|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Lily, Rose, Iris, and their brother, Herb.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
A horror game?
You might want to up the rating on Toppling Spell metamagic a bit - Spiritual Weapon and Spiritual Ally are both [force] spells, and if the GM will allow you to use Charisma instead of Wisdom (Seriously, why has this not been updated yet?) to hit with them, they could be quite nice with Toppling Spell.
Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
here are the list of problem abilities i have seen, whether they are spells or passive abilities or whatever, spells offer access more reliably to more people
Witness the TVTropes (WARNING: Do not follow link without lots of spare time) list of Story Breaker Powers. There's a spell for almost EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. (In D&D3.5, take out the 'almost'.)
In an actual story, if a wizard is a major character, there's usually SOME reason they can't just use their magic to solve every problem.
I watched a bunch of first episodes with a group. We managed to get about five minutes into that one, and unanimously decided "nah". So we watched something else.
I went back later and watched the rest, and in retrospect, I SHOULD'VE STUCK WITH "NAH".
Trigger Loaded wrote:
On RPGnet, Jurgen Hubert came up with a setting specifically to justify the small bands of wandering adventurers: Doomed Slayers. I think it's pretty good.
Trigger Loaded wrote:
Strangely, I don't recall a lot of setting where adventurers are treated like heroes and celebrities. I've seen quite a few where adventurers are treated like they're two steps removed from dirty criminals and tomb robbers. (Or treated like they are dirty criminals and tomb robbers.)
I guess your players like having their characters shat on from a great height at every opportunity?
Logically speaking, in a 'really' quasi-medieval world, anyone allowed to carry weapons and wear armor on a regular basis would either be nobility, or work for nobles. [sarcasm]And we all know how player-characters LOVE getting ordered around by their social superiors.[/sarcasm]
[sarcasm]Blasphemy. Don't you know the rules? ANYTHING cool a character wants to do must be either a feat, a skill-check, or a spell. NO EXCEPTIONS.
It might be amusing if the Paizo staff started applying the same logic to magic spells that they do to non-magical elements of the game. Save some page count too, when Jason Burlman took out all the spells that he's not able to cast in real life.
:D Hopefully, he'll follow the same methodology as this guy.
As someone pointed out another time the Caster Supremacy Issue came up, another way fighters got screwed in the changeover from AD&D to 3rd ed was saving throws - at least in 1st ed, Fighters either had the best or second-best saves against _everything_. Since 1st ed just had straight save rolls for most things, this meant that high-level fighters might not cast spells, but they were very hard to affect with magic if they didn't want it. Not so in 3rd/PF....
But yes, having built a gonzo magic system, it really behooves the designers to build the society that exists in conjunction with it from the ground up. Which is going to be hard, considering. So, we totally agree. :-)
It should probably resemble Eberron more than Merrie Olde England, I think we can all agree...
Sean FitzSimon wrote:
It's the only Oracle guide I'm aware of, so I'm happy to see you're updating it. Thanks!
I have to fervently disagree with this. The strength of RPGs over other pastimes is the degree to which the players get to change the shape of the story. If the PCs can't affect the narrative except by grinding along on the treadmill, I might as well go play Final Fantasy XXI or watch a movie instead.
APs are understandably somewhat on rails, but they're not the be-all and end-all of RPGs.
Best solution I've heard for this: Let the sidelined PCs' players take the parts of important NPCs.
The problem with magic in PF is that spells are designed to be superior to the whatever other options. It is the way it was designed and the way is still done with every new book.
YES. I can think of no places in PF (except possibly straight weapon damage) where Muggles Do it Better. The devs seems to have thought that limited spell slots per day would be enough to reign in the spellcasters, and I see no evidence that that is the case.
Cerberus Seven wrote:
Eh, more like magic was designed to be balanced in the game but by different standards. It has its own unique set of restrictions and laws meant to curtail ridiculous power inflation.
What are those? Aside from 'Wizards can't heal', I'm having a hard time thinking of ANY limits to sufficiently high-level magic.
There's a reason that Elminster rarely uses his magic directly; the raw power of higher level magic is just as likely to be turned against the caster as it is to solve the problem the way the caster expects, with a myriad of possible results in between those two extremes as well.
Actually, the REAL reason he rarely uses his magic directly is because if he did, the story would be over on page 3.
