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

Cartigan's page

5,782 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 5,782 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

LeadPal wrote:
It would be easier to double all values and aim for 20 RP than to add fractions.

Then we just start getting arbitrarily large number, but you may have a point. Some things DO need to be fractional (or the equivalent thereof), if not the things he identified.


Gary Teter wrote:
Actually I'm a little curious about why it's even on our site to begin with.

It's getting to the point of being out of spite for statements like that.


Gary Teter wrote:

Just a quick note to point out that this is precisely the kind of thread that I can pretty much guarantee the designers will not be reading. We get that you all need a place to argue about our playtest strategy, our collective skills at putting together a balanced game or whatever, so I'll leave the thread standing, but:

If you have actual feedback to give on the playtest, you should post it in a different thread.

Which is why I didn't put it in the playtest forum to begin with.


Maxximilius wrote:


"Like any "X creation rules", either it's so bad and nerfed no one will use it, either there is potential for abuse with enough rules-fu."
Item creation rules are the same, yet I see no one complaining about how the DM must watch and fiat over any attempt to craft magic items.

Because either you are trying to create something unique and the GM is expected to arbitrate it because the rules don't really address it or you are trying to create something that exists and no one cares. If the unique magic item creation system was expanded to a complex point-based design system about how and what magic items could be made, I imagine there would be a lot more threads on it.

Quote:
Finding overlooked, potentially gamebreaking rules is what a playtest is for, beyond other details. In appropriate threads, that is.

Finding and fixing them. You missed part two.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zarathos wrote:


Yes, they should indeed. Piecemeal options from both TSR and WOTC worked great in many cases. It really depends on the type of campaign that is being run. Every GM and player should be open and honest about the type of game they wish to play. The concept that every option especially together will work perfectly in sync and balance is an unrealistic and impossible expectation.

Especially when you explicitly design for the opposite result.

Quote:
A good game is about telling a great story and having fun.

Which you can do without any rules at all so let's stop playing the true role-player card in an argument about mechanics.

Quote:
I like Pathfinder because it embraces the sprit of the world's oldest RPG.

Wargames?

Quote:
Once again, if you want a game that doesn't embrace that spirit and has balance in the forefront, please look to 4th edition. You are not going to find that here.

"If you want a game where the rules are second to the story, please go play White Wolf, you won't find that here."

Quote:
In fact, I have recently grown more excited about a 0e retro-clone Swords & Wizardry.

The irony is palpable.


My impression? "Nom, nom, nom, this money is delicious."


Selgard wrote:

I agree in part and I disagree in part.

The Summoner by its very nature is a vehicle for allowing a PC to create something, such that no other PC is the same as him. I like that. But, the Eidolon should be balanced with the point structure with what you can create. Since it is Player Class it *should* be written with a minimum of "broken combo's" allowed.

Creating races on the other hand is a tool for the DM. It, by its very nature, will require the oversight of the DM if not the direct and active work of him. It is the DM's job to create the races not the job of the PC's. So yes, there will be "ways" to create overpowered critters in it. But since it is something for the DM to use, it'll be something for the DM to consider and balance out appropriately. Paizo should trust that a system to help the DM out abit, will also require that DM to understand the rules enough not to break his own game with it. There will *always* be ways to game the system. Just like people try to pick the perfect race to benefit their class, there wll be ways to create races to "min/max" for that perfect class.
But since creating races is a system for the DM, I feel it is alright for them to trust the DM not to allow the PC to break the system with it.

Unlike the Eidolon, which *should* Be fully self contained for the PC to create with, without requiring the DM to stand there with a hammer and stop silly combo's. (which it currently requires).

-S

I must agree and disagree with you in turn. A race creation guide is the most beneficial for GMs in homebrew worlds (and perhaps theoretically for adventure path writers to make new creatures but that may be marginal due to constraints). But this does not erect a wall between players and race creation. Either we can pretend that players won't want to create their own races because "it is for GMs" or we can accept that will happen and not accept problems that the GM is going to have to fix himself that should have been fixed in the first place.


Zarathos wrote:
The only concrete rules are in the core book. The rest are options that may or may not be balanced when used all together. I believe that to be true under TSR's AD&D 2nd Edition in late 90's, WOTC 3.5e in the mid-2000's, and finally currently under Paizo.

Clearly because TSR and WotC wrote stuff completely stand-alone from each other and uncollaboratively and otherwise poorly designed, Paizo should continue that traidition.

