|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
It only took 1244 votes, but I have now officially seen every item known to remain in the competition.
Changes color and texture to match any outfit; transforms into a bathing suit on command; uses mimic adhesive to maintain support without straps in situations where straps are unwanted...
I may have submitted the wrong item this year.
Amanda Plageman wrote:
Oooh... Chest as in 'upper torso'. I was somehow reading chest as 'large box', and was confused, since I didn't even know that was a slot.... /facepalm
Upper torso + large box = brassier of the mimic
Will Huston wrote:
I will regret signing the papers to buying a house in the middle of the voting round if I end up in Top 32 and can't find the time to continue on.
On the plus side, if you make the Top 32 and can't find time to continue on, you get the opportunity to make one of the alternates very happy.
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
"Incorporeality" is not something to be just tacked on.
One does not simply walk through Mordor.
I always up-vote my own item without remorse because I'm voting for the designer who made the item, not the item itself. I have 100% confidence in my own design skills and significantly less confidence in the design skills of an anonymous, randomly-selected stranger.
Jeff Lee wrote:
I'm noting certain trigger words. Rather than causing me distress, they instead send me spiraling into a reverie about pop culture references and it takes time and effort to recover and get back on topic. For example, there are items out there that keep making me think of this guy.
NA-NA. NA. NA. NA. THUNDER!
( •_•) (x_x)
It was a battle of Edge vs. Edge.
It was just a matter of time before someone got...
♫♪ YeeaAAHHHH! ♫♪
Okay, item, half-way through your description, I was convinced you were biting off more you could chew. But then you busted out that monster in the second half of your description to make it all work. Very clever.
pH unbalanced wrote:
That depends. Did they intend to allow the action to interrupt attacks of opportunity made against the wielder during the wielder's turn? I think that would require an immediate action on the wielder's own turn, not a swift action.
(I don't know what item we're talking about here, but my instinct is to assume the item's creator wasn't going for that level of nuance; they just named the wrong action type.)
If this one particular item makes the Top 32, it's designer should thank me because I believe I've up-voted it twelve times now. I'm not even all that excited about it. It just happens to be better than everything it gets paired up against.
Thomas LeBlanc wrote:
...As usual, the 3 most overlooked considerations that affect cost...
Actually, the single most overlooked consideration that affects price is this guideline almost no one reads:
"The easiest way to come up with a price is to compare the new item to an item that is already priced, using that price as a guide. Otherwise, use the guidelines on Table 15-29." [emphasis mine]
Per the Core Rules, the table lots of people immediately consult is not the default pricing method for magic items. The table is what you fall back on if the price-comparison method doesn't provide a useful result.
I'd say I like the ocean-themed item, but that's too Pacific.
Meh. I found the mojo on the not-quite-as-good-as-the-good-one one better myself.
Finally, some praise that might apply to my item... :P
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
That emoticon may be too specific to an item.
Actually, LeBlanc and myself are the only ones to have done this all three times. If I make it and he doesn't, I will be rather sad as it has felt something like a brotherhood.
Yes, Feros, but then you'll win the Prize of the immortals.
"There can be only one."
613 votes and I finally saw my item! W00t!
I don't know what to think about it being paired up against that item, but at least I finally saw it.
I must be in a pessimistic mood.
Every few pages in this thread, I see a statement of condemnation that says something like, "This item spits in the face of everything fun about gaming and makes me question the existence of E. Gary Gygax. I will up-vote a poorly-templated grocery list before I ever allow this piece of garbage to tarnish the game forever with its unforgivably bad mechanics and its unsavory intentions towards my loved ones."
Every time I read a statement like that, I immediately assume it's directed at my item. I don't assume that about any of the mild snark in this thread, just the truly vitriolic stuff.
I'm only put off by the word "filigree" if it's being used to describe something that isn't filigree.
You could have a tier for contestants 8-12 years of age and a tier for contestants 13-17 years of age. The sixteen highest-voted entrants in each tier could get Top 32 forum tags and compete in Round 2; the four highest-voted Round 2 entrants in each tier could get Top 8 form tags and compete in Round 3; and the highest-voted Round 3 entrant from each tier could get an Apprentice Superstar tag.
There needs to be an Apprentice RPG Superstar contest for younger competitors.
