Dark Wings being granted at 15th level and Wings of Fire being at chosen at minimum 7th level, On Dark Wings is CLEARLY superior due to having no use limit like Wings of Fire.

It's like you're comparing a 4th level spell to an 8th level spell and complaining that the 4th level spell is weaker...

Except that an 8th level spell would be different enough that you would have reason to use the 4th level still sometimes, and even if it's not much different (say Cure Critical is clearly better than Cure Light, but of course its higher level) you are still limited to how many times you can use the higher level version, plus if you only need to cure 8hp, why waste your Cure Criticals? However, if you had Wings of Fire AND On Dark Wings, Wings of Fire would become worthless as soon as you got On Dark Wings because they both do exactly the same thing, other than the limitations on usage time.

Scavion wrote:

As opposed to 15th level(A HUGE difference), you get permanent flight which you'll only use just as much as the Oracle's wings will anyways.

So, when the Infernal winged person decides to fly away and the Oracle wings person follows.... well, the Infernal escapes because he's got unlimited flight time and the oracle better make sure he's not too high up when his time expires, a danger the Infernal doesn't have.

Stark_ wrote:
You're kidding yourself if you don't think 8 levels is a LONG time. Flame oracle pays for a swift action each fight to get it much earlier, since 7 minutes will be enough for your fights and some puzzle solving. They just can't have them out all the time.

Well, right I realize that, but maybe the ability should improve at higher levels then? Because, as it stands looking at a level 20 character... An Infernal Sorcerer's wings are hands down better than the Flame Oracle's.

Brandon Hodge wrote:
Same as traps: experience awarded once on survival.

Yeah, but then some haunts are just stupid "oh look some ghosts ran by you here have some xp" There is at least one haunt like that in Carrion Crown.

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Gregory Connolly wrote:
Actually RAW anyone with 3 natural attacks qualifies for Multiattack. Only in PFS do you need to be a level 10 Ranger with the natural weapons style.

Well since this is for a PFS character that's a pointless statement and it's flagged as a monster feat so you'll need GM approval in any other setting that's a less then accurate statement.

Um, as the OP I will correct you on that, this is not for a PFS character, so PFS rules do not matter to me... unless the person you are talking to with the ranger said his was a PFS character? Either way, this thread isn't in the PFS forum, and as the OP looking for ADVICE, PFS rulings don't matter to me, just the RAW.

Like for example on how PFS rules differ from the RAW, it was said that a Half-Orc counts as both human and orc for all feats and effects related to race. So, the Half-Orc can take the Racial Heritage feat. So, take Racial Heritage Elf. Then, now that they are a Human, Elf, and Orc, they can then take an Elf Only Class Archetype as a Half-Orc. This is allowed by the RAW, it is not allowed in PFS, nor even is the Half-Orc allowed to take Orc Archetypes or Human Archetypes... They are a Half-Orc ONLY, in regards to Archetypes.

So, if this was in the PFS section of the forums, this would matter to me. Since it's not in the PFS, I really don't care about PFS rules.

I apologize if this is coming off a bit rude (I hope it's not), but I don't play PFS and so I tend to get frustrated when players come in trying to impose PFS House Rules on me over the RAW.

As for my character, Fanglords DO get a bite attack, so there is no reason for Mother's Bite which I'm pretty sure she can't take anyway, as that's a Lamashtu religion trait and she's an antipaladin of Calistria. Then as for changing her species to a Pitborn Tiefling, that would not work cause I want her as a fanglord lol.

So, anyone else have any idea why the weretiger was changed in the errata despite the RAW for lycanthropes supporting the stats as they were... ? Other than "the errata is an error" ?

colemcm wrote:
Don't know if it's been mentioned, but an Antipaladin's spells are powered by their Charisma, so you don't need to boost her Wisdom.

Oh crap you are right LOL I forgot about that... wait are you sure? Cause in 3.x they were Wis I thought, that's why paladins were so annoying you needed high stats across the board.

DesolateHarmony wrote:
Should this thread be in advice or houserules?

Advice because it's about how to do it by the rules, not about a house rule to change the rules.

Hmm then looking at the style feats... Tiger or Panther are kind of cool, plus fit her concept thematically. Then how exactly would blade boots play into a natural attack chain, or could they?

Cool, thanks everyone and as for the reason her Str is 14 and her Dex is 16, that's cause a big part of it is I just am not a fan of full plate, not to mention part of the concept is that she's an antipaladin because that best fits her passions and very evil streak vengeful nature, not cause she wants to be some champion of evil in full plate. She's stealthy and a big roguish in that if you slight her so she's going to decide to kill you, you might not see her coming.