Quote:
You want a good game; you got have a good DM with good players. No rulebook is going to make it so. This is the game from 0e to 3.75e.

Great, not we get into the existential sophistry.

Quote:
Options whether for the GM or player are still only options at the GM's discretion. Options bring flexibility and power but in the wrong hands can bring abuse. I don't want to be "protected" by the ruleset just to bring perceived balance.

You didn't answer the question.


Kieviel wrote:

After reading the thread, looking at the ARG play test, people's homemade races already created and how the core races were made with the system I can't really find anything out of balance.

Maybe I'm missing it, where is the balance issue?

Look at anyone trying to break it. You manipulate it in one way or other and the whole thing easily turns into a parody of race creation. That should not be doable. There should be inherent limits here and there to stop that or at least dampen it. If they try to attack it from the end result instead of the root cause, like the Eidolon, they will hurt it for everyone.

And as far as bad abilities go - look at Change Shape and Spell-Like Ability when picking 0 level spells.


Maxximilius wrote:
Cartigan wrote:

Because no one understands that is not a valid rebuttal to "something is inherently wrong with the game design."

Well, speaking only about the Advanced Races game design, just as a reminder :

Quote:
Right now the system in is playtest.

Their playtests rarely change much from test to print. They usually through in some bad balancing and call it a day.

My problem is that this premise is looking a lot like the Eidolon. And that didn't go well at all. The release was not only just as broken as the playtest, it managed to confuse the hell out of everyone with all the unique rules and arbitrary constraints they made up to try and balance it which did nothing to actually address the problems.

The first clue of what is wrong with this is they are CLEARLY balancing it based on existing races and using that as a rule of thumb to reverse engineer the race creation system out of them. The problem is, races aren't balanced for spit. Unless they COMPLETELY overhaul this - which they won't - the whole thing is going to be another Eidolon.

You want some fix suggestions?
1) Include fractional RP worths (I can NOT be the only person who looked at the 0-lvl spell 1/day SLA ability costing 1 RP each and went "What.")
2.a) Stop reverse engineering from existing races
2.b) Keep the reverse engineering but stop using a concrete system to judge correct power level by.


Dale McCoy Jr wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
God forbid I or anyone else want a product that doesn't have to be arbitrated.
I'm sorry, but what you are asking for there is literally an impossible standard. Everything needs arbitrated. Everything.

No, it doesn't.

Roll a d20. A 10 or greater hits. A 9 or lower misses. Please explain what of that needs to be arbitrated. Needs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MendedWall12 wrote:

I do find it interesting that Paizo has said "While this won't be legal for Pathfinder Society Organized Play, this system will allow players and GMs to add new and innovative races to their game, as well as to add some of the more monstrous options to the party roster."

If they won't allow it in PFS, they obviously know it isn't purely balanced. As others have said, though, when has a system ever been 100% balanced. I, personally, haven't seen a system yet that is 100% balanced. That being said, if there aren't serious improvements in the balance of this little gem, I definitely won't be allowing it at the table.

100% balanced is impossible. An attempt at balance and a rationale approach to the issues is what is sought after.

Do we really need another Eidolon debacle?


Maxximilius wrote:
Not wanting to troll, Cartigan, but it looks like every thread you start is a rant about a random topic that could be ended with "GMs decide what will be in their game" but doesn't

Because no one understands that is not a valid rebuttal to "something is inherently wrong with the game design."


Dragonsong wrote:
Cartigan wrote:


That isn't remotely what I mean by advancing and you know it.

No actually I didn't because everything you list below are level based things you by using two separate terms seemed to be implying two different things, obviously you were not and that's cool it's why I asked for clarification.

Quote:
If you are going to play a game where you level up incredibly slowly, why level up at all? The point of leveling up is to gain new abilities. There is literally no other reason to do it. If you almost never level up, why not just never level up? I would refuse to play any game where I never gained any new abilities or gained new abilities so slowly that I might as well have never gained any. You are just doing the same exact thing in the exact same way forever. It's boring and pointless and I am pretty sure there are better game systems designed for that than d20.

Alright, apparently I hadn't said what I meant to say clear enough to separate the RP from the mechanical.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azure_Zero wrote:

That's why as a GM, I BANNED the summoner. I know the Evolution system can become broken.

GMs are in control of content and systems, not players.

If you don't like the system don't use, don't allow it, and or not buy the book.

God forbid I or anyone else want a product that doesn't have to be arbitrated.