I know (and dissapointingly cannot find) previous winners and judges comment that they would rather see a good idea that hints at a writer's creativity over well executed mechanics. "Mojo" is the buzzword for this. A good idea poorly executed isn't enough. But a... Superstar idea with mojo and reasonable execution is much better than a boring idea with solid mechanics.
As a voter, I look for items with really cool ideas and really tight mechanics, not one or the other.
On topic, I've seen a few items this year that meet those criteria.
So, let's see. We've got lots of drinking, dancing, and gambling items. Lots of music and dance items. A fair number of nautical items.
I think this year's theme is Dockside Tavern.
Template Fu wrote:
I promise to stop feeding on template errors if I get in Top 32! :P
You're more correct than you know. Once you make the Top 32, the system prevents you from posting under aliases in the Superstar forums. Template Fu will no longer exist here.
Russ Brown wrote:
Okay now I have to add filigree to my cowbell ringing aparatus! And runes, it definitely needs runes. Runes - out of which will spew buckets of gore and vomit.
My torc torquing apparatus needs all of these features.
Is a cowbell an apparatus?
If so, I've got a fever, and the only cure is more apparatus.
Suggestion for future contestants:
If you have a very specific question like this about an item you want to submit, have one of your friends post the question on your behalf (or just say that you're asking on behalf of some unspecified person you know so no one knows for sure who submitted your item if they see it).
Of course, the OP might decide to submit something entirely different, and if we do see an apparatus when voting, it might be one inspired by the OP's question, not one submitted by the OP...
James Jacobs wrote:
No. No aeons. They don't really fit into the themes of a Lovecraftian adventure path...
The "faceless caretakers of reality" who "exist beyond the understanding of most mortals" while "endlessly striving towards goals unfathomable even to many of the planes' eldest inhabitants" aren't Lovecraftian? They have multilateral body symmetry, flesh whose properties aren't exhibited by normal matter, and a mode of communication that relies upon telepathic fever dreams. If you kill one, it's parting 'words' might be a vision of its hivemind race at work across all of space and time, guiding the future of the multiverse on scales so vast, your victory and your life are stripped of all significance in the face of the aeons' cosmic endeavor, the smallest fraction of which is beyond your power to effect in any meaningful way.
Aeons are more Lovecraftian than half of the actual Lovecraftian monsters in the Pathfinder bestiaries.
*shuts off loud music playing at the Top 32 Guildhall and Beach House*
"Okay, party's over. Everyone squatting in the Guildhall needs to go. The Superstars will be here on Friday... Yes, this Friday... No, you can't sleep in the back room while the contest is taking place... Everyone who isn't here for Superstar needs to clear out by Thursday afternoon at the latest. The Guildhall opens for business on Friday."
You won't get a discount, but I hear you can pick up Erroneous Origins, a campaign setting tie-in to the errata document which includes a feat that addresses all of your concerns. Also, check out the Classes chapter of Errata Unchained, which includes some important errata the designers always intended to publish in place of the actual errata they published.
Last month: Dinosaurs.
Expect Animal Races: Clan of the Ox in August.
I'm not scheduling a July release this year due to some uncertainty regarding my day job. That situation should be resolved, one way or another, by the end of the month.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Be polite to your fellow platesetters everyone.
I'm going to be platesetting the vigilante this weekend, but I'm already confused by dual identity. Does an avenger's social identity go to the left or the right of the salad fork? :P
Why does it have to be a prestige class? It could be the first-ever evangelist-like base class. That would make the vigilante a self-contained gestalt subsystem that can transform any other class in the game into its superhero alter-ego starting at 1st level. (Okay, probably starting at 2nd-level, since you can't give all of the abilities of another class in addition to the starting vigilante stuff all on 1st level. The evangelist-style stuff would have to wait until 2nd level.)
If it's true that the vigilante is a more-specialized version of something that multiple other classes can already pull off, then the vigilante shouldn't be a base class. A more-specialized version of a class that already exists is just an archetype.
In fact, the vigilante class reads a lot like a list of abilities meant to appear in archetypes for other classes. Avenger could be a brawler or fighter archetype, stalker could be a rogue archetype, warlock could be split into an arcanist and a kineticist archetype, and zealot could be an inquisitor archetype. The vigilante class is just dual identity and renown plus a bunch of abilities that should be options available to other base classes.
