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

"Devil's Advocate"'s page

1,437 posts. Pathfinder Society character for Beckett.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,437 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Minimal and worth the trade offs.

Shadow Lodge

It's easy to boost Dex too. Heck, Urban Barbarian dip becomes mandatory.

Size increases will at most mean -2 Att, -1 Dmg even for a Dex based monster who would easily trade it for the extra reach and higher damage, unless they are ranged.

Shadow Lodge

I'm just curious, would the Dex to Damage fans be okay with a Feat that allowed Str for Init, AC, and Refl?

Shadow Lodge

Looks like the Errata is finally out. Not too much on the Warpriest by the looks of it, but it was clarified that the Sacred Fist looses Flurry and AC bonus for wearing

Errata wrote:
Page 131—In the Sacred Fist archetype’s Weapon and Armor Proficiency, before the last sentence, add “When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a sacred fist loses his AC bonus and flurry of blows.” In the AC Bonus ability, in the third sentence, change “deflection” to “dodge”. At the end of the ability, add the sentence “This counts as the monk ability of the same name, and the sacred fist’s warpriest levels stack with monk levels for determining the benefits.” In the Flurry of Blows ability, at the end of the second sentence, add “, except the sacred fist’s attack bonus from warpriest levels does not count as his warpriest level.”

Shadow Lodge ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily" wrote:
Is it a cleric of Gunssuckia, God of Gun Hatred, who derives his divine power from hating guns and who would have their power stripped if they cooperate with a gun user?

Absof*%%inglutelly. In fact, I think that Season 6 can use a whole lot of Gunssuckia's divine and sacred teachings. Have at it!!! Where can I learn more?

:P

Shadow Lodge

Ok. Lets say you are a fantasy character where its a real world fact that there are these folks that can remove curses, (again a real thing) or cure even the deadliest diseases with a few kind words.

He or she obviously believes the universe works differently than you do, but is willing to set that all aside if needed, or at most pay a little compensation or a favor.

Then, one day your son, daughter, close friend, whatever gets sick.And then gets worse. Then everyone else they live with starts dying from similar symptom, and its clear that your guy/girl is just not getting better.

You sympathize with the person that slits the persons throat that had the only means to help your guy/girl over the one who decides to risk their life just to help you out? The one who only failed because someone else killed them for nothing but a close-minded, uneducated sense of utter selfishness.

Shadow Lodge

Flynn Greywalker wrote:
James Sutter wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
Set wrote:
These days, the pendulum seems to have swung a bit to 'everyone in Rahadoum is evil, crazy and filled with hate, and will burn their own atheist brother at the stake when he gains that 4th ranger level'
What pendulum is this? Did I miss some content? This seems radically different from how the nation is portrayed in the two campaign setting guides.

I'm with Lincoln--as probably the staffer with the most investment in Rahadoum, it's definitely not supposed to be a totally evil, hateful place. While there's certainly a witch-hunt element for those who directly espouse the worship of a god, they see it as an attempt to protect their freedom and independence from powerful outside forces (the gods and their churches) who are constantly throwing their weight around and telling mortals what to do.

I see Rahadoum less as an evil society, and more as a fiercely independent nation that's terrified of religious terrorists trying to subvert or destroy their culture. (I know, it's an outlandish idea for a nation, but this is fantasy, right...?)

True James. But, as you wrote about Rahadoum, the god wars there soured the general country. They had seen nothing but death at the hands of "good" and "evil" deities. So, they flipped the gods, goddesses and clergy the bird, forced them out and told them, don't come back or else.

People today feel that way in the real world about many religions that are supposed to be based on love and hate. That is the reason a country like Rahadoum can exist.

I love the Pathfinder Tales book Death's Heretic because it took a former leader in the Pure Legionnaires and turned him into a tool for a goddess, because he asked her to save his love.

The basic problem with that is do we assume that there has been more or less death afterwards? Afterwards, obviously means that it wasn't the divine responsible, but the people and leadership. If its more, that means that Rahadoum basically is the idiotic hypocrisy some people see it as. If it is less death afterwards, well, why does no other nation, empire, or people anywhere else share the same experience, data, or results? Either way, it does not make Rahadoum look good, smart, or logical.

Secondly, I just can not buy an explanation that the nation would be anything but CE for such practices as being perfectly willing to murder even a friend or family member who is just trying to help someone out by curing them. The sheer fact that the entire nation is based on the idea of enforcing a tyrannical law on everyone is even more vile and depraved than things like seduction into a demon cult. It's also a offensive concept which indicates a lack of understanding or care for an individuals sense of spirituality, which is probably the most important aspect of any ones sense of self. Kind of ironic as part of the reason for the Rahadoum face-lift was to not offend real world atheists.

