Eric The Pipe's page

What about some equipment that only worked for mythic characters, in the cases of temporary mythic levels. That way bonus equipment could be given, without exceeding the WBL after the tier goes away.

It's not raw but, I suggest talking to your DM, unless he's a dick that's a feat at worst.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

Aberzombie wrote:

Honey is the only natural food which never goes off.

** spoiler omitted **

Actually the process of making Alcohol requires the ability to spoil. Most mead brewers must add water to the honey so it can spoil.

And here I always thought it was because the yeast converts the sugars in the honey, producing alcohol and carbon dioxide.

The sugars can not be converted until it is diluted to the point were it can go bad. It is the breaking down of the structure that allows it to be converted.

Containers with mead have been found to date back to before containers of beer.

Containers with beer have been found to date back to before containers with bread.

The first grain domesticated was barley, for making beer.

The Codes of Hammurabi have a least one law pertaining to beer, which at the time was made by the women of the household.

When Louis Pasteur discovered microbes and the pasteurization process, he was studying beer, not milk.

Before they used hops, a substance called grout was required for use in all beer made in England, it's recipe was a secret as it was used as the means for taxing beer consumption at the time. The recipe is now lost to time.

The reason Guinness was the biggest selling beer in Ireland was because it had the lowest alcohol content and was there for the cheapest. The level of alcohol dictated the tax on the liquid. When shipped to America and places like that, the alcohol content was upped.

Honey is the only natural food which never goes off.

** spoiler omitted **

Actually the process of making Alcohol requires the ability to spoil. Most mead brewers must add water to the honey so it can spoil.

Just Spreading The Word on the cool new game by Monte Cook. Check it out, participate in the kick starter if you can. The min has already been met, so now we are just adding more cool stuff.

No more advice?

She is going to be a slyph, and I'm already taking cloud gazer at first. I have an 8 str and planned on spellcasting for attacks. Melee would be just to risky.

Any suggestions for feats for a gestalt Rogue (Rake)/Sorcerer (Stormborn) build for Skull and Shackles, but with a Air ship instead of a normal one?

23. "Let him die. At this point it'll just be simpler to raise/resurrect him."

I've actually said this. We were trying to rescue him from hell, so we put an arrow through his head rather than fight our way through the demons to rescue him.

41. Oh, s$@~, that was flame strike not cure light wounds....

My current favorites are Belgian style yeti (which is even better on tap) and Smokestack Series Bourbon Barrel Quad from Boulevard Brewing Company. Though I'll drink anything produced by Great Divide, and just about have.

Which is silly. Like a Oracle is someone who predicts the future... no they are someone cursed and cast divine spells in Pathfinder.

I would encourage you to type in Oracle to a search engine.

I'd totally include this race in my setting.... Then I'd tell all the players that wanted to play it, they are unwilling to leave their "area" pick a race that would actually want to be a adventurer. Unless we are playing a game with only this race as an option, then let the non-magical role-play commence.

That forces every single Rogue ever to have 13 Intelligence (which is nearly worthless for them) and spend feats on Combat Expertise (which is worthless for them), Two-Weapon Feint (which doesn't nearly make them viable by itself), and Improved Two-Weapon Feint (which they can't take until level 9 at the earliest and which has 3 pre-req feats as well as high stat requirements). It also forces them into a two-weapon fighting style, because Improved Feint only allows them to make a single attack and Greater Feint actually does almost nothing for the Rogue that uses it.

Please do not tell me what is now "required" based on some rule changes. You'll find it's only required if your goal is to break the system, that I can do without help. The word you want is desired, it is desired to have a 13 Intelligence, and desired to have combat expertise, and all that other crap. The only thing that is required to live and die, and without one you can not do the other.

For the record, I always play rogues, and I always have as high a Intelligence as I can.

Ugh. That dramatically tips the scales towards heavy armor. It's basically impossible to kill a full BAB character in full plate with those rules unless you can bypass their armor DR. No, really, I mean it. Even a sneak attacking rogue averages to roughly one damage per attack.

