Dark Midian's page

381 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 381 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

The first one. It is oddly-worded, but the "against agents of House Thrune and so on" part is supposed to apply to both of the previous bits.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Paizo did the right thing by making single-classing attractive over the 3.x Frankenstein's monster builds of yesteryear.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm legit hoping the final AP has the PCs building up to fight a rampaging Tarrasque, and PF1 ends with the entirety of the Inner Sea region devastated and rebuilding.

pauljathome wrote:

Given that we have both the d20srd and Archives of Nethys, is the Paizo PRD really all that important any more?

I know people say its "official" but it seems to have at least as many bugs in it as the other two sites

Yes, technically. It's basically the resource document for PFS; if it's up there, you don't need to bring a book for it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:
Madclaw wrote:
Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:
NetoD20 wrote:
They are changing small aspects of their costumes. I would absolutely love if Ezren were to get a pointy-hat.
Assuming he's not too old to adventure now.
Are you kidding? Ezren may be getting older but he still keeps in shape. I mean have you seen mythic Ezren? Dude is swole! His adventuring days aren't done yet.
It's been 10 years since PF1, and he was already really old by then, he could've died of old age by now.
I figure his age is kind of fixed in time. Like how Batman has been in his 30s since the 1930s.

Batman is at the youngest in his late 30s, if not early 40s. Dick Grayson and Jason Todd are both in their early-mid 20s.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
None of these are basic, common or sense to me. They're more of "a history buff is mad because they want a simulation of medieval Europe and what they get is some Gygax guy throwing names at things at random" frankly.

Hey, I'd love to do away with "studded leather", rename it "brigandine", and make it obvious that the metal plates are the main protective component and not the leather. :v

The other ones really are kind of pedantic, especially the dagger one; what, did you want the dagger to be 2d6, x4 crit just because people used to finish others off with it?

Maybe with 1e going by the wayside they can afford to keep up a 2e PRD.

It's a lot like how PF rogue's sneak attack had rider effects that only functioned if the sneak attack dealt damage. Think of it as, "It doesn't matter how hard you stab someone in the kidney if their skin is too tough to break or they immediately heal afterward."

I kind of liked 5e's counter-argument for standard healing being evocation and the raise dead line of spells being necromancy, but I admit this is more intuitive.

Is there anything you can actively criticize, something you didn't care for?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
A Reddit report from Garycon said there’s a limit on how many use activated magic items you can use per day, which included wands. His was only 1+Cha, so spamming CLW wands won’t work anymore and you’ll have to invest in higher level cures at some point. It also makes shields more valuable if you can’t heal cheaply between fights.
Terrible idea. I'm definitely going to be against this.

Yeah, it sounds like they're trying to enforce simplicity by saying "No magic item healing after a certain times per day." I hope that this gets absolutely shredded in the playtest, because I don't want to see a repeat of SF's "You can only have so many magic items on you at a time" deal.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
QuidEst wrote:
I imagine they’ll be... cautious on rolling out Mythic or similar, given the response last time.

No public playtesting on a brand new power system PLUS doubling down with an entire AP based on said untested power system. The response they got was entirely their own fault.

Yeah. Maybe this time they'll keep up on it with 2e.

So... What are your opinions on PF 2e, KK? Especially after all the work you've put into cataloging 1e?

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Backgrounds as a replacement for traits, archetypes being prestige classes, bulk, magic item limits.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erik Mona wrote:
And WOW, that last AP is a DOOZY.

Is Golarion exploding to make way for Starfinder's story? Or is this like an Order of the Stick scenario where suddenly there's a flash of light and everything's updated to the new edition? ;)

If my math is correct (Which it rarely is), War for the Crown will end in August, we'll get Return of the Runelords, and then we'll get one more full AP before GenCon of next year when 2e is scheduled to be released.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just please, make the cleric/oracle spell list suck a little less. Clerical magic took a big hit in 3e when the list got stretched to nine levels, as opposed to six previously. Also, more diverse clerics!

Dragonborn3 wrote:

From the podcast: Acid Splash is an Evocation spell now? I have to wonder if this means the other Acid spells are getting moved too. It would be nice to see the 'blasty' acid spells moved out of Conjuration.

Will the Cure spells be moved to Necromancy?

If anything, likely Evocation, 5e style. Raise Dead and that line of spells should be Necromancy, though.

10 people marked this as a favorite.

1. Okay.

2 & 3: No. Nononononononono.

We're not going back to the days where you couldn't multiclass out of monk and paladin. They got rid of those rules in 3.5 by the end anyway, once you took a feat you could multiclass out of paladin into specific other classes.

The "one chance" thing is a flavor thing; it literally only matters for 1st level characters since there are no multiclassing paladins in your theoretical campaign.

Do all of this in your home games if you like. Don't make it canon.

deuxhero wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:
deuxhero wrote:

@Dark Midian

We had that the FIRST playtest. It's why CMB/CMD is STILL broken at higher levels and against any monstrous foe.