No, that is quite possibly the HIGHEST offense to commit around here. What one must do, clearly, is suck it up, not critique any design, and toss out anything they don't like after the fact.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azure_Zero wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Umbral Reaver wrote:
I think his point is that GMs have been making custom races for their worlds since long before the ARG. They don't need 'permission' from the book to make custom races.

No, my point is saying "It's GM only!" isn't a good selling point. Nor does saying "GMs can ban race creation!" fix the problem with race creation.

GMs can ban all classes that can cast spells, but that doesn't do anything to the fact that spellcasting classes are widely more powerful than non-casting classes.

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

If anything, I think this is going to help GMs make better custom races. Sure there will be players that bed and plead for their ultimate race that is better at one particular class and useless at all other classes. Nothing is ever going to stop that. However, these rules will allow a GM to make their own homebrew world better by making balanced custom races.

But they aren't balanced. Did you read anything I wrote? If you look at the forest instead of the trees, you see that the ability for players to create uber powerful races is a symptom, not the disease. They can do that because it isn't balanced.

There is no way that a system like this can be fixed 100% and be perfect.

Perfection does not exist.
It is a universal law that no matter what IT is, IT WILL have flaws.

Being fixed 100% and perfect is wholly different from "Let's let the GM arbitrate it instead of trying to make it make sense."

Did ANY part of the Eidolon nerfing balance it? You know, like the wholly arbitrary limiting of natural attacks? No, because that was never the REAL problem, the problem was giving them 8 arms and using attacks with manufactured weapons. The problem was that they could even GET 8 arms, not that they could attack with all of them. The symptom was addressed half-assedly, not the disease. That is what I am feeling will happen here.


Umbral Reaver wrote:
I think his point is that GMs have been making custom races for their worlds since long before the ARG. They don't need 'permission' from the book to make custom races.

No, my point is saying "It's GM only!" isn't a good selling point. Nor does saying "GMs can ban race creation!" fix the problem with race creation.

GMs can ban all classes that can cast spells, but that doesn't do anything to the fact that spellcasting classes are widely more powerful than non-casting classes.

Dale McCoy Jr wrote:

If anything, I think this is going to help GMs make better custom races. Sure there will be players that bed and plead for their ultimate race that is better at one particular class and useless at all other classes. Nothing is ever going to stop that. However, these rules will allow a GM to make their own homebrew world better by making balanced custom races.

But they aren't balanced. Did you read anything I wrote? If you look at the forest instead of the trees, you see that the ability for players to create uber powerful races is a symptom, not the disease. They can do that because it isn't balanced.


hogarth wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Except those are alternate systems. This is an option, but not an alternate so it is more likely to be allowed into a game since you don't have to overhaul the entire game to accommodate it.
Huh? How do you have to overhaul the entire game to accommodate Words of Power or piecemeal armor? And where do you get your definition of "option" vs. "alternative"?

I was thinking of armor as DR, my bad. I'm not completely familiar with words of power, but I do know it is still an alternate system.


Azure_Zero wrote:


This part is more for GMs than players. As GMs can now fill their custom worlds with their custom races.

Yeah, good luck with that selling and argument point.


hogarth wrote:
I don't think it will have a "harmful impact" any more than the Words of Power system or the piecemeal armor system will have a harmful impact; it'll remain a rarely-used optional system, I suspect.

Except those are alternate systems. This is an option, but not an alternate so it is more likely to be allowed into a game since you don't have to overhaul the entire game to accommodate it. The whole thing is going to be a huge mess.


Dragonsong wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Dragonsong wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
InVinoVeritas wrote:


The campaign is perennially low level. Over a year ago, we started at 2nd level. We are now 3rd.
Wow, just wow.
I have played in a game where leveling was that slow so that is not all that surprising to me. in earlier threads InVino has mentioned they predominately play E6-ish games so slowing the level rate allows for longer campaigns in an e6 type game.
I would assume E6 and taking a year to gain a single level are entirely different. There is a difference between never gaining a level and never advancing.

I will agree that they do not necessarily go hand in hand but I can understand some groups who like e6 may wish to also have a very slow level progression.

I am not sure what you mean in this context by "never advancing". The long low level game I played was in Planescape 6 years and only 6-7 levels by the end. But I advanced within my faction, became a player in the inter planar arms trade, and established a Salon for painters in Sigil in that time. To me I advanced the character greatly even if I did not level. But I may not be understanding what you are meaning by that word can you give me a bit more detail about what you were meaning there.

That isn't remotely what I mean by advancing and you know it.