Shadow Lodge ***

1.) Part of the reason I was thinking about this was based on a discussion I had about DM's with favorite scenarios to run. A lot of us have favorite scenarios that the more we run them, the more we are able to weed out the issues, make the NPCs a little more interesting, and make the experience more fun for everyone. So, part of the idea was that it would benefit everyone to help encourage DM's to master a few scenarios (moreso than how it currently works) by helping to incentivize them for doing so.

2.) Off all the benefits, I think getting extra access is probably the one I find most appealing as an extra reward. I'd run games without it, but still this is probably the one I like the most.

3.) I'd say, as I DM more often than I play, probably about 80% of the time I reserve this to save characters from death or a condition that will remove them from play for a while. It's nice for that, but I get my Reroll from things I've purchased. The +1-+3 is pretty irrelevant for the uncommon personal use. It's the reroll itself that's the good part, and that has nothing to do with GM Stars. Something that's also worth noting, simply having DM Stars does not give you a free reroll. You need to have one of the products to get the free reroll, and then if you have DM Stars, you get an additional bonus.

4.) I've had this from the start and never once felt any need to use it on any character. It's just, well it doesn't do much for the divine classes I mostly play.

Shadow Lodge ***

Eric Brittain wrote:
What do you think has changed?

Nothing needs change. For the most part, I expect the same individuals that have already made up their minds one way or the other are not going to change their minds, but I did point out earlier I planned to revisit it after a few months. Maybe some factual based arguments for or against? New thoughts on the subject?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
I think the difference is, whereas numerous folks have produced Dracula movies over the years with no collaboration with one each. Prior to the ramp up for The Force Awakens however, all Star Wars media was set in the same timeline, from games to books. And that continuity was maintained over multiple decades.

Not really. Actually, on of the more commonly held EU Canon has been the large amount of "The Old Republic" lore, set 4,000 years prior to, if I recall correctly, the Battle of Yavin. The Old Republic was also partially included in Star Wars 1-3 as Lucas did need to retroactively include certain aspects like Jedi not being able to marry, the Banite Sith Order/Rule of Two, (one Master and one Apprentice at a time), and to a point the miracle birth of Anakin.

Up until recently, and this probably has a lot to do with the current ownership of various licenses only, the Old Republic material was 100% approved Canon, and looking at the actual announcement, it looks like it's saying (outside of a few noted cases where it does specifically contradict the movies), they are not being removed from canon as much as future material will not include them, which probably wouldn't matter anyway.

Shadow Lodge ***

Just figured it's ben a while, so why not revisit this.

Shadow Lodge

Can someone please translate for Goth Guru?

What does a Deflection Bonus even have to do with unarmored and non-shielding characters getting a free Mage Armor or Shield casting retroactively? What freaking Monk ever would not love that ability to kick in once they get hit.

Or, off topically, when did Monks becomes fighters? Officially or otherwise?

Shadow Lodge

Monks?

Shadow Lodge

Barathos wrote:
What does that have to do with the name "Pathfinder" being only relevant to Golarion?

In Golarion, there is a world spanning army called the Pathfinder Society. What they are saying, I believe, is that the System Neutral material is written to follow the Setting Material, so for example you have the Setting's major deities in the Core book. They refused, until recently, to publish a Dex to Damage style Feat/option because of the Setting centric Dervish Dance. Things like that.

Shadow Lodge

I say read-between-the-lines because these are arguments and discussions I've heard from others, rather than something I'm trying to prove.

As far as I know the only reference to Christianity, and please note this is just one of multiple things I pointed out as lacking in PF, is an obscure reference in Artifacts and Legends. Oddly enough, its extremely vague and literally read-between-the-lines. :P

Shadow Lodge

thejeff wrote:

Well, I don't count myself an "internet expert", but I'm willing to concede WoD, with the caveat that as LazarX, it's our world with twists rather than a new creation. That said, it was also pretty Eurocentric and bits of their treatment of other cultures and groups made me cringe at the time - often being more US/European pop-culture takes than anything else.

For Dragonlance, I only read the original novels (maybe 2 series?) and a couple modules and haven't done so in decades. They did have women as major characters, though I can't really comment on their roles at this point. I don't recall (and a quick internet search doesn't help) much racial diversity - though I guess Riverwind(?) & Goldmoon(?) were basically Native American?
I may be forgetting or they may have come in later, but I don't remember any black or asian characters.

