|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I remember that feeling very well last year, and how bummed I was about it. And to my great disappointment, I've been one of those who has disappeared this year; I'm in the thick of my academic quarter now, grasping to find time for all the stuff I have to attend to, and Superstar just got kicked to the curb for me. But I'm still going to try to find time to look at the encounters!
Love the elf, love the mercane. I doubt the goblin is going to see a lot of use at my table, but if I ever need exactly that mini, boy will it be cool to have it!
Erik Mona wrote:
I thought I'd put a link to the job opening here in the blog, in case some of you miniatures stalwarts might consider a change in career.
Get behind me, Satan! (Besides, I doubt you're looking for a crusty old grognard in that role ;-)
Those are cool! I especially like both wizards. My only quibble is that I'd like the dwarf even better if his potion bottles had some color, but that was probably a couple paint steps too many. Maybe I'll add a dash of color to those myself.
While we're in wizard territory, let me add that I think it would be cool if you occasionally made a mini that was suitable for a spell effect. For instance, it would be great to have a transparent (not-Bigby's!) hand spell, a floating disk, a couple of spiritual weapons (though some stuff has come out in Heroclix lately that's good for that), a Large resilient sphere, some various spell walls that could connect up to each other smoothly, etc.
Don't know whether you just overlooked this one or consciously didn't want to answer, so I thought I'd try once more and then leave you alone. I hope that's okay! :-)
edit: sorry, I just realized that you chimed in on this issue recently in this thread, so I'll consider my question answered. Thanks!
Erik Mona wrote:
I totally get this, and approve. The only exceptions I might encourage you to make are a couple of the flying dinosaurs, since most "drugstore" toy dinosaurs aren't based. A pterodactyl and the smaller flying dinosaur from Souls for Smuggler's Shiv (can't remember its name offhand -- rhamphorynchus, maybe?) would be useful. At present, for Medium-sized flying dinosaurs, I'm having to use a repainted Heroclix Beast Boy pterodactyl that's less than ideal.
Rules question: In your games, when someone with the fly spell up is knocked unconscious, does she (a) hover in place, (b) feather fall down as though the spell were ending, (c) come crashing out of the sky, or (d) something else?
And while you're thinking about flight, in your games, could a paralyzed mage with fly up still control her movement mentally?
I agree, they're playing things pretty safe. But I don't think that's a bad strategy for them, at least short term; Paizo ate their lunch in a big way over the last several years, and they've needed to get back to basics. By sticking to the core stuff, they re-assert, hey folks, remember where the "real D&D" is. (Not that I think that's true.) I also think, though, that it's a bit of a trap for them to stick with their old campaign worlds. A lot of what made Paizo and Golarion exciting was that the world was genuinely new, and no one knew what the answers to the big questions were. (I even wonder if the devs knew, at the beginning.) It's exciting to be part of that first group of discoverers, and people who have been tromping around Toril for the last 30 years just can't get that experience anymore -- not in the same way, anyhow.
Kalindlara, you're prescient! The new official D&D set (Rage of Demons) is just in the process of getting released, and there's a bunch of drow in it. So that would be another reason for not going heavy into drow.
Re: Drow, yes, there are a lot out there from the old DDM line, but I can tell you that my stock of them for sale has gotten pretty picked over, and in particular I have a very hard time keeping the cheaper ones in stock. (Any Drow Blademaster I list is generally gone within 24 hours.) The arrival of 5e brought a lot of new players into the market, and drow still have cachet. In any case, I'd bet you'd do well with a couple of cheap commons, maybe an uncommon drow female of some sort (something particularly alluring would be very welcome, I think, since most of the drow females on the market are pretty covered up -- with the exception of the Champion of Eilistraee who *still* goes for $25+...) and a male drider as a rare.
Dark Foll are a great idea, as are drow (particularly if it includes 1 or more male driders, which have a unique look in PF) and duergar. I'd also like to second the bandit notion: there are surprisingly few good basic bandit and thug minis available in the existing range of prepainted minis, and they're always in demand. And I don't think there are any dedicated female bandits at all. Particularly given how popular Kingmaker has been, I'd think such a grouping would be really popular, maybe led by a rare Stag Lord? (And if you do such a grouping, it would be great to have one of them be on the portly side, like Auchs; there aren't a lot of obese minis out there, and sometimes an adventure calls for such a character.)
