|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
ya, wait, don't withdraw because I pondered a goblin. =)
I was just throwing it out there to see what folks thought of it.
To be honest, I'm pondering not doing the AP thing at all.
Re: goblin PC thoughts
The general hope will be to tie his background in with one of the other players (whoever feels up the RP side of things and a willingness to work it in)
Basic premise being, said other pc managed (completely unintentionally) to save him from drowning (exact details of the event to be decided)... and ever since, despite countless attempts to lose him or shoo him away, he's been following them around incessantly like a cheerful little puppy... (that occassionally goes all feral and gnaws someone's leg off.)
They finally gave up trying to dodge him, and just got used to him following them around. Though he doesn't speak common (goblins do not get it automatically) and the other PC does not speak goblin, eventually the two of them have worked out a sort of pseudo language between them (part common, part goblin, part facial expression and physical gestures and tone, etc) that they understand each other well enough... much to the confusion of others.
Mechanically, I can give him common, just not use it.
(my main reason for hoping to do it this way, is because I want to make him this seemingly happy cheerful little fellow that's almost always talking to himself and breaking out into cheerful-sounding goblin tunes he makes up on the fly (like Golum in the LotR movie singing his little song while catching the fish) It would be really difficult to come up with all of this for real, so much easier to just mention he's off to one side singing something then worry about making up the words (I'm obsessive enough I'd probably try to do it)
I don't intend on him being a big conversationalist, just a missile you point and shoot at the enemy (possibly with a hidden clever side not immediately obvious.. depending on how my stats work out =))
Motivation is not a big issue, as he will just be intent on doing whatever the other PC is doing, and supporting their decisions over anyone elses. (In reality he believes the other PC is an avatar of the goblin hero god Zogmugot, who for whatever reason decided to allow him to live then stick around so clearly he must assist them in all things)
Not sure on the campaign traits, will partially depend on when he and the other PC meet up (I could work in a few of them if needed)
The feral gnasher archetype is a goblin only barbarian archetype that basically gives them a bite attack and upgrades to that.
Lots of background and Rp stuff rolling around my head still, but don't want to dive too far down this rabbit hole if its not going to work for the campaign.
The only pc I'm inspired to play at the moment, that I can't do in PFS, is a goblin feral gnasher...
Mostly for the rp side of it, as I'd hope to convince everyone *not* to know goblin =)
Not sure how viable the archetype is over the long haul though, as want to mostly just gnaw on things.
Will have to ponder.
The musket and pistol used to say the same thing (what the pistol does now)
The errata changed the musket wording, but they forgot to change the pistol wording.
There was a later clarification that the pistol was supposed to change as well in the same way.
These were errataed (?) not too long ago.
ie: using both barrels is a standard action
This was primarily to avoid all the gun shenanigans that used to occur with folks shooting both barrels for every attack during a full attack actions.
So in your example, you would lose your iterative attack (as you can't full attack anymore firing both barrels) but gain the 2nd bullet ... so +2/+2
Unsure what happens if you misfire on both ... =) kaboom?
GM V wrote:
its a 1-5 but we will probably be in the high tier. It is part 3 of an arc and you get to play with mythic powers.
Its actually a 3-7.The first 2 parts were 1-5, the 3rd part is higher.
You are paraphrasing.
The exact wording is of import
Precise Strike: "To use this deed, a swashbuckler cannot attack with a weapon in her off hand"
Whether its in your hand is not relevant, for either ability.
If you've house ruled around the stuff, that's fine. But straight up, not so much.
I think seasons 4 and 5 have all sorts of nicely connected gems in them, connecting things from both seasons and from multiple directions.
General plot spoilers for a number of Season 4 and 5 scenarios:
The afore mentioned Disappeared -> Fortress of the Nail in season 4 leading to the confrontation with TD in Vengeance at Sundered Craig in season 5
The Glories of the Past series in season 4 ... followed by the season 5 (Siege of the Diamond City) special ... leading into The Traitor's Lodge ... then to the same Vengeance at Sundered Craig scenario mentioned above, though for a different (but connected) npc confrontation.