I have no idea what you mean to imply by "analogy for inclusion". You can also present an analogy for something without actually including it. In fact that's how you usually do it. The original X-Men were an analogy for racism and were all white. Then it became more homosexuality, but it was still a long time before there was a homosexual character. You could have a strong theme of "We need each other to stand strong", but just not include people of different races or give them narrow stereotyped roles.

And really, "Judeo-Christianity"? In Dragonlance? As an analogy or actual Jews and Christians? Cause that's hard to fit in.

I'm also not sure why you think Paizo shrieks in fear at including everyone. They don't have Judeo-Christianity, for what I think are obvious reasons. They haven't done much if anything with Native Americans, though there is a place in the world for them and there's been some talk of it. They do have atheism, blacks, interraciallism and heroes and villains of all sorts. So, near as I can tell, you're way off base there.

Theros Ironfeld wasn't included much in the novels as they had to trim over half of them, but he was a blacksmith that was forced into slavery after loosing his arm. It was through his dedication and mastery of hard work and the later acquisition of the Silver Arm of Ergoth that allowed to recreate the Dragonlances and present them in the time of greatest need.

Depending on your point of view, Tanis can be either a representation of bisexuality, caught between two very different worlds and not fully accepted by either, or the more common half breed. In the first, Laurana is the more feminine aspect while Kitiara is the masculine, and it also plays a great deal into how his character is least of all understood even by his closest friends. More of a read-between-the-lines case than an explicit one, as the character as presented is not bisexual.

There is also something to Tas being gay. Again, it's more read-between-the-lines, but there are a lot of comments like "when are you going to find a good Kender (Halfling) woman and settle down, start a family,. . ." and his reply is something like "I've tried. I just, well, I can't really related to other Kender anymore." The given connotation is that he has grown up, but it could also very easily be suggesting he doesn't have any attraction to females.

For the Christian part, Tracy Hickman is a devout Mormon (I believe), and he and other have included a lot of aspects in there, some as easter eggs and others as parables. For example, the Platinum Discs of Mishakal (that hold the greatest gift for mankind) is an allusion to the Joseph Smith's Golden Plates. Paladine is often presented as a carring father that wants mortals to make the right choices on their own, there are more than a few miraculous curings of the "get up and walk" style.

Both Gilthanus' and Silvara's as well as Huma's and Gwyneth are tales of interracial relationships, (as well as the more upfront Tanis and Laurana), and there is also something to be said for Raistlin being a metaphor for transgender.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shisumo wrote:
The Shoanti have a pretty heavy Native tribes vibe going on.

They do at that. Honestly, they slipped my mind, so thanks for the reminder. :)

Shadow Lodge

knightnday wrote:

They also aren't done yet. There are portions of the world, and the gods and people therein, that haven't been touched on.

Not everything is going to be there for everyone right off the bat; that doesn't mean that they are never going to follow up.

Which is all fine and dandy, but you may want to actually look up "inclusiveness", and reconsider just how long Pathfinder/Golarion has ostensibly been in existence. It' either a "pick and choose" setting or a "a little bit for everyone" setting. Can't be both, and by it's very nature, Golarion is not a "a little bit for everyone" setting.

Don't get me wrong. I'd absolutely love for Pathfinder to catch up, and start seeing some awesome stories come from it. A single father caught between taking care of his kids and a life of adventure. A "half-breed", or heck a cajun offspring of as Mwangi and an Andoran seeing the corruption and mistrust in both their parent's peoples and trying to come to grips with life in a world that I not altered just to highlight their struggle. A classic Christian knight story. A jewish occultist. Native American Indians that are not some sort of beastmen alternate species. "The Orient" that is not some sort of secret mystic society of exoticism. There is so much ground not covered/allowed, it's insane.

Shadow Lodge

LazarX wrote:
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
Morzadian wrote:
Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

Behind the curve? They pretty much set the curve in Non-Earth settings. (WOD doesn't count because it's an adaptation of our world, not a wholly created setting)

What gaming setting is? Maybe d20 Modern? Nah, saying that the WoD is just an adaptation isn't going to cut it. Might be better to argue that it's a lot closer to the real world, with strong metaphors of addiction, religious persecution and extremism, personal believes vs freedoms vs security, but unless you want to argue that vampires, werewolves, mages, ghosts, and angels are both real and secretly hidden and controlling us since the start of time, I don't think that's going to fly. Or that racism is the direct result of a pair of elder's petty squabble, that religious persecution is the result of some dark pagan entity trying to corrupt mortals, and all human achievement is only possible because of the Matrix.

:)

Shadow Lodge

thejeff wrote:
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
Morzadian wrote:
Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

I'm sure there are lots of groups Paizo hasn't touched and maybe even some they've declared they won't touch, but "far from inclusive" and "pretty far behind the curve" are very strong statements and I'll need some evidence. At least examples so I know what you're talking about.

