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

DeciusBrutus's page

4,834 posts. Alias of Daniel Powell 318.


RSS

1 to 50 of 4,834 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'd like to see a mixed group; two characters that slew Karzoug, two that defeated the Hurricane King, and two that got mythic from WotR AP1-3.

I'd go a different way with the power feats though: When all of your power feat boxes are checked and you earn another one, select a different role card for your character and gain one of the listed abilities that has a version without a checkbox. Once you have all the basic abilities, you can start checking off boxes. Ignore any ability that is verbatim identical to an ability you have.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Suthainn wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
Berselius wrote:
And hopefully one day we'll also get a single player Pathfinder RPG PC game that allows you to build a party of four (and also gain NPC Cohorts if you take the Leadership feat like in Storm of Zehir).
You have Sword Coast Legends (based on D&D 5E) to do that.
I do hope that turns out to be a good game, but sadly the suggestion isn't much use to those of us who would like to actually play a game using in the pathfinder ruleset and set in Golarion.

To use the OGL rules in a video game requires the permission of WOTC. That's not going to happen.

Plus the same things that make a rules system good for tabletop make it bad for a computer game. Contrast TOEE (Troika 2003) with Pillars of Eternity; using a fine-grained system designed for computer use makes everything better (rather than the NWN approach, witch required that many creatures be arbitrarily immune to many types of effects for balance reasons.


A dagger is a melee weapon, a ranged weapon, a weapon, and an object. That means that it can be affected by things that specify any of those types.

Slashing grace allows you to apply your dexterity instead of your strength modifier to "that weapon's damage" under certain conditions. Not "melee damage" or "ranged damage", or even "that weapon's weapon damage". If you can figure out how to add your strength modifier to spell damage from a light or one-handed slashing weapon wielded in one hand, Slashing Grace lets you use your dexterity modifier instead.


Odd then that they aren't valid targets for Magic Weapon, which targets "weapon touched".

EDIT: monk unarmed strikes are weapons, but not unarmed strikes generally. "Natural weapon" is clearly not a subset of "weapon" for MW, why would it be for anything else?

A one-handed double slashing weapon would make this even more complicated…


So in any case natural attacks, not being weapons, are allowed. As are unarmed strikes made using TWF, as long as they are kicks, el ow strikes, or attacks with the hand that just threw the dagger.


Rynjin wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:

1st round: maximizes time stop, apply all buffs, quickened dominate person.

2nd round: maximized time stop, apply area debuffs, quickened Mass Save-or-die of choice.
3rd round: quickened disjunction, maximized time stop, dimensional anchor, cloudkill, wall of force.

Swap around as required or appropriate. It's a bit heavy on the various metamagic rods. But the "all debuffs" part should leave the PCs with most of the possible negative conditions, except for the ones they are completely immune to.

Except Time Stop precludes you from using spells that directly affect others.

So, of all of those, only the buffs, the Wall of Force, and the Cloudkill (which is a s~&+ty spell to use on 20th level PCs. A piddling amount of Con damage they can probably shrug off or are immune to even if they manage to fail the save?) actually work.

Plenty of debuffs have their effects indirectly. Crushing Pit is an easy one. Raging rubble, summon swarm, and any effect with area and duration are all useful. As well, an augmented time stop forces a duel.

And you don't have to be a spellcaster if you have 20 ranks in UMD and the right equipment.


1st round: maximizes time stop, apply all buffs, quickened dominate person.
2nd round: maximized time stop, apply area debuffs, quickened Mass Save-or-die of choice.
3rd round: quickened disjunction, maximized time stop, dimensional anchor, cloudkill, wall of force.

Swap around as required or appropriate. It's a bit heavy on the various metamagic rods. But the "all debuffs" part should leave the PCs with most of the possible negative conditions, except for the ones they are completely immune to.


Not a standard action— an attack. You can make one attack as a standard action, or you can use one of your iterative attacks to perform a melee touch attack with a held charge. You can also charge with a melee touch to deliver a spell, if your target has moved away.


