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

Diremede's page

27 posts. Alias of Micah Higgins 220.


If they don't want to follow the "carrot" you have given them, hit them with the stick. So they don't want to find the golden box that's fine. Ask them what they wish to do next. Lay out a few options for them, and let them choose. Whatever option they choose is irrelevant, wherever they go to take care of that task, undead have over run the area and you just move your adventure to there. If you do it right, they will feel like they found the path themselves and it wasn't so much railroading as much as a broad reaching problem that they stumbled into once again.

I played a monk when PF first hit the shelves before the APG and UC (which believe me the UC makes the monk much much better), and thought the class was well balanced with the rest of my party members. My role in fighting, which this was more of a choice thing, was to use monk weapons with the disarm ability or trip ability and I chose the disarm feats and trip feats as I leveled. If you pick the right feats you can disarm pretty much anyone and trip a lot of foes as long as they don't have 4 legs. With fast movement you can really dictate a battle field. All in all with the step up feat I found the monk to be the perfect mage killer. You have good saves, can disarm them if they have a wand, and you can stun them into oblivion with their weak Fort save. I think everyone has this monk idea of their character being Bruce Lee, Jet Li, or Jackie Chan and they are just going to rip through 40 people at once punching people through walls.

Where I noticed the biggest dip in performance or usefullness as a monk, was fighting monsters, and by monsters I mean 4 legged nasty creatures that were just strong and ruthless. You can't disarm them as they have natural weapons, and they have huge CMD's against trip, and typically high Fort saves against stun. So your only option was to get close and try to hit them. Which at low levels sucks, but at 8th level you can fire off 5 attacks if you use a ki point doing d10 damage. Even if you don't have much of a strength bonus, you can still shell out some decent damage. Not as much as a raging barbarian with a two handed weapon mind you, but you can hold your own.

Stubs McKenzie wrote:

1/day cost is spell level × caster level × 1800 ÷ (5/charges per day) , not just 1800

Haste is 3rd lvl, and the CL of the item often determines caster level unless otherwise specified.. (haste 1/day vs haste 1/day as a 5th lvl caster)

Assuming minimum its 3x5x1800 for 5 rounds a day, all used in 1 shot, not throughout the day (unlike boots of speed)... 5400 gp

Correct, clearly goofed on my math there. Although its funny that the celestial armor costs less than this, yet fly and haste are the same spell. If you break out the cost of the celestial armor, the math isn't correct for the item based upon the formulas given. Of course you can say that about 50% of the magic items in the book.

So the item should be 18,750gp market value

You are essentially creating an entirely new piece of magic armor, I'm not sure why you would use the celestial armor which is a chain shirt that gives you fly to create a breastplate that give you haste. Just use the rules for creating magic items to get to where you want to go.

Mithril Breastplate +3, haste 1/day Max Dex +5, AC penalty 1, Arcane Spell Failure 15%, light armor

MW Mithril Breastplate - 4,350gp
+3 Armor Enhancement - 9,000gp
Haste 1/day command word - 1,800gp

Total Market Value 15,150gp

Done and done.

cherub78 wrote:

...and a combat trained war pony has a strengh of 17...

There are plenty of medium creatures, that have the strengh an the physical apearance to carry a medium character.

IMO it makes no common sense to deny it.
Player "I get on the bulky war pony"
Master "no, that is forbidden"

my question still is, how to handle it, when combat begins... "you have to dismount" just does not feel right.

This is one of those things your just going to have to make a call as a GM or as a group and say that the pony either is or isn't a suitable mount for said character, and treat it like you would any other mount. I'm not clear why your characters would have to dismount when combat begins, makes no sense to me as long as ride checks are made or the animal is combat trained.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Apraham Lincoln wrote:

The original pony express wanted young people (ideally orphans as it was dangerous work) but was only short lived as trans america telegraph lines made it obsolete.
Also more to the point, despite it's name, the Pony Express used full size horses, not ponies. After all, the horse also had TO CARRY THE MAIL in addition to the rider.
Yep. And they deliberately ran them to their physical limits providing a fresh horse for the rider so they could continue the run at that speed. Large, strong, fast horses were prized.