In another system you might be right, but D&D3.x/PF magic (aside from Wishes,) is usually VERY safe and controlled.
That's what you get for making a BBEG with a Constitution penalty.
And you are completely mistaken. I just told you how to make martial characters and magic character have equal potential within the framework of dnd. Give the rogue a theives guild. Automatically. At x level, he gets the 'henchmen' ability. (SNIP)
Which isn't bad, but not every rogue player wants to be Don Corleone. Some would rather be Carmen Sandiego, and steal mountains, or the thoughts out of their opponents heads.
So there's also the 'crank a mundane ability to fairy-tale levels' approach, but that offends the people who want REALISM in their game about elves and fireball-flinging wizards.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Lawful Good people can use legalistic screwage if they think their target deserves it.
Right up until the DM throws you into a situation where highly specialized spells are required, and you don't have them.
If highly specialized spells are needed, odds are good that the non-casters are just as screwed as the sorcerers.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
I'm kind of boggled at the thought that a character who makes a save on a 6 or higher is thought of by his player as being bad at making saving throws.
Eh, that's still a 25% chance of failing.
If an architect has 25% of their buildings fall down....
DPR is not the only measure of character ability. A halfway-smart caster can completely short-circuit a LOT of plots in a way that no mundane character ever could.
Murder plot? "Speak with dead" (And possibly Raise Dead, if anyone cares enough.)
Consider a succubus. The save DC on their Dominate Person is 23. A 7th level fighter has a mighty +2 for their base will save. If they don't have sky-high wisdom, a good cloak of resistance AND some luck, the rest of the party now has TWO huge problems to deal with.
What's bizarre is that
And VampByDay: My sympathies. What kind of jackass GM lets someone makes up a character just to kill them, instead of just saying 'play something else'?
Human (or Halfling, maybe?) Druid
Human Warlord (From Path of War) - just because it looks like fun.
Ninja social skillmonkey who wears bright colored clothes and works as a musician in their day-job. "I'm a bard."
Dwarf wizard who wants to make magic weaponry, and who wants to personally field-test their creations. (So they'd need armor proficiency)
People have survived falls from miles in the air in real life.
As for the whole Caster Supremacy Argument, there are ways a fantasy RPG can rein in the spellcasters - the problem is that D&D 3.X used NONE of them except finite spell slots. D&D-style magic is, for the most part, fast, convenient, cheap, and safe. Heck, at least in AD&D, some spells could backfire badly. (Haste aged you, Polymorph could kill you, Teleport had a small risk of teleporting into solid rock...) So we're stuck with wizards with no limitations, and non-casters with no useful abilities because REEEEEAAAALISM.
So, if we actually want the
1: Beat spellcasters with the nerfbat until they scream for mercy, then beat them some more.
If you go with summoner (I've seen them in play, they can be quite good), ask the GM if your summons can be 'toy' versions of the normal creatures, maybe? (Same stats, they just looks like dolls.)
A custom feat to give summons some construct-like immunities would be nice later on, but that might be pretty powerful.
Personally, I don't know many settings well enough to come up with a backstory that'll be easy to fit into the setting - and if it's a homebrew world, I won't know it at all. So I generally find it easier to come up with very broad strokes, and fill in details later.
Then my current GM dropped a five-page questionnaire of backstory & personality questions on me. Sheesh! So much filling-in I had to do... but it did give me some ideas to use later. Him too, I suspect...
Anyway, terrible backstory stories. I'm happy to say that this one isn't mine, and I never played with it:
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
Interestingly, there's been studies done on transgender people in academics.
Hmm, I still always have one in my games...does that mean I am "Old-school" or a "crazy $#i7"? ;-)
That's not an 'or' question.
A good bit of graffiti I heard of from an 1st ed AD&D game:
The walls in this corridor are covered in soot. Someone used their finger to write something in Common: "Adventurers who follow us, take heed: The room ahead is too small for a fireball."
A reversed potion of invisibility. Everything ELSE effectively becomes invisible to the imbiber.
I think that condition is commonly known as 'blindness'.
Bugs Bunny did that once.
There's a comic in one of the Exalted splatbooks where a necromancer is showing off by having a roast ox march around the dining room so that his guests can cut off their slices.
