When designing something, or making suggestions for changes, it is often helpful to compare the test object against something similar that has already been done. To that end, I'd like this thread to be a place where playtesters can post an ACG class and another class (3rd party publisher, homebrew, or other) that fills a similar niche. Hopefully, the designers and other playtesters can use this information to see what has been done in the past, what works, what doesn't, and what might work better.
To start things off (an incomplete list):
Warpriest: Divine Channeler (Rite Publishing)
Please feel free to add more and to comment as to which classes should be used as examples both good and bad, what should be borrowed, and what should be avoided.
So, as the thread title says, how high can you realistically and when taking things to the extreme, get a crafting and/or profession check.
Here's what I can see
Crafting Check, Level 20
For a total of +46, and then you can take 10 to get a 56 or you might get lucky and roll a natural 20 for a max of 66.
Now, more realistically, I'd think you could expect to have an Int of about 32 at level 20, so you'd get a int modifier of about +11 instead, which will still let you get check results in the 50 - 60 range.
As a coda, what do people typically use as target values for high end item crafting DCs and what level of optimization do you typically figure on for mid-range crafting DCs? Alternatively, do you not worry too much about players being able to hit very high DCs early and use wealth-by-level/gp control what can be crafted at what point in a player's career?
Frightening Tune is a spell-like ability. I believe that one of the requirements for a spell-like ability is that it mimics a particular spell (normally named in the ability description). What spell is Frightening Tune supposed to be mimicing, and should it be mentioned in the ability's description text?
The Chelish Diva Archetype from the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea Magic book has the following text
I'm curious if the bolded text is intended to apply to just these new forms of performance, or to all of the Chelish Diva's bardic performances.
The Bard Archivist Archetype has some serious ambiguity, and I'm hoping for some Paizo/developer interpretation of what was intended/what will be errata'd.
The way I understand archetypes, is that they replace/change all class features all at once, not as the character gains levels. This means you can't have a class feature get changed once, and then removed at a latter level, since it was already removed when the archetype was selected.
So, going with that assumption, how does the Archivist archetype work?
At 2nd level, the archivist archetype replaces versatile performance with Lore Master (Ex). This has been clarified by the author to mean that the original Lore Master ability is modified, not changed.
At 5th level, the Lore Master ability is replaced by a new Jack-of-all-Trades feature identical to the one the bard normally gets at 10th level. Since the Lore Master ability was not replaced, but changed, this means that the archetype is attempting to both modify and replace the same class feature. If it isn't, then that means that the author's clarification is in error, and the Lore Master Ability is a replacement of the old one. Extra text would be needed to ensure that the new Lore Master ability functions in the way it was intended, as the current text does not appear to do that.
For further confusion, but it doesn't appear to be causing any problems, a the old Jack-of-all-Trades class feature is replaced by Probable Path.
I've finished the non-magical manual conversion. I'm hoping someone can look this over to see if things are balanced and if everything is clear. I'd appreciate it if the reviewer could look closely at the costing section, as I'm considering ripping the whole thing out and figuring out something using the normal magic item pricing rules, but I'd prefer not to if it is not needed.
Feel free to make comments in this thread with regards to any issues that you can see in the conversion.
I've finished up a rather large conversion project updating the Scrolls and Spellbook variant rules from the 3.0 Bastion Press book Ink & Quill. I've taken a certain amount of creative license when doing this update, as between 3.0 and 3.5 there were a number of things that needed to be reconcilled, and there were a number of holes caused by the edition change. Most numbers used in the original needed to be recalculated/rebalanced, and I'm certain I've made a number of errors or inconsitencies. I'd appreciate it if several individuals could look this over and try to spot any errors (both formating and conversion/math).
I'm wondering what other GMs and players think about the following Craft/Profession checks to make the following inks. I've tried to extrapolate the DCs based on the Craft table. Do the numbers seem too high, too low, about right, should there be an alternate skill or a substitute skill used for their creation, or do you have any other thoughts?
Black Ink...................Craft (alchemy) DC 15
Note that Octopus Ink is more resistant to fire damage, while Stained Animal Blood Ink is more resistant to fire and water, and Stained Humanoid Blood Ink is more resistant to fire and water and also increases the caster level of necromancy spells/scrolls written in the blood.