Actually the original horses used by the pony express were only 14.5 hands high(which is a fairly short horse, but a horse all the same), which is about the technical size used to define a pony which is how the pony express got its name even thought the beasts used for the venture were indeed horses. Small horse express didn't have the same ring to it. Your average appaloosa ranges from 14-16 hands high, and you will find pony breeds that are just as tall as an appaloosa, but the appaloosa is a considered a horse and I know from experience it will carry may fat butt and load of hunting gear in the mountains of Colorado without any issue (I would guess around 300lbs between me and my gear).

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some solid advice above.

I have always found that the best trap is the most obvious trap.... or maybe its not a trap .... eh but it probably is.

"You come to a large stone door, but the door will not budge and there do not appear to be any opening mechanisms. On either side of the door are two holes about 3 feet off the ground. The holes are just large enough you could stick your hand in them. A quick inspection with a light shows that the hole goes in about 2 feet and in the back is a metal handle. Perhaps moving one of them opens the door, and then again perhaps not."

This type of door/trap or possible trap usually leads to some fun role playing. Players try to come up with ways to "test" the holes before putting a hand in, afraid of what may be inside. Try to move the handle with a mage hand. Decide which one to turn, which way to turn, or does it pull or push?

This is a more of a trap to get past or maybe not even a trap at all, it could simply be that two people are required to open the door. Either way its more fun than just the standard roll - detect trap - roll disarmed trap.

Delenot wrote:

Can you ready more than one type of action in a given round?

For example; On your turn can you move then ready a standard action of attack if a target gets in range and ready a free action of rage if you are able to attack?

I do not believe that in this case the rage would be impacted. The rules state you can ready a free action, but I don't think the act of raging while attacking comes into play in this regard. If you ready an attack you should be able to rage and attack.

Okay just looking through magic weapons, the different specific abilities, etc. there seems to only be 4 alignment enchantments Axiomatic, Anarchic, Holy, and Unholy.

All of them align a weapon against a specific type of DR, but they also add additional damage dice and all are +2 enchantments.

So the answer to the question I'm looking for is what if I just want to align a weapon. Say I want to make a +1 short sword that is good aligned, not holy, just good aligned for the purpose of getting through damage reduction.

Are there actual RAW for this or would it simply be house ruled as a +1 enchantment?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As always with this game, if you don't like the rules and you are the GM, then change it, simple enough. In my games I completely get rid of alignment system as it exists in RAW. You are either Good, Nuetral, or Evil. Paladins and monk characters still have to follow a code of conduct for their faith or beliefs to maintain their class abilities, but I see this as more discipline rather than lawful or chaotic. If they abandon their codes, they lose their class abilities. This allows the Paladin and Monk classes to stick to their own codes, but allow for flexibility as far as group cohesion works.

I know some people will cry and say oh but what about damage reduction and blah blah blah about law and chaos. It's simple, you house rule that crap away to and change the DR to something that makes sense.

Ah, makes sense now. You would have some major negatives though, although you would have a ton of dice rolls.

stormraven wrote:

So you have a Monk (level irrelevant) that is slinging an @ssload of shurikins using Flurry of Blows. He expends a Ki point to tack on one more attack (a-load +1). Can he use the Rapid Shot feat to make it a-load +2?

Please note - I'm aware that the -2 to Hit on every shot due to Rapid Shot might make this an 'iffy' tactic. I'm just wondering if it is possible according to the rules OR (as with Two Weapon Fighting) the feat doesn't work with Flurry of Blows.


Edited a typo

No you cannot do what you just described in the same round. Rapid shot requires a full-attack action with a ranged weapon to use. Making a flurry of blows also takes a full-attack action to trigger.

You cannot make 2 full-attack actions in the same round.


These are all very useful and insightful answers to the question. There are more than a few very good ideas that I think I will try to incorporate into my game and see how it goes.

Thanks for the quality responses.

This question is primarily directed to fellow DM's. The question?

How do you handle player wealth in your campaigns and why do you handle it in the manner you do?

I am curious on peoples opinion of this matter and how it has changed or even broken their games. I myself have found that if I allow the party to have even the "standard" level of wealth, as recommended, they always seem to have a lot of coin laying around and thus want to try and throw money around as far as trying to find someone selling powerful magic items, like all some poor wizard does is construct useful magical items for adventurers and sells them.

