The top10 APs concepts that i am wanting for the future are:
1- Osirian AP, really The Mummy like saga
2- Numerian AP, something Promethean like.
I concur!
Osirion is really quite mysterious. Its ancient history shows their culture took quite a dramatic leap in technology and sophistication emerging to be a great empire rather quickly after the Age of Anguish.
It is unclear what the cause is, but the text strongly suggests an outside force intervened.
Then in 4609 Prince Khemet I arrives with great power to drive the Keleshites out.
There is great fun in speculating who or what these mysterious powers are.
My bet is a certain naughty Outer God with a thousand forms...
Actually the Modules are pretty good. The Harrowing got good responses as did Feast of Ravenmoor, Crypt of the Everflame and Midnight Mirror.
For shorter scenarios why not pick up some PFS scenarios. They are cheap and easy to run and you can just take the Pathfinder Society element out of it quite easily.
On this one I always champion Legacy of Fire. Kingmaker is also good.
Carrion Crown is a big no. The 6th book in particular is quite nasty and gruesome. Skull and Shackles can also be quite unpleasant unless you adjust it.
There's a strong and vocal group of supporters for Distant Worlds AP on the forum. We're burning candles and holding a vigil every Saturday. Our prayers will be answered someday.
Maybe the GM has a specific world that doesn't have Wizards in it? Maybe he wants to keep arcane casters as NPC's? Maybe there is a good plot reason that Sorcerers and Wizards don't exist that will be revealed in the course of the plot?
The GM has warned the players that divine magic may be lost in the course of the campaign. Warnings of this nature are not the actions of a dick GM.
I think that judging a person that you don't know based on no information is a really nasty thing to do. This was a really horrible thing to say.
We have had 13 PC deaths in Skull and Shackles and we are halfway through book 2...
All the AP's can be tough, there are some nasty encounters in all of them. The best thing to try is to look to spot tough encounters before they arrive, there are ways to mitigate them, think about what the enemies are and how they act this might help you make the encounters easier.
D&D/PF characters are supposed to be competent, heroic characters capable of taking on opponents that can walk through walls, breathe fire and tower over even the tallest buildings. They do this with a smile on their lips and resolve in their hearts.
With fumble rules your heroic characters turn into clowns. 16th level fighters with two weapons who are supposed to be able to take on the most powerful of outsiders and dragons will be fumbling like Mr Bean every couple of rounds. It's ridiculous.
When fumble rules are bought up I always say the following: When does Conan fumble? When does Aragorn stab himself in the foot? Point me out the passage where Drizzt hamstrings himself.
Can the edition argument start its own thread? Thanks.
Love the Cavalier, Samurai and Inquisitor.
Like the Oracle.
Meh on the Ninja, Magus, Summoner and Gunslinger
Dislike the Alchemist.
Hate the Witch.
My opinion is just that, an opinion. I love that people love the Witch and Alchemist, kudos to them. These options don't destroy the game, they enhance it.
If you don't like a class, house rule it into the cornfield. Problem solved.
The messageboards are the wrong place for this discussion. We don't know the full story, there may be extenuating circumstances that the OP didn't know about.
Long story short the OP should send Mike Brock an email.
As the thread title says do you need to touch a magic item to identify it using spellcraft?
This issue has come up several times in my games where particular items have magical effects on them, either a trap or touch based magical effect. Players always think twice when I ask them if they are touching a particular item.
Also, if an item is cursed you can't remove it without a remove curse spell. Does that mean that the curse affects the first person to touch the item or the first person to equip it?
Only minor thread necro, less than a month is fine really...
My favourite story took place at Paizocon UK 2011. It was the Sunday and the entire convention was playing Shadow's Last Stand.
Shadow's Last Stand:
I was playing my Taldan fop Viscount Dalian Vrey, Cleric of Shelyn, defender of Taldor and master violist.
We got to the point where we were accusing the Spider of treason in front of the Andoran Parliament and it is fair to say I kind of went for it, I proceeded to lay out the charges in a way only an entitled, over the top Taldan noble could. I was loud, forceful and dramatic and at the end of my non stop 5 minute rant I was on my feet gesticulating wildly, pointing at the GM and yelling "I ACCUSE YOU MADAM! I DEMAND THAT THIS TRAITOR BE REMOVED FROM THIS AUGUST ASSEMBLY AT ONCE!"
There was a pause as I realised every other table had stopped to watch me which was followed by a loud round of applause from all the other tables. Needless to say I passed the Diplomacy check :).
Ever since then Dalian has had something of an attitude. "You want me to go where? I addressed the Andoran Parliament y'know!"
There was a famous case of a guy at a M:TG convention who stank so much that the tournament referee ruled that it was an unfair distraction and awarded the whole match to his opponent.
I also respectfully disagree with the last sentence from Bob. I don't care what others do at my table, if they want to play an entirely useless character then that's their choice. I think it's rude to judge people like that.
Whoa, no judging. I was merely pointing out that table variation and player-style might create hard feelings at the gaming table. I'm not saying I am one of them and hopefully, a player's choices for their build will not impact the GoodRightFun at the table. However, we have all seen the passionate "discussions" regarding non-optimized vs. optimized, useful vs. useless, etc. that