If you are going to play a game where you level up incredibly slowly, why level up at all? The point of leveling up is to gain new abilities. There is literally no other reason to do it. If you almost never level up, why not just never level up? I would refuse to play any game where I never gained any new abilities or gained new abilities so slowly that I might as well have never gained any. You are just doing the same exact thing in the exact same way forever. It's boring and pointless and I am pretty sure there are better game systems designed for that than d20.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Scanning the playtest release and several posts about the "Make your own race" stuff, I'm getting one of those classic "bad feeling" feelings. The first clue was the very idea of "Make your own race!" after the Eidolon fiasco (that maelstrom is still going on*). The next was some of the completely absurd values of certain things (look at SLA cost for 0 level spells and Change Shape). Then a few of the people with good eyes have made the inevitable completely imbalanced, yet perfectly legal races that Paizo is going to try to "balance" around. Which I asked General Achbar about and you know what his response was (after the Eidolon fiasco).

I am getting the feeling that this is going to be an entirely new "Eidolon evolution" problem, but even worse since it isn't just one class but custom races playable by any class. Paizo just isn't good at getting balancing right, I'm sure there are a couple reasons for this but that's the short version. A book section dedicated to creating custom races is going to be a can of worms that can't be fixed and while not impinging on PFS is going to have a harmful impact on the game outside it.

I think the "Create your own race, for fun and profit!" needs to be tossed right the hell out right the hell now and they should just throw a some extra races in there to fill the space.

*Bet you didn't think I could work maelstrom into a sentence.


yellowdingo wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:

2. The Owl Spirit likely knows all the bending forms (though we only here he knows Water Bending in all three styles). He wouldnt be an all knowing Knowledge Spirit aware of every Nation if he didnt.

3. The Avatar refers to wishing he knew metal bending long before Toph 'rediscovers' the technique. Given the cyclic nature of Technology which seems to rise and fall with periods of Expansionism of one nation or another, So to will the Bending subspecialties like Metal Bending.

Which means in thousands of years not even the Avatar knew how to metal bend.
We dont know that. Knowing that metal Bending is possible may be an indicator that that the knowledge existed with at least one incarnation of the avatar lineage.

What.

Saying "I wish I could bend metal" has NOTHING to do with knowing one COULD bend metal. I could say "I wish I could turn AOL CDs into gobstoppers" doesn't mean I could do it.

Quote:


What do you mean 'What'?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FlatWhat

Quote:
Sokka angered the all powerful knowledge spirit.

They ALL angered the knowledge spirit. Their entire party. Oh, and THE WORLD.

Quote:
The only reason the Library will come back is if the Knowledge spirit sees that Sokka is a changed person and coughing up a huge amount of Knowledge on the fire nation will go a long way toward that.

What

Quote:
Only Toph is currently seen as capable of sand bending so if any part of the library exists in the real world she will be able to access it.

Or you know, the Avatar. Even Toph couldn't bend a palace out of thousands of tons of sand.


Dragonsong wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
InVinoVeritas wrote:


The campaign is perennially low level. Over a year ago, we started at 2nd level. We are now 3rd.
Wow, just wow.
I have played in a game where leveling was that slow so that is not all that surprising to me. in earlier threads InVino has mentioned they predominately play E6-ish games so slowing the level rate allows for longer campaigns in an e6 type game.

I would assume E6 and taking a year to gain a single level are entirely different. There is a difference between never gaining a level and never advancing.


InVinoVeritas wrote:


The campaign is perennially low level. Over a year ago, we started at 2nd level. We are now 3rd.

Wow, just wow.


hgsolo wrote:


Ultimately 1.b) would have been my rationale against your plan.

Except 1.b is why the DM is wrong...


Lo, ye can of worms shall be opened and out of it shall spilleth a great many horrors unimaginable.

1) Your DM was both right and wrong
1.a) You couldn't get the blood from a summoned creature - it isn't really there
1.b) SUMMONED CREATURES DIE ALL THE TIME.

2) This can of worms has been opened before and shall be opened again. Apparently many DMs, in their infinite forest blindness, have decided that summoned creatures can and will do nothing but fight and you can only use them to fight because otherwise they don't want to die so will refuse to doe anything that kills them - other than fighting. Oh, and they can't do any utilitous things that DON'T kill them because that would mean the Wizard is being clever and we can't have that.


I swore I made some suggestions on some thread about "horror" movies..

