|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I don't see this KS project happening. I'm well aware that KS projects don't follow the linear progression, but aside from the exponential growth during the first few days, it's been pretty linear so far. Since it reached $350,00 after 18 days, it doesn't appear that realistic that will acquire that much funding in just 6 days.
Is there a way for a wizard to increase his chances for resisting dispels? Aside from the obvious - increase in Caster Level. I'm looking for a feat, item, archetype that just flat-out gives a bonus. Is there such a thing? I seem to recall that I saw it somewhere, but whether that was 3.5 or PF, I can't remember.
If you modify a spell with a metamagic feat, does it count as a higher lvl spell for purposes of using a rod on the same spell?
And a follow-up quest if the above is correct - you use want to use a metamagic rod on a spell of 3rd lvl that's been modified by a metamagic feat, can you still use a lesser rod, or you need more powerful ones?
When using detect magic or identify to learn the properties of magic items, you can only attempt to ascertain the properties of an individual item once per day. Additional attempts reveal the same results.
What does this mean, precisely? Additional attempts during that day reveal the same results (effectively, it can be retried tomorrow) or every additional attempts (until someone else tries, or try with a spell or acquire a new rank)?
Benicio Del Espada wrote:
Technically, it only says you can "speak" languages, but it's a 3rd level spell. In my games, you can use it to read, too. YMMV.
Yeah, that is good logic, but I also have a player who puts max number of ranks into Linguistics and I don't want for his investment in it to be made useless by one spell.
While under the effects of the Tongues spell, are you able to also read all languages? The spell description leaves room for doubt as it states that subject can speak.
Furthermore, Oracle's Tongues curse states that he can 'understand any spoken language', which also confuses me even more.
What's your opinion?
INT 20 should be do-able, if you don't do 15 pt buy. INT 22 by lvl 8 seems to be quite normal these days.
PCs are lvl 7 at this point, even if the said wizard had 21, wouldn't make a difference.
Libraries add from +2 to +4. But even then, do you seriously think that an adequate DC assumes that pc has skill focus in history, a trait, a library at disposal and requires a 17+ on a d20 roll? And I seriously doubt any PC would want to travel all the way back to their city and research a random name they read somewhere.
Alternatively, have a celebrity visit their kingdom, a famous historian or scholar specialized in (ancient) history.
The whole point is that even someone VERY MUCH specialized in history wouldn't be able to make that DC.
Spellcaster casts Ray of Exhaustion on a creature. It makes the save and now it's fatigued. Next round, spellcaster casts the same spell again. It makes the save again. Creature who is fatigue while under the effects of the fatigue gets exhausted. But there are some rules on spell effects stacking which I'm not that much familiar with. So what happens now, is the targeted creature:
A) Fatigued, because effects from the same spell don't stack.
How are PCs supposed to make the DC 40 History check to recognize Vordkai's name? Even IF they put ranks into history at every level (which most of people won't do) and IF its their class skill and IF they have Skill Focus and IF they have a trait that gives a +1 and IF they have 20 int and IF they roll a 20 that still adds up to 39 (7 ranks +3 class skill +3 skill focus +1 trait +5 int).
Even under some really questionable assumptions (why would anyone take skill focus history, for example), it's impossible, why even give the DC?
The only thing I can think of is Lore Oracle who can get a large bonus on an int skill check, but Kingmaker was out before APG.
A pretty elaborate plan for one attack. :P
It specifically states that it works on natural attacks and that it enables them to bypass one of the following: bludgeoning, cold iron, piercing, silver, or slashing. Why wouldn't it work?
That's all fine and dandy, but I specifically asked if there's a way to pass Cold Iron DR.
I'm looking for a way for my animal companion (a dog) to bypass DR/Cold Iron. Greater Magic Fang doesn't allow it, Eldritch Claws applies only to silver and Amulet of Mighty Fists +3 costs 45k gp. So, aside from spending 45k on one natural attack (or 22.5k if I get someone to craft it), is there a way to obtain Cold Iron attacks?
Well, if you introduce Adivion earlier and then scatter more clues around that __________ is the head of Whispering Way, it could be a nice reveal.
I hear you, though. That's why Wes addressed the subject in the intro to SoG.
Here's my grievance with this. That part wasn't deftly done. Telling the DMs who read the intro to reintroduce the main villain as they see fit isn't what I call adressing an issue. And here's why. One of the reasons lots of DMs decide to run an AP is that they simply don't have enough time or imagination (my case) to create their own campaigns. And that's why I spent (literally) hundreds of dollars on two APs I ran so far (Legacy of Fire and currently CC). I've got no problem with that, even though it's not a small sum for a college kid from Serbia. Legacy was lots of fun and Jason Nelson was more than enough helpful with his suggestions on how to tweak things and generally it was a good written AP.
And then comes the FINAL chapter of Carrion Crown, where designers give us a few vague paragraphs on how Adivion should be incorporated in the campaign. But by that point, it might be late for somebody who's running the campaign as chapters are published. Or simply doesn't go into in-depth reading of chapters other than that they are currently running. I was lucky enough that my campaign was only on second chapter by then, but I have already missed a few chances to introduce Adivion as some other DMs suggested. DMs, mind you, not writters of the AP. Not to mention it was kinda irresponsible not to let DMs know up front that they'll have to think of lots of foreshadowing themselves.