You can throw daggers with iterative attacks and Quick Draw without using two-weapon fighting. You can combine weapon attacks and natural attacks without using TWF. You can't use slashing grace with TWF or if your other hand is occupied with a shield, but you can use it while fighting with more than one long sword in a round if you drop the first one and Quick Draw another one.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Great summary! I'm working numbers and tactics to provide meaningful feedback on the consumables.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Indeed it is PvP. Just yesterday we had our first successful bluff, in which one group threatened to attack and paid to declare three feuds, but didn't, causing the defending group to spend time adjusting to a defensive posture.


Experience should be awarded for overcoming challenges, not killing wolves. Killing wolves is one way to overcome some challenges, but I think that a sleeping dire wolf could reasonably be a cr2 challenge even if the party killed it, and even if they woke it up, provided they has the information required to know that it was there and asleep.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Why don't people on prepaid time count for profit/loss? Clearly they have already made their contribution to cash flow, and were given a liability in the form of game time. Doesn't the voiding of that liability count?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I don't want to say that people who can't be bothered to read a guide won't ever learn how to play PFO, but people who aren't willing to spend the effort to learn need patient friends and/or lots if patience themselves.

Reading the new player guide is easy mode learning, and only hardcore gamers should take the maximum difficulty setting of figuring it out themself.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

The only GW or Paizo policy I am aware of on sales is "Buyer and Seller beware".

I personally have a non-specific distrust of that site, mostly because I expect a high base rate of fraud in grey market internet goods.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Audoucet wrote:
Ryan's new business plan. Waiting for Decius to buy more players.

I wouldn't do is for anyone less awesome than Kobold freaking Cleaver. At least not without some condition other than "be more likely to participate".

Goblinworks Executive Founder

If I'm tracking correctly every t3 thing I've seem dropped was acquired while we were killing Mordant Spire Champions or duergar.

I've seen about six drop, but I know that there have been more. Mostly it's been broken master weapons from the MSC and adamantine ore from the duergar. Recipes and expendables have also arrived, in roughly the same proportions as the t2 salvage.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

The elementals are generally lower level than the Mordant Spire. The Drow dark elves will be slightly stronger and the lich's minions will allegedly be nasty.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you want to stay in, I'll buy a package of goblin balls for you. Because I'd rather have a KC in PFO than have more dice.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Only PFO subscribers can post on the GW forums, making these a good way to explain PFO to Pathfinder fans.

While we should point out that these aren't the preferred or most used forums, we shouldn't imply that they are completely obselete.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

The problem with pickpocketing has nothing to do with reputation and has already been done to death in this thread and several others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You don't die until you need to reset your hand, so I'd use it every time I was rolling a check that would win the scenario.


Vic Wertz wrote:


mlvanbie wrote:
The old version of Silas seems to deal damage if you try to evade, but the new one would not.
Yes, he does: "If you do not defeat Silas, Silas deals 1d4–1 Poison damage to you. "
If you evade Silas, that text doesn't happen, does it?
Mike Selinker wrote:
Evade ignores the entire card except for anything that says anything about evading or things that might let you evade.

"Before you act" says something about evading, and since evaded banes are neither defeated nor undefeated the "if any player (fails to) defeat" works, unless the player who encountered the bane evades, in which case the rules for evading take precedence, because that text is ignored.

Occluding Field:
Current:
Each character at this location encounters the Occluding Field. Any character may reveal a boon with the Sihedron trait to evade the barrier; if all characters at the location do so, banish the barrier. Characters who fail to defeat the barrier are dealt 1d4+1 Force damage that may not be reduced.
If defeated, shuffle the barrier into a random other open location deck. If there are no other open locations, banish the barrier.
Proposed:
Before you act, you and each other character at your location may reveal a card with the Sihedron trait. If all players at your location do so, banish Occluding Field. Every character at your location who did not reveal a card with the Sihedron trait encounters Occluding Field.

If undefeated, you are dealt 1d4+1 Force damage that may not be reduced.
If defeated, shuffle it into a random other open location deck; if there are no other open locations, banish it.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

For the practical portion, it would involve changing the email, deleting any payment information on file, changing the password, and telling the buyer the new login info. (The buyer should then confirm that the email is correct and change the password again before adding their own payment information).