So, I'm looking through d20pfsrd.com to find spells that protect your spellbook. So far I have the following (roughly divided into active spells and passive spells).
Are there any other spells that people like to use to protect their spellbooks, or other good tricks for spellbook protection?
So, lets say using humanoid blood as ink when scribing a necromancy spell gives a boost to the caster level of that spell. The question is, should using humanoid blood in this way be evil only, or is it something that is more neutral and depends on how you go about obtaining the blood.
Alternatively, should it be something that defaults as evil, unless you take special care that the blood is obtained in a non-evil way?
Right now, I'm leaning towards the second, but I'd like to hear from other GMs and players.
The Adventurer's Armory and Seekers of Secrets list a number of different types of inks.
Ink (1 oz. vial) 8 gp — CRB
The core rulebook lists one vial of ink as costing 8 gp, but doesn't give any information as to roughly how many pages of text this is good for. By and large, this doesn't matter too much because you typically subsume material costs into the costs of adding spells to a spellbook or writing a scroll.
Ink, ghost 25 gp —/20 SOS
Ghost ink from Seekers of Secrets is clear that one vial is good for one page of text.
Ink, glowing (vial) 5 gp —/15 AA
Glowing Ink is per vial, but it is not entirely clear how many pages the vial is good for. Given that the cost is cheaper than the regular black ink from the Core Rulebook, I'm leaning towards saying the vial is good for 1 page of text, similar to the ghost ink.
Invisible ink doesn't say if the ink is per page, per vial, or how many pages a vial of invisible ink is good for. I'm guessing that these are for single vials, like the glowing and ghost ink, and that each vial is good for one page of text.
So, issues I'm looking for clarification:
How many pages can you write with Glowing and invisible inks, and is the cost for invisible ink the cost for a single vial?
I'm curious as to what hardness, hitpoints, and break DCs people generally use for locks small enough to be carried around (think a padlock sized, or a lock on a small portable box vs a lock that is part of a structure). The Core Rule Book has DC's to disable simple, average, good and superior/amazing locks, but doesn't touch on these other ways to defeat a lock.
I'm also assuming that as a baseline the lock is made from steel.
So, what type of numnbers do GMs tend to use when their players decide to just smash or rip a lock apart rather than fiddling with their lockpicks.
So, while working on a side project, I discovered some weirdness with the spellbooks and their weights.
A blank typical wizard's spellbook (100 pages), weighs 3.0 lbs.
If we assume that the weight of the book will be the total of the page weight plus the cover weight, we get the following equations
100x + y = 3
where x = the weight of each page, and y = the weight of the cover.
Solving for x and y, we get weights of
x = 1/25 = 0.04 lbs.
I realize that we're dealing with magic, but can anyone point out a non-flubber explanation for the weights of the spellbooks that lets me get positive values for the page weights and cover weights that fit the base information given?
(Incidently, for those who care, each parchment page in a blank spellbook costs 1 sp, while the cover/binding costs 5 gp.)
Rite Publishing - Celestial Commander...
Magical research continually uncovers new and innovative means of protecting spellbooks. While most spells generally rely upon the principles espoused by active and passive spells, a handful of spells challenge traditional methodologies, progressing in previously unknown directions.
Bastion Press - Approaching Wizard, Champion of the Tome, Ethereal Library, Illusory Glue, Oozing Script, Phineus' Writhing Tentacles, River of Blood, Venomous Pages
I'm looking to do a conversion of the Asclepian Doctor feat from Sean K Reynold's New Argonauts book. The 3.5 text of the feat is below
I'll probably make it a bit more campaign neutral, but I'm wondering what range and limitations should I put into the feat during the conversion to keep it balanced as a campaign agnostic feat. I'm thinking of keeping the Prerequisite Heal ranks at 10, rather than reducing it to 7 as the conversion guide suggests. This would give the Raise Dead effect two character levels after casters get it. Altneratively, I could change it to 8 ranks, which makes it obtainable at the same level as Raise Dead normally comes into play.
My other concerns are if the DCs for the Raise Dead effect are high enough and what, if any, other limitations should be put on the Raise dead effect. Should I add some sort of material component/cost. Should the DC be higher? Remember, I'm trying to retain the skill, not magic nature of the original feat.