Well, if you count yourself as an "internet expert" than WoD basically goes without saying. So, lets just look at Dragonalance.

Dragonlance, in much the same way as the X-Men movie are an analogy for homosexuality, is an analogy for, well inclusion. It has a multitude of very important characters, ranging from black to white to asian to "green" and "purple". It presented strong and independent women, and men, and a broad range of motivations and personalities. Unlike Pathfinder, it didn't shriek in fear at including everyone, so there are things like Judeo-Christianity in there, or atheism, native americans, blacks, interracialism, heroes (and villains) of all sorts.

And the fact that it's over 30 years old says something. It also says a lot that Dragonlance's war cry I "We need each other to stand strong" while Pathfinders is more along the lines of "OH, pick me, I have a _____ as an Iconic. See how progressive I am. I must be the first one to do it." Well, minus the ". . . Oh wait, you don't agree. CLUB, CLUB, CLUB <over the head>. Like I said, I must be the first one to do it." part.

:)

Shadow Lodge

Morzadian wrote:
Earlier versions of D&D like Greyhawk has black gods (Touv pantheon) but has far less inclusion than Pathfinder, as Pathfinder has positive black characters, like Quinn the Investigator iconic.

Huh???

Pathfinder is very far from inclusive. They might be more inclusive in some specific cases, namely gender and orientation, that's also about it in. But even for just those two, they are pretty far behind the curve, (considering thing like the WoD, oddly Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and many other similar settings). Don't get me wrong, they do a pretty good job in that sense, but there are a lot of groups out there that Pathfinder/Paizo have not touched or outright decided they will not.

Shadow Lodge

zergtitan wrote:
Would love to see feats, items, and player options for eagle knight PCs.

Sadly, I did notice that the summary does not include something like: "and plenty of Feats/Archetypes/Player Options to help play a champion of Andoran/Eagle Knight", so I'm more inclined to think its just a fluff and DM book.

Shadow Lodge ***

Item Creation Feats, including Scribe Scroll, are not allowed in PFS. All magic items simply spring into existence randomly, (not kidding) or are occasionally unique oddities. Said Wizard NPC likewise does not have Scribe Scroll, so can not just make a scroll for you. Being a new, uncommon spell doesn't change that.

PFS limits what you can buy, or rather what is available to be bought, though it is notably a very artificial way. In Core, as far as I understand it, those spells simply do not exist to your character until that character finds them. Its pretty clear for Wizards how that works. Not so much for everyone else.

As to the Spellbook on Chronicle Sheets, Absolutely Not!!! Its only good for about 3 classes, 1 in Core, and that is something that should be written in when it applies, and signed off. Plenty of scenarios have multiple spellbooks, too much possibility for error, and not to mention APs/Modules, and I need my extra room for trophies and other notes.

Shadow Lodge

Personally, I would much rather keep the AC as a more undefined antagonistic organization as possible, so I would rather not have a book that details them more than they already are.

Shadow Lodge

I think it might be better to say something like " If a creature with a space larger than 5ft is targeted by an area affect and the area is equal to or smaller than their space, the area of the affect radiates to reach 5ft beyond their space on all sides, unless it would normally extend beyond that point."

This wouldn't give larger creatures such a huge advantage with area spells and effects, but would allow them to still affect a small area around them.

It would also be much less wonky with Huge and larger creatures where the grid intersection which is the point of origin would not be the middle square(s).

Shadow Lodge ***

Paul Trani wrote:
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

I was actually trying to ask two separate questions that as far as I can tell, the Blog does not cover.

1.) can a non-wizard purchase something on the spot that they find, but is not listed on the Chronicle sheet and use that to add that spell to their list?

2.) can a non-wizard purchase scrolls that are listed on a Chronicle Sheet any time after that session, to add it to their spell list?

Again, the answers to your questions are:

1.) No
2.) Yes

I was looking for an official clarification. I'm not sure if your response is speculation, inside knowledge that hasn't been released, answered in some random other thread, your personal preference, or what, but it's not clear in this blog.

Shadow Lodge ***

Yes, but the for the second boon, it does specify it needs to be done at the end of the scenario. It's unclear if it is just that one portion or the entirety.

Shadow Lodge ***

I was actually trying to ask two separate questions that as far as I can tell, the Blog does not cover.

1.) can a non-wizard purchase something on the spot that they find, but is not listed on the Chronicle sheet and use that to add that spell to their list?