Urdefhans would also be welcome, since there are none at all presently available.
And want to make me *really* happy? Give us Small and Large spriggans!
Edit: oh, and a couple more trogs to go along with the Xulgath from way back might be nice!
Interestingly, in 3.5 the spell description talked about this sort of situation explicitly. It included a paragraph that said: "The DM should adjust saving throws by circumstance. For example, a creature charging down an incline that is suddenly greased has little chance to avoid the effect, but its ability to exit the affected area is almost assured (whether it wants to or not.)"
It does not, however, include rules for damage from falling down stairs.
I agree with you that it doesn't let you move through solid surfaces. I guess I disagree with you about avoiding squeezing penalties, since those are exactly the kind of obstacles that prevent one from "moving and attacking normally".
The obvious question: How does the spell make it possible to wield a big weapon in a tight space? My answer, annoying as it might be: That's the way the magic works!
I wasn't expecting so many quick responses, so thanks!
Let me respond to a couple different things:
(1) Automatic grapple failure: I agree that's the strict interpretation of the language, but it seems to me that a person under FoM could still allow herself to be swallowed, grappled, or pinned if she were so inclined. She could just choose to stop being grappled/pinned whenever she liked. What, could a person wearing a ring of FoM not allow himself to be hugged by his kids?
(2) Using weapons inside the beast: I agree that space is tight, which is why the swallow whole rules say that you count as grappled inside the creature. But FoM makes you immune to being grappled (whenever you want to be.) So my interpretation is that when you drew out your halberd inside the creature's gullet and wielded it, the magic of the spell would allow you to move freely within the space in a way that would allow you to attack with the weapon. By my reading of the spell, if movement is possible at all, the spell makes it possible for you to move normally. And I'd say the same thing about someone trapped under an avalanche or cave-in.
I just want to run this scenario by people and check my reasoning. If you have Freedom of Movement (hereafter, FoM) up, it shouldn't be possible for a monster to swallow you whole against your will, but I can think of cases where one might *want* to be swallowed whole, and so might allow it to happen. (Something like this happens in an early Adventure Path adventure I know of.) So, once you had been swallowed, is it safe to say that, due to FoM, you would not in fact be grappled, and so could (a) make normal attacks to the creature's GI system with any sort of weapon, not just light slashing and piercing weapons, and (b) could climb back into the creature's mouth whenever you wished?
And I assume that FoM would give one no protection against, for instance, any acid damage one was exposed to while swallowed.
For easy reference, here's the Swallow Whole rules from the PRD:
If a creature with this special attack begins its turn with an opponent grappled in its mouth (see Grab), it can attempt a new combat maneuver check (as though attempting to pin the opponent). If it succeeds, it swallows its prey, and the opponent takes bite damage. Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to one size category Smaller than the swallowing creature. Being swallowed causes a creature to take damage each round. The amount and type of damage varies and is given in the creature’s statistics. A swallowed creature keeps the grappled condition, while the creature that did the swallowing does not. A swallowed creature can try to cut its way free with any light slashing or piercing weapon (the amount of cutting damage required to get free is equal to 1/10 the creature’s total hit points), or it can just try to escape the grapple. The Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. If a swallowed creature cuts its way out, the swallowing creature cannot use swallow whole again until the damage is healed. If the swallowed creature escapes the grapple, success puts it back in the attacker’s mouth, where it may be bitten or swallowed again.
This thread is recent enough to be only mostly dead, so I don't even know if this counts as thread necromancy, but I just wanted to point out that, whichever way people choose to rule on this issue at their tables, you're going to have to give the same answer to both the question about moving through the circle and the question about attacking the person protected by the spell, because the text of FoM specifically says that the spell enables you to "move and attack" normally.
