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

Chris Kenney's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,127 posts (4,034 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 Pathfinder Society characters. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Uhm, the really egriegious thing here is the GM declared "Automatic damage every round until you're dead from being grappled once and you have no options to escape." There's a bit more going on than just the legality of the grapple itself.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

While the opponent might technically be able to grapple a whirlwind, your GM messed up on a couple of points.

1) The Whirlwind ability triggers in response to touching the creature using it - grappling most certainly counts as touching, so he has to make a save before the grapple can begin.

2) Being grappled does not deny you the ability to use any actions in particular - it imposes penalties on some of them and prevents actions that require two hands but changing shape with Wild Shape doesn't require any hands at all (It's a Supernatural, not a spell-like).

3) In addition, each round the grappler needs to make a new CM check to maintain the grapple. This would almost certainly continue to count as touching the whirlwind, requiring new saves against the Whirlwind ability. Plus, of course, a natural 1 on any given check is an automatic failure, so there's also that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Continual Flame is at will ability of Torch Archons. it costs NOTHING to do massive amounts of Continual Flames. You could light a city in a day or two by Calling up an Archon or two and having them drop CF's where instructed for a nominal fee.

==Aelryinth

In addition to the above, you also can't actually do this - Summoned creatures can't use spell-likes with an expensive material component (or, more likely, won't.) Continual Flame requires 50 gp of ruby dust.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Deylinarr wrote:
Why would the DC be Cha based for a class that uses Wis as it's casting stat?

Because, unless specifically called out, that's how SLAs work.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What about the White Mage Arcanist? You'll probably need the Witch to be willing to cover some of the non-Curing spells, but you'll be able to use spontaneous healing pretty well. Then build as a blaster Arcanist.

EDIT: Just double-checked myself and forgot that Witches don't have some of the key spells either. This would mean you'd be dependent on purchased scrolls and wands, although with UMD on your list you could probably do this since you'd likely need some Charisma as a blaster anyway.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Quote:
Quote:
4.If the parrot stays a parrot, but gets feats and things, do I still have to use handle animal to control it in pfs.
Moot point, as PFS only goes to level 12 and true spirit ability isn't available before level 16. But even if that wasn't the case, your dear parrot would be way above animal intelligence and understand language, so no handle animal check should be needed.

In PFS, an animal companion's intelligence and languages are considered irrelevant - you always need to use Handle Animal checks to control the animal regardless of what you try to do to get around it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
the secret fire wrote:
Wizard: "Gah...uhhhhh...this is...but I...wait! I'm going to cast a web between the rocks down there, and you peeps jump down into it. It might be a bumpy landing, but it should catch you, and I can dispel it when you're all down."

And then the party dies. There are about ten reasons it doesn't work or is a rotten idea in this scenario, starting with the fact that you can't cast it on the area described in the first place.

I'm sure others will also point out that the wizard's probably going to have scrolls of better solutions to the problem handy, and know which ones.

Quote:
Arcanist: "Well crap guys, I didn't prepare the right spell, but...give me six seconds...ok, now I can cast feather fall with all of my 1st level slots. You may jump at your leisure."

And he's burned through about a fourth of his resources for the day given a probable party of five-six targets. So even IF your web scenario worked, an Arcanist working with his fewer spells has just as much, if not more, reason to apply cleverness and ingenuity to the problem so he doesn't burn through his entire spell allowance. He also doesn't have ready access to Scribe Scroll, so he's (a bit) less likely to have the right answer a move action away without spending daily resources.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Also, and one thing I feel the need to keep bringing up, is that Golarion is written as though it's not a static setting even though it very much is. What we see isn't intended to be taken as the end point, but a continuation of a never-ending cycle whereby the sentient races (particularly humanity) rise up from the stone age, usually to the beginnings of a Magiindustrial Era...and then some moron wonders what the World Destroyer Button on the new doohickey does and/or a rock falls out of the sky and resets everything back to the stone age. This has literally happened four times in various incarnations that I can think of off the top of my head.

Golarion does not have some wondrous continual upward curve of accumulated knowledge. Even in the real world, where we don't have to contend with civilization crumbling every couple thousand years on average, knowledge has routinely been lost and regained all the time up through roughly the later half of the 20th century. And we're still rediscovering stuff we obviously once knew.

How much worse is that going to be in Golarion, without an internet, where printing presses exist for maybe 300 years at a time and then people have to burn the books to survive the winter?