The Gingerdead Man
Jack Frost (not the kids movie, or maybe the kids movie, depends what you think it a "horror" movie I guess)
Killer Clowns from Outer Space
Gingerdead Man 2
Jack Frost 2
Green Lantern (THAT'S a horror movie)


Dragonsong wrote:
Cartigan wrote:


Which is actually a weird thing to say because Fighter (the class) actually gets BETTER at using heavy armor and it makes no sense to not use it. Now, that might hurt Paladins and Cavaliers.
Unless of course wearing heavy armor means you make heat exhaustion checks every minute or every 10 minutes rather than every hour...

So, you are saying that if you change the environmental effects rules, it's worse to wear heavy armor? Yeah, having a dick GM DOES make it worse to wear heavy armor.

Fighters should get a bonus to the penalty anyway due to having armor training. Of course, casters should have Endure Elements prepared for long treks in the jungle.


Riku Riekkinen wrote:

I would say that Barbarian & Ranger are best suited martial classes for APs like Serpents Skull or Savage Tide. Because of their skill selection & ease to use different weapons (rage & FE don't ask what weapon you are using). Monk is right out because of the need of very spesific equipment.

Fighter, Pally & Cavalier suffer from:

Serpents Skull players guide wrote:

Recommendations: All manner of weapons and armor

exist in the Mwangi Expanse, but legends speak of certain
types of powerful magic weapons being hidden in the
region’s ancient ruins. Fighters might want to avoid
dedicating themselves to the use of heavy armor—or pursue
ways of increasing their mobility in such armaments—as
the heat and other challenges of the jungle can make such
gear unwieldy, or even dangerous, to wear.
I don't think fighters are bad usually. But if the guide actually states that heavy armor is a bad idea and doesn't give recommendations what weapon you should use, the fighters life will be a lot harder than usually.

Which is actually a weird thing to say because Fighter (the class) actually gets BETTER at using heavy armor and it makes no sense to not use it. Now, that might hurt Paladins and Cavaliers.


Dabbler wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
{still not getting it}

The question is not about which class is best.

The question is not about what role monks fill.

That is actually NOT the question and were it the question, no one is answering it anyway. Though that is a good question because I have NO IDEA what role the monk is supposed to fill.

Quote:
The question is about which classes can still function best with restricted magic items.

Full casters -> 3/4 casters -> Paladins -> Rogues -> Fighters -> Rangers -> Barbarians/Cavaliers -> Monks

Quote:
If you look at my answer, I listed monks as first out of the non-casting classes,

And I listed it last out of all classes.

Quote:
so all the arguing about casters and how effective they are is not really relevant.

Then why do you keep bringing it up and with nonsense arguments to boot.

Quote:
However, they will be impacted by lack of scrolls, wands etc. that they often utilise.

No, they really won't. The only expendable item I have ever seen casters use consistently is a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.

Quote:
Let me put it this way: of the non-casting classes, the monk has the most magic-like abilities.

No, not really. Even if we discount the half-assed casting, Paladins exceed them. And get way better stuff for it:

Quote:
They get a lot of class features, but they are criminally underpowered and most are finite due to being based on Ki.
Quote:
Hence, he is able to do the best in low magic for the same reason that the caster is good in low magic, in that he does not depend on magic items to get magic effects. He will still be impacted by lack of rings, amulets, bracers, belts and headbands, but no more so than any other class.

The Monk is bad in low magic for the same exact reason he is bad in high magic - it's a bad class. It gets a ton of features but the class is highly MAD with nothing to show for it but the ability to not actually do anything very well but max out AC, which is useless. It's features are extremely gimped. The Monk was bad in 3.5 and Paizo did nothing to fix it.

Quote:
The other fighting classes are impacted by lack of magic in their weapons and armour.

The other fighting classes can use real armor and have class abilities that increase their damage.

Quote:
The monk isn't - or at least not as much.

The Fighter's, Paladin's, Barbarian's, and Ranger's damage output was only MARGINALLY based on magic item bonuses.

Quote:
I am not arguing that the monk is better at fulfilling any of the roles of these other classes in any way, I am just pointing out that the monk doing what the monk does is less impacted by lack of magic items than, for example, the fighter doing what the fighter does or the wizard doing what the wizard does.

Yes, the Monk is equally good at being a Monk in either high or low magic, that is to say the class is just as bad with magic items as it is with no magic items. I agree with you.


Dabbler wrote:


No one said about what role the character was to fulfil, it's about which can deal with low magic best. Especially no one said anything about it having to be a tank!