I'm interested in building a reasonably optimized Shadow Assassin that can contribute well to the party both damagewise as well as in roleplay situations.
Looking the class over, I'm thinking I'll want to have moderate to good Wisdom alongside the usual Strength. I'm also thinking I might want to do something that makes use of Light Weapons and the fact that the Shadow Assassin can qualify for Fighter feats.
Does anyone have any recommendations as to how to build an effective Shadow Assassin that is fun to play?
I was looking through back issues of the Wayfinder magazine and noticed that none of the following issues are in compliance with the OGL
In none of these cases did was Sections 6 or 8 followed and all issues were lacking the updated Section 15 portion of the license (as per section 6).
What was the intention with regards to Product Identity vs Open content, and what should the Section 15s be for these editions?
Something I've noticed in a lot of Paizo products, is how little they make use of 3rd party material in their products. Third party content tends to only show up as a limited number of bestiary monsters that get used in the Adventure Paths. I'm happy that Paizo does use the 3rd party bestiary entries, but it would be nice if there was a bit more use of other 3rd party content. In both Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic, there were several feats that had been done better in third party publications.
I realize that the Paizo staff and freelancers may not have access to every 3rd party publication (obviously), however you can find a lot of content online at d20pfsrd.com in pretty much every category you can think of. All I'm requesting is that designers take a quick look through and 3rd party resources to which they have access to see if something has already been done. If so, the OGL allows Paizo to republish the feat/spell/item/rule with proper credit given.
It's always disappointing to see a bunch of time and effort put into writing something that has already been done by another. Especially so if the 3rd party offering is better written and works better mechanically and in actual play.
/climbs off his soapbox.
This thread is for sharing cool Pathfinder RPG things you've discovered and want to share with others. It can be something you found in a book, on a website (such as d20pfsrd.com or PRD). Feel free to include 3rd party PFRPG material in the list of cool things you might want to talk about.
For discussion purposes here is a template you can use
What: The title/name of the cool thing you found
Where: Where you found the cool thing. This is where you'd put a link if you have one.
Why: Why you think the thing you want to share is cool. This could be for mechanical reasons, flavour reasons, or other reasons.
I'll go first with an example
What: Thassilonian Runes
Where: Rise of the Runelords #5 (also d20prsrd.com.)
Why: A subsystem that allows players/GMs to enchant the bodies of a character (something fairly common in fantasy) while limiting the number of runes allowed. Really cool for characters wishing to have a small magical trick available to them that doesn't rely on a magical item. Nothing says classy like a fighter waving his hand and having a luxurious palanquin convey him where he wants to go. Traveling in style and comfort isn't just for the wizards anymore.
For GMs it also allows them to add additional powers, capabilities, and statistics to NPCs without allowing the players to just loot the items off the body once they've defeated the NPC. You can do this with templates, but I find that players get tired of fighting templated creatures after a while. Thassilonian Runes gives the GM another lever to use when designing encounters.
Serpent's Skull adds a couple new spells:
Both spells were added to the game after the Advanced Player's Guide, but neither spell includes the Oracle on the list of classes that can cast the spells. Was this an oversight (since Clerics are listed) or are these spells intended to not be included on the oracle spell list?
Starting this thread off, my votes this year.
Chad Bartlett — Steelhawks
For 3pp who have material that has been posted to the d20pfsrd.com, have you noticed any increases or decreases in the number of sales of the posted material? All material currently includes links back to either the Paizo store or another online webstore where the product in question can be purchased. On the whole, does having your OGL material posted on d20pfsrd.com help or hinder your sales and do you have any evidence (statistics/sales numbers, site visits directed to the product page from d20pfsrd.com resulting in a sale) to help back up your conclusions on this matter?
Inquiring multi-templated felines want to know.
Why does the Core Rulebook list non-magical armors and shields in the Magical Armor section?
For example we have the following in the non-magical shields:
But in the magical armor and shield page we have
alongside a number of magical shields.
Why does making a nonmagical shield out of nonmagical mithral or darkwood make it different than making a shield out of nonmagical wood or steel?