In this last campaign I have basically made a point to make sure the PC's have little money at all. Now I still throw in a few magic items here and there, and they are quick to sell the +1 short sword they found only to find that everyone around them is very poor and they are offered very little if nothing for it. I am trying to get them to focus more on the game and improving their characters from a role playing stand point rather than purchasing powerful magical items to make them "stronger". I believe the best item that any of them have at this point (they are level 11) has a +2 enchantment. At this point I think one character has amassed a small fortune of 3300 gp in various precious stones and coin. All of them have at least a +1 weapon, +1 armor, and at least 2 other magic items either a cloak, ring, belt, or something. I do leave a few healing potions around for them to find or buy, but they are of the lesser or moderate variety and I don't really consider potions treasure, they are consumables.

So far it seems to have worked and I feel the players have a better grasp of their characters, and one of the players has even taken the initiative to take craft magic arms and armor since he cannot find a suitable magic user to buy from.

What about you folks?

I typically keep my players fairly economically strapped so that they can't just throw money around. In fact I would say my players are border line poverty stricken at all times in comparison to other adventurers.

In this case though, especially gold ingots, I would say they should be able to get full value for these items unless of course no one in town can afford to pay full value for them.

joela wrote:

We are working on a set of updated Psionics rules and in the spirit of the Open Playtest Paizo did for Pathfinder we are starting with asking YOU the fans - what would YOU want?

Our intention is to update the Psionics rules with errata and changes to balance some of the powers out, following in the footsteps of Pathfinders "less Save-or-Die" and more "major damage on a failed save" revisions. Each of the 4 "core psionic" classes get an update (partially based on our Untapped Potential updates) and we streamline feats and other items.

What remains the same? Power points, augmentations, items.

So, once again - what would YOU want to see updated, changed, revised or altered and WHY?

Feel free to drop by at Dreamscarred Press - The Definitive Source for d20 Psionics › All Types › All Topics and leave an opinion too!

Full post here.

I definitely want to see something different in regards to psionics, and by different, I mean that psionics and magic don't mesh. The 3.0 and 3.5 versions I thought were okay but I thought they took the easy way out in regards to keeping some kind of game power balance. Too many of the "psionic powers" were simply magic spells with a different label, which made it easy to throw into the game, but really had very little impact in the regards of making psionics something unique in regards to the game. I liked the 2nd edition (dark sun) version, however it was often game breakingly powerful.

Psionics should be powers of the mind and power over the mind. I would love to see it stay a point based system as it has in the past, however I would like to see something to the effect that the mind gets "tired". I did like the psionic disciplines in 3.x however I think the "powers" list really needs to be looked at. There should be certain powers for certain disciplines and those powers should be unique to the game, not the same old spells with a new label.

"Case study: monk grapples wizard on round 1. During same round, ogre bodyguard swings and hits monk, taking him down, ending grapple with wizard."

The reasoning behind grappling seems to get lost by some people. There are a lot of preconceptions of what being "grappled" and "pinned" are. Also I don't see why you would expect there to be 50/50 chance to hit the other person instead of the one you are targeting.

To be grappled just means you have enganged in grabbing someone to either prevent them from moving or impairing their movements. So to grapple a wizard or anyone the benefit is you have limited their movement and limited what they can do in a combat situation.

An example:

Two people are being being attacked by a wizard, so you decide to grapple the wizard. The wizard is now limited to spell selection and cannot run away. Your buddy can pull out a knife and stab the wizard who you are forceably holding in place, and controlled movement. Now sure the wizard can squirm around a bit and try to avoid the hit (thus the dex penalty, but not helpless), but it sure makes it a lot easier to hit someone if your buddy is holding them in place.

The next round the wizard doesn't get free, and you initiate a pin. This doesn't mean you have to pin them to the ground, this isn't WWF or WWE or whatever they call it now. You can pin someone against a wall, against a table, the floor, the ceiling if you can fly I guess, or any object that makes sense. If you are in a bar and initiate a grapple and then a pin, perhaps you pin your opponent over backwards against the top of a table standing over him. You don't have to be on the floor rolling around to grapple or pin. Also simple arm bars and locks are effectively pins without actually pinning an opponent to anything. You can put a guy in a very painful standing arm bar or wrist lock and I guarantee you he isn't going anywhere.

