The Bundle of Holding is a group of ebooks by RPG authors. Pay what you want, like the Humble Bundle.
Our collection includes recent novels and stories by Matt Forbeck (Brave New World), Chuck Wendig (Hunter: The Vigil), Jenna Moran (Nobilis, Exalted), Stephen D. Sullivan (D&D/AD&D, Chill), Rafael Chandler (Scorn, Spite), Sarah Newton (Mindjammer, Legends of Anglerre), Derek Pearcy (In Nomine), and Aaron Rosenberg (Asylum, Spookshow).
So there is this Kickstarter by the National Space Society to create a video on realistic near term reasons why space exploration and development is important to society, and what it will look like.
So the guys who made all the awesome Infinity Engine games are making a new one through Kickstarer. They have my money. Do they have yours?
I wish I was making this up.
2012 Texas Republican Party Platform wrote:
We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority
Anyone else following what is going on between The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk?
Long story short - FJ threatened to sue the oatmeal webcomic because of archived complaints about FJ's policy of reposting copyrighted material and proffitting off of it without artist permission or attributes.
The Oatmeal responded to the lawsuit by starting an indiegogo campaign to raise money so that he could take a picture of said money with a comic of the lawyer's mom seducing a bear, and then donate the money to the National Wildlife Foundation and the American Cancer Society.
In a few days he has raised over 140K.
So, after looking through the various encounters this year I have noticed a very common trend. If I run a party of the assumed level (where CR=LVL), the encounter will be a speed bump for them. Now, for some of the encounters, this is reasonable. But anyone outlining the final boss of a dungeon puts themselves at a disadvantage from doing so.
Take Mike Welham's encounter as an example. If you throw a mummy (CR5), a CR1 snake, and 2 1/3rd CR skellies at a lvl 6 party, a few level 3 spells and the encounter is done. On the other hand, if I throw this at a lvl 3-4 party, it makes for a good final fight.
In the end, unless you are running a solo enemy, your encounter CR will always end up being higher than the highest enemies CR, and thus the strongest enemy will be less of a threat to the party than you usually want for a final boss. This may be fine for mid-adventure fights, but final epic fights excite voters much more.
In the future, I would like to see a recomended level range submitted with the encounters for the fight. Depending on the type of fight, the designer make put the level closer or further to the CR. I feel as though we would see more interesting and useful encounters out of this than we do now.
So, I had this thought last night and was wondering what people think. There have been complaints about wanting things to be built at reasonable rates. The definition of reasonable varries from player to player, but I think we can all agree we don't want to see castles spring up instantly but also don't want them to take a year to complete.
So my idea is this: Manpower as a limmitted resource. It could be a requirement for lots of stuff: large scale building, standing armies, castle guards, assistant crafters, shop assistants, caravan guards.
This is a hard resource to create. Its not like you can go out and mine it. It would allow for the game admins to control growth by limitting the number of people available for the players to do things with. They could be a significant resource drain on the ecconomy (which is not necessarily a bad thing.) They could also be a good candidate for microtransactions.
What do people think?
I'm working on a new character, and I'm currious what people think. The rest of the party consists of an Oracle of an unknown type, some form of caster who controls undead (not sure if he is planning cleric or wizard), and 1 undefined with an undetermined player. We will be starting at level 1.
Abridged background: I was born to a noble family in a prominent house. At the age of 12, my house participated in a rebellion and the rebels lost. I was able to escape as I watched my family cut down before my eyes. I joined the commoner's who were rebelling, but recently decided they were petty thieves.
Game of thrones:
Think Arya Stark if she stayed with Robert's bastard son instead of joining the Hound
Human Cavalier: Order of the Shield
Traits: undetermined. Want something that gives know(nobility) that fits my background. Likely taking Poverty Stricken as the other for survival.
Skills I care about:
I am planning on going sword and board, without the ability to go for mounted combat frequently enough to make it worthwhile. When I am mounted, I will be more likely to use my size advantage to control a greater area for stand still.
Overall, I am worried about the party's damage output. Without taking power attack until 9 at the earliest, only a 16 str, and going sword and board without TWF, I wont be bringing the damage to the table. I like where the build is going though. Anyone have anyadvice?
So, orriginally this post was to be in responce to the now locked How is this supposed to be ballanced thread. I'm not trying to restart that flame war. I just want to show some math. When I started this, I was doing it to show that guns were not overpowered, but the result I came to has put me thinking it needs more study.