Cross posted from another forum
I've been banging my head over the Bones Oracle's Undead Servitude Revelation. I'm not sure if there's some sort of problem with it or me. The problem I'm having is with the duration of Undead Servitude. The text for Undead Servitude says that I get Command Undead as a bonus feat, but when I look at the Command Undead feat it says that undead are under my control as if under the effects of Control Undead. Then it goes on to mention that intelligent undead receive a new saving throw each day to resist my command. Now, the problem I'm having is that Control Undead has a duration of 1 minute/level. With this ability there's no way I could control an undead for a full day. I'm wondering if the command undead feat is suppose to be referring to the command undead spell. If someone could help me out with this I'd greatly appreciate it.
Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat came out within a couple of months of each other, but seem to have some contradictory information about who can use Inquisitions:
Ultimate Magic wrote:
Inquisitions are intended for inquisitors, not for other classes that give access to domains. While a cleric or other domain-using class can select an inquisition in place of a domain (if appropriate to the character’s deity), inquisitions do not grant domain spell slots or domain spells, and therefore are much weaker choices for those classes. These other classes use the appropriate class level as their inquisitor level for the purpose of inquisition granted powers (clerics use their cleric level as their inquisitor level, and so on).
Ultimate Combat wrote:
Some inquisitor domains are not the domains of their faith but are movements within a number of faiths. Many religious individuals and orders find themselves in conf lict with the users of arcane magic, and have created inquisitions and training regimens expressly to fight arcane spellcasters. With GM approval, any inquisitor of any deity can take the inquisitions detailed below. Inquisitions are domains that only inquisitors can take. They are not open to any other class that uses domains. If an inquisition’s granted power calls for a saving throw, the DC of the save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the inquisitor’s level + the inquisitor’s Wisdom modifier. The inquistor’s caster level for granted powers and spell-like abilities is equal to her inquisitor level.
Which is correct, and what was the reason for the change between the two books?
What spell levels should this spell be, and is the spell over the top in its effects?
Arrow of Vengeance
Casting Time 1 standard action
Range long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
The somatic components of this spell involve firing a masterwork (but not magical) arrow from a bow. The magic of the spell increases the range of the fired arrow to the range listed above, and imparts an enhancement bonus to the attack roll equal to your level divided by four, minimum +1. If this arrow hits the target, it causes normal arrow damage.
If the creature struck has ever knowingly and willingly caused you harm (meaning that you have suffered damage from an attack launched by that creature or have ever been affected by a magical effect from that creature), the arrow automatically scores a critical hit. Additionally, the target must make a Will saving throw or become fully affected by the power of this spell. Such a creature suffers a –4 morale penalty to all attack rolls made against you, and you gain a +4 bonus to all saving throws incurred by attacks from this victim. By concentrating for a minute, you can divine the location of a creature under the effects of this spell as per the spell locate creature. All of your attacks that threaten critical hits against the target automatically confirm as critical hits. Finally, as a standard action you may prematurely end the effects of this spell at any time you have line of sight to the victim and he is within a range of 5 ft. per caster level. Doing so envelops the target in a blast of sacred (or profane, for evil casters) energy that deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 10d6). A successful Will saving throw halves the damage done from this final act of revenge.
This spell is normally only granted by deities of war or vengeance.
Ultimate Combat references a number of abilities/features/etc that have not been included in the book. These may have been cut for space, or have had a name change without fixing all the references. This thread is intended as a depository for all the things that are missing so we can hopefully get some of the missing material provided to us in the form of a blog post/FAQ answer.
So, starting off:
Basically, if both the alternate class and the base class have a class feature with an identical name, can the alternate class use the archetype as well. For example, if a hypothetical Paladin Archetype replaced the Spells and Weapons and Armor class features, could the Antipaladin alternate class select the same archetype? In other words, should we treat alternate classes as a separate class or a super-archetype for the purpose of stacking/selecting archetypes?
Paizo continues to add more and more animal companion options. Typically the animal companion version of a creature differs from its bestiary version. Are there any guidelines available on how to do the conversion?
In the process of making some changes to how class information (archetypes) is displayed on d20pfsrd.com, I've noticed certain areas of class mechanics which do not appear have received much attention. I've listed several areas below that might be of interest for a 3rd party publisher looking for a mechanical niche to develop:
For anyone else reading this thread who has spotted mechanical niches that are relatively empty, please feel free to add to the list.