It does, but the point of the rogue is to catch the fighter unaware, not just flank.

If you want it to lean a little more that way take away the BAB bonus to defense when he looses his dex (that's the other thing I did).

The best, yet slightly complicated, idea I've come up with is still:

Use the normal rules out of Ultimate Combat: non-magic bonus to dr/magic, ect
This is balanced by the die of damage the weapon does.

Add Con mod to this DR, whatever type it might be.
This balances out Str mod to damage.

Add BAB to hit and to defense
This balances out each based on level and class.

Dex and other bonuses add as normal for touch and flat-footed, ect

Add armor magic bonus to DR and Defense, this balances with magic weapons adding to hit and damage.

This creates a system where,a 15th level fighter fighting a 15th level fighter both with +5 weapons and armor balance out and the dice are the important things... But if one is higher level or has better weapons they quickly become deciding factors.... Training and equipment matter.

If your worried about unarmored people, realize, that in life, unarmored people get killed real quick.

In this system I also suggest that the DC of caster spells are all changed to 1/2 caster level + 10 + casting stat, regardless of the spell. And realize DR even /- doesn't work for energy damage. Wizards with their lack of armor can do massive damage, but must look out for the fighter that can rip through their defenses.

Also this works well with the Wounds and Vigor system.

DrDeth wrote:

And, speaking in character has been required by all sorts of RP heavy DMs, it's not "Old School" at all.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

Old School doesn't have to mean bad, some of the idea's were very good. Only speaking in character is very much old school.

I didn't detect any hint that he thought 'Old School' was a bad thing, just that in his experience, and mine, getting into character is not something that was done way back in the past, that disappeared when the new blood joined in.

If you read any of the examples of play in old rules, it's full of players referring to their PCs in the third person.

"Black Dougal will check the chest for traps."

"Black Dougal gets pricked by a poisoned needle. Make a save vs poison."

<roll> "Rats! I rolled a 2."

"Black Dougal falls to the floor, dead."

"Frederick the Dwarf will go through Black Dougal's backpack, before he hits the floor."

"Morgan Ironwolf reminds Frederick that she had first dibs on Black Dougal's boots."

etc.

While you may have interpreted his post fine, you failed on mine, "Only speaking in character is very much old school." And yes, a lot of that has disappeared in the "new blood."

More direct: The active dis-allowance to speak out of character is something that players consistently did in the past, this is practically the definition of "Old School". It is also something that has not completely carried through to the new players. This does not stop the new players from doing the same, nor does it stop it from being good, nor bad. It does make it an old school thing to do.

Speaking exclusively in character has nothing to do with getting into the character.

Jessica "Babbit" Lagamorph

Went by Babbit, which was the last name of a customer I once had. Still a bad ass name. Her creation was fun, her name rocked and her story was the best. She's the character I bring out when I can't think of something I want to play, cuz she's always fun.

The key is she's a non-combat rogue, hates to fight, loves to use skills, while adventuring.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

leo1925 wrote:

I was the one asking this on another thread.

I can't understand number 4. Can someone explain it for me?

An old school DM playing pathfinder would only allow the core book. period. no, I have this cool idea and stuff released to back up the idea and it's not even broken, i'm really a little underpowered.... CORE BOOK ONLY.

Bah, that's a pretender. A true old school GM wouldn't be playing Pathfinder.

True, though I was just trying to explain the idea with a more modern example.

Use the gestalt rules, everyone is half monk. Except don't use, the monk bab or saving throws, the other class is the primary class with just the monk abilities tacked on.. but everyone in the world has this... you should also include armor as dr from ultimate combat...

Maybe also lose flurry of blows, requiring the character to invest in two-weapon fighting instead. (it works the same, it just requires feats)

I've always preferred the 2nd edition version of psionics. They were significantly different than wizards, not just wizards with spell points, which is what most of the current versions are. It had some issues, the whole telepathy thing, but I liked maybe not getting the power to work and wasting the action.

