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

David knott 242's page

1,408 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,408 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Dave Justus wrote:

Since you multiply the number of times you roll damage, not the damage itself, the question doesn't apply to critical hits.

It seems to me that in all cases you use standard mathematical orders of operation. So, before you add you multiply and, as a special rule, after you multiply you round if you have a fraction.

Fractions are therefore NEVER used in any mathematical operation that occurs after you get the fraction.

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.


My serpentine eidolon started out looking like a wingless lillend.

I expect her to look something like this by maximum level.


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.


agnelcow wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

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?

The deity section of the prerequisites for the class lists 5 classes for each of the core 20 deities who are most likely to become Evangelists. However, there are no mechanical restrictions on which classes worshiping which deities may take the class, so presumably the "aligned class" section does not restrict this. Which is nice, considering bards (who have access to the Dawnflower Dervish archetype) aren't listed as an option for Sarenites.

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.


Dylos wrote:
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.


Where is character level defined to exclude racial hit dice? I have never seen character level defined that way.


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:

Can't burn webs with a light spell or everburning torch...

Ask the cleric in my group ;)

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.


Shifty wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:
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).

If you have a Cleric or Oracle, and if they have it ready.

For all the reasons above - including becoming lost or separated from the party, or something happening to the cleric/oracle, one would think it reasonable to carry at least one days worth of water - or around 8lbs worth.

Are you seriously going to stop the party and have the cleric cast for you every time you get thirsty?

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.


GeneticDrift wrote:

If you want to do this, let them have the option of a 1 being a miss or they can reroll the attack for a chance to hit. Failure is a fumble.

As this is solely an option it cannot be seen as a punishment (maybe a false option, but i think it is decent).

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).


Shifty wrote:
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.


At a high enough level in certain classes, the Create Food and Water spell makes carrying food unnecessary. But food is definitely an issue at the lowest levels.


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.


Abrir wrote:

I'm curious if this would allow a character below the con. score to be healed above, and no longer be dead(spirit willing?). as these are the only wounds you would die from.

thoughts?

Treating deadly wounds takes a full hour, so the time factor alone should stop that from working.


Anguish wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:

A paralyzed character has effective Dexterity and Strength scores of 0 and is helpless, but can take purely mental actions.

Strength of 0 has a carrying capacity of 0.

He is automatically overloaded, and cannot move.

Since when does a person's own weight count towards encumbrance?

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.


RainyDayNinja wrote:
NoStrings wrote:
You cannot fly while paralyzed. The fly skill is dexterity based, which means that using it requires physical movement to use. I would rule that a character in that situation hovers in place, subject to winds, etc.
But even hovering requires a Fly check. I'd rule that a paralyzed person automatically fails all Fly checks, however nowhere in the Fly skill does it specify what happens when you fail a Fly check (unless you're using wings).

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?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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:
Corvino wrote:


The only way I can really see this working is if you spend 1 turn casting a scar on an both a friendly and enemy via split hex and build it from there. And that's if you GM allows you to Scar the same target twice. You're still very limited in that you can only cast one Hex at range per turn, cannot cast spells or quickened spells and have a minimum 1-round setup time if you want to cast offensively. Healing is also limited by the standard once-per-person-per-day nature of hexes.

That's the point of the box of turtles. The turtles provide a base for both friendly and hostile hexes without affecting the character holding the box.

So the "bag of rats" returns once again!


darkwarriorkarg wrote:
Ra and Horus might have it as well.

They definitely do, according to that Paizo Blog entry.


I think I could generalize this question: Is there any X 10/Y 10 combination (with X and Y both being core or base classes) that could even be competitive with any X 20 character?


Doomed Hero wrote:
Captain Wacky wrote:
From the looks of the text he would be a carrier. Able to pass it on to others through bite but unable to tranform himself. He wouldn't get any of the benefits, really. It requires you to succumb to the curse/disease.

Alright, let's explore this idea.

What if they were a lycanthrope first. Would Plague Bringer just suppress the disease?

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.


It could have worked with an ordinary warhorse as the mount. However, a hippogriff is a magical beast with no animal companion stats, so how could that work?


MichaelSandar wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

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?

It used to. Granted, nowadays it's standard to rearrange, have a minimum, etc. Stats matter a lot more in PF (or recent incarnations of D&D) than they used to. We play a weekly 1e game, and while the stats are important, they're nowhere near as crunchy as in the d20 system.

As for 'why are you joining a party', well there are plenty other reasons than 'this party already has a cleric, I'm not making another one' or what have you. Hell, look at Salvatore's group (off the top of my head). Not all of it has to be about perfect game balance.

Male Drow Ranger
Male Dwarf Fighter
Male Human Barbarian
Female Human Fighter
Halfling Thief

Not exactly a 'balanced' party, but they seemed to get along nicely. :)

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?


MichaelSandar wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

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).

That's not rewarding dishonesty. That's just a reminder not to play with people you don't trust. Don't play with cheaters.

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).


Tinalles wrote:

An Armored Kilt and a Haramaki both give you an armor bonus to AC. That is, the type of bonus is "armor". Since the two share the same bonus type, they don't stack.

You can still wear both if you want, but you'll only get +1 out of it, not +2.

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.


Kobolds prefer to eat human babies in front of their screaming mothers.

Goblins would just as soon eat the mothers first.


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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

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.).


Ah, that's good news -- the "temporarily" part, I mean. I had been suspecting some sort of permanent rift between LRGG and Paizo.


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.


What happened? All of the Pathfinder compatible products from Little Red Goblin Games have disappeared from the Paizo store. Is anyone at liberty to explain what happened?

1 to 50 of 1,408 << 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.