In another thread, there was a discussion about adventure "break points", points in the adventure where things could go off the written course of the adventure:
This seemed to be a fairly popular idea: to include sidebars identifying the "break points" and suggestions for what can be done. I realize that a certain amount of this is already done, but it appears that a number of AP users feel it is information that should get slightly more attention.
So, apparently each deity has their own holy symbol, favoured weapons, special spells, and favourite ways of making their will known. Do the Golarion deities each have their own favoured animal/creature (ie: Desna - Swarm of Butterflies)?
If there isn't anything official, do any of the Golarion junkies out there have suggestions for what animal (lets try to choose animals preferably, maybe a magical beast if nothing else will work) would most likely be the favoured animal of each deity? I'm mostly looking at this from a perspective as to what would be thematically appropriate Animal Companions to use for each of the deities if chosen through the animal domain feature or for a character who worships one of the deities as their primary deific patron.
In 3.5, the Living Monolith prestige class had full bab and d8 hp. It is a Fighter type that gains a number of immunities and supernatural powers to help guard the tombs of Osirion. In pathfinder, would it be best to raise it's HD up to d10, lower the BAB down to 3/4, or leave things as they are (HD: d8, Full BAB)?
Greetings. I'm person who has recently become responsible for classes and prestige classes over at D20PFRSRD. A number of prestige class conversions have been done from 3.0 and 3.5 to the PFRPG and in the interests of quality control I was wondering if anyone had some useful feedback/critiques as to how things have been done and where some changes might be made.
The goal when converting these prestige classes was to get them into PFRPG without making any major balancing changes. If the prestige class had an ability it gained at second level which was something of the nature of
A random exaggerated example wrote:
The conversion would change the Search check to a Perception check. In short, changes were not made so much for balance's sake, but rather to get them in a format easily usable in a game. That said, a variant with more extensive changes and rebalancing may be considered, but the preference is to not stray too far from the original.
In general, the conversions have tried to follow the guidelines in PFRPG conversion manual unless there was a strong enough argument to do things slightly differently. (i.e. the Justicar with d8 hp and full bab).
So, without more ado here are the prestige classes that have been converted
Shield, Throwing wrote:
From the Adventurer's Armory.
The free action to throw a shield seems to allow for very high/infinite damage scenarios with this equipment property when combined with the Quick Draw feat. A character with both feats can draw and throw a shield as a free action.
Am I missing something as to how these feats/equipment properties are supposed to interact?
The Pathfinder Savant prestige class from Pathfinder Chronicles: Seeker of Secrets does not have any weapon or armor proficiencies listed. Pretty much every other prestige class lists something for the weapon and armor proficiencies, so was this information accidentally left out, or deliberately?
Finally after about a year of work I have finished a set of spell cards for use with the Pathfinder Core Rulebook. The cards are formatted for printing both back and front and are either 2.5x3.75" or 5x3.75" depending on the amount of text. The cards are intended as game aids to bring a bit of color to the game table and to help remember what a spell actually says.
Pathfinder Spell Cards – Core Rulebook Spells
These spell cards are intended for use with the Pathfinder RPG and use the spell text from the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/).
You can find the spell cards at D20PFSRD at the following link
The following class spell packages are now available:
These cards are licensed under the OGL 1.0a, the Paizo Publishing, LLC Community Use Policy, and the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives – 3.0 Unported licenses. Licenses for artwork listed in the Artwork Licenses and Credits section take priority on a case-by-case basis.
I would like to offer thanks Paizo Publishing for the Pathfinder RPG, to all those who offered suggestions and feedback on the Paizo forums, and to the specific individuals and posters who provided extra help to this project:
The two pieces of artwork appear to be by either Andrew Hou or James Zhang (Ben Wootten is the other credited interior artist). Andrew normally includes his signature on his drawings, so I am leaning towards these being by James Zhang. If anyone can confirm one way or the other, I would appreciate it.
I have been unable to identify the artist for this blog's artwork. There is a signature, but it is not one I recognize or can find with any of the listed artists for Pathfinder 15: Armageddon Echo.
The listed artist for the AP this is featured in are the following:
Cover Artist: Steve Prescott