As for the antipaladin being not optimal, that's part of why I wanted the advice on it. I'm not a player that cares about optimal fighting over roleplay. I do however not want a character that will be worthless in combat vs. her peers at higher level. Looks like a lot of what you guys have said tells me that even if it's not optimal for her to be a dex build natural attacks anti-paladin, it works.

Then as for the rest of the stats, as a fanglord she gets +2 Dex, -2 Wis so having her Wis a bit higher to compensate that penalty yet still be viable as an antipaladin is hard then to find the points to have a high Con too. Originally I had her Str lower but then when I realized that if she wasn't able to use Dervish Dance to add dex to damage since she's not using a scimitar, the higher Str for damage would be a good idea

EDIT: Okay, as Rynjin suggested I dropped her Int to 10 and put her Con up to 12. Don't want to drop her Int lower than 10 simply cause I DO want her to have some skills, and with an Int of 10 she's only got 2 (+1 favored class)

That's a good question, though when I ran Carrion Crown I required players to actually "solve" the haunt to get the xp. Just leaving the room was too easy for most of them, unless it was one that couldn't be stopped, but pretty sure most of the ones in Carrion Crown at least could.

Okay, so I've never been fond of the way natural attacks are completely independent of iterative attacks even if all you attempt are your natural attacks.

Sure, at lower levels the catfolk with claws gets two attacks where as the fighter with a sword gets only one. However, at level 20 where the fighter is getting 5 (or more with TWF), the catfolk who wants to use her claws still only gets two attacks.

So, I've always house ruled that claws can be treated as light slashing weapons.

However, many people think this house rule is a bad idea.

So, the reason for this thread is... assuming a campaign is not going to end prior to a certain level, why bother with claws/etc at all? Why not plan for the future when they will become worthless by not taking them in the first place and spending your feats to maximize manufactured weapons?

So, my idea for a character I REALLY want to play as a natural weapons character, she's a Fanglord (weretiger-kin skinwalker) antipaladin of Calistria. Kinda weird for an antipaladin to use natural attacks, but it's a cool idea i think, plus the unorthodox nature would help to illustrate to me why the natural attacks are worth having (or not.)

So far first level I have her stats as follows...

STR 14
DEX 16
CON 10
INT 12
WIS 11
CHA 16

Will need to spend some of her level up stat points to raise her WIS to 14 to get all her spell levels. In the mean time though, her 1st level feat is 'Extra Feature' so that she can shapeshift her bite AND the claws at the same time. Possibly may or may not take it twice more to be able to fully shift all 4 abilities.

So, who out there knows natural weapons enough to help me out with this? Sell me on natural attacks RAW.

HaraldKlak wrote:
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:

TL;DR I house rule that you may treat claws as light slashing weapons because why would anyone want two 1d4 claw attacks when they could get 5 1d4 dagger attacks?

Well it isn't entirely fair to compare a single racial feature (2 claws) with 20 class levels and several feats toward being good at something (fighter levels + TWF).

What those claws give you compared to TWF is:
Higher attack bonus, higher damage from Str and PA, no need for TWF feats, no need for the quickdraw feat, weapons that cannot be disarmed or sundered.

Natural attacks are front-loaded. At lvl 4 the druid or barbarian is amazing with 3 natural attacks, when the fighter get's a single one with his sword. IMO it is not unreasonable that the scales tip in the other direction later in the game.

But why must they tip? Why does a level 20 character who started her career suddenly have a racial ability that makes her subpar if she uses it past a certain level?

If you just treat them as light slashing weapons as I do, then a level 20 claws fighter with all the TWF feats is exactly the same as a level 20 dagger fighter with all the TWF. If you take Improved Natural Attack, then you are sacrificing a feat to get a better weapon... which the regular weapon fighter just has to pick up a better weapon... So, the normal weapon fighter still has an advantage in that he doesn't have to use a feat to increase his damage die.

It just really says to me that unless you know your campaign isn't going to go past a certain level, you're better off just forgetting you have claws (or in the case of some species that can choose claws like catfolk or dhampir) not having them in the first place and using normal weapons.

NOW, that said... I've recently been looking into it and I am going to try to see if I can make an effective level 20 character that uses natural weapons without feeling like they should just retrain all the natural weapon "crap" and pick up a sword. In fact, I think I will create a new thread to further discuss this, and get some help in a nice level 20 build for a claws based fighter.