2.) can a non-wizard purchase scrolls that are listed on a Chronicle Sheet any time after that session, to add it to their spell list?

Shadow Lodge ***

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:

Im a little confused, too.

Lets say a Druid finds a scroll in a game, but it is NOT on the Chronicle sheet. Can they buy it, at value, and then add it to their effective list?

If instead they find a scroll that IS on the Chronicle sheet. Can they later, (games later), purchase it and add it to their list?

Andrew Christian wrote:
If it isn't on the chronicle, they can't buy it later.

Assuming that your response was aimed at me, that doesn't help at all, or even pertain to what was asked.

:P

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Im a little confused, too.

Lets say a Druid finds a scroll in a game, but it is NOT on the Chronicle sheet. Can they buy it, at value, and then add it to their effective list?

If instead they find a scroll that IS on the Chronicle sheet. Can they later, (games later), purchase it and add it to their list?

Shadow Lodge ***

Jesse Davis wrote:

PBPGAMEDAY.COM seems to working right now - I think it was a godaddy issue that resolved.

I am only up to session .... 73-ish - will finish the rest Monday evening.

You can actually see what is reported here: http://ironhelixx.com/pbpgameday3/results.php

I noticed that I have a game listed twice. #138 & 139 should only be one session, when you get to it. I'm not sure how that happened. It was a game I took over from DM Kim.

Shadow Lodge ***

Ragathiel
Spring Loaded Wrist Sheath
Burst of Radiance
Sacred Summons + Lantern Archon <pew pew>
Mendev Priest/Crusader Archetype
Earthbreaker
Inner Sea Gods
Champions/Faiths of Purity
Aasimar
Dhampir
All the Hero Labs data I purchased. . .
The Monster Summoner Handbook (see #4)
Furious Focus
Angelic Wings
Liberating/Murderous Command
Growth Domain
Spark
Masterwork Backpack
Journal
Stormstone
Mess Kit
Masterwork Survival Kit
Midwife Kit
Swarm Suite
Hot Weather Outfit
Ioun Torch
Various 200-800gp Ioun Stones of +1 Skill
Alkili Flask
Unique "priest" spells, lists, Feats, and Traits
Hollow Pommel
Holy Symbol Tattoo!!!!!!!!
Agile Breastplate
Mountain Pattern/Four-Mirror Armor
Enhanced Diplomacy
Lore Warden Fighter

Shadow Lodge

Oh, absolutely. I think that's my main issue with almost all of these Player's Guides, is just how lacking they are.

Shadow Lodge

Assimar have a really nifty Favored Class bonus that helps keep maximized Channel Energy relevant, though I should point out that there may not be as much undead as you'd expect.

My understanding is that the AP significantly changes after part one, so don't use early play as a guide on what to build towards.

But, keep in mind that Channeling, even maxed out, just doesn't keep up well at all, for either healing or harming.

The Evangilist Archetype might be worth looking into, especially early on.

I highly recommend talking with the other players, especially the Rogue and Sorcerer, and dividing up your Knowledge skills to work best. You take History & Religion, Sorcerer takes Arcana, Nature, and one or two others, and the Rogue takes what's left (or something like that).

Dividing between Diplomacy, Heal, History, Religion, and Sense Motive, (and hopefully Perception) should have you spread pretty thin on skills, which kind of sucks for the Cleric that kind of needs more points to do their basic job description.

Most of the Campaign Traits, in my opinion, where very bad, so hopefully your DM is giving you a free one that has to be one of those, but if not, oh well.

Affable might be a great option. Blessed Touch, Birthmark, Exalted of the Society, and Fey Fondling are my goto Cleric Traits.

If you do go with Iomedae, Chosen of Iomedae and Divine Warrior can work pretty well for a +1 free damage plus always useful Light source, though you might need Extra Traits Feat.

Shadow Lodge

I'd say the Affable Trait and high Diplomacy and Sense Motive.

There are also a few Feats and Traits out there that help in allowing you to deal Nonlethal Damage much easier, which I think would be mandatory.

A 1 or 2 level dip in Monk might also help, getting an AC bump (with a bit of mobility for no armor), you can use your fists for Nonlethal as needed, and Evasion.

It really depend I guess on what you mean. Pacifist, as in "I don't want to kill" or "I don't want to fight" or do you mean a Buffer Cleric?

In my opinion, Buffer Clerics tend to loose their steam at mid levels, when healing just doesn't keep up and other characters start getting their own permanent buffs via items. They are nice to have around, but as an extra. They are too reactive. But that also depends on your group.

Summon Good Monster would be a good extra Feat to consider, as might some of the newer Familiar Feats, which could allow you to stay back and send your pet in for long distance healing (3 Feat investment). But again, it sort of depends on what exactly you mean and want for a Pacifist.