I'd turn it into more of a skill system, with powers known, and a skill check like thing to turn them on. remove the chance for critical failure and critical success from the 2e. and make it cost to keep the power active, but allow rejuvenation of the points when resting, not just at the beginning of the day/after a nights rest.

Instant effects, like fireball, is the domain of the spell caster, not the mind bender.

OH, and the one exception is wild talent, the 2nd ed wild talent did not work, no need to include that.

When we found treasure, he would spew all over the stuff he wanted to keep for himself, because he knew none of our characters would want it after that. Whatever was vomit-free, we would split among the rest of the party.

Screw that, the clean spell was a cantrip, just cast that.

PC:
Don't really have a favorite Player I've played with. Each of the people I play with on a regular basis have some good things about them and some bad.
One of my friends can drop me to the floor with laughter, and he's decent at role-playing, but trying to get him to learn the rules is a pain and he can't run games with players that are clever.

Another one is a decent designer and is fun to talk game designing with; but he couldn't role-play his way out of a paper bag, he thinks he's smarter then most people, so a moderate intelligence character (10-11) is REALLY stupid according to him.

We all have issues when it comes to role-playing, I'm sure I have my issues. And I almost always play strikers, it's just how my brain works. Every time I try something else I get bored or they change into them. The characters themselves are different in personality, as least as much as I can make them.

System:

I love the gurps system in theory. Bell curves are THE AWESOME. But I still don't have running it down, so playing it is harder than other systems.

I play tons of D&D/Pathfinder, it's got a great easy running combat system, but the skill system leaves something to be desired.

And finally Shadowrun is a favorite because of the magic system and it's possibilities, I swear one of these days I'll rewrite that damned thing into a fantasy/steampunk setting/system... It'll be right after I rewrite FASERIP (another favorite) for simplicity and L5R into a Last Air Bender like setting.

31) I hand out what characters you are to play when you get here.

(and one dm)32)I'll level your characters up for you, you don't know what you got better at during game play.

33)You demand to know why there aren't more unnecessary charts in this book.

12. when he kills you every two sessions and tells you stories of his old DM who killed them every session.

THIS and more like it, I think that is what pisses me off about "old school" dm's, according to them they had it worse. I just feel like I have it boring.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And, speaking in character has been required by all sorts of RP heavy DMs, it's not "Old School" at all.

Old School doesn't have to mean bad, some of the idea's were very good. Only speaking in character is very much old school.

I was the one asking this on another thread.

I can't understand number 4. Can someone explain it for me?

An old school DM playing pathfinder would only allow the core book. period. no, I have this cool idea and stuff released to back up the idea and it's not even broken, i'm really a little underpowered.... CORE BOOK ONLY.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The DM is ALWAYS right

4 of 7 of those are photos.

Are you implying that photography isn't art? Cuz, I, having no talent in photography but knowing a lot of people that do, can tell you that photography is an art, photo-shopped photography equally so.

There could easily be a gunslinger or siege engine sorcerer. Just replace the feats with the special abilities and subtract a spell per day or something. That way the sorcerer gets more things to spend its spells on without changing/inventing bloodlines. (the bloodline feats are mostly crap anyway)

I've really enjoyed the Twenty Palaces series, and the first one is cheep in kindle form HERE

And the Monster Hunter Series, by Larry Correia, is fun. It is a good fast read, with lots of great lines like, "Vampires only sparkle when lit on fire."

Eric The Pipe wrote:

Now I'm sure some of you would have kicked me out for these actions

What, for making a character whose only purpose was to piss off me as a GM?

Nah! Killed you and buried you in the foundation of the house maybe, but not kicked out! :P

Just remember at the end of the story, you love me. Sometimes letting a Player be a jerk isn't a bad thing, it can make a good story better, not all heroes are nice about it.

thank you!

can you give me some more infos, on how you planed to set this up?

markus.teich - at- gmail.com

thanks!