While I understand the RAW, I house rule that if a creature does not use manufactured weapons, they can use their iterative attacks progression INSTEAD OF (not in addition to) the standard natural attack rules by essentially treating your claws as light slashing weapons. Just cause otherwise it pretty much makes claws pretty much a throwaway trait to me... if you are a level 20 fighter with a two-handed sword you get 5 attacks but then you can't use your claws... you have claws good for you but you can't use them. But you throw down the sword, you only get two attacks? But then take two daggers and the two-weapon fighting progression and you can get up to 8 dagger attacks, but your claws... still worthless! Might also note that this house rule generally only applies to claws, so no biting people 5 times, if you use my house rule, you can't bite in that round because you are focusing on using just your claws.

TL;DR I house rule that you may treat claws as light slashing weapons because why would anyone want two 1d4 claw attacks when they could get 5 1d4 dagger attacks?

Are wrote:

The simplest explanation is that the Weretiger stat errata was an error.

Well yeah but do they make errors in errata, because as far as I can tell, it shouldn't have been changed. A hybrid and animal form has the same stats as the base creature or base animal, whichever is higher and then all forms get a +2 Str and Con. The werewolf follows this, the wereboar does, the werebear does, they all do... except the weretiger because it was changed... inexplicably. So, I am asking why was it changed when the change causes the weretiger to no longer follow the same creation rules as the rest?

Maybe you and I are right, the errata is an error, and if so then it should be changed back, or else I'd really like to know the justification for the weretiger becoming an exception to the rules every other werecreature follows.

So, could you guys please hit the FAQ button for me on the OP? Even if it doesn't end up in the FAQ, at least hopefully we can get a look from a developer to tell us why this change was made, or if it is in fact an errata in the errata!

Just also double checked the full errata for the original Bestiary, and there is no mention of the werewolf stats being changed, so this change was done only to weretigers... which makes no sense!

Majuba wrote:

I haven't looked at these closely, but could it be that the +2 Str/Con is applied to the base creature's stats, and then compared to the base animal scores?

So Human, Str 13, Con 12. Goes to 15/14 in hybrid, then replaced by the Tiger's scores.

... Glancing at wererat, the human is higher regardless. Werewolf, it looks like the +2 was applied to the Wolf constitution score (much as it was the tiger's before errata).

Right, the werewolf wasn't changed... just the weretiger. But no, it says as I bolded +2 Str/+2 Con in all forms... so I don't see how the intent could be for that to be applied beforehand, since more than likely the animal stats are going to be higher already unless you are playing a min-maxed fighter...

Plus, I just double checked and the werewolf is thus...

Human Con 14
Base Wolf Con 15
Werewolf Hybrid/Wolf Con 17

So, the werewolf IS getting that extra +2, but the weretiger does not anymore... which makes it a complete replacement, negating the bonus the other lycanthropes get and that is right there in the RAW.

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Cao Phen wrote:

I think you are confusing Enhancement Bonuses that increases Attack/Damage with Weapon Ability Bonuses that adds special stuff, like Flaming and Ghost Touch. The limitation that the Magus Arcane Pool has is that you can add Enhancement Bonuses to your weapon (up to a +5 So-and-so Weapon), but you can not have something like a +7 Weapon.

No, because if the non-bladebound magus had the +3 flaming keen bane scimitar, he couldn't add Ghost Touch because he's not got enough points left... he'd exceed the +10 limit... However, the bladebound magus with his +3 black blade could add Ghost Touch and brilliant energy to his black blade. He couldn't however add all the others (and since "bane" is also an arcana, I think I can assume that neither magus has the ability to add bane in his example)

At least, that's what I got from his post... I could be misunderstanding his meaning myself.

DM Sothal wrote:
Flagged the post to be in the wrong forum

Oops didn't notice the Adventure Card part... sorry... wish there was a way to manually move it myself, or delete it and repost it.

7 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Okay, so a lycanthrope has the following rules...

Bestiary wrote:
Ability Scores: +2 Wis, –2 Cha in all forms; +2 Str, +2 Con in hybrid and animal forms. Lycanthropes have enhanced senses but are not fully in control of their emotions and animalistic urges. In addition to these adjustments to the base creature's stats, a lycanthrope's ability scores change when he assumes hybrid or animal form. In human form, the lycanthrope's ability scores are unchanged from the base creature's form. In animal and hybrid form, the lycanthrope's ability scores are the same as the base creature's or the base animal's, whichever ability score is higher.