That said, I wouldn't allow FoM to trump Magic Circle spells, or the protection from attacks granted by PfE. These hindrances operate not by presenting physical obstacles and hindrances of the sort described by the examples in the spell, but are tied to alignment. For me anyway, that just gives it the wrong flavor to be overcome by FoM. FoM is so potent already anyway, so where there's a grey area, I tend to avoid expanding FoM's power.
I'm not noticing any big gap in quality between this year's winners and other years'. Maybe that "wisdom of crowds" stuff isn't so crazy.
Isaac V wrote:
Lol, I actually had written another sentence in that post to the effect that "not that I think you have a particular problem in this area...", but I deleted it as long-winded and unnecessary. Though you made your avatar, you tell me! ;-)
Isaac V wrote:
I know we're supposed to stay quiet about our future round submissions, but are we allowed to talk about our open call items/other people's open call items in their respective threads?
Yep, should be fine to talk about the round that's done. But a word of advice: be cautious with your tone where other people's items are concerned. Everybody's watching....
Joseph Kellogg wrote:
It's a fantasy RPG; anything is possible!
If the issue is a safe place to rest, you can give them a place protected by NPC's, or create a particularly secure location for them to discover. I was a player in the Serpent's Skull campaign as 1 player of 2, and we did very well by (a) having 2 characters that were very self-reliant and could cover a wide range of party needs (i.e. a ranger and an archaeologist bard), and the 1st adventure in that campaign gave us a group of NPC's that could watch over us while we slept. Running with 2 was a challenge, but with cautious play and creativity we held up quite well!
Hell, get a blender, let him drink a sandwich!!
And I too celebrate Brigg and all he stands for, even if it's only to halfling height.
Late to this party but the internet is forever. So: if you're going to allow this readied attack to avoid the miss chance, doesn't the same thing apply to the blinking caster readying an action to cast a spell? It would give the blinking caster a way of ignoring the 20% chance that his spell goes off in the wrong plane. The logic is exactly the same. But that makes blink an even stronger option, which seems to me a bad idea. So for game balance reasons, I wouldn't allow either use of a readied action.
Nothing to see here, nothing to see here. Move along.
D'oh! I actually hesitated before writing that, but I wasn't in a position to check. Sigh. Thanks for the correction!
Heroism and inspire courage don't stack; they both provide morale bonuses. And the bonuses of archaeologist's luck apply to all the most important rolls a player makes, including saves.
As I've said, my experience has been that, with Lingering Performance, I have not enough rounds to do what I have to do. I have to economize, yes, but to my mind that's good game balance. But we can of course agree to disagree!
Matthew Morris wrote:
This. I was just about to point out that the bonus is a luck bonus, which is otherwise hard to come by. Heroism + Archaeologist's luck ftw! But Lingering Performance is a must.
I should add: my archaeologist was part of a very small party, so having the effect only work for her and not the whole party wasn't a big deal. I needed a couple of characters who could take care of themselves without much support in a wide range of circumstances, and an archaeologist was perfect for that.
Fwiw, I'm not pushing for Interpretation 2, whereas my own inclination was always to prefer Interpretation 1, which seems to be the consensus here anyway. I was just thrown by the discussion I saw in that Dragon article, which may or may not reflect the author's considered view of the question, didn't see anything on the messageboards that addresses the issue, and thought I'd check and see what other people thought. So thanks for your responses!
James Risner wrote:
Really interested in the perspectives of store owners! This is closer to what I expected. I would assume that for every hardcore PFS player who watches rules changes closely, there's a dozen (a hundred?) people who buy the books that interest them, take them home, use them how they use them, and never look at the Paizo boards even once. It's probable that the sorts of people like us who read and comment on these boards are the exception, not the rule. (Which is not to say that our views/interests don't matter or shouldn't be taken seriously by Paizo.)
Genuine question: How many of these problems come from inadequate game-testing? Could Paizo do a soft release in PDF form only, and then sell print editions only after the chief problems have been revealed and (hopefully) solved in play? I know that you already do this to an extent when you release early versions of new classes and rulesets for playtesting and player feedback, but would it be impossible to make the PDF publication of new texts another round of playtesting to make sure you get it right?