If the vigilante is going to be a base class, it needs to be something more compelling than "I'm kinda like that other base class, but I can socialize, too." Vigilante needs to be to the master spy what the swashbuckler is to the duelist; it needs to be a spell-less analog of the bard; it needs to be something, anything, that we don't already have. What it doesn't need to be is four existing base classes with some social subsystem abilities tacked on. That's what archetypes and feats are for.
If it's absolutely necessary that a vigilante mimic the role of another base class, at least do away with all of these designer-imposter specializations. You should just get to count some fraction of your vigilante levels as levels in one other base class of your choice and gain the features of that other class accordingly. You aren't a feaux inquisitor (or whatever other class). You're a super-diplomat who can turn into a super-boogeyman, both of whom happen to have some genuine inquisitor class features in addition to their social/anti-social talents. (Which, incidentally, makes for a great cover story. "I'm not a rebellious vigilante, I'm an inquisitor who keeps the peasants in line. I can demonstrate my inquisitor abilities if you require proof.")
To expand upon Abraham's point, let's compare the dual identity mechanics from Ultimate Intrigue to the performance combat mechanic from Ultimate Combat and the kingdom building mechanic from Ultimate Campaign.
What happens if we want to make a new subsystem for airship pilots? Do we have to make a new airship pilot base class with specializations that allow cleric-like airship pilots, fighter-like airship pilots, rogue-like airship pilots, and wizard-like airship pilots? And do we have to go back and add an airship pilot specialization to the vigilante class, the gladiator class, and the kingmaker class?
Why should we recreate the existing base classes every time we get a new subsystem? Why not just design rules that allow characters of any class or archetype participate in the new subsystem?
Avengers and stalkers, being mundane, should require a few rounds to change identities, but they should get to keep all of their talents when in their social identity (since a mundane disguise doesn't magically change who you are).
Warlocks and zealots, being magical, should lose most of their spells and talents when in their social identities (because you have to turn off your magic to hide it from other magic), but they should be able to magically assume their vigilante identities as a standard, move, or swift action.
The vigilante's niche seems to be "one-level dip class."
You take one level in vigilante if your character concept requires a scry-proof dual identity, then immediately multiclass into something else:
vigilante (avenger) 1 / slayer X
You have your one vigilante level to protect your secret identity plus a bunch of levels in something else to get vigilante-like abilities you can use even when you are not using your vigilante identity.
No mutagenic vigilantes that sprout adamantine claws or turn into big green monsters?
No artificer vigilantes that craft custom suits of magic armor?
No supernatural flight talent?
I have some progress to report, as well as some spoilers to reveal:
I'm getting closer to publishing an introductory version of the Custom Class Builder. I still have lots of class and archetype features to edit, but most of the central mechanics are finalized.
The Custom Class Builder streamlines a fair number of common class features by making them work like inquisitor judgments (or unchained barbarian rage stances): you can, in theory, gain a large number of these class features from a single custom class; every one of them scales with your class level, no matter how many others you gain; and you can (usually) have only one of these scaling class features active at any given time.
By setting things up this way, the Custom Class Builder makes it easy to mix and match class features like bardic performances, fighter weapon training, inquisitor judgments, ranger favored enemies, etc. A custom class grants a combination of these scaling abilities that fit its theme, and class members choose which one of these abilities is active at any given time.
In addition, every custom class has an ability called heroic effort, which serves as a general-purpose point pool. Some of the scaling class features mentioned above require heroic effort to activate and maintain. Custom classes can also grant various other features that would normally depend upon different point pools: arcanist exploits, gunslinger and swashbuckler deeds, monk and ninja ki powers, magus arcana, etc.
Every custom class grants one class feature per level plus a number of additional proficiencies on 1st level. Many low-level features of existing classes can be selected as proficiencies. Each custom class also gains a progression of bonus talents based upon its Hit Die, with smaller Hit Dice granting more bonus talents. Blocks of these bonus talents can be exchanged during class creation for spellcasting (or similar abilities), with larger blocks resulting in better spellcasting progressions.