Here is the Tiger stats...

Bestiary wrote:
Str 23, Dex 15, Con 17, Int 2, Wis 12, Cha 6

Then here is the errated Weretiger hybrid and animal stats...

Bestiary 2 wrote:
Str 23, Dex 16, Con 17, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 8

So, looking at what I bolded there, and since the base lycanthrope rules have not changed, the stats for tigers have not changed... why has the stats for the weretiger changed? As the tiger has a Str of 23 and a Con of 17, that's the base stat... then as it says in the Bestiary you add 2 to them. Hence 25 and 19 were correct the first time...

Why the change? The only way I can see this change making sense is if the +2 Str, +2 Con in hybrid and animal forms. line was completely removed in a Bestiary errata, but to my knowledge it has not been removed.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat this is crazy!!!! I so have to get these... so it's about 2 months between each one?

sunbeam wrote:

Unless someone rules that the wings get in the way or something, when are you not going to have the wings out?

Why wouldn't you have them on all the time?

Well, in the case of Wings of Heaven and Wings of Fire, because you can't. One minute per level. Plus, common sense says they would get in the way, not to mention OMFG that dude has huge bat wings... he's a demon/devil RUN!!!! Yeah, unless you are actually using them, there's no need to keep "On Dark Wings" active other than the fact that you can.

Yes, but forget the feat that didn't exist before since I only mentioned that as to what made me notice this... it's an at-will ability vs. a minute per level ability. Even if you delayed Wings of Fire to 15th level and made it a standard action...

Which, your mention of Wings of Heaven is a good point... That's a discrepancy in the main book (nevermind that Wings of Heaven has no indication of the type of action it is to activate.) Looking at it from a purely game mechanic standpoint, why would I want Wings of Heaven over On Dark Wings at 20th level? Standard vs. Swift? That's in no way worth the difference between a 24 hour ability vs. a one minute per level ability... maybe if Fire/Heaven were one HOUR per level it would seem more worth it at 20th level...

Okay, I am sure there are other examples, but this is one I just noticed and inspired this thread.

I am redesigning an old character of mine who has infernal ties. So, I am going with a flame oracle, but I also was thinking of taking the Eldritch Heritage feat with Infernal.

So, that's when I noticed...

Infernal sorcerer gets...

Infernal Bloodline wrote:

On Dark Wings (Su): At 15th level, you can grow fearsome bat wings as a standard action, giving you a fly speed of 60 feet with average maneuverability. The wings can be dismissed as a free action.

and the Flame oracle gets...

Flame Mystery wrote:

Wings of Fire (Su): As a swift action, you can manifest a pair of fiery wings that grant you a fly speed of 60 feet with average maneuverability. You can use these wings for 1 minute per day per oracle level. This duration does not need to be consecutive, but it must be spent in 1 minute increments. You must be at least 7th level before selecting this revelation.

Now, other than On Dark Wings being granted at 15th level and Wings of Fire being at chosen at minimum 7th level, On Dark Wings is CLEARLY superior due to having no use limit like Wings of Fire.

So, why the discrepancy? Is it just the level difference when you get it, or is there other factors at work? Is it just a case of two difference designers designing each power and the oracle's designer not keeping it equal to previous abilities?

Also, the difference between a swift action and a standard action to activate is only nominally relevant, you could easily change Wings of Fire to a standard action and then it would be exactly the same, but would that be wrong to do from a game balance standpoint?

*Casts Animate Thread!*

So, anyone know for sure what the line means "This ability has no effect of the witch is immune to disease or poison?" I probably am going to run it as the Empathic Healing bypasses immunities, but what do others do?

Ah, alright last game post I saw was we said we were following the footprints, was waiting for an answer, maybe I should have said something else.

Oh well, SOCKS. Thanks for trying, maybe another time.

Sometimes things come up and you have to miss a game... "I dont feel like it" isn't a valid reason to me... but "My boss told me I have to work tonight" is... so is "My sister is in town for only two days" and other various things. Actually being SICK (not just a general "i dont feel like it") is also a valid reason. But, all of these are potential things that could come up hours before the game and break your contract. So, yeah nobody I play with would sign such a contract, not even those who are less understanding about missed games are THAT much not understanding.

Scavion wrote:

Evil alignment is a serious matter in my games. If you callously throw it around on every hoodlum, then yes we're not going to see eye to eye.

But what defines evil? There are grades of evil. Applying alignment to real life persons is kind of hard, but for analogy sake...