Pretty sure that's why CMD in SF is based on your armor, and bonuses are nonexistent.
I meant the first playtest as in the Pathfinder playtest. The CMB/CMD math simply not functioning was known and reported multiple times there.

I know what you meant. In any setting like this, there will always be times where the devs will say, "We're professionals, we know better than you, this isn't a problem" and lo and behold it's actually kind of a problem later on.

Then again, a fair amount of devs who worked on the original Pathfinder beta don't work for the company anymore.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, if there's another thing that I'd like Paizo to take notes on from 5e, it's "Use errata as clarifications/fixes, not balance passes." I get that PFS is a thing, but please, PF2e should let the practice of nerfing things into the ground for no reason die, especially when errata itself is so rare because of the book reprint requirement.

deuxhero wrote:

@Dark Midian

We had that the FIRST playtest. It's why CMB/CMD is STILL broken at higher levels and against any monstrous foe.

Pretty sure that's why CMD in SF is based on your armor, and bonuses are nonexistent.

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Really, I just hope that this isn't Pathfinder: Starfinder Edition and that the devs actually take note of complaints in the playtest, as long as those complaints are conveyed respectfully and positively.

The last playtest we had, toxicity aside, we had devs basically tell us, "We don't need you to crunch numbers for us, we don't need armchair devs." Well, considering this is a new system (If it isn't SF-based), that's exactly what's going to happen. A few thousand of us fans crunching numbers compared to a few dozen devs is liable to catch something someone missed.

He means that when you take Extra Wild Talent, it comes with its own prerequisites, so you don't have to worry about the "being treated as a lower level" deal that pops up when you take a second or third element for expanded element.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:

Hey Mark, simple question this time.

In Starfinder, whenever the core rulebook says something like, "You pay 110% of the item's base cost", does that mean you simply pay an additional 10% over the item's base cost or do you actually pay double the item's cost and then 10% extra?

I am really really not an official source for Starfinder, even more so than being not an official for Pathfinder. That said, 110% of something mathematically means 10% more than full.

See, I knew that math degree would count for more than being an SF guy. ;)

I guess saying "Pay the full cost + 10% extra" would have been too much wordage.

Basically, if you were to do it the way the book intends (Adding computer stuff to a phone) it'd cost the additional 10% plus the fact that if you still want to keep it comm unit sized you'd be required to pay for the miniaturization thanks to computers gaining bulk by tier.

Flagging for move to the Advice forum. Since the OP is looking for advice. :v

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh lookie here...

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

So technically, if Ghost gets a +1 to Stealth for trick attacks when supposedly it wasn't really supposed to because it gets a Dex-based skill for TA, wouldn't/shouldn't Daredevil also get a +1, because it gets a Dex-based skill for TA?

The trouble though is that it specifically says that silkweave is super durable. I would also recommend going with the rules for leather for the hardness and HP.

RPGs aren't realistic and weapons aren't meant to be all in one, more news at 11

Nope, unless you have a class feature, feat, or item that says otherwise. One a week.

Erm, where's the earth-shaking kaboom? Maintenance was supposed to have started nearly two hours ago.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Mark, simple question this time.

In Starfinder, whenever the core rulebook says something like, "You pay 110% of the item's base cost", does that mean you simply pay an additional 10% over the item's base cost or do you actually pay double the item's cost and then 10% extra?

I only saw one major thread for this about five months ago, so I figure I'd give this a shot once the dust had settled for the Core Rulebook being out.

The rulebook states:

Comm unit:
A personal comm unit is pocket-sized device that combines a minor portable computer (treat as a tier-0 computer with no upgrades or modules) and a cellular communication device, allowing wireless communication with other comm units in both audio- and text-based formats at planetary range (see page 272). A personal comm unit also includes a calculator, a flashlight (increases the light level one step in a 15-foot cone), and several entertainment options (including games and access to any local infospheres). You can upgrade a personal comm unit to function as some other devices (such as full computers and scanners) by spending credits equal to 110% of the additional device’s price.

Now, normally, upgrading your computer makes the thing bulky and hard to transport, but doesn't cost anything more than what the table for tier costs says it does.

To upgrade a comm unit however, you have to pay over double the cost of the tier AND presumably it still makes your comm unit bigger so you basically have to pay for the miniaturization upgrade to transport it anywhere? Is there a reason for price hike?

Also, are upgrades subject to the 110% umbrella?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fallout is what people think of for futuristic power armor? Really?

Not Doomguy or Master Chief? :v

Cthulhudrew wrote:
Great resource, as always. One thing I noted the other day: it looks like the entries for Bestiary 5 are still incomplete. Not sure if this is still in process or if it got lost in the shuffle.

Bestiaries are basically the last rulebooks to go into the pile, since they're all 90% stat blocks with lots of numbers.