The last major component of the class creation process, which I am developing now, involves companions (animal companions, eidolons, familiars, etc.). During creation, a custom class can exchange one or more proficiencies to gain a companion as a class feature; the more proficiencies exchanged, the better the companion. One proficiency might get you an animal, ooze, plant, or vermin companion that must be controlled using the Handle Animal skill, while four proficiencies might get you an independent dragon or outsider companion with eidolon evolutions.
The introductory version of the Custom Class Builder won't contain all of the three-thousand-plus character options currently in development, but it will contain a beta version of the custom class creation process, along with a representative sample of the many features that can be added to a custom class.
My current goal is to release this introductory PDF for playtesting and review later this summer.
Of course if he playtests by making up parties of characters and having them converse and interact with one another when he's the only one there... that would be a little strange.
Now I want to run a PbP with no one but myself and four aliases so I can tell the story of an AP in the form of an online novel about my four characters.
I am referring, in the above statements, to Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur and Animal Races: Dawn of the Cerapod. Each of these two, related PDFs features a new, playable and customizable race of humanoid dinosaurs.
In Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur, you meet the ruthless carnosaurians, the often-villainous upper class of the Great and Terrible Lizard Empire. In Animal Races: Dawn of the Cerapod, you meet the fierce but noble Bird-Feet, Bone-Heads, Horn-Heads, and Shield-Bearers that are the common folk of the same ancient empire.
All of that is ancient history, but history tends to repeat itself. Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur includes the stats of a carnosaurian lich who may be scheming to revive his long-dead race, while Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur details numerous ways an ancient race might survive its apparent extinction. (Hint: one of those ways involves an extradimensional zoo which may or may not be a theme park.)
If you feel like playing an anthropomorphic dinosaur (or someone who wants to revive an ancient race of anthropomorphic dinosaurs in the modern world), check out Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur and Animal Races: Dawn of the Cerapod.
The dinosaurs are on their way...
Animal Races: Dawn of the Carnosaur and Animal Races: Dawn of the Cerapod have both been uploaded. Barring technical difficulties, both are on schedule for release on June 12th (or slightly before that, depending upon your time zone).
Psionics is essentially magic wearing the clothes of New Age psychic phenomena. Unlike magic, whose literary heritage spans from much older sources, Psionics in the game draws mainly from comic books, horror movies like "Scanners", and the "New Age" movement.
Psionics is essentially is less sci-fi version of D&D's magic system. Unlike D&D's Vancian magic system, which was lifted directly from a science fiction novel and appears nowhere else in literature or mythology, D&D psionics creates a mechanic that reflects the way most people assume magic would work in a fantasy setting: practioners draw upon a depletable pool of energy which they shape to their will without "preparing" or "memorizing" an abitrary number of fire-and-forget spells.
I am referring to the proposed Cerapoda clade, which includes Ceratopsians, Ornithopods, and Pachycephalosaurs.
The same PDF also covers Cerapoda's sister clade, Thyreophora, so it would have been more accurate to call it Dawn of the Ornithischian, but "Ornithischian" didn't sound as cool as "Cerapod" (and wouldn't have fit on the cover even if it did).
Saurapoda, meanwhile, make an appearance in both PDFs as a race of reptilian giants.
Welcome to the Jurassic Multiverse.
Your tour begins two weeks from today.
Ah, you're primarily running PFS scenarios. That explains why you aren't noticing any number-related character growth in Pathfinder. In my experience, PFS focuses on a very narrow slice of the Pathfinder game. Many types of encounters that showcase character growth are specifically excluded from PFS (as opposed to something like Kingmaker, where the advancement of your raw numerical bonuses can change the difficulty and feel of entire dungeons).
Your examples keep assuming that Pathfinder characters encounter only monsters whose CR is approximately equal to their own level. Sure, in a poorly-designed adventure where the PCs never meet groups of lower-level enemies, they won't feel like they are advancing. Advancement in Pathfinder is all about becoming significantly more badass than creatures that are below your level; that's why those creatures are below your level.
The problem with flying kick is that it doesn't say you actually fly when you move, so difficult terrain will still half your movement.
The description of flying kick flat out states that you move through the air when using flying kick. The first sentence reads: "The monk leaps through the air to strike a foe with a kick."