It just so happens that the 'snapshot' of this development and redevelopment cycle we're given is at a point where the "unknown" about the science of arcane magic still vastly outweighs the "known."


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
666bender wrote:
SLA can be gain from 1 class.

Not true. You just need one SLA from an Arcane source and one from a Divine source. Racials are always Arcane, but the Trickery domain gives Mirror Image as a divine SLA, allowing you to qualify via SLAs for both requirements. There may be others, but they're probably not as useful so people aren't going to know them off the top of their heads.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It should also be pointed out that Golarion goblins have been described as having a seriously unreal metabolism at times (such as four killing and eating an entire horse in a single night.) That's probably a bit extreme, but it gives you an idea of some of the problems even a "civil" goblin might cause.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

All right, here's the idea for a character - Ex NEG who got drummed out of the service, and was grabbed by the Society who recognized that she is still dedicated to the fight. She has a small PI job on the side as a cover for her activities for the Society, and uses her Tager abilities for investigation more than combat.

Crunch below, probably best to check it since it's been a very long while since I made a character and memory of the mechanics is fuzzy.

Crunch:
Sarah Watson (Female Human Tager (Shadow)/Former NEG Mecha Pilot)

Age: 28 Height: 5'8" Weight: 130 Lbs
Virtue: Courageous Flaw: Violent

Agi(7): 8/4 10/5
Int(6): 6/3 6/3
Per(7): 8/4 10/5
Pre(6): 6/3 6/3
Str(4): 4/2 6/3
Ten(7): 8/4 10/5

Actions: 2/3 Movement: 6/8 Orgone: 5 Reflex: 7/8
Vitality: 11/13

Skills(20 + 2 human + 12 Cheats = 34):

English: 4
English (Literacy): 2

Athletics: 2
Communications: 2
Law Enforcement: 1
Misdirect: 2
Observation: 4
Pilot: 3 (Wheeled Vehicles, Mecha, Personal A-Pod)
Stealth: 2
Streetwise: 2
Surveilance: 2

Armed Fighting: 1
Dodge: 3
Fighting: 3
Marksman: 2
Support Weapons: 2

Assets:

Eidetic Memory (3)
Tager (Shadow)(4)

Drawback
Disgraced (-4)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My read - a Pearl would only work if the Arcanist has some way to "burn" the prepared spell slot (Losing access to the spell prepared in that slot) and would restore it for use with their spontaneous casting pool. Right now, I don't know of any way to do that other than maybe some 'steal spells' type abilities.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

All right - working on ideas, but have to work tonight. I should be able to finish in the morning - this is gonna take a LOT of skills to get just right.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Definitely interested - have an idea for an ex-pilot. Would mecha skills be verbotten by the campaign rules? (I was thinking a few points put towards them to represent "Used to do this all the time, but it's been awhile.")


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Nathanael Love wrote:
Sure if they put all the revisions in one single volume of an updated core book and don't redo any other books, that would be fine. . . that's not an "edition" though.

Uhm, yes it is. WOTC's been trying to change the idea of what constitutes a new edition by creating a new game every five years and labeling it a "new edition" but that doesn't make them right.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

man! if only they would come out with a book like that, why they could call it Pathfinder to the Max, or maybe Pathfinder Unchained?, nah!

;)

These sorts of things have never proven a long-term solution. It's been tried before, and at best you get temporary bickering about as bad as any edition war short of the 3E/4E one, followed by lots of "Well, I like it but it's 'just a sourcebook' and one of the other players hates it so we don't use it." Plus it can't actually fix underlying issues like the save divide, the Feat structure, the spell level assumptions, and so on.

And yes, I believe it's possible to fix these things without invalidating the Adventure Paths, although it's enough work that I can see Paizo being very hesitant about trying.

Pathfinder Unchained is a good breeding ground to try out new ideas for a revision. It's not a substitute for actually going in and doing that revision.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
JCAB wrote:
Especially when they are not actually indented to be BBEG in Aps.

So you completely missed my point. Anybody in a secondary supplement who gets more than a few lines is potentially going to be one of these down the line. To use your example, just because the head of the Acadame has not yet been featured in an AP doesn't mean he will not be. In fact, given the background on the Acadamae, he's a very good candidate for such at some point in the future. Just because that AP hasn't been written yet doesn't make it good practice to make him unsuitable for it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm going to take this to a meta level for a moment. Those arguing that characters CAN be low level are disregarding a very key problem.

