|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Dave Justus wrote:
Not true. Those fractional favored class bonuses would never work if you rounded them down to zero at each level where you received them before adding them up.
By the current official FAQ, yes that would be legal -- at least until the dev team revisits that FAQ answer as James Jacobs suggested they might in the Inner Sea Gods product discussion thread.
You can certainly use a bow while sitting on the back of a horse (in other words, riding), so the only issue for sitting at a lower level would seem to be whether the bow itself is touching the ground and thus more awkward to handle.
By the way -- it will be several levels before that favored class bonus actually pays off. It doesn't give you the ability to summon your eidolon in one round -- it reduces the time required to summon your eidolon by one round each level it is taken until you can summon it in one round at 9th level.
If you are interested in summoning your eidolon quickly, that can be taken care of at 4th level with a 2nd level spell (Summon Eidolon) -- and you would not really be able to dispense with that spell until 5 levels later.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Also, with the summoner is the life link ability. The summoner may want a larger pool of hit points to transfer to the eidolon.
Although I must admit that in my experience the Life Link ability has very seldom proven useful. At low levels, there are very few enemies that can reduce an eidolon with 1+ hit points all the way to -Con hit points in one hit, so you very seldom get to use Life Link in a way that keeps the eidolon up and fighting.
Okay, then the lists can clarify one point. I assume that they are all core or base classes? By implication, that would exclude prestige classes at least -- for the sake of sanity if not balance. I think a lot of people's heads would explode if they had to deal with multiple layers of "+1 level of existing class".
Grim Tales (based on d20 Modern) had another approach to limiting magic that only let you gain casters levels at odd levels starting at 3rd level. It also had a system of strain damage from casting spells as well as notes about how this change affected the rarity of magic items and the danger presented by magical monsters.
This approach could be approximated in Pathfinder by requiring the first level or two a character takes to be in a non-spellcasting class and forbidding characters to take a class level that would increase their caster level beyond half their character level.
Ah -- so the validity of the complaints about potentially abusive choices of aligned class would be campaign dependent unless the examples already include something that is potentially problematic. The open question would be what are the aligned classes for a deity who is not one of the top 20. So -- it looks like it will be at least two weeks before I can see for myself. I was going to refrain from buying the PDF for this one, but it looks as though I won't have the patience to wait those extra few days until my FLGS gets its physical copy.
This seems wrong to me but evangelist doesn't specify that the aligned class has to be a non prestige class heck evangelist can increase levels in exalted or sentinel!
That's interesting -- a couple of pages back Lord Gadigan made mention of an Evangelist choosing "one of five deity associated classes" -- and the mention of "aligned class" as opposed to simply "class" suggests that there is some limitation of the class that can be chosen. So what is the real story here?
I had my summoner ask his eidolon where she came from more than once, and each time she would give a different answer. Sometimes she hints that she knew his patron goddess in a past life, sometimes she hints that she is an avatar of the goddess, and sometimes she denies existing at all before the first time he summoned her. My summoner eventually gave up on this question.
I was counting the animal's hit dice as character levels, since they do seem to count as such for most purposes. Where is the ruling that character level does not include racial hit dice?
An intelligence of 3+ and three non-standard animal companion feats are required, thus I assumed a 5 HD animal companion that increased intelligence to 3 at 4th level and retrained its prior feats appropriately by 5th level.
At least a cohort taking the Leadership feat hits a point of diminishing returns, as the maximum level drops by at least 2 at each step. A familiar loses half hit points at each step.
But there seems to be no similar limiting mechanism for the animal companion of a 5 HD intelligent animal companion. You could rule that a newly recruited animal companion cannot have an intelligence of 3+ or non-standard feats, but that only delays the issue until you can retrain its feat and its ability score increase -- so time and money are the only limiting factors.
However, further advancement of the animal companion will cause those further down the chain to fall behind eventually. When the druid is 20th level, the animal companion has 16 hit dice, its animal companion has 13 hit dice, its companion has 11 hit dice, and so on until you reach a potentially infinite number of 6 HD companions. But how many of these companions would you actually want to take with you on an adventure?
Cardinal Chunder wrote:
But that sort of situation does not come up often enough to require everyone in the party to carry lit torches at all times -- especially given all of the alternate solutions available to a party of sufficient level and diversity of talents.
If the party has stopped for a break, why not? One casting is enough to hydrate the whole party in most cases.