I'm truly surprised with all the tech that SF has, Paizo didn't try to take darkvision back to its roots of being infravision.

VoodistMonk wrote:

Personally, I would just let you take it if you have weapon finesse for the curve blade. Weapon finesse is listed as the prerequisite for the feat, the curve blade is special because it can be finessed but isn't light.

Honestly, it's a melee character, let them do whatever they want, it's not like it will ever matter compared to any spellcaster.

Cool for home tables, not cool for PFS.

OP: There is no Piranha Strike for non-light weapons. It's called Power Attack. You should have thought your build out more.

I know it's not in a core book, but try looking in the Skulls and Shackles AP? That'd be the only place I could think of that has characters piloting a boat and having to worry about that kind of thing.

Val'bryn2 wrote:
However, according to the section on subdomains in the Advanced Players Guide, it states that a cleric must have access to both the domain and subdomain through their deity. Therefore, there is clearly a mistake that was made on Sivanah. Firstly because of the above mentioned, second because the deity's alignment doesn't match the subdomain, thirdly, because according to the lore of the setting, proteans HATE Sivanah, so serving the cause of them kind of goes against the deity.

The rule about a cleric having to have access to both the regular domain and subdomain was retconned some time ago, as deities like Kostchtchie grant the Ice subdomain without having access to the Water domain; it simply means that you get that domain, but taking the subdomain is mandatory.

Regardless, checking Inner Sea Gods reveals that Sivanah has no access to the Chaos domain, and therefore OP does not get the Protean subdomain.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's as it says. You can activate it as many times as you like, but these kinds of abilities usually have a clause that says you have to use it in round/minute/hour increments. So if you activate it once, there's a round. Deactivate and reactivate? Another round.

I'm on Windows 7 64-bit, Foxit version, and the sheet is the Starfinder Auto-fillable Character Sheet v1.06.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

1. If you mean "Can I use Explosive Missile to infuse an alchemical item?", no. The most recent version of the Explosive Missile alchemist discovery specifically states it has to be an "arrow, crossbow bolt, or one-handed firearm bullet."

Ultimate Combat, pg. 24:
As a standard action, the alchemist can infuse a single arrow, crossbow bolt, or one-handed firearm bullet with the power of his bomb, load the ammunition, and shoot the ranged weapon. He must be proficient with the weapon in order to accomplish this. When the infused ammunition hits its target, it deals damage normally and detonates as if the alchemist had thrown the bomb at the target. If the explosive missile misses, it does not detonate. An alchemist must be at least 4th level before selecting this discovery.

2. Correct.

3. Correct, except the part mentioned in #1. You can't use Explosive Missile on alchemical items.

4. It's up to you. It would cost the user three uses of their bombs, so it would be a "nova" option that would very quickly get outclassed. Technically, as long as the weapon being used is ranged, it would be fine rule-wise.

Mike Shel wrote:
Dark Midian wrote:
Are you allowed to tell us just how much of the dungeon you used? Considering that the deep levels are basically 15th level plus possibly mythic.


With that said, since this is chapter 2 of the AP, there are limits, and the levels listed in Dungeons of Golarion were used as a guideline.

Except for my BBEG: ** spoiler omitted **

Ah, the good old "Hey, you can't fight this thing so the GM expects you to run!" encounters.

Mike Shel wrote:

I loves me some dungeons!

It remains to be seen what the cruel and clever James Jacobs will do to my turnover, but what I sent in is packed with nasty, dungeon-crawling badness. I took my lead from the excellent article on Hollow Mountain in Dungeons of Golarion - I can't recall who's responsible for it (Jason Bulmahn, Matthew Goodall, Brandon Hodge, or Anthony Pryor), but it provided a great framework for a multi-level crawl I hope people will love (even if they fail to survive).

Are you allowed to tell us just how much of the dungeon you used? Considering that the deep levels are basically 15th level plus possibly mythic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Mark, less of a rules question on this one. What are the chances of the Void kineticist element getting printed in a hardcover book? Did you ever bring up the idea for it to be in Planar Adventures?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A. 5th edition D&D is doing very well. One of Pathfinder's biggest niches was "Hey, at least we're better than 4e, and we're still roughly like that old system you liked!" Now that WotC is actually putting up good competition with a recognized brand, it's natural that PF sales will slip.

B. Pathfinder is bloated. They're scaling back the amount of books because they finally realized that putting out books at breakneck speed is not the best way to go about things when everyone's already overworked AND they have a whole new system to worry about.

C. On top of B, Paizo has recently lost a number of high-level employees in the past year or so. They literally only have one forum moderator and seem unwilling or unable to fill the positions that are left.

This is such a leap of logic I'm surprised you're not on a mental gymnastics team. While the logic of two-handing a shield is fine, if a bit weird, the bashing property treats the shield as larger for damage dice. It does not make anything truly larger, and a light shield is still light.

1 to 50 of 381 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>