Every six months, one of these rulers might be designated the BBEG of an Adventure Path. Not 'your personal campaign', but something meant for general publication. This enforces a very tight structure, including pre-selecting a CR range that can be used. On average, APs end with the PCs at around level 15-16, which means the CR has to be something that would be appropriate to challenge PCs of those levels.

And people tend to be kind of touchy when something new deviates wildly from previously published material.

This pretty much dictates that more NPC rulers will fall into the high range than the low, simply so that future authors and developers won't continually find themselves in a position of having to justify a previously-discussed NPC suddenly adding ten levels and an artifact they didn't have before. You can get away with that every now and again, but not every time you start on a new AP.

Nothing's stopping you in a homebrew campaign, but Golarion's got to support the main product and that imposes design limitations.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Flame mystery has several decent blast powers, as does the Winter mystery.

Honestly, you're going to be very unhappy trying to be a blaster as a Mystic Theurge. It may be doable at this point by hunting through every single splat book, but it's literally going to take you months of research and possibly hundreds of dollars buying relevant Additional Resources if you're new to the game as a whole, and you'll still probably going to be less capable than a straight class because you'll be, at best, a spell level behind everyone else.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think the goal was to try to keep it relatively balanced with the Core races. Flight's expensive with the Race Builder (and correctly so), so you probably can't get everything you want. If your GM doesn't mind a little more power, you can probably add some of that in, but not all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1) Yes.

2) Yes.

3) No. "Magus Spells" in the Magus Armor Proficiency refers specifically to spells from the Magus class.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jonah "Deadshot" Johnson wrote:
at the end of it i think it came out to almost a 40 RP rating...

That should be your first clue that it's massively OP. Zero HD races should average around half that. 26 would be pushing, 40 is beyond the pale.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I also think there may be a cultural aspect to it. The gestures are close to universal, but casters taught in one school may exaggerate the motions, creating sweeping gestures that have some "force" behind them to try to ensure accuracy, whereas others make the shapes in a manner that is tight and controlled, with precise angular motions. It's the same spell, looked at through slightly different lenses.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Eh, not sure it's that cut and dried. The proper way of phrasing this is "Do you get all the Domain Spells unlocked at 1st level and are just unable to use them, or do they get added to spells available as you level?"

Before you ask, this is actually possible. Gnome Oracles have the ability to advance their Curse class feature faster than their Oracle levels. When combined with the Haunted curse, this starts adding spells known that are above the highest level the Oracle has access to. She knows the spells, but cannot cast them (absent a metamagic feat that reduces their effective level.)

EDIT:

Domain Class Feature wrote:
Each domain grants a number of domain powers, dependent upon the level of the cleric, as well as a number of bonus spells. A cleric gains one domain spell slot for each level of cleric spell she can cast, from 1st on up. Each day, a cleric can prepare one of the spells from her two domains in that slot. If a domain spell is not on the cleric spell list, a cleric can prepare it only in her domain spell slot. Domain spells cannot be used to cast spells spontaneously.

Reading that, I think that you get the spells from your domain immediately on gaining access to the domain, whether you can cast them, and the Domain slots as well. But I'm not positive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

To clarify further - Psionics references in Golarion are mostly confined to the pre-PFRPG days, specifically the old "Pathfinder Campaign Setting" and maybe a few splatbooks. The rub is that they're not really Avistani, coming from further east (Pretty much between Avistan and Tian-Xia by land.) There are a few other references as well, like Aboleths and other monstrous races with access to the abilities.

They're rare, require training that comes from beyond the core campaign setting, and even then are acknowledged as just being an unusual way to access magic. I might not have any issue with it in a "kitchen sink" party, banning it as simply unavailable even though it's in the setting because, say, you want the players to all be Andoran slave liberators or from the Land of the Linnorm Kings is well within your perogative.

Asking politely for the above references so you can decide whether it fits the local flavor you're going for wouldn't be out of line, but you want to be careful about not escalating it into a challenge.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:

Erm, yeah, your mileage varies quite by a lot there to the one used by Paizo themselves. By official stats, the weakest demon lord is pegged at CR 25 and true deities don't even have an assigned CR, because they are beyond CR 30. Baba Yaga is mythic because the party is not supposed to fight her, after all.

Now, that she is as powerful as the most powerful demon lord is another thing, but arguable. Still, your CR scale is way off in regards to what Paizo themselves assume. For them, true deities are invulnerable even to high-level mythic characters (at least in their own realm) and can utterly annihilate entire metropolis with a single attack (see: Saranrae, Gormuz).