From what I can tell, at level 10, a pistol using fighter will average more damage than a bow using one, but suffers from the reduced range increment. The comparisons I keep seeing will not show this though, because people keep comparing the 2 as if they had equal stats and gear. There are a flaw with this.
The main reason I see for this is because the pistoleer will be auto-hitting for all intents and purposes. Giving them more than a +1 enhancement bonus is a waste, but I keep seeing them with guns equal to the bow user's. Typical weapons at this point will be +3. Trading +2 to hit for +2d6 damage (ex. flaming and frost) is extremely valuable to them, since that +2 does very little. For a bow user, this is not the case. They get more damage out of the +2 to hit than out of the additional damage.
The best level 10 DPR I could come up with quickly (without getting into too much equipment details or searching through less familiar APG content) for the bow user against the dragon is 50.43, but I could get up to 64.8375 with the pistoleer. Against a more typical enemy AC of 25, the same bow user goes up to 64.575.
I am assuming Deadly Aim cannot be used on the touch attacks. It favors the gun user more if it can.
dex 15 +2 human, +2 level, +4 belt = 23
other stats irrelevant
equipment: +2 composit longbow +2 str vs +1 Flaming Frost Pistol
Bow: +19/+19/+14 1d8+16, 19-20 X3 crit, double damage on first shot
With Haste, the Bow user catches up more:
25 AC is the point at which the pistol user pulls ahead of the bow when unhasted, 26 when hasted.
All this being said, I still do not think that guns are broken. Alternate stat generation methods would pull this more in favor of the bow user. He also bennefits more from buffs that affect hit, like bardic music. A bard in the party will cause the bow user's dpr to jump well over the pistoleer. I think some of these issues need further examination though.
Foam Brain Games, a new game store, will be opening up this Saturday, January 22, at 39 Second St. Troy NY. You may have seen them at conventions before, they have traveled accross the northeast, including PAX, and are finally setting up a base of opperations. As far as I know, they are having a 20% off purchases over $50, 10% off other purchases, sale their opening weekend. They plan to have tables set up for games and stuff. Come, they're nice people and I want to see them succeed.
Their website can be found here, though it appears they have not updated it with info on their new store yet.
Disclaimer: I am not officially involved with the store in any way. Friends of mine is opening it and I figured I would announce it here.
In annother thread someone mentioned that you can cast a quickened shocking grasp and it gives you a free melee attack from spell strike. I do not want to see this used in games, and think it will break things. I think Spell Strike should be clarified to only give you the free melee attack on spells with standard action casting times. You should still be able to channel the quickened strike, but you should not get the free melee attack from it.
So, for the most part I like the spell list, but I feel like a few spells should be added. So here are the ones I think it could use.
So, you can imbune your arcane weapon with Dancing. When you do this, it very clearly states that you are not considered wielding the weapon. So durring that time you cannot cast spells without making a concentration check as if you have lost your bonded weapon.
Granted, by the time you can do this you have a high chance to auto-succeed. I just think this should either be made obvious or removed.
So, I keep seeing the claim that the Magus will never be able to make the concentration check DCs needed to use Spell Combo and I find it flatly wrong. So I'm doing some math to show it. My sample Magus will be built with a 15 starting int, the same cha I recomend for bards. He will have +1 at level 4 for level and +2 at lvl 5 for an int headband, which upgrades to +4 and +6 at 12 and 18, for a total of 22 int at 18. I will not give him a tome of int, since he really does not need it. He will take comat casting at first level.
lvl / spl lvl / Con Bonus / Norm DC / SC DC / Norm Prob / SC Prob
As you can see, this magus has no problems casting his highest level spells defensively atfer the early levels. His probability never goes below 50%, even when using spell combat, and that is only at level 2. He has only a moderate intelligence, arround the lowest you will likely take in the class, and he does not have the trait to give hime annother +2 to his concentration checks.
I do not think that getting a spell off half the time in melee while also attacking is a bad ability for a level 2 character.
So, given that item sales are one of the best ways to generate BP, to a point where it causes issues, and that low level magic items rarely sell because the PCs wont choose them, I was thinking of a houserule to mitigate this. Having a random/semirandom determination of what item sells each turn. This way, the PCs wont always choose to sell the biggest thing, especially since they really shouldn't have any control over what sells and what does not.