I think the PF group got it right. Now the 50/50 for ranged, well you could question it, but again, hitting a target being held in place is always easier than hitting a free moving target.

Now do you want to initiate a grapple if you are outnumbered as in the Case Study example with the monk against the wizard and an ogre body guard, probably not. That just doesn't sound like a good tactical plan in any situation where you are outnumbered 2 to 1. Now if you have a friend and its say 3 on 2, it could present itself in a favorable situation, but only if the tactics are correct.

Multi-class characters are always going to be behind someone who focuses on a single goal. It's just as true as in real life. You can't be great or knowledgeable about everything. If you want diversity you will have to accept a measure of sacrifice to other abilities. A fighter 8/ wizard 3 will have a lesser BAB than an 11th level fighter, but he also has the options of casting bears endurance, bulls strength, cats grace, spider climb, blur, invisibility, mirror image, darkness, see invisibility, protection from arrows, resist energy, expeditious retreat, feather fall, ray of enfeeblement, true strike, shield, protection from evil/good/etc. Sure the fighter is going to have to spend some feats in arcane armor training, but lots of these low level spells can change the battlefield in the favor of the fighter/wizard.

While this class combination is not nearly as strong straight up as a pure fighter or wizard, the character will have several spells at their disposal that they can use to ehance their role playing abilities and hold their own in combat.

You have a lot of things happening in this scenario. I would say you would have to make a stealth check to get to the door and open it. Then depending on how far you were to "step back" you would need to make another roll to get your bow out and knock an arrow, and finally a third one when you move back to the door to take a shot.

Now after you shoot, you have initiated combat, so an initiative will be rolled. If the critter beats your init then I would give it a new perception check, with a significant bonus to find you as you have shot it through a door into a room, there are few places you could be and it should know the direction based on the direction the arrow is sticking in it. If it succeeds on the perception check it comes after you, if not I would have it seek cover. If it loses init then obviously you can attempt to move away from the area and make another stealth check to remain hidden.

Again a lot going on and it really depends on the DM.

The current craft rules are broken, period, end of story. The rules are based on the value of the item, which will never reflect the true amount of time it takes to craft an item, at least not from a "real" stand point. You can make two exact same metal statues, both cast in a mold, one made of lead one made of gold. The melting point of lead and gold are very different, but still really really low when compared to iron(lead 621 F, gold 1947 F), so with a hot enough fire it won't take that much longer. So melt them down, cast the molds, the statues are exactly the same, same mold used, however since gold is worth significantly more than lead the gold statue, by the rules, would take weeks if not months longer to make.

The wonderful thing about Pen and Paper RPG's, is that the game is truly yours. So have the DM rule on it, or come to some agreement on how long it takes to make something. If the rules simply do not make sense, make rules that do make sense.

As for crafting poison I really think it depends on the poison, and not just based on value. Poisons taken from the glands of a living organism for instance don't need to be made, but must be harvested, extracted, and stored properly. Other poisons may take time to create as the poison is the result of a long chemical process. In all honesty it would be very difficult to set a standard for this that truly works for everything, as all situations would vary. Some poisons might take a month to create. This is the reason for the gp standard for crafting as the value of an item is the only constant.

Good luck on coming up with something that works for your group!

I've been a GM/DM/Player for years and the problem with high level adventures always boils down to creating a challenge for players, and by challenge, I mean a good story that can really challenge them. Throwing tougher and tougher monsters or high level NPC's at them in combat is easy and just gets repetitive. The hard part is creating a truly challenging story where a party of PC's can't simply use high level spells/abilities to bypass everything. At the same time you can't create an environment that completely negates their abilities either as that is counter productive, frustrates the players, and basically throws the rewards for getting to higher level in their faces saying " ya you can do this now, but it doesn't work here ".

Personally I have been extremely lucky in the fact that I have played with some good DM's that figure out a way to really challenge the party without doing this, however the highest level we ever got to was 14th level. I have DM'd a group up to 16th level in an Oriental campaign, which was much easier to come up with challenges simply due to the nature of the setting, but it was still hard.