Casters - gain a great deal out of scrolls, wands and staves. Take these away and their versatility, their greatest advantage, is sorely hindered by their restricted spells/day (just as the monk is restricted by their ki, only perhaps more so).

Combat Classes - rely on magic armour for protection and magic weapons to deal damage and overcome DR. Take away those things and combat classes suffer as much if not more than casters.

The Monk can over come some DR (the most common ones) with his bare hands, he doesn't need armour but has an AC that will scale with level without it.

Basically, the monk can gain from having magic items, but doesn't stop being effective without them.

Wow. No. Just no.

You like Monks, we get it, but that is a laughably bad assessment.

A caster's power is in.. BEING ABLE TO INHERENTLY USE MAGIC. Scrolls, wands, and staves are bonuses but they are not NEEDED for the classes to fight anything at the correct CR. Scrolls, wands, and staves are basically "ring of the ram" or "apparatus of the crab." They have their uses but are ultimately not as good as their inherent abilities.

Combat classes need magic items, yes, but their flat magic bonuses are lower than the benefits from Strength or the benefits granted by their classes. A Monk is never going to have the equivalent of full plate and a heavy shield without magic items, and if he DOES manage that, he won't be able to HURT anything. Moreover, he has to use an expendable resource to gain those things with his bare hands. Combat characters can just pick up a new weapon with the property. Or can rely on casters to enhance them. Due to someone at Paizo hating Monks, they can't benefit from those enhancements. Paladins can enchant their own weapons and are partial casters. Rangers are partial casters and get bonuses against certain enemies. Fighters increase their own weapon damage and to-hit. Rogues get sneak attack.

Sure, if you want to spend your day avoiding getting beat up, play a Monk and run away. If you want to actually contribute without magic weapons, play something else.


Kthulhu wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
David Fryer wrote:
I am hoping that in Series 7 we can see Mickey and Martha Smith again, even if it is just in a one shot.
I'm surprised they weren't involved in the finale. It looks like the 11th is ONLY dealing with Rory, Amy, and River.
Thank god. Ten dragging everyone he's ever met to the last couple of finales got pretty damn tedious. Especially "The End of Time 2", where half the episode was spent with him "dying", but not so quickly that he can't jaunt all over time and space to have a pity party with every single sentient entity he encountered while wearing Tennant's face.

Which was wholly different from Stolen Earth/Journey's End where almost everyone still alive related to Doctor Who was involved and it still made sense.


Riku Riekkinen wrote:

OP wrote:

Where's the Weed? wrote:

I was using general terms, sorry if that confused some.

I really mean a campaign like Savage Tide, or Serpents Skull, where the access to magic items is very limited until you can Teleport.

Cartigan wrote:


Then your GM is a git.
GM: "Hey, I know this is a homebrew world and that you specialize in longsword, but here, the only magical weapon in the country is a sai. Have fun!"
The AP they are using may be pre-made. Some GMs are lazy enough not adding the weapon of your choice to an AP. And besides, if the fighter is guaranteed to have an item of his choice it kind of dillutes the whole going commando thing.

Then I guess you won't be changing weapons. You are better off staying with your primary weapon than trying to use a +1 Sai.


yellowdingo wrote:

2. The Owl Spirit likely knows all the bending forms (though we only here he knows Water Bending in all three styles). He wouldnt be an all knowing Knowledge Spirit aware of every Nation if he didnt.

3. The Avatar refers to wishing he knew metal bending long before Toph 'rediscovers' the technique. Given the cyclic nature of Technology which seems to rise and fall with periods of Expansionism of one nation or another, So to will the Bending subspecialties like Metal Bending.

Which means in thousands of years not even the Avatar knew how to metal bend.

Quote:
4. The Point Being That the presence of Sokka with large volumes of Lore 'might' encourage a return of the Owl with the Library to retrieve them. If there is any part of it in the real world then having an Earth Bender like Toph capable of Sand Bending on a Powerful scale might be useful in digging it out.

What.


Riku Riekkinen wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Riku Riekkinen wrote:
AdAstraGames wrote:

Fighter, surprisingly.

Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Weapon Specialization
Weapon Training

Not discussing witch class is the most powerful/usable for the party, but who would lose most in a pre made adventure path in witch you aren't guaranteed to have an equipment of your choice. I think fighter loses the most as your feat choises suggest a fighter really needs a specific type of weapon to be effective.
But that is NOT what we are discussing. We are not discussing a blind booster tournament, we are discussing a world in which it is hard to find magic items, not a longsword
Well, I meant that it is not certain that you'll find a magic longsword. The OP stated that his world don't have magic shops, not that the magic items are extremely rare. So a fighter who is specialized in one weapon is most likely screwed.