I'm not aware of any escrow providers, so all trades are based on a high level of trust from at least one party.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

The bigger they are, the harder they are to fell.

Ogg's heads now adorn five pikes, and the rivers run red with the heart's blood of what once was the core of his army. But his forces were numerous, and the disorganized remnants of Ogg's hubris remain a threat that still must be dealt with.

Thanks to everyone who assisted.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I know I didn't request an RSVP, but it would help for planning purposes if anyone planning on attending would say when they planned to be present.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

On the 27th Day of Gozran, AR 4715, General Vrel Vusoryn of the 4th Battle Guard - River Kingdoms, declared Reckoning on any Ogres found in the southern Echo Woods.

Shortly afterwards, scouts of the echo woodsmen discovered that the army of ogres was led by an ogre known as Ogg, who shared in the blessing/curse of Pharasma and was apparently resistant to immunity.

And so the call went out for more pikes. Ogg's head is destined to grace all of them, until he gives up his dream of leading the ogres to victory in their siege of the inaccessible Fort Inevitable.

This weekend, everybody is invited to participate in the fall of Ogg the undying near the old university. Rewards will be offered to participants based on escalation completeness. Timing details will be determined by discussion and availability of participants, but are currently estimated to be Saturday from server uptime for about seven hours and Sunday from server uptime until complete.

PFU members and recent graduates are particularly encouraged to participate and get a feel for how to handle escalations. Basic gameplay advice will be offered purely on a time and attention-available basis.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I see lots of germs of ideas for great MMOs here, but I don't see much that wouldn't require writing off a huge part of work already done in order to incorporate into PFO.

Are you sure that you're not designing a MMO based off of Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis? There's probably a niche for that somewhere, but I think that there are some pretty hard problems to solve first. What would the players' goals be in a MMO succession game, and how would a player that spent only 12 sessions with a character (semiweekly for 6 months) feel that they were accomplishing something?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Audoucet wrote:
Saiph wrote:
Perhaps it's time to move on man.

Actually, I don't come here very much any more, but when I see Ryan talking nonsense on MMORPG.com, I can't help it.

And to be honest, I consider that the 1500$ I gave to this game make my occasional complaining worth it for GW.

How much did you get for reselling the platinum account?


Based on my convention experience, don't rely on cellular data to work either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sign me up for a half-orc brain, if you have one. I'm on a diet.

I'll me there as Decius Brutus.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Neadenil Edam wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

Lam, please, check your data before posting. EBA is 5 settlements:

Brighthaven, Phaeros, Keeper's Pass, Hammerfall and Blackwood Glade.

It is like your previous clam that we have have claimed 1/4 of the map. Imprecise and misleading.

I think Andius believes that EBA is just Brighthaven and the other settlements are all now TEO alts :D

Don't be silly.

We're all Blaeringr's alts.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Lam wrote:

I come into this concept from Kingdoms of Camelot and other team games (sorry, do not recall names). These were teams of max 100 who would develop their "kingdom (much like developing character) and take on other teams. Maybe that is my naive view of GW, based upon my past. But they speak to settlement vs settlement play. Not individual play, but teams of individuals.

I think that is still there. That is something Bluddwolf, Andius, Nihimon, Cheatle, Decius and not addressed. The question is how I bring my General into this game now, when it is not there, yet.

This is about generals. But it is not stable enough , yet.

Bring your general into the game now, and start working your way up. I would be surprised if the ones that started now took as long to get to where the ones who started three years ago are now.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Tharak Venethorn wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:

138 Holdings would cover the claim.

With perfectly min-maxed companies (getting 67 influence per characters) it will take 205 characters (iirc that holdings cost 100 influence before upgrades). That is well within the EBA's character numbers. But that only works if companies can hold multiple holdings... Can they?

The logistics of it all would be interesting to see.

Of course 1194 characters could claim the entire 800 hex map through the same math.

I would LOVE to see them try controlling that entire area with outposts once raiding, asset destruction, and feuds are in. If those features ever make it in without being completely neutered first.

I agree. It's far more likely that we will cede territory than that we will claim more. Whether we can hold on depends almost entirely on how strong the groups that want to contest us are.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Savage Grace wrote:

I get that, but knowing who the claimant is at war with would be vastly more important information to most travelers.