I was actually looking at this from the point of view of an oracle whose spells known included Create Water and Light. For obvious reasons, I had her not bother carrying torches or a waterskin. Most of the rest of the party carries waterskins (since they would otherwise be out of luck if anything happened to the oracle) but nobody bothers with torches since there are so many full casters in the party that can cast the Light cntrip/orison.
I like this idea, as it makes it the player's decision whether to risk a fumble and does not punish high level warriors with multiple attacks (as they are more likely to simply accept a single miss rather than risk a fumble).
If a pound of weight in rations a day seems encumbering, I wonder how you deal with the weight of the water per day...!
Create Water is a zero-level cleric spell, castable at will if you have the spell prepared (as a cleric) or known (as an oracle). You only need to carry one empty container -- cast Create Water on it, drink or otherwise use whatever you need, and then dump the rest and repeat as needed.
We could extrapolate from the rules about armor and bracers of armor and rule that only one of the intelligence boosting items functions at all for all purposes -- normally the first item unless the second item grants a greater bonus.
Since the saving throw of a spell is basically the spell's attack roll being rolled by the target instead of the attacker, maybe something bad should happen to a spellcaster if any of his targets rolls a 20 on a saving throw? Under this house rule, a spellcaster who targets a dozen or more creatures with an area effect spell would have real cause to worry, just like the 20th level monk or two weapon fighting ranger who has a similarly high number of attacks.
If the spell does not involve saves, attack rolls, or attempts to overcome spell resistance, you could still include a "casting roll" that hurts the caster if he rolls a 1 and perhaps gives him some minor benefit on a natural 20.
If anything, it actually makes more sense to have a fumble system for spell casters than for weapon users -- magic is a mysterious and scary force to most people, since they are not sure that the caster is in full control of his powers. A fumble system for spell casters would reinforce that paranoia.
Rolling first prevents you from using the argument presented as a circumstance bonus or penalty to the Diplomacy roll. On the other hand, presenting the argument first helps the DM decide which skill is applicable -- Diplomacy with an honest appeal, Bluff with a lie that is obvious to the DM and players (but not perhaps to the NPC), or Intimidate if the player is threatening the NPC. At the very least you would want to establish what the player is trying to do before he makes any skill rolls.
Treating deadly wounds takes a full hour, so the time factor alone should stop that from working.
Unless the character with a carrying capacity of zero is stark naked and carrying no equipment, he is overloaded.
It is basically a matter of the way you want to run this lycanthopic antipaladin NPC. If you want him to have the benefits of lycanthropy but none of the drawbacks, you can make him a hereditary lycanthrope. If you want to rein him in a bit, make him cursed/diseased.
Don't you fall when you fail to hover? You don't have the options of staying where you are (since you failed to hover) or of deliberately moving (since you are paralyzed), so what else is left but falling?
So -- is there an estimated date for getting the contents of this book into the PRD? The date of the last post in this thread reminds me just how many months this book has been out.
So let me get this straight -- Alice actually thinks it is more difficult (in this case, impossible) to get out of the way of somebody who cannot see you and who is walking through your square without trying to run over you than it is to get out of the way of somebody who sees you and is actually trying to run over you?
Orfamay Quest wrote:
So the "bag of rats" returns once again!
Doomed Hero wrote:
I think lycanthropy is only a disease or curese if you were infected with it. If you inherited it, you get to change into an animal pretty much any time you want to and have no real downside to your condition.
Novels work differently from games, though. The only way you would have a group like that in a real game would be if the GM imposed heavy restrictions on spellcasters (since the drow ranger has spells and spell-like abilities, the game isn't quite "no magic"). Otherwise, if you were going to join a group that included these characters, would you want to play yet another warrior?
The temptation is too strong, especially if getting in touch with the GM is too difficult (as it often was back in the days when my group rolled stats). To take an extreme example -- if you rolled nothing higher than an 8 for your ability scores and your DM did not specify rules for throwing out an unsuitable player character, do you wait until you can contact him or go ahead and trash that character and replace it with another? With no set guidelines, one player may show up for the game with a character whoses stats are inferior to those that another player rejected -- and this will happen with even the most trustworthy people.
Still -- if point buy or a fixed array is unsuccessful at achieving balance, rolled stats does not improve matters at all but just throws in yet another random unbalancing factor. If anything, seeing a player roll absurdly high stats makes it more difficult rather than less difficult to bring those stats in line with what other players rolled.