Then your GM is a git.

GM: "Hey, I know this is a homebrew world and that you specialize in longsword, but here, the only magical weapon in the country is a sai. Have fun!"


Eben TheQuiet wrote:

Luckily D&D is more than an exercise in not being dead. :)

Not for the Barbarian.


Tangible Delusions wrote:
Eric Jarman wrote:
Dragnmoon wrote:


And I missed that 200 years went pass... Was that mentioned at all? I know it was in the first episode.
A good question is: How much of that 200 years was spent in the timeless alternate universe? The Doctor would probably count it as time spent, whether time was actually passing or not. Timey wimey and all that.

Or falls under "Rule #1"

Fezzes are cool?


Crimson Jester wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Badass yes, but utterly stupid and nonsensical. Everyone else had already removed their eye patches yet were still running away but he isn't removing his because he will forget what he is supposed to be fighting? Whatever comes through the damn door like a tempest.
No offense Cartigan, but remember the bit with Winston and the Doctor. Even in the middle of a fight, they suddenly have no idea what the heck they're doing.

Like how everyone else is running away after taking off their eye patches?

There is clearly an invading force trying to physically break down the door. You don't need a computer eye patch to figure out to shoot whatever comes through it.

Quote:

Taking off the eyepatch would result in:

"Ok, why am I holding my gun?" *sounds of banging against door* "My men are out there, but why? Am I guarding? Well no marks on my arm so no Silents about. Why did I take my patch off, hold on let me put it back on."
*Door gives way, Rory loses precious seconds trying to get his patch on/in shock/fumbling with his revolver, dies horribly.*
You can't remember the Silents when you look away or what you were doing at the time of looking at them. What you are saying is they can't remember ANYTHING about ANYTHING. There is CLEARLY a force trying to break down the door. His men clearly died after clearly shooting at things and oh yeah, there are dead people around them. They wipe out any memories created when looking at them, not any memories created relating to them ever - the Doctor still realized what he and Churchill were fighting.
Only because of the marks on his arm. Everything else he forgot. They made sure you could tell that.

Yes but that's what I said; he realized the marks on his arms were associated with the Silents. With Morris' interpretation, he wouldn't even have been able to remember that.


Define "broken." And what level are the PCs.


Optimus Rhyme


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Riggler wrote:


It adds the "pick up the item dropped" part for which there are core rules for. Picking up an item triggers an AOO. Just because the rules for disarm allow an "automatic" pick up, doesn't negate the AOO. The Disarm ability would need Errata to add that this automatic pick-up does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

Can you even take an AoO while unarmed? Attacking while unarmed without UAS (including while gauntleted) provokes an AoO, if I recall.

And the word you are not bothering to include is very important - "automatically." There is no rule for "automatic" actions other than the English definition of "they happen." It doesn't say you can pick up the weapon as an immediate action - a defined game action inside a defined game time space. Automatically throws the whole "pick up a weapon" out of whack because there is no defined game time space. The logical conclusion is you gain control of the disarmed weapon without any consequence.


Matthew Morris wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
Badass yes, but utterly stupid and nonsensical. Everyone else had already removed their eye patches yet were still running away but he isn't removing his because he will forget what he is supposed to be fighting? Whatever comes through the damn door like a tempest.
No offense Cartigan, but remember the bit with Winston and the Doctor. Even in the middle of a fight, they suddenly have no idea what the heck they're doing.

Like how everyone else is running away after taking off their eye patches?

There is clearly an invading force trying to physically break down the door. You don't need a computer eye patch to figure out to shoot whatever comes through it.

Quote:

Taking off the eyepatch would result in:

"Ok, why am I holding my gun?" *sounds of banging against door* "My men are out there, but why? Am I guarding? Well no marks on my arm so no Silents about. Why did I take my patch off, hold on let me put it back on."
*Door gives way, Rory loses precious seconds trying to get his patch on/in shock/fumbling with his revolver, dies horribly.*

You can't remember the Silents when you look away or what you were doing at the time of looking at them. What you are saying is they can't remember ANYTHING about ANYTHING. There is CLEARLY a force trying to break down the door. His men clearly died after clearly shooting at things and oh yeah, there are dead people around them. They wipe out any memories created when looking at them, not any memories created relating to them ever - the Doctor still realized what he and Churchill were fighting.