One settlement could have 20 enemies. We've already seen an area I would call "besieged" tell new players that it was a safe place for them.

Why not encourage groups to declare what territory they are interdicting, and what groups they are ganking there?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Neadenil Edam wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:

But that only works if companies can hold multiple holdings... Can they?

Yep.

You would also have to try and protect all 138 from attack though.

In reality renters would do it.

Not sure we really want renters in PFO though.

Why not?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Lahasha wrote:
Black Silver of The Veiled, T7V wrote:
The reason why AGC wasn't given a non-hostile warning was because AGC was put on the Hostile List from previous actions they have taken in and around Keeper's Pass.

The problem I have with that is when this all kicked off you guys didn't even know it was the AGC who put the tent up. Everyone was accusing Golgotha of doing it. I had someone actually tell me I was on a list of Golgothans - while the Golgothans were killing me 'cause they thought I was on your side.(That was just funny.)

No one did their homework really, and I think a lot of the arguments would have been avoided if you simply applied your policies consistently.

Quote:
Edit: To change possible relationship between AGC and members of EBA, perhaps the leadership of AGC would open a diplomatic dialog with leadership of our three settlements.
Yeah, that would probably help a lot. I'll try to bring it up next time I have a chance.

The first step would be either publicly disavowing membership in Golgotha and the Empire of Xeilias, or bringing EoX to the table.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread is for the discussion of the EBA territory and polices. Please take discussion of policies that you imagine some nominally Lawful Good group created to a different thread.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Tharak Venethorn wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Tharak Venethorn wrote:
TEO Cheatle wrote:
We consider anyone harvesting resources, attacking escalations, or establishing holdings to be hostile, unless given prior permission from EBA leadership.

This just seems like a very interesting way to tell people that all but your foes are welcome in your borders.

You don't think something along the lines of "We reserve the right to tell anyone harvesting resources and attacking escalations to cease and desist on a case by case basis" might have better conveyed the idea you are now backtracking to and trying to convince us is what you meant from the start?

The idea that we are 'backtracking' to is that coming in without permission is prohibited, but that permission is not onerous to obtain. Which is much less a change than saying that prior permission is optional.
Ah so you are retaining that part. Is it your belief that all, or even the majority of players that will come into your territory to adventure and gather read the forums enough to be aware of these borders that exist only as lines on the forums and rules only laid out on the forums?

Ignorance of the rules is not exoneration, but it is a reason. We would be providing no useful information to anyone honest by announcing how we handled players who were ignorant of the rules.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Tharak Venethorn wrote:
TEO Cheatle wrote:
We consider anyone harvesting resources, attacking escalations, or establishing holdings to be hostile, unless given prior permission from EBA leadership.

This just seems like a very interesting way to tell people that all but your foes are welcome in your borders.

You don't think something along the lines of "We reserve the right to tell anyone harvesting resources and attacking escalations to cease and desist on a case by case basis" might have better conveyed the idea you are now backtracking to and trying to convince us is what you meant from the start?

The idea that we are 'backtracking' to is that coming in without permission is prohibited, but that permission is not onerous to obtain. Which is much less a change than saying that prior permission is optional.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Tharak Venethorn wrote:

What's the point of even having this policy then if acceptance is guaranteed? Wouldn't it be simpler to say "Hostile factions can't harvest in our lands."

Given that Brighthaven was founded on the principle of being a safe haven for all but your enemies to come and find a place to play in peace under the protection of TEO what's the point of telling everyone they need prior permission?

We haven't denied permission so far. When we need to deny permission, the need to request it will not be new.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I use lots of player-based solutions.

I take extra care to be security-aware while doing so, because any one of them might have a vulnerability that could compromise many things.

I would not take bets at the odds offered that eg XenForo does not have a vulnerability that might compromise a token that can be used to change the email address listed on the account, or otherwise compromise my characters.

Unified sign-in is the right long-term choice, and treating security of that login seriously at every point is far more critical than forum features.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Is there any clarification about whether melee range cantrips and orisons are intended to consume charges, and will not be buffed, or are in the same class as longsword attacks and will be, or neither?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Atheory wrote:
what point would that be?