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
Ahh, that brings back happy memories of my elementary school days... trying to create the perfect letter for use in tests, halfway between a 'T' and an "F"....
It's the same with the Paladin. A cleric who goes out of favor with his deity can ingratiate himself with a new one, and bang! He's good. The Paladin however has this big red self destruct button that turns him into a fighter without class features or feats, and there are those who want to know when that button can be pressed.
And some people just can't resist pushing the bright shiny, CANDY-LIKE BUTTON.
Plus, Immunity to disease. :D
OP: What did you EXPECT the Paladin to do about the goblin babies? That sounds suspiciously like a 'no win scenario' to me.
Similar to FATE, Legend of the Wulin (a game based on wuxia movies and stories) has Chi Conditions, which can represent curses, prophecies, military strategy, the effects of medical conditions, emotional manipulation, and even boring stuff like injuries. There's two types: Weaknesses penalize you when you act incompatibly with it (trying to move around with a broken leg, for example) by giving you dice penalties or weakening your Chi, and Hyperactivities, which reward you when you go along with it, via dice bonuses, faster Chi regaining, or even bonus XP.
I think it's very good for modelling social conflict, since the loser doesn't HAVE to act in accordance with it, it'll just make things harder if they don't.
I'd really like to run a game of Legends of the Wulin. Well, I'd like to PLAY it, but I'm the only one I know who has the book, and I've seen some accounts of an amazing gonzo-modern setting for the over-the-top kung-fu, and if running it is the only way to play, so be it....
I second the motion of having the characters learning from each other and changing and growing in their viewpoints. Role play that out and form a cohesive group that can go forward.
Plan B: Have everyone die in horrible, pointless PVP. At least it'll be over.
Anyway, getting back to the Jumping Thing. Let's try to remember that Overland Flight exists. With ONE 5th-level spell, a caster gets to:
Ignore all Climb checks
How many feats is that worth? Keep in mind that a 9th level caster probably has more than the one 5th-level spell slot, too.
From your original post, I'm not seeing ANY reason you should stay in that game unless you're being forced to play at gunpoint.
Walk out. Tell the other GM & players WHY you're walking out. If none of them follow, their loss.
To be fair, sometimes fights between high level casters aren't any better.
Heck even something as straightforward as hitting someone so hard that they're knocked over is an Ultra-Sekrit Special Technique that'll cost you a wad of feats.
Apparently, all those kids on schoolyards are secretly combat veterans.
Well, the purpose of RPGs is to turn die-rolls into interesting stories, and fumble tables certainly manage that.
Unfortunately, said stories usually end up being farces.
And because Reasons, it's harder to regrow a lost limb than it is to come back from the dead.
Glad to hear he enjoyed his horrible demise. A lot of players (myself generally included, sorry to say) just hate 'losing', but it sounds like he took it well.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
How's a barbarian do healing?
Apropos to the thread, this comic seems relevant.
unfortunately the ice tomb hex has no effect whatsoever on undead or constructs
It might do a little cold damage.
There's a spell called Icy Prison, but it's not on the witch list.
I wouldn't bother with the Charm hex - the duration on it is so short that it looks to be nearly useless.
Quark Blast wrote:
I had a GM once who thought Critical Fumbles were a great idea. I took the tables, ran some descriptive stats on them, and it showed typical PCs would be permanently maimed, at a minimum, by the time they reached 3rd level.
Oh, you and your silly "statistics" and "common sense"... :D
Best test for fumble rules I've heard yet: "Run a combat of 10 level 1 Warriors against 10 straw dummies (Medium inanimate object, AC 5). For 2 minutes (20 rounds) each Warrior makes 1 attack per round against the dummies; the dummies do not attack back.
Also, in 1st ed, 1GP = 1XP, and it cost a hefty sum to train up to next level. Although lots of people ignored those rules...
PCs were expected to sneak around, try to avoid fights as much as possible, and go for the big score when they had the chance.
Petty Alchemy wrote:
If you're playing a witch, you can make fumble rules work for you: Just take Misfortune, and give your opponents something you can laugh at.
Personally, I dislike fumble rules in PF - partly because I signed on to play Prospero or Conan, not Laurel and Hardy, and partially because some critical tables will let characters screw themselves up in ways that an enemy battleaxe to the face couldn't do, which just seems _wrong_.