I'd actually suggest against Sanctuary. It's far too inconsistent, and in my opinion, sort of trap spell. On the other hand, Shield Other should be a high priority, just make sure that whoever you are using it on doesn't go too far, or the spell stops.

Burst of Radiance and also Sound Burst are two good spells as well, though both are also a bit blasty. But the damage is not the key part as much as the short duration Stun or Blind.

Command is another good one, especially if you can coordinate with the party to maximize it's use.

As for Domains, (and I can't remember if the Archetype limits your options or not), but Charm, Community, Defense (Milani), Glory/Heroism Healing/Restoration, Liberation, Travel, and Trickery are all worth looking at.

Shadow Lodge ***

Honestly, the more this is present, the better chance it will be noticed, and other will be aware of it. So please do not merge it.

Shadow Lodge ***

rknop wrote:
I think the point is that the Core Campaign does not modify the standard PFS campaign in any way (with two small exceptions). The standard PFS campaign will continue has it has. The Core Campaign is a new and different thing. The Core Campaign need not influence or change anything about the standard campaign or how it is run.

This is inevitably untrue, unless they plan on presenting new Core Chronicle Sheets for each and every scenario/Module out there. If not, then it's going to lead to Core Chronicle material influencing Normal PFS Chronicles to make allowances for special rewards for Core Play. I guess we will see when Core becomes 100% official (the guide is out, all questions answered)?

Shadow Lodge ***

rknop wrote:
"Companion" classes mean more things to keep track of, which I think leads players to eschew them a bit.

I'm not sure how that makes Players not use them?

rknop wrote:
As for gunslingers, I'm not sure they're as overpowered as people always say. However, lots of people also don't like guns in their fantasy, so that drives them away from that class. (I personally don't agree; Golarion is what it is, and it's different from the assumptions that came out of AD&D/1e that leads the hobby to thinking how D&D-like games are "supposed" to be.)

I'm not a fan of guns (or technology) in D&D/PF, but I think if the Gunslinger targeted normal, full AC, it wouldn't be as much of a mechanics issue. Also, keep in mind that while guns have always existed in D&D and in PF, even before PF became it's own game, actual guns hadn't been very present. They existed in this far off, unknown land, which allowed people that liked them to play there and use them and those that didn't to go on without them. Now, though, everyone and their little doggie has a freakin' gun or three, and the one small balancing factor against using guns (the price per shot) has been thrown out the window. It also doesn't help that Paizo's other fix to the DM problem was to make a terribly overpriced and highly ineffective defensive item, which sadly makes a DM's monsters even weaker just so it can be a tiny bit stronger against guns, and really doesn't apply to PFS.

Shadow Lodge

This is, I believe, now how it works based on the new ruling. Only the first Diagonal ignores the normal rule on moving diagonal, (every second square counts as double movement).

10ft Reach = 2 Diagonals
15ft Reach = 2 Diagonals
20ft Reach = 3 Diagonals
+10ft Reach = +1 Diagonal.

If it is Natural Reach, then you would threaten all squares in between. If it is not Natural Reach, that is you don't normally have Reach, but are using a Reach Weapon, it is only the normal square you threaten. If it is a combination, such as Enlarge Person (Nat Reach 10) plus a Lonspear (additional 5ft), you threaten between 10ft and 15ft feet, but only the second square diagonally wit your Longspear. If said character also had another (non-Reach Weapon attack), with that attack, they would threaten between 0ft and 10ft, and again, 2 Diagonal Squares.

Shadow Lodge ***

Alex McGuire wrote:

I believe that all PCs, regardless of class should have the same or nearly the same access to spells, even if they gain spells in different ways. Here is some suggested wording for the Guide to Organized play, specificically for the chronicle sheet items section of the Core campaign rules:

"If a player comes across a scroll of a spell found outside of the core rules that is on their spell list during an adventure, the player may purchase the scroll for the standard cost after the adventure for the purposes of gaining access to the spell. The scroll is considered expended, and a Wizard can perform the normal process of adding the spell to their spellbook, and can take 10 on the spellcraft check to do so. Clerics, Druids and Rangers can choose to prepare the spell as normal from that point on. Bards and Sorcerers can choose to add the spell as a spell known any time they gain a spell known of the appropriate level, and can retrain spells of that level into the spell on the scroll, spending the normal prestige and gold costs to do so. The GM should notate on the chronicle that the player has gained access to the spell."