Is someone who pirates software evil? Possibly could be considered so by some people. Is a serial rapist-killer evil? Most definitely.

So, if you were doing a modern-day game and a selfish person that didn't care about anyone but themselves who regularly downloaded illegal movies and games but never physically harmed anyone... they must die, as they are neutral evil?

That even said, I've know people that I would have to unequivocally say would be Lawful Evil without any doubt that were much nicer than many who would deem themselves Lawful Good. Then again, there is doubt as this person would only be Lawful Evil by modern morality... very "Live and let live" attitude, cared only about himself most of the time, yes but does that make him evil, or is he only evil because he strays from the accepted morals of modern religion?

Scavion wrote:
In a perfect world no one is evil =P

Real life nor Pathfinder is a perfect world.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Went to the actual Facebook page and found the old comment thread, and later he commented this...

Jason Bulmahn, Game Designer wrote: was a joke and mostly for fun. We changed the rule for game balance reasons, not based off my experimentation. Besides, if I only based rulings off my actual skill sets, the only things characters could do in the game would be design buildings, write game rules, and drink beer.

So, with THAT, I'm mostly okay with it as it doesn't (yet) set a precedent of silly rulings. :P

3 people marked this as a favorite.
reika michiko wrote:

Im sorry im not a paizo fangirl. Apparently you can only post good things about paizo and their materials.. because criticism is overrated and unnecessary.

There is a thing called constructive criticism. If you had explained the problems you had with your example and then asked for alternatives, or even said why was this design decision made, that's constructive.

However, when you start the thread with "What was Paizo thinking" say you "hate them with a passion" and other such very hostile things... that says one thing to Paizo staff (and any company really)

This is a very hostile and rude person that we should ignore.

You make very valid points, but they are tainted by your hostile attitude and insults to the staff themselves.

williamoak wrote:
If you want to go nuts, check out the variant tiefling tables. The tieflings can be hermaphroditic. THat can always make weirdness.

Yeah, I have a tiefling like that in my current campaign, although nobody knows yet. They think she's just a normal human woman, and with her being an oathbound paladin with oath of corruption, oath of charity, and oath of chastity, odds are they probably won't find out any time soon.

... you only have one core race PC and you are starting in Westcrown.

I Didn't Know I'd Love You So Much

Alexa Vega and Anthony Stewart Head

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

I remember lots of films from my childhood where the protagonists discovered a lost civilisation. It was either dead, or the protagonists helped to destroy it! I always wished that the filmmakers had made a film about this civilisation at its height!

The old 'magic is rare and wonderful' thing is boring. With the rules as is, with magic being reliable, reproducible and predictable, it's hard to imagine it not being as all-pervasive as technology! I once did another campaign where magic was as ubiquitous as tech, with crystal ball relay stations manned by apprentice wizards (instead of telegraph stations), continual light was everywhere, etc. etc.

Ever read Terry Brooks' Shannara series? Essentially it was our world (although he's recently written novels to bridge his Sci-Fi world so it's not quite our world, with Shannara) but the "Last Great War of Man" (pretty much always sounded like World War III to me) basically destroyed the world. Humans survived, but the elves and dwarves and all such races that were in hiding came back. In that setting humans aren't dominant, they are mostly equal with everyone until the second trilogy where the elves retreat again.

Alright, thanks everyone. I went ahead and hit the FAQ button since it is kind of unclear, I think it could use at least a developer clarification, if not an actual FAQ/Errata ruling.

Rynjin wrote:

Looks like it? But it IS pretty unclear.

Usually the language is "deals 1d4 points of Constitution and Wisdom drain", but it IS separate from the other vampire text.

Yeah... I am trying to remember where I saw someone say that vampires no longer do DRAIN but I can't find it (i even googled "pathfinder vampire blood drain" and all I found was discussion that they have it, not how it works except the confusing to me RAW)... and it looks like the Nosferatu does... so kind of confusing...

Rynjin wrote:
AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:
Really? Outsiders can be vampires? So, a succubus vampire is totally legal?? *mind blown*

Fitting target for Animate Thread.

And yes, yes it is. Epic Meepo put one (and a Spawn version) on the SRD, actually, if you wanna see what one looks like stat-wise (though templates are pretty straightforward).

Ha, yeah I almost didn't want to post, but there was no discussion or anything just a simple "Yes" and I was like "Wait, what?" so I felt I just had to clarify because the 3.x rules it was humanoids and fey only (and you could only turn your own race or some such weird rule)

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Okay, so I looked for this and I couldn't find it...