Alwaysafk wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


Barbarians do a little better on their own, but have even more armor class problems.

Barbarians have no AC problems. They have no AC to have problems with. Barbarians should focus on hitting hard and being big ole meatbags, not stacking armor and being worried about getting booboos.

That's an excellent way to get dead in D&D.


Matthew Morris wrote:

One thing I enjoyed is that Rory, no matter the reality is loyal to his wife. Love for the ages and all that.

That and Captain Williams took a level in badass. "It already has, ma'am." indeed.

Badass yes, but utterly stupid and nonsensical. Everyone else had already removed their eye patches yet were still running away but he isn't removing his because he will forget what he is supposed to be fighting? Whatever comes through the damn door like a tempest.

Then he is completely incapable of doing anything and is disabled the second they break in and Amy has to save him, again.

The only good part was when they were walking away from the room down the hall and were like "We should go get dinner" "Yeah" "Then get married" "Yes."

David Fryer wrote:
I am hoping that in Series 7 we can see Mickey and Martha Smith again, even if it is just in a one shot.

I'm surprised they weren't involved in the finale. It looks like the 11th is ONLY dealing with Rory, Amy, and River.


LazarX wrote:


I did like the touch that in River Song's final scene in that series she's wearing her Byzantium outfit.

Because, as she literally says, she jumped there directly after escaping the Byzantium. They are periodically checking back and forth with each other. Though it's not even remotely clear why she waits until then to go back and reveal what the Doctor said at Lake Silencio.

Also, what's unclear, ultimately, is WHY the Doctor asked River to marry him. Clearly it was to give someone (it's not exactly clear whether it was the Doctor or River) access to the tesselator's control banks as a family member, but it doesn't show us why that's important.


AdAstraGames wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
AdAstraGames wrote:
A bunch of pro-fighter stuff.
And you have a will save of what, +2? At best? If the wizard goes first, roll a 15+ or loose. If the wizard goes last, you hit him for 15 damage, maybe half his hp if he hasn't buffed, then roll a 15+ or loose.

Evidently, you have never built a fighter, like ever.

Fighter Build:

16+2 STR [10], 15+1 DEX (7), 13 CON [3], 10 INT [0], 12 WIS [2], 8 CHA [-2]

Traits: Reactive, +1 Will Save
Feats: Weapon Focus, Iron Will; Improved Initiative; Power Attack; Weapon Spec; Rapid Shot

Fort: +5, Ref: +5, Will: +6, +7 vs Fear. Init: +3+2+4=+9. AC of 10+9+2+2=23. If I'm willing to go breastplate, it's 10+6+2+3=21 and a move of 30' per turn.

That is a rather inane selection of feats. What level is this little circus even at?


JoelF847 wrote:

I wanted to make sure I understand something correctly after the finale. Between The God Complex and the Wedding of River Song, the Doctor was on the run for 200 years, and then after the finale, he's alive, and 200 years older than he was up until the end of the God Complex? Nothing in the finale undid that, right?

If so, then while there's no practical effect on the continuation of the show, it gives a nice window for books and "stuff from the Doctor's past that the viewers have never heard of before" to have occured in.

Yeah, it's basically "insert media here." Especially those events skimmed across in the season premier episode.

I can't think of any stretch that long in the Doctor's life between things happening.


Riku Riekkinen wrote:
AdAstraGames wrote:

Fighter, surprisingly.

Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Weapon Specialization
Weapon Training

Not discussing witch class is the most powerful/usable for the party, but who would lose most in a pre made adventure path in witch you aren't guaranteed to have an equipment of your choice. I think fighter loses the most as your feat choises suggest a fighter really needs a specific type of weapon to be effective.

But that is NOT what we are discussing. We are not discussing a blind booster tournament, we are discussing a world in which it is hard to find magic items, not a longsword


yellowdingo wrote:


In what way doesit contradict Avatar Lore?

One, it doesn't make sense.

She is pregnant with Tenzin - her third child - in your book? When the hell does this take place?
And the Owl Spirit uses metal bending? When the hell did it learn metal bending? Toph made that right the hell up.
Moreover, how do they EVEN GET BACK THERE? It's buried in the desert - if not removed to the spirit world. I mean, maybe if the Avatar breaks out his Avatar powers and raises it but even the Avatar is usually less powerful than the great spirits and ancients of the world.

Ko was probably killed or banished by the Waterbending Avatar after he found out what Ko did. Which is why it's in the spirit realm.

1 to 50 of 5,782 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.