Also, I think that wizards trading non-core spells back and forth is detrimental to the spirit of the Core Campaign. I think that you should only get access to a spell if you encounter it yourself. Suggested wording for the guide:

"Wizards may not copy spells that are found outside of the core rulebook from other PC wizards' spellbooks. They may still copy non-core spells from spellbooks found as treasure."

I agree. Wizards really shouldn't have any special advantage to add non-Core material, and it either needs to be disallowed entirely, or handled equally for each spellcasting class.

However, even with a ruling like this, I think divine casters would still be screwed, as Chronicle Sheets don't hand out much (if any at all) special spells on scrolls and there are no "prayer books" to be found. The base spell lists are already heavily skewed towards arcane casters, so I'd be more inclined to suggest that either any spell encountered is free game or NO Non-Core spells at all, even if it's on a chronicle sheet. Can't learn it from the book, and can't even purchase the scroll. If you find the scroll, you can use it, but only n that one scenario. The later, I think, would also stop any future issues that might come up round spells (or whatever) and unforeseen consequences down the road.

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
It's unlikely, but what would be amazing is if Paizo did a sort of about face on how they normally do books like this, and basically ignore the classes that are already "wild" and instead focus on making other classes more playable in a "wild" setting.
xeose4 wrote:
my brain would explode if they did this.

In a good or bad way?

xeose4 wrote:
I really want to preorder this because I pretty much only play "wild" characters, but I'm also kind of leery. is there more wilderness than the jungle theme in this?

So, with that in mind, would you rather have a book that allows you to use more classes effectively as "wild characters" or more tools for a few existing "wild characters"?

I'd rather see, and this is just me, but I'd rather see, for example, ways to play a Cleric, Paladin, or Fighter in the wild than more Barabarian, Druid, or Ranger mechanics to help them do what they can already do.

Shadow Lodge ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Once I get everything fixed up for this PbP Game Day, Ill go ahead and toss out a few Core PFS PbPs and see if anyone bites.

Shadow Lodge

Or they stop making things class specific.

Shadow Lodge ***

Probably less a statement about wasting paper as much as a lack of interest in playing Core.

It's kind of what I was thinking above I think a lot of DM's will want to run Core, but less people will want to actually play it. But we will see.

Shadow Lodge

This is one of the few books I'm looking forward too, really hoping for some love for the Cleric. A way to get a Lantern Archon that's almost a pet would be amazing. A real Pew-Pew Cleric.

Shadow Lodge

MAJT69 wrote:
137ben wrote:
Now, if you are looking for something other than "more support", you'll have to specify what it is you want. Obviously, if you want something like weapons of legacy from 3.5, then 3.5 has that. But there are other things which, say, 13th age handles better despite having less support/splats.

I think I own every 3.5 book ever made. And every single one of my players refuses to touch it.

13th Age seems to be favoured among them, but I've offered to sell Pathfinder as an improved and cleaned up version of 3rd edition. I have them interested in the idea, and wore down their objections to two areas: the wealth-by-level/Xmas Tree effect, and the perceived weakness of the premade adventures (which I asked about in another thread).

Here, I just wanted to know if there was some official way to escape the WBL thing, something like automatic bonuses or similar.

So as Devil's Advocate says above, they can spend their money on a Portable Hole or Flying Carpet instead of something that gives them a dull-but-essential combat bonus.

It seems that Unchained will have Legacy Weapons or something similar to that, anyway.

Honestly, I'm not sure about Unchained, but I highly doubt it will be what you are looking for. It's ben said that it is NOT Pathfinder's Unearthed Arcana, and I don't know. The more I find out about it, (which really isn't much), the less it's what I was wanting. Similar to the Mythic thing (for Epic). However, what you might really be interested in, it's not "official" but it is a free houserule that's pretty in depth is the E6/P6 system.

The basic idea is that it takes the d20 system and limits it to 6th level(ish). E6 (Epic 6th Level) was originally done for D&D 3.5 and P6 (Epic Pathfinder 6) is just the Pathfinderized version. Because you never advance (in levels) past 6th, basically anything that is higher than a +2 doesn't exist. No one can make a +4 sword, (literally, no one can). 5th Level spells are basically nonexistent, though some can be done a rituals (of like 50 - 1 billion people). It heavily favors martial characters by design, as those are the level they are the strongest over all, but the stated intent is to make a more realistic, low-magic setting.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Snorb wrote:
There is also the magic item treadmill: You're going to be running into problems because you need The Stupid Six (Magic Weapon, Magic Armor, Amulet of Natural Armor, Ring of Protection, Belt of Physical Stat, Headband of Mental Stat), and you'll need to blow most of your rather arbitrarily-decided-roughly-fifteen-years-ago (!) wealth by character level on improving The Sextet of Stultissitude just to keep up with the monsters' steady improvement. (So much for setting some money aside to buy your castle stronghold, hundred score magi to guard the dump, and the hottest cleric of some quasi-evil deity to serve as your consort, I guess, but that +4 corrosive burst dragonbane/aberrationbane katana's not going to pay for itself.)