That you can't set up base camps in our territory with impunity. What did you think the point of taking the tower was?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Atheory wrote:

@Decius

I'm sorry, but the feud mechanic isn't in the game yet. Try again later.

What's that got to do with anything? According to my understanding of feuds, settlements and nations wouldn't be able to declare feuds against companies. In the finished game, I bet we'd have raided one or two of your holdings and considered our point made.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

"Expense" being largely measured in programmer time, which is a resource that would take lots of programmer time and money to increase.

Doubling the number of programmers would take a significant amount of productivity away from the existing team for cultural acclimation and task organization adjustments.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

I love how

Gol Tink wrote:


We had no intention of beginning a war with Keepers' Pass or Brighthaven. We still have no real intention of being in a war with Keeper's Pass or Brighthaven, which is why we have been keeping the vast majority of our operations close to Phaeros lands.

is equivalent to "2 hexes from Keeper Pass, in the mountains".

I get the tactical reasons perfectly, it is way easier to get targets if you sit in the main access to KP, where your target movement is restricted to a single hex and the ogre help you. But I find that that beavyor make the statement "we want to fight only Phaeros" blatantly false.

Not a surprise as this is as much a propaganda war as a guerrilla war for Golgotha.

I liked this response, the first night of our interdiction campaign we in point of fact did not attack anyone up on the mountain we only operated in the area around Phaeros. The next day the entire brighthaven alliance mobilized to take all of our towers. The next day I opened up the area of engagement to include the mountain that PK and Brighthaven reside on.

I am willing to provide prof of the original set or orders to my members if anyone would like to see it. There is some profanity in it how ever.

If you didn't want a war but felt forced into one because we defended a tower for a day, would you be willing to settle for a state in which there isn't a wave that sweeps up from the south and wipes all of EoX's towers, and EoX generally respects EBA territory and doesn't try to inderdict anywhere outside its own borders?

Or is one tower important enough to go to war over, but all of them not important enough to be an important part of peace?

Phaeros believes that the principle of punishing gank squads, regardless of how effective they are, is important enough to war over, but that the cost of total war leaves every participant worse than a more limited war.

"Limited war" was the reason why we took only one tower, and the fact that it wouldn't result in any loss of training or support was a factor. After EoX started ganking in retailiation, the amount of damage that I intended to cause increased significantly.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Gol Phyllain wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Gol Phyllain wrote:

We are talking about a different tower agreement not the original NAP.

You are correct

Asking us to remove it would have been a nice place to start yes. We might not have agreed but it would have been nice.

There was no such agreement and you know that. Try to act in good faith.

Ah, I'm sorry, the “unilateral cooling off”. While we are being candid, will you admit that the EOX did not, in fact, break any deals that we had with you? I'm not talking about respecting your “territorial rights”, as we never ratified those territorial claims. To the EOX, that Mordent Spire hex was fair game. Our towers were also fair game to you, apparently, and in attacking us you dragged your allies, who were very much in an agreement with the Empire, into an unnecessary war. A war that, in turn, made all of the EBA's towers and players fair game to us.

Would that be us acting in good faith?

We only attacked a single AGC tower, and they are and always have been independent of you.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Rynnik wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Try to act in good faith.

Good faith?

Like people from Phaeros trying to tell new players in general chat that there is not a war ongoing in the SE last night? Purposely putting new players who may NOT be aware of the ongoing situation in harms way for the sake of political posturing? THAT sort of good faith?

Because that is pretty lame and if Phaeros can't even set aside political perspective long enough to be honest and helpful with new players I don't want any of your brand of 'good faith'.

Lol. All we said was that most players were as safe as anywhere else. And based on the alts that various people had looking for you, that was pretty much true.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

An interesting end state would be making each shrine have an owner and the owner decides who can res there.

TKP shrine would allow middle and high rep, Rotters Hole shrine would allow everybody. Wilderness shrines might vary depending on who controls them.

Each time you can choose one of your threaded shrines or the nearest one that allows you.

1 to 50 of 4,834 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.