And the Library of the Lion -> Horn of Aroden connection you mention above ... to find the Horn... then onto Assault on the Wound to actually use it (if you're the right faction) ... and the events in Assault happen more or less in conjunction with the events in Sundered Craig.
There's all great connected stuff going on there.
All in all, I think they did a great job of making the PC's feel connected to the massive events that went on with the whole Sky Citadel/Worldwound storylines. And not just in the above scenarios, but many others.
The problem is that you want your mount to be an actual griffon... just a young one.
That leads to problems.
From an enemy not knowing that its not an animal, assuming its a magical beast...
To someone using Gorge of Gluttons on it =)
Its not 'just fluff that doesn't affect mechanics' if its type is visually different.
The rule quoted for smoke is not the rule for 'normal smoke' its the rule for 'heavy smoke'.
There's a difference.
It is the same as the smoke from a smokestick.
ie: it does nothing but obscure vision, just in a bigger area.
Just cause its a spell like ability, does not change the casting time.
It still takes a whole minute.
A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description
You said it already, it seems the closest to the urgrosh.
Which is basically a battleaxe/spear combo.
If you want to ignore the spear side, then its just a battleaxe.
It is not a dwarven waraxe.
You could use feat you mention, to do piercing damage with a battleaxe.
mileage will vary
There is no miss chance due to being incorporeal.
The concealment from the evolution should apply to everything (corporeal or not). that's part of the 'shadow' stuff, not the 'incorporeal' stuff.
Shadow Form is not making your eidolon incorporeal. Be clear on that. It gives it some concealment, and allows it to affect incorporeal creatures... but it is not incorporeal itself else it would not need to give it the Ghost Touch ability, as incorporeal creatures can already affect other incorporeal creatures.
And just for clarity, you can give your eidolon the shadow form evolution via the level 2 summoner spell, lesser evolution surge.
Also, this evolution might not be PFS legal, unless you're a Fetchling... if it matters.
Gwen Smith wrote:
Utilizing the chronicles takes more then a round... well unless you spent the hour on the right book earlier in the day I suppose.
To reitterate what the previous poster was referring to...
It looks like someone overwrote the slayer class description page with the slayer archetype page.
both have the same content.
Not sure when this happened... but as of now, its impossible to look at the class description =)
You're calculating this wrong in your examplea +1 weapon requires a caster level of 3
Weapon Special Abilities - Caster Level for Weapons wrote:
For an item with only an enhancement bonus and no other abilities, the caster level is three times the enhancement bonus.
A corrosive weapon has a caster level of 10A thundering weapon has a caster level of 5
Weapon Special Abilities - Caster Level for Weapons wrote:
The caster level of a weapon with a special ability is given in the item description.
Price +1 bonus; Aura moderate evocation; CL 10th; Weight —
Price +1 bonus; Aura faint necromancy; CL 5th; Weight —
So a +1 corrosive thundering katana, would have a final CL of 10 (the highest of the three) and thus the make whole would require a 20th level caster (thus putting the cost at 20 x 2 x 10 = 400 gp)
Out of curiosity, does a beast rider cavalier qualify to take Monstrous Mount? (They don't meet the requirements, as written, having none of divine bond, hunter's bond, or the mount class feature (the later is traded out for the exotic mount class feature)).
How is this a problem at level 1?
A fine sized gunslinger will be doing what?
So he does 1 or 2 points of damage? And won't have any bonuses to that at 1st level other then maybe point blank shot. Most things will laugh at him.
Now, once the dex to damage kicks in, then it might be a decent number (along with deadly aim) ... but until he gets to level 5, he's not going to destroy anything.
I thought there was a rule somewhere that dire animals were not legal to purchase in PFS.
So its not legal to purchase dire animals from the Animal Archive.
Does the AA supersede the UE, due to being the newer publication?
Seems like it should just be a blanket things, but guess not.
Its not a touch attack though.All the physical kinetic blasts are regular ranged attacks.
Only the elemental kinetic blasts are touch attacks.
Thus his original question.
hmm... what happened? When I first posted, we were high tier whether I played 4 or 6... =) Now we're low, regardless.