Thanks, said it better than I could have. Only going to add that Mythic power isn't meant to be "relatively normal" at all. At least in Golarion, having it represents nothing more or less than the start of apotheosis.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Magi only really function well as pure melee blasters. You are just too dependent on the blast spells for your damage to waste much of your store with buffing. This makes sense, since this was the specific gap in the bard's repertoire the Magus was designed to fill.

If you want to go the self-buff route, Bard, Inquisitor, Warpriest, and Cleric should be your go-tos. Probably in that order. The Bloodrager may actually join that list in the final version, probably at the end as a partial caster.

The Eldritch Knight is an interesting approach, but it does have the disadvantage of being mostly-caster for about half the campaign, more or less (assuming a typical AP.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
chaoseffect wrote:

I think one issue here is what is meant by "spell you know." That's 100% clear for a spontaneous caster, but what about a Wizard? Does that mean spells you've prepared for the day or spells in spell book? If it goes by spell book what is the limitation of how the shield can draw from it; ie I lost my spell book will it still keep making spells from it? If the spellbook needs to be present, what if I have specialized spell books called "Blasting," "Save or Suck," and "Battlefield Control" and then choose to "lose" all but Save or Suck for the day after prepping spells by giving them to someone else to throw in the bag of holding?

Perhaps I'm over-thinking this, but I have no idea how it is supposed to work for prepared casters.

It's old terminology left over from the pre-3E days. "Spells Known" for prepared casters is "every spell they have access to." For wizards, that means every spell in every spellbook you've ever owned. For a witch, this presumably would apply to familiars, and Divine Prepared casters it would mean every spell ever printed. (Not that they can actually use the item, but you get the idea.)

In case you're not familiar, prior to 3.0 wizards had a hard limit on the number of spells of a given level they could store in their spellbooks, linked to Intelligence. If they wanted to learn a new spell outside of this limit...they were completely out of luck, since the "spells known" were permanent and even if you lost the spellbook they took up a slot.

Very few groups actually played this rule as written, if at all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Charender wrote:
Which is why a lot of people houserule around it....

Well, yeah. Just thought the explanation would be helpful since the logic is fairly non-intuitive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
CKorfmann wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
CKorfmann wrote:
I've never seen anything to suggest that. ***
There's actually a FAQ specifically saying they're not compatible archetypes, though it does recommend what you should do if you choose to houserule it
Interesting. I'd never even heard of there being a controversy about it prior to today. I don't see an issue with it. The recommended house rules are sort of obvious and make sense.

Basically, it's down to Wildblooded not functioning the way it really feels like it ought to. It's not a "separate" bloodline that's very similar to an existing one, it's actually the same as the base bloodline abilities with an archetype applied.

Once you understand that, all the logic falls into place really. Since it's an archetype, and functions as such, the abilities replaced are archetype abilities. Crossblooded replaces all bloodline-related abilities, including Arcana, while any Wildblooded selection will inevitably replace at least one of them. Hence, by RAW, they conflict.

It's just kind of silly and awkward.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Please correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Infernal Healing originally limited to worshipers of Asmodeus back when it was printed in Gods and Magic? Yes, that's a 3.5 source that's been superseded, but that does seem to indicate at least original intent.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jobysama wrote:
Would both revelations apply to the Cleric healing or would it be more prudent of me just to make my Changeling a full 10 Life Oracle?

Go fully one or the other. If you absolutely, positively must have the ability to heal in melee, a Cleric with the Merciful Healer archetype can be useful.

Also, quick lesson in Pathfinder Healing - As you go up in levels, it becomes harder, and eventually impossible, to do the "Holy Trinity" bit during combat. Damage will eventually outstrip pure healing capability over the course of a single combat (but not an adventuring day.) The Heal spell helps with this when you get it, but you can't keep that up to the pace necessary.

I don't go so far as to say healing in combat is useless, but you seriously need to be looking at other options. Holy Word/Blasphemy is the same level as Heal and can potentially prevent far more damage. And of course there's a reason the saying "The best debuff is death" exists.

Short version: Even if you want to be a "primary healer" pick yourself some kind of secondary role and make sure to get spells and feats to support it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thaX wrote:
It never mentions size, neither the character size nor the weapon size.

Precisely. Therefore, these things are irrevlevant.

Quote:
It even goes as far as to assume the reader already knows that the EB is a Two Handed Weapon.