To be honest, I haven't put anything down on paper. I just knew that is was there and was going to play it by ear. I just figured they would come across the town while making there way to the next encounter. Then throw ghouls at them until they run away. It wasn't a detailed plot. Mood would be the important part.

I am playing in a four man group, and by process of elimination have been chosen to be the 'rogue' character. I am not terribly fond of the class in general, as I prefer more of a Druid or Wizard type role. What are some good alternatives to playing a core rogue that won't limit my growth at higher levels or overlap other players roles?

P.S. Arcane Trickster is an option I am thinking of, what are the limitations of this PrC?

The easy way to play a wizard but covering the rogue stuff is to play a wizard, Detect Traps and Knock do all the stuff rogues do that no one else can do. I've already heard tell there is a new bard type that gets the trap finding abilities in UC. Play that.

Don't play an Arcane Trickster, it's the worse of two worlds and just doesn't keep up. (I've tried multiple times.)

I totally understand where your coming from, but I run a party of 7-8 players, and several of them get bored quite quickly. Sometimes I think the 10% exp penalty is the only thing keeping me from having to work a new character into the story and reasoning for why one left, every session, cause someone was kinda bored and wanted to try someting else.

I could see how that could be a problem that needed a house rule... Good Call.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

Kyle Olson wrote:

Eric The Pipe wrote:

nope, double checked that when i couldn't find them, then re loaded the program, nothing seems to work.

Can you tell me what you're expecting that's not there? I can check to see if it's in the data so I can get a better idea what's happening.

Usually when people can't find monsters it's because of the sources button in the bottom right corner of the screen.

The stuff from the carrion crown series ** spoiler omitted ** and i wouldn't question it, but i swear it was there at one point. And it's got stuff from other parts of Carrion crown, like the ** spoiler omitted ** but some of the other stuff is gone.

The lopper is under "NPCs", you have to change the filter to NPCs or All. I've gone back and forth on setting this filter to default to all, but I should have it remember what you left it on in the near future.

Ok, Thanks for the help, I just turned it off as some point when I was pressing buttons. Once again this this is beautiful, THANK YOU.

I came up with the idea of combining the tiers of classes with multiclassing to make it work nice. the classes are separated into their tiers, then multiclassing works almost exactly like 2e; average of the two rolls, divide xp between the two classes, best of BAB and saves (not stacking).

I've played a lot of gestalt characters, an important part is the HP, roll two dice each appropriate for their class, add together and divide by two.

My general opinion is that Wizard, Druid and Barbarian go on the slow chart, Rogue (and possibly monk and bard) go on the fast chart, and everything else goes on the medium. But you should divide the classes as you wish among the tiers.

also if your including role-play xp, give a character more for acting "in a class," if he casts a bunch of spells or acts wizardly give him xp just for his wizard class, ect.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

nope, double checked that when i couldn't find them, then re loaded the program, nothing seems to work.

Can you tell me what you're expecting that's not there? I can check to see if it's in the data so I can get a better idea what's happening.

Usually when people can't find monsters it's because of the sources button in the bottom right corner of the screen.

The stuff from the carrion crown series

and i wouldn't question it, but i swear it was there at one point. And it's got stuff from other parts of Carrion crown, like the but some of the other stuff is gone.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

I don't know what happened but all the enemies from the adventure paths are gone. Did I do something wrong?

Did you unselect them from the sources?

nope, double checked that when i couldn't find them, then re loaded the program, nothing seems to work.

I don't know what happened but all the enemies from the adventure paths are gone. Did I do something wrong?

I had one DM that force the character to fight death after the 2nd res, or not be able to come back.

Anyway, I understand not wanting a penalty cause you died, but we use it as a deterant to keep players from constantly changing what they are playing cause the mechanics arent working out how they want all of the sudden. We've had issue with it before in the past, and the penalty is generally enough to get players to stick it out unless they are just REALLY not enjoying a character.So, swap characters in my game all you want, but it wont be free.