As with Gunnar, I'd rather not play a 6 in a 3-4.
Curaigh, could you hook up the discussion thread?
What is 'completely legal' can vary greatly from GM to GM.
Just cause you read something one way, and thus sure its 100% legal.
Thus table variation!
Hit the FAQ.
But just to throw another bone in the pile.
Mithril is generally priced by weight for non armor/weapon items.
Would it make sense for the size/weight of the armor to take a similar route...
A mithril chain shirt for a human is 1100 gp
That would mean a chain shirt for a large-sized animal, which only weighs twice as much, would end up 100*4 + 1000*2 = 2400 (instead of 4400 if you'd multiplied it all by 4)
So basicaly, multiply the base armor price by the cost multiplier (x2 for medium, x4 for large) and the mithril price by the weight multiplier (no change for medium, x2 for large)
That makes sense from a materials standpoint, and might keep the armor in a price range where folks might be able to afford them.
Of course, it then makes you ponder small-sized guys...
Just a thought.
Ya, I've seen all that. Thus my confusion =)
I'll hit the FAQ button and hope it gets to a point where someone 'officially' says something!
Given that if its not wrong, the entire animal companion section of a whole book is wrong... perhaps that will lend some weight to getting an answer. Errors in that scope seem like something that should get answered.
Disclaimer: This is for PFS, so keep that in mind... I'm casting the net wider, however, for information's sake.
I have a large sized mount, with the Narrow Frame feat... which is nice to get him into tight spaces... but alas, it does not remove the movement penalty for moving through those spaces.
So I'm wondering if there are options for removing this penalty for the mount. Traits, Feats, Magic Items, etc
To date i've been able to find a trait (Suck In Your Gut in Kobolds of Golarian... which is not PFS legal (I don't think))
A magic item (the Corset of the Vishkanya... which requires activating to use, which is not permitted by animal companions in PFS)
Is there anything else?
Being able to ignore difficult terrain does not seem to do it.
This is in regards to the Multiattack feat that druids gain at level 9 for their animal companions.
"An animal companion gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has three or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite three or more natural attacks, the animal companion instead gains a second attack with one of its natural weapons, albeit at a –5 penalty."
Which, makes it sound like if you have an animal companion with 3 or more attacks, who has no secondary attacks (which is most of them) that gaining this ability does absolutely nothing.
So, is this a thing? Officially?
Based on the developer post linked, in response to that official blog post, animal companions with 3 (or more) natural attacks, are supposed to get an iterative attack once they get Multiattack at (druid)level 9 if they have no secondary attacks.
This seems contradictory to the wording of course... but if you look at any and all of the animal companions listed in the NPC Codex Appendix from Druid level 9 and up, that have 3 or more attacks (small/large cats, badgers, dinosaurs, etc). All of them gained an iterative on their main attack.
So it seems like this is actually an official thing... and there's some language missing from the ability description.
I'm asking from a PFS perspective of course...
The Kineticist has me curious... though not sure if level 1 is the best point to get a feel for it.
Failing that, barbarian or cleric (since I have aliases set up for them already and I'm lazy! =))
Actually, the restriction on good/evil/chaotic/lawful spells does not state the restrictions are limited to spells from the class itself.
For instance the cleric/inquisitor versions state: "can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one)."
Nowhere does it state that the source of those spells matter.
OK, so the text for the Grab evolution for eidolons states that they can only use it on creatures one size smaller then themselves.
This has always been the case, and was not updated with the bestiary ability of the same name... nor was it changed in the Unchained version.
But, looking at the Iconic unchained summoner's eidolon (Padrig) included with the Fane of Fangs quest (@ level 5)...
The text for it's Grab ability does not match the Grab ability in the Unchained book, instead following the bestiary language.
Is this an error in Padrag or an error in the Unchained/APG?
Some clarification from the powers that be would be nice.
I know I've avoided this evolution for some time due to the size limitation.
If we already own the scenario in question, we don't need to register a game by this Sunday, correct?
Am humming and hawing about whether I want to give the PBP gming thing a try... just trying to determine my deadline to make up my mind =)