The base vampire says...

Bestiary wrote:
A vampire can suck blood from a grappled opponent; if the vampire establishes or maintains a pin, it drains blood, dealing 1d4 points of Constitution damage. The vampire heals 5 hit points or gains 5 temporary hit points for 1 hour (up to a maximum number of temporary hit points equal to its full normal hit points) each round it drains blood.

Then the Nosferatu entry says...

Bestiary 4 wrote:
A nosferatu can suck blood from a helpless, willing, or grappled living victim with its fangs by making a successful grapple check. If it pins the foe, it drains blood, draining 1d4 points of Constitution and Wisdom each round the pin is maintained. On each round it drains blood, the nosferatu gains 5 temporary hit points that last for 1 hour (up to a maximum number of temporary hit points equal to its full normal hit points).

So, am I reading this right that the normal vampire (Moroi, to use the Blood of Night term) only does ability damage, but the Nosferatu does ability drain?

Really? Outsiders can be vampires? So, a succubus vampire is totally legal?? *mind blown*

Hama wrote:
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
my favorite part of star wars, was that the setting wasn't dominated by humans, but had a variety of species with a variety of cultures for each. golarion gaves elves a few cultures, but didn't give many to the other races with the exception of humans.
Then you haven't watched Star Wars carefully. Humans are the dominant race in the galaxy. They are the most numerous and have the most political power. Especially the Empire which was very humanocentric.

Yep. Play Star Wars Old Republic as a non-human and you will see. Even Republic side there is times where an alien will be like "It's because I'm not human, isn't it? That's why you won't help me?" or if your charater is not human then instead he'll be like "Come on, we aliens need to stick together... you gotta help me" because for every alien there is 10 humans.

In the Empire, pretty much most non-Humans are at best second-class, if not slaves. On Dromund Kass random conversations you'll hear stuff like "I didn't do it!" "Shut up, alien scum. Speak only when spoken to."

Best case of an alien is to play a Chiss Agent, at which point when the aliens are like "Wow, so great to see another alien, sucks how the humans hate us so much" if you are a Chiss you can pretty much say "Actually, not that bad." because Chiss are the one species the Empire doesn't totally hate. They are allies with the Chiss Ascendancy, so they don't speak badly about you nearly as much as they would if you chose another alien species.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Laurefindel wrote:
Hama wrote:
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?

Don't have any problem with that. Being a big Star Wars and LotR fan, it's actually my preferred type of fantasy setting.

I also like settings were humans are the underdog, but only when the accent is put on humans as PCs ironically. I also like settings were humans are not present altogether; but one of the races usually acts as the "default-two-arms-two-legs-adaptable-creative-likes-war" race taking the same role that humans take in other settings.

Kind of taking a bit of inspiration from one line said in Mass Effect 2 about the adaptability of humans being why they are so quickly becoming #1 in the galaxy after only 30-40 years, I recently developed a campaign setting (for GURPS) where all of our mythology, gods, stories, it's all true. But, anything supernatural is an alien. They all visited Earth because they wanted something from us. The adaptability of our DNA could help them in some way. So, for example, they "greys" (which I took this part from Stargate, I admit) want us because they are dying so they are hoping through experimenting on us, they can figure out how to save their own species. Plus, some species are able to breed with humans and get crazy results. For example on that, Jesus was half human, half-Elohim (the species that is angels and demons) The aliens are very hard to kill, but they stay dead. However, the resulting hybrid is no harder to kill than a human, but they regenerate and cannot die. They will always resurrect. Most aliens are also either unaging or very long lived. So, humans with our super-short life spans, they don't understand. To most of them, we are just toys for them to experiment on, like rats. Now, most of them do tend to be nice about it as they aren't the scientists, but the campaign is set as kind of a gritty cyberpunk world with these "gods" walking around... Some humans still have faith, but most are atheist because they've essentially met the "gods" so cybernetics and even robot bodies to live forever (if your mind lives on, are you still alive? Is there a soul?) and such things, desperate not to die. There is also a LOT more humans, for various reasons. They greys? They are dying. The Elohim? They are so long-lived that they only have children if they want to, so they generally don't. The Sidhe and Bane-Sidhe are actually an anomoly as they are unaging, yet there is a lot of them. They're the species that the characters are most likely to run into, and the Bane-Sidhe tend to head up criminal organizations and keep the humans under their heels.

Sorry that was long-winded, but your mention of "humans as the underdog" kind of made me think of that campaign :D

1 to 50 of 880 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.