I have played with characters that have been boring/caused problems. I just talked to the DM, that character left, new one came in, problem solved, no reason for an XP penalty. It made game play smoother in most cases. I guess I'm now used to playing with at least half-adults, killing your character to get a new one would be looked down on. Social shaming go.

I'd also consider Star Trek to be about 70 percent soft magic.

LOL, sounds about right.

Not really. Believe me, I want there to be. If you go through my history you will find battle after battle against the "God-Wizard" crowd.

But the metamagics...I can't really argue with them.

And as to it being fire, with the admixture evocation school you can chance the type of energy. And this is just one example, with the same procedure easily applicable. This isn't a corner case, or even a cheese exploit.

The fact that metamagic feats stack is, in my opinion, broken. It was poorly thought out and designed in 3.5 and wasn't corrected in Pathfinder.

Rods are, in my opinion, beyond question broken.

I want to be wrong about this, so feel free to present evidence. I really do mean it when I say I hope the Devs jump in here and say I'm missing a nerf.

But I don't think so. So I'll be houseruling metamagic rods out at minimum and likely ruling they don't stack.

But again, I'm open to suggestion.

I'd present evidence to counter your arguments but you haven't given any evidence to support your arguments. So far you presented your opinion, and one argument that I'm not sure could be pulled off without enhancing the hell out of the spell, which would take a lot of money and time. So please make a case, not a whine.

Keep in mind that the focus on this post is using magic in story writing and one should interpret it carefully for gaming.

Absolutely.

Eric The Pipe wrote:

Don't make me regret coming to a game. If I'm not having fun why in the hell am I doing this? "Die at your own risk" my ass.

That was the one part of Gendo's post that really caught my attention. It was almost like he was challenging people to take issue with his play-style.

You're absolutely right when you say that the game is supposed to be fun. I think it would be fun to play a game where death wasn't a revolving door. I get where that could effect players and the choice they make. What I don't get it is, if you've removed the resurrection options why would you make the player's new character join the group at a lower level? Can someone give me a reason for this? I mean if it's just a DM call type-thing, well, I think you kinda need a better reason than that.

The last time the DM took xp/levels away from a new character, I stood up, told him no, I'm dead. Unless they can resurrect me I can't come back. That was the end of my time with that DM. His game fell apart soon after, because all the other players in the game held the same stance, no players no game. (Which is something that all full time DM's often forget.)

I think this blog post stats perfectly the problem with magic in role-playing and how it should effect games. Link

We know all the rules to how magic works, it can't be a wondrous, game shattering devise. If you want this use artifacts, that have no rules on how to make them.

Treat all magic as hard. If you want something different your going to have to get rid of the wizards as pc's.

Made a bet with a friend that was playing in my game that I could pull off having the Deck of many things in my game without screwing up the game. My reasoning "I just had to obey the rules on it"..... Needless to say a thief with a mansion isn't a thief anymore. (It was a thief campaign)

Quote:

This game is not like life, in terms of personal improvement. In life, we prefer ways to better our flaws before our strengths, while in RPGs the opposite is nearly always true. In other words, a DM shouldn't expect a group to hand the belt of giant strength to the wizard because he's the weakest. (In truth, this makes complete sense, because the wizard will actually be better protected if someone else has that belt.) This is an issue to consider, if you haven't yet, but I digress...

I used to let the players keep all the xp, and get treasure for their level. Now i let them have -1 level and treasure for (the adjusted level) or current xp and significantly reduced treasure (little more than 1st). I have found before they can get a hold of raise dead the treasure is so small it doesn't make a difference if they have none.

To the OP: this guy needs to learn some manners, or leave. All of his actions are rude. Be as polite as possible when you discuss it with him.

Wow I feel like the opposite of your group. I get pissed off when people use cell phones at the gaming table. How to prevent the texting asking for a ride home is to make the other players turn off their cell phones so he cannot recieve the text.

I would not turn off my cell phone for you, I have a child and I don't always bring her to gaming, I have my cell phone for more than texting jokes. I do however refrain from excessive use of my cell phone when gaming. It's just not polite, which is the important part.