Honestly, a few simple tweeks could fix this. If you remove the rule that a cast needs to have their casting stat at a certain level to cast spells of a given level, and make DC's based on caster's HD rather than their Stat, that can remove a great deal of the "I need a Headband of ______".

Ring of Protection and Amulet of Natural Armor are also not at all required. They are just common due to their relatively cheap prices vs other more circumstantial rings and amulets. Especially the Ring of Protection, though, it' just a far too common bonus, so to me, it's not really worth it most of the time. I'd generally rather have other things like Ring of the Sublime, Feather Fall, or even Sustenance.

Very few things can compare to the amazingness of a Magic Carpet, so I'd rather just buy some backup weapons than try to maximize one main one, and even Fighters nw get bonuses for Weapon Groups to help out.

@ the OP, something that Paizo has changed and an official rule that may help are the Spell Masterwork Transformation and the ability for anyone (not just casters) to create Magical Items. So, to a certain extent, you can already do a limited form of Weapons of Legacy, especially if you view things like +1 and +2 items as less magical and more rare/uncommon.

Shadow Lodge

Well, Pathfinder is not too unlike 3.5. It was, but not really all that true any more designed to allow for all the old 3E products to be crossed over. It's still possible, but with the amount of PF bloat, a lot of it isn't really as functional as it could be. For good or ill.

PF has changed a great deal of some of the basics of the game, and a lot of the time you really need to read into things to spot it. Some of the big ones are that Prestige Classes are not very good most of the time, and have kind of been replaced with Archetypes, which are just the 3E variant Classes, or older edition Class Kits. They have the strength that they allow a class to better fit a concept from early on, but they also have the weakness that they are specific to a single class and start to step on other's toes, especially kind of ruining Prestige Classes.

Pathfinder tends to have a sweep it under the rug/band aid policy for a lot of rules issues, not really wanting to give definitive answers so that individual groups can rule on things as they want to.

The Skills system has been altered, both good and bad. It's simpler, but also a little bit less customizable at the lower levels where you kind of need it for classes with less skill points and Class Skills.

The wealth by level and Christmas Tree effect is still very present, but it also depends on hat exactly you mean. Having certain specific items is not required to play like it as in 4E, and in PF there are a lot of extra ways to make do, from the extra class features most classes and races get, to consumables. On the other hand, buying better gear is a part of the game.

For me, and I'm not really a fan of the setting at all, I think that 3.5 was a better overall game, more balanced and more customizable. I prefer WotC's Errata/Faq system to Paizo's, and in general I like the 3.5 system over the Pathfinder one. But, it's not too different, and Pathfinder has done some really good things. So I don't at all mean this to bash Pathfinder, just giving my honest point of view.

There are a few really important selling points for Pathfinder, though.
1.) Most of the Core Material is online for Free, HERE
2.) Buying a few of the Main PDF's is pretty cheap. The Core Book, Adv Player's Guide, and Bestiary 1, all you need to really play, are $30 (US), less then a single hardcover book for most games.
3.) You can still import a lot of 3.5 material wit a bit of work.
4.) It is a current product that is still being actively supported. This one kind of depends on just how you normally play. In a home group setting, this isn't that important. If you want to play at Cons or game stores or whatever, though, it's much easier to find a PF group than it is a 3E group.

I'm sure others might be able to point a few things out I've missed, too. I'd suggest, as a first step, just looking through the PRD and seeing what you think. If you are interested, and your group is at least willing to give it a try, pick up the Core book and APG, and give is a shot a few times. From there, I'd start looking at the Bestiaries, (which are much easier to try first and use from the online page).

Shadow Lodge

Personally, I find that Cavaliers make particularly terrible knights, but it really depends on exactly what you mean by knight. Cavaliers are good at mounted warrior, but not terribly effective outside of that. Not terrible, just not better enough to make it worthwhile, in my opinion.

A Fighter with a decent Cha tends to do a better job, if they can take a Trait or two for Diplomacy+. Heavy armor mobility I find better than most Mounted Combat perks combined, just because the Cavalier's mounted specialty is not particularly a common circumstance for many fights.

Shadow Lodge

A Cleric can make a really good knight as well. That's actually what the class was partially based on, the holy warrior.

1 to 50 of 1,437 << 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.