I have a couple ideas, each with drawbacks and bennefits
1. roll randomly to determine what sells:
2. weighted roll:
3. Roll a GP ammount that purchasers have each month and select an item/items in that range. Base the random roll off of how many items total there are for sale (perhaps 2d12x1K for each major, 2d8x1K for each moderate, 2d4x1K for each minor). Not sure if I want to allow sale of multiple items this way, provided it does not exceed their limmit. I think I would.
I like the flavor of option 3 the most. The more items that are available, the more money that enters into the system to buy things. More adventurers come here to spend their money.
So, seeing as alignment threads are everyone's favorite discussion topic, I figure I will start annother one. A lot of the debate I see is agravated by people having different views of how the alignment system should be applied.
Some people feel that the actions you take determine your alignment.
Some people feel that the reasons for your actions determine your alignment.
Some people feel that your characters philosphy on life determine your alignment
Some people feel that your character thinks and processes data determines your alignment.
Some people think how your character reacts to government determines the law vs chaos scale. Others put almost no importance on this, and look at how you organize your life. I take more of a Myers-Brigg approach with characters who are thinking, planning, and methodical being lawful and characters who are more emotional and spur of the moment being chaotic.
There are others out there, but I'm having trouble thinking of them right now. I'm wondering how you interpret alignment. What things do you put importance on? Do you hold different characters to the same standard, or does your standard vary based on the character? Personally, I look at each character seprately and try to figure out what is important to them.
I do not think everyone has to interpret alignment the same way, but it helps to understand why others interpret it differently. Otherwise, you can never have intelligent conversation. Not that alignment threads have much of that, but talking can never hurt.
I have a player who gave me an awesome thing to manipulate him with in his backstory. He is an Oracle who in his sleep scribes seemingly random, somtimes prophetic things in his sleep. When he uses his Augury class ability, he flips through his notes to see if something pops out to him and is appropriate.
The character is looking for guidance in his life. I am thinking that all of the major gods will leave messages to him while he is in this state, and occasionally he will notice a very clear message, besides his augury. This message is from a different god each time, instructing him on how he should live his life.
I have some ideas for things each god will say to him, but I'm not the most familiar with the Pantheon. This is our first game set in Golaron. I'm wondering what others think. I could also use more for if the same god is rolled more than once. Personally, I like moral grey, and the idea of evil gods giving advice that could turn him good or good gods potentially turning him evil is amusing.
Abdar Civilization cannot flourish without order
Ok, so after see a couple comments about how powerful Entangle spell is and me personally thinking its not very powerful, I realized that there may be a reason. The entangle spell grants the entangled condition. The entangled condition has 1 of 2 effects on movement, either forcing movement at half speed or tethering something in place, depending on the type of bonds. Entangle spell does not specify which of these 2 should be used, so I have assumed half movement, in which case people effectively lose a turn double moving out of the area. If taken the other way, this spell is much more powerful, to the point where I feel it is past the power of a 1st level spell. I am curious how other people run it.
This spell causes tall grass, weeds, and other plants to wrap around foes in the area of effect or those that enter the area. Creatures that fail their save gain the entangled condition. Creatures that make their save can move as normal, but those that remain in the area must save again at the end of your turn. Creatures that move into the area must save immediately. Those that fail must end their movement and gain the entangled condition. Entangled creatures can attempt to break free as a move action, making a Strength or Escape Artist check. The DC for this check is equal to the DC of the spell. The entire area of effect is considered difficult terrain while the effect lasts.
Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell.
So, I have seen a lot of comments on how Deadly Stroke is a horrible feat and is not worth the time or effort. I thought this was true, until I noticed that it doubles all damage, not just weapon damage like Vital Strike. This got me thinking of ways arround the standard action intimidate, and led me to the barbarian Intimidating Glare as a move action. The result is a fighter-9 barbarian-2 build at lvl 11 who can demoralize every round for extra time and deal almost as much damage as his full attack. (20 point buy, 19 base str, +1 lvl, +4 item, +4 rage, GWF, WT. +3 magic falchion)
The higher those ACs go, the closer they get. At 32 AC, Deadly stroke exceeds a full attack on this build.
For about 16 DPR, you are dealing 1 Con bleed and get to do something with your move action. Many monsters at that level have 16 HD, so the differential is reduced by their con loss closer to 8. That move action can be used to intimidate others, which saves you about 10 damage from their lowered BAB and makes them more suceptable to ally spells.
Now, you need to design your character arround this, so its not for everyone. But I think the feat has a place and is not bad. It may not be the best, but its certainly a viable build. The intimidation prereqs are not the greatest, but I have found shaken to be a usful condition for many levels.