I think my major objection to rolling stats is that it does not model what it purports to model: random generation of a human being from your campaign world. If rolling stats is meant to represent the hand that "fate" dealt you, then why are you allowed to arrange the scores as you like? But if rearranging is not allowed, your highest stat is (for example) strength, and your party is already mostly front line warriors, why are you joining this party and not some other party that lacks muscle?
How much do you like being reminded every session about the time one of your fellow players rolled 3 20s in a row? Especially when you were there to see it?
Rolling stats forces a similar situation. The problem is balance, not honesty (although any system that rewards dishonesty, as rolled stats not observed by the GM does, should be eliminated on practical moral grounds anyway).
Not correct. According to Adventurer's Armory, wearing an armored kilt with light or medium armor increases the armor bonus from your actual armor by +1 at the cost of that armor being treated as the next heavier category. So a wizard wearing a haramaki and an armored kilt would indeed get a +2 bonus to AC -- at a cost of being slowed down a bit for wearing what is effectively medium armor.
For the 5th level spell and up, the major difference is between outsiders for Summon Monster and giants for Summon Natural Ally. The giants tend to be tougher but less versatile than their outsider counterparts.
The simplest approach would be to go with the biped base form and have him carry the (Small) summoner between battles. During battles, either the summoner jumps/climbs down or the eidolon puts him down before getting down to business. The summoner is a spellcaster, not a cavalier.
I have on occasion engaged in what I would call "posotive" metagaming. On more than one occasion, my PC has found himself separated from others in the party and not sure whether the other PCs survived wherever they ended up. It was a real toss-up whether in character he would follow them or abandon them and go look for another party to adventure with. In such situations, the only real question was when he would follow them -- not whether he would do it.
To make matters worse, high level casters actually destroy gems. I wonder if the destruction of enough gems is what could eventually drain the world of magic? After all, it is not much of a leap to go from some spells being uncastable because of lack of gems above a certain size to all spells being uncastable because too many gems and other magical substances have been consumed.
I recently generated a cleric who offers prayers to nearly every god she is aware of, even those with opposed portfolios and alignments. She has a patron deity to whom she is dedicated and who receives the lion's share of her prayers and service -- but she definitely believes in giving all deities their due.
I recently was in a session where my character had seen about 3/4 of a rectangular dungeon complex and was preparing to cast Dimension Door to reunite with other party members from whom he had been separated by structural collapse. Even though I saw exactly where they were on the map, I based my teleport destination on symmetry with what I had actually seen, not what was actually there. I also made sure my character was in good enough health to take some scramble damage if somebody else was there (I could see that the selected squares were empty, but of course my PC had no way to know that.).
Random rolls and static values are the extremes. There are variants at both ends -- for example, I have been in some campaigns where players just get the maximum. Iron Heroes had everyon roll a d4 for hit points, with extra points added according to what the size of the hit die would have been -- so, for example, a class that would normally roll a d12 for hit points would roll 1d4+8 instead.
But frankly, the only reason I can see for rolling hit points is tradition -- the game started out with rolled hit points, so many people just assume that that is how things should be done. But why should the amount of damage one can take be rolled? What does it represent? At least with ability scores you are (supposedly) representing the randomness of genetic luck (but then why are you allowed to arrange the rolls as you please?). But all of the factors that go into determining your combat toughness are already known -- why not just plug them into a formula an calculate a final value?
Super Genius Games had the "Hut" base form -- that is probably the closest thing to a treant I have seen. This form is basically built to carry people. Combine it with a small race, and you can ride it into combat from 1st level.
The Ultimate Campaign rules for retraining are the official solution to your problem. At this point, you have Endurance twice, once as a standard feat selection and once as a free bonus feat from your fighter archetype. Having that feat twice provides no benefit, so you would want to retrain one of them away. Since Endurance from the fighter archetype is built into the archetype, you would retrain the first Endurance feat you got and replace it with something more useful. This will cost you a little bit of time and money. If your GM is generous, you may be able to talk him into waiving those costs.
I would have started with a biped -- treants definitely have claws but not necessarily bites. They are big and strong but not particularly agile, which again works best with a biped. There is no particular reason to make him fast, so he does not really need more than two legs. I would add arms and claw or slam attacks up to the maximum, give him the most natural armor you can, and make him as big as your level allows.
It is a pity that there is no "plant traits" evolution, as that is the big thing this eidolon would be lacking.