Another thing that I have seen DM's do is limit the effect of spells such as speak with dead, raise dead, etc. or make it hard for these things to happen. Not making them impossible, just difficult. It represents challenges on their own. Such as you want to raise a murder victim, but the victims soul will only return when their stolen locket is returned to their body or something like that.

I myself don't really get wrapped up in levels, more a good story, but some players really get wrapped up in it.

Ellington wrote:

Since I made one about the Inquisitor it seems fitting that there should be one for the alchemist as well.

1) An ability somewhere early that allows him to ready his bombs as a swift action. Using up a full-round action every time you want to throw a bomb does not sound fun.

2) Mutagen scaling with levels to some degree. This has been covered pretty well in another thread.

3) The Infusion discovery a core part of the class.

4) Some way to combine Bomb effects. Possibly a high level discovery.

5) A bomb that dispels magic would be pretty sweet.

And that's it. I really like the Alchemist and just think he needs some minor adjustments.

The class as it is written is beyond saving. Its just another spellscaster with the same old spells, it's just that you have to do a little something different to "cast" them. This doesn't really bring anything new to the table, I was truly hoping for a different class all together.

ohako wrote:

I don't know, I think throwing a bucket full of swords at something sounds cool.

a) shuriken are a monk weapon, and so a monk can flurry with them. A monk can also take the Cornugon Stun feat (from the Cheliax Companion), and actually throw a Stunning Fist (I'd call it a Stunning Star). (If you succeed in stunning a flying enemy from the ground with a shuriken, go you!)

b) I think a monk that took Improvised Flurry for ranged would also need Quick Draw, because no thrown weapon other than shuriken are free to draw. Also you still couldn't throw more than 1 two-handed object.

Good observation with item B. I was pretty much thinking of smaller and light 1 handed objects that a person could easily snatch up like apples, mugs, spoons, and the such for this feat. Perhaps we could add "improvised weapons must be considered light weapons to be used in a flurry".

It would nip out anyone trying to pick up a heavy chair and doing a flurry with it =) Thats just silliness.

You want to make combat simple again? Its easy.

Start a new campaign at 1st level and use the slow XP chart or not even award XP anymore. Level the PC's as it fits your campaign and kill the campaign off at around 10th-12th level. The most memorable fights are the ones between 5th and 8th level as far as I am concerned, but thats just me.

Charender wrote:

Second, I would make it melee weapons only and use catch ioffguard as the prereq.

and your character name must be Jackie Chan....

Shuriken are listed as a weapon that the monk can use in a flurry of blows as per the rules and is a ranged weapon. So rather than a flurry of melee attacks the flurry is a flurry of flying metal death!!!! Okay they only do 1d3 damage, but they are still allowed in a flurry.

So if a character grabbed up a handful of beer mugs and started winging them at foes (a mug does 1d3 dmg by the way), I can totally see a flurry of mugs. Or perhaps a flurry of thrown broken glass or a flurry of thrown rolls that were not baked very well and left out too long that are hard as a rock. I can see lots of flurried thrown objects.

So that is why I added the throw anything in there as well as melee, it just seemed to fit the idea behind it.

Improvised Flurry

A monk can use an improvised weapon as part of their flurry of blows.

Prerequisites: Catch Off-Guard or Throw Anything

Benefit: You are able to use an improvised melee or ranged weapon in a flurry of blows. You still suffer the penalties for using an improvised weapon if you do not have the appropriate prequisite feat when using an improvised weapon you are not proficient in (Catch Off-Guard for melee, Throw Anything for ranged).

Normal: You can make a flurry of blows with unarmed attacks or monk weapons only.

Well I don't see how the feat is broken. The feat clearly states that the improvised weapon is given damage as per something equivelant in size and function. So a chair leg becomes a club, perhaps a larger chair leg becomes a great club, a beer mug becomes a sap, a sharp broken thin piece of wood might be considered a dagger, a heavy serving tray as a shield, etc.

Its a pretty simple feat that can only be used in the manner above only if the 1. The DM is an idiot, 2. The DM allows idiot players to his table, which he deserves to have munchkin players if he games with idiots.

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.