So looking at the poison rules, most injury poisons have an onset time of -. For those, are the saves rolled immediately, or should the save be rolled at the end of the round? I ask because of the poison stacking rules that increase the DC by +2. If I full attack and hit you with 3 doses, should you be forced to make 1 save at +4 to the DC, or 3 saves at base, or the first save at base and +2 for following ones for each one you fail?
Hey guys, I'm looking for a list of bonuses and descriptions/special rules for them, and where they are specified in the rules. For instance, some I have heard but want to verify:
Is there a list of these types of bonuses somewhere and their special rules?
So I am designing a ranged, mounted combat ranger, and noticed that spring attack is on the list of feats for the animal companion. If I take spring attack with my animal companion, can it ride in and get an attack, and then I shoot it without provoking an attack of opportunity. I know that you fire from the midpoint of your movement, so I'm not worrying about the ranged attack AoO. I am wondering if the rider provokes an AoO if his mount uses spring attack.
The only real problems I have seen with the inquisitor are lvl 1 feat selection and a general lack of fighting style options other than ranged (this includes lack of martial weapon prof, which forces racial and divine weapon selection, which I don't really mind too much.)
The Bane ability promotes lots of attacks from a single weapon. This promotes ranged combat to get more attacks. TWF, the main way to get more attacks in melee, doesn't work since you then have multiple weapons and one wont get the benefit of your strongest class ability. (I think a cool solution to this could be to let them bane both sides of a double weapon, but I have no idea how ballanced that would be)
1st lvl feat selection is an issue because he doesn't have 1 BAB. He is locked out of many of the starting feats for melee characters, mainly Weapon Focus and Power Attack. Rogues suffer this as well, but they can TWF. Clerics can get comat casting or extra channel, which the Inquisitor wont be doing nearly as often. Bards get Arcane Strike if they want to focus on combat, or more bardic music. Combat expertise and specializing in manuevers isn't great because they are harder to do with the exception of feint, and they don't need that to be effective since they lack sneak attack. They also have lots of MAD, and Int is arguably their best dump stat, so the 13 requirement is harsh. This further promotes the ranged inquisitor for whom point blank shot is a good feat.
This leaves the inquisitor going to feats that support combat but don't define him, like toughness, bonus saves, or dodge (spring attack is a poor choice for the inquisitor, who likes lots of attacks, but +1 AC is never bad.) Since he gets no bonus feats, this puts him behind the other combat characters. He is also decent at taking a non-combat feat with his good skills, but he is good enough at most of those that he doesn't really need it.
That being said, many of the current tactical feats promote flanking or sword and board, so there are some nice benefits to not going ranged there. These just don't kick in until 3rd lvl and there is little reason to grab one with your first lvl feats. I for one would not be upset if there were no specifically ranged tactical feats
Now, I'm not saying that I want something like the full BAB, or +1 BAB for feat qualifications that other people have recomended. What I would like to see are some new feat trees that you can qualify for without BAB. Especially ones that would promote an inquisitor who goes non-ranged.
Reading through the Cavalier's abilities, I noticed wording I do not like: "The cavalier must end his movement adjacent to an enemy" This is from the Protect the Meek ability in Order of the Shield. This means that the Cavalier cannot use a lance, since it has reach, with this ability. This wording already hoses reach characters with Step Up and Stand Still feats, I would hate to see it have unintended consequences here. Perhaps "The cavalier must end his movement threatening an enemy" would work better.
So, in a number of the discussions, I see people claiming that certain builds do not put out level appropriate damage. I would like to ask people, what do you consider level appropriate damage at certain levels, say 1, 5, 10, 15, 20. Now, this is not a question of what your max damage should be, not everyone wants to twink. This is a question of how much damage should the melee characters be putting out to be effective at the job of killing enemies, and what should their hit bonuses be.
This comes up because in a Fighter sucks thread I put up a build that averages 50 damage (from 2 attacks) at lvl 10 without weapon spec or weapon focus with +17/+12 to hit using a guisarm. I was told that wasn't level appropriate and wouldn't be combat effective. I disagree, but would like to hear other's thoughts.
So, I while building a tripping fighter with reach, I have run into some interesting rules questions.
Cleave allows you to make multiple attacks:
I am looking at the advancedPlayersGuidePlaytest/general and at the bottom there are 4 threads that now have 0 posts. As I started one of them and wanted to reference it in a new discussion, I noticed that the posts are gone. Any idea what happened to them?