This is an appeal to designer intent, and therefore not relevant to the discussion and a distraction. We already believe the designer didn't intend the feat to work this way, but that's not the topic. The topic is how it works. There have been many cases over the past five years where the designers either didn't foresee how rules would interact, or simply made a formatting error. PFS-RAW says that you use how they wrote it until a specific FAQ (the lowest level of errata) says otherwise. You have posted many FAQs that speak to intent, but none specifically speak to either the feat or the Earthbreaker, so they too are not relevant.

The only thing that matters is the strict words on the page, and what they mean. Until you can explain why "You may treat X as Y" with no other qualifiers means anything other than that, you're wrong.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Thax, what you're missing is that this is a fairly obvious case of the design team trying to simplify the feat and screwing up to make it now do a number of things that weren't intended.

However, PFS-level RAW (the standard of this sub-forum) doesn't care about that. The feat does EXACTLY what it says and nothing else. You're trying to argue that the RAW and the obvious RAI match, but some of your own quotes pretty much prove that isn't true. There is literally zero room for interpretation on this point, but you keep trying to twist logic around to 'make' it so.

Specific always trumps general, as well. So if you have a feat that says "You may treat X as a one-handed weapon" all that the feat says is that you have the option to use the rules for a one-handed weapon when you are wielding a weapon that happens to be named "X." It needs additional text to limit that to a specific size category.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Agreed. To further clarify, these are all good seeds for backstories, much less so for mid-campaign events if the GM isn't on board. It sounds like your GM isn't on board.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Weird thing is that I'd regard the character as high Cha with no ranks in Social skills save possibly Intimidate. She certainly leaves a strong impression, it's just usually a negative one.

That said, this is likely a bad idea. PF being a cooperative game, making a character with the intention of being a jerk to the other PCs is almost inevitably going to come off as being a jerk to the other players unless it's in a group of close friends. You indicated that this is a concept looking for a game, which means that you'll most likely be playing with strangers or acquaintances.

All in all, I'd save it for a group of people you know exceptionally well, and even then have a very long talk about it before the first session with everyone who will be involved.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My assumption has always been that arcane summoning functions as a sort of pre-fab contract. Since the summoning doesn't really put creatures out too much, they get some nebulous bit of something that the spell can conjure for them for "free" (to the caster.) Once they take the 'something' they agree to fight, and appear via astral projection. If one particular creature doesn't agree, another will take it.

Ergo, all summons are willing in the technical, although if you repeatedly do so to force things summoned to serve against their basic nature word might get around the Great Beyond.

*

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

From that link, I note the rules on Haunts are "intentionally vague" per their own writer.

This tells me they're not suitable for Organized Play.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hmmm...for Elsa in particular, might I suggest using a cross-blooded (Water/Draconic (silver)) with pre-chosen powers? Essentially make it a custom bloodline for her with the archetype built in, and gloss over the actual draconic nature of things. For a young player, the disadvantage of Crossblooded (fewer spells known) might prove to be a strength, since it's less for her to keep track of.

When she starts to advance and wants to know more of the rules, show her exactly what you did and what might have been done differently to make a different character, as part of teaching her character building (in both senses of the term.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thaX wrote:
The Earthbreaker has no exceptions, the character treats it differently when he uses it in a specific way.

This is not what Thunder and Fang says. You can't twist around this point no matter how you want to. It says you treat the weapon as one-handed. There are no caveats, no exceptions, no further requirements. When the text says "You treat X as a Y weapon," and doesn't give any qualifiers, it means that, for that character, it is always, in every way, a one-handed weapon.

The rules text you are looking for is "You may wield an Earthbreaker appropriately sized for you in one hand." THAT would cause the rules to fit your definition, but that's not what the feat says to do.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Compton wrote:
With that out of the way, let me address the conclusion that you've presented: in effect, that the character can buy anything on one of these Chronicle sheets at a moment's notice—even if that character is a mile underground in a sealed demiplane—so long as it's not during combat. This is not the case. Items that show up on Chronicle sheets are not kept in a nebulous storage capsule of things that you can purchase retroactively at a moment's notice. They are items that are added to your legal purchase list (normally consisting of the "always available" list and anything you've unlocked with Fame), but one must still go through the standard channels for acquiring them.

...although looking at it now, that sure does seem like a neat one-off boon to have, doesn't it? Makes some of those older mods sheets potentially useful under the right circumstance.