Like I said, some DMs aren't really up to the task. Some of them maybe don't visit the forums to rely on other, more experienced DMs to give them ideas.
IMHO, the main villain of the campaign should be just as important as the overall story and players should know whom they are facing long way before the final encounter. Example for this is Jon Irenicus from Baldur's Gate. Right off the bat he gives you a reason to hate him, has an amazing storyline and you run into him a few times during the game. Example of a memorable Paizo villain is (spoilers for Legacy of Fire):
Jhavhul. Right from the first chapter, PCs hear about an ancient efreeti warlord. Not enough to hint at the fact that he's the main villain, but enough to give some info on the backstory. Here and there, PCs can learn some more stuff about him and they finally meet him halfway through the campaign and then carve a bloody path to him for the next 3 chapters.
And here we have little to NONE mention of Adivion in first FOUR chapters (seriously, his name doesn't even appear at all in Trial of the Beast, I just did a search of the PDF. In Broken Moon he is mentioned only in relation to Auren Vrood and finally at the end of it they learn they will battle a lich). Not a good foreshadowing. I imagine the reaction that my PCs would have when they learn that Adivion is the final boss would be 'Oh. Who's that?'
What I am trying to say is... Had you mentioned that we, the DMs, would have to work hard on the main villain, it might be that some of us would reconsider buying/running this campaign. As it happens, I had all the confidence in Paizo that they would offer me an Irenicus-worthy villain, so right away I subscribed to this AP and bought all the supporting products (Harrow Deck, DM Screen, Rule of Fear, Map Folio, Undead Revisited) and got an unfinished product. This was the reason I immediately unsubscribed from any further APs once I read the Intro to chapter 6.
Now, please don't take this post as an insult, I'm just trying to supply you with some constructive critisism and state my issue with it because this wasn't the standard Paizo quality that I know and love.
Ok, it costs 10 feet of movement to move 5 feet within difficult terrain, that part is clear. Part that confuses me is this:
Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 3 squares.
Does that mean that every diagonal move in difficult terrain counts as 15 ft or just when you're entering difficult terrain from normal terrain?
In CRB, it states that 'preparing to throw a splash weapon' (pg. 183) is a full-round action. What does that exactly mean?
Do you first need to:
1. Use a move action to take it out of backpack
1. Using a full-round action means taking it out of backpack
Point is, I really have no idea why preparing Alchemist's Fire would take a full-round action. Who would bother with that in that case?
I'm intrested in a situation where a lvl 1 Fighter is wearing it. Mind you, not a lvl 1 character, but a multiclass character (say a Fighter/Rogue) who has one fighter lvl. If he wears it, he's treated as a lvl 5 Fighter for the purposes of Weapon/Armor Training, does he now gain those abilities or no?
While using a longbow, do you get a +1 Shield bonus to AC or not? I'm a bit unsure about the bolded parts of the description:
My interpretation is that you don't get the penalty while using the bow, but you also don't get the AC bonus either. Am I wrong in this? Or you get +1 Shield Bonus even while attacking without any penalties?
By the time we got to the last couple of chapters everyone was feeling a bit drained & just wanted it to end.
Same happened to us. Only we just stopped playing on chapter 10. DM didn't put in any extra work and we were just going through the encounters killing baddies left and right. We played for about 3.5 years due to schelduing issues.
Why was it unclimatic?
Kain Darkwind wrote:
One thing I've always noticed is that Paizo products are fairly difficult to find (in comparison to say, 4e DnD), which I attribute to a loyal consumer base.
Hm, on internet, everyhing is easy to find if you know where to look. Quick search revealed to me that every single PF book is avaiable for download, aside from few newer ones, such as Halflings of Golarion or Inner Sea Primer.
Also, the name of the topic reminded me of a funny picture:
And cmon guys, could you talk about seppuku elsewhere?
Vampiric Mist from Bestiary 2 has an ability that reads:
Blood Overdose (Su) When a vampiric mist gorges on
Is this supposed to be a Dodge bonus? Or is haste bonus some kind of new bonus?
Finally, while not specifically tailored to the minutia of your question, Morvik's response was reasonable. You're attempting to combine polar opposite classes, and not in a way that is based on established mechanics (example: paladin to blackguard). It wouldn't kill you to be a bit polite to a reasonable response to your question.
I'm not atempting anything, I'm DMing for a group that has a Monk/Barbarian. With reasonable explanations and character development for why is he a Monk/Barbarian. My question was regarding that particular situation, mechanic-wise. If I wanted opinion on that combination fluff-wise, I would ask that in some other forum. I just don't like when people 'judge' other character concepts that involve some class combinations that don't make sense to them on a topic unrelated to fluff discussion.
Thanks for your answer, Phneri. In response to this:
That said, if you want to go kung-fu with it, I could see a pure monk as the Landlord/Landlady characters from Kung Fu Hustle and a monk/barbarian as something closer to The Beast. Yes I used kung fu hustle for my example, because the premise is a bit silly.
The character in question is based on the concept of Dwarf Slayers, from the Warhammer world, if you're familiar with it. If not, well, they fit the concept of monk/barbarians. They fight unarmored and throw themselves recklessely into combat with opponents far more superior than them in order to die a worthy death, so they can attone for a terrible deed they once commited.