Michael VonHasseln wrote:
John Compton wrote:
Items that show up on Chronicle sheets are not kept in a nebulous storage capsule of things that you can purchase retroactively at a moment's notice. They are items that are added to your legal purchase list (normally consisting of the "always available" list and anything you've unlocked with Fame), but one must still go through the standard channels for acquiring them.
Reading your response, does this mean that Fame requirements do not need to be met to purchase something listed on a Chronicle? Or do those Fame requirements STILL restrict that purchase until the fame level is hit? I ask this because I may be doing a grave disservice to my players; they have been waiting until they reach Fame requirements, just to be safe.

Fame requirements do not need to be met in order to purchase items off a chronicle sheet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually, we do have a pretty good idea of what the weight gain looks like thanks to the Bloatmage Initiate feat. Since it's equivalent to a medium load, it's not beyond saying "to calculate the weight gained from taking the Bloatmage Initiate feat, use your strength score. Add the low number from the "Medium Load" column to your maximum weight." Done.

Whether that's worth the time to put on Additional Resources, who knows.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well, I suppose in the PFS sense it's legal (if drawbacks were PFS legal) but that's so cheesy I'd really expect any sane GM to push back.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Of course, it's beta. "Because we haven't made a call yet and don't want to deal with feedback involving known corner cases" has some validity.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Biggest problem with that is legacy - how do you determine what faction older characters are?

It's a neat idea, and one that I actually suggested way back in season 1, but at this point implementation is complicated by five-six years of characters made under the old assumptions. I guess a "soft reboot" along the lines of the S0-S1 changeover could do it, where a character who is converting could pick a faction based on either current boons or their original selection (and getting a boon chronicle that lets you pick one faction's boon a number of times equal to your level to represent past service.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DundjinnMasta wrote:

@Chris Kenney

That final escape hatch is not necessary since the Amatatsu Seal can actually turn people into Amatatsu Scions, giving them the ability of divine rule if no other heir is present/alive. Which basically means that the backlash for Amatatsu Scions dying isn't as great as one would believe.

There are at least three places where the Seal can be plausibly lost to the party and beyond recovery built into the AP if the party is too slow to respond to various things. If they haven't opened the Seal between those occasions, they can lose the ability to invest new Scions.

If they manage to lose the Seal, the entire party to attrition, Ameiko, and their last-ditch replacement...well, at that point they were probably never meant to succeed


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Short version: It gives an explanation for why there wasn't a massive backlash when the heirs of the only possible ruling family started dying, and it provides one final escape hatch if all of the original party and Ameiko dies (a missing heir of one of the remaining families needs to be found since the last Amatatsu is gone.)

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Also, for Taldor in particular, well. . .

Spoiler:
No time to find the quote from Brock right now, but the basic point is that the faction started the year on their last legs. He even originally said that, and I believe this is a direct quote, "feel lucky that you even have a faction." Lady Morilla not being able to get support at home and needing to engage in some elaborate theater to make it look like Taldor's doing is a reflection of that. If the Taldor faction fails to accomplish the Mission this year, it's curtains, another faction closed for good.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Devilkiller wrote:
If you feel like the new Crane Wing is useless I guess you feel not only that a +4 bonus to AC once a round is useless but that Total Defense is useless too.

In every live table game I've ever been in, a +X to affect any one thing that you're not doing is useless because most GMs won't hold up to tell you when he's looking to hit you, he'll just figure out your AC and announce "3 hits, X damage" (And most of the time not even the number of hits unless you have DR) unless you force him to hold up the game for every time you're attacked, which annoys everyone.

Total Defense means no one bothers to attack you, as a rule, unless you're the only target in reach. So that's pretty close to useless too.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
voska66 wrote:
We thought the Master of Many Styles was too good too at first but then we realized we missed that part of losing Flurry of Blows. Then the Master of Many styles monk in our game was no so good any more. Very defensive but had no offensive ability, the player retired that character for that very reason.

One level of MOMS for Crane Style + Crane Wing. X Levels in the one-handed weapon user of your choice (Lore Warden's popular with the powergamer kiddies, but really almost anything is good). You're invincible against most single humanoid opponents until 6th level anyway, so you might as well just build normally thereafter.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot you need to be human to exploit it for a one-level dip at first or second (assuming you pick up Dodge to get the prerequisite for Crane Style with the human bonus feat). Dodge is. . . well, +1 AC is always nice even if it's not wholly impressive.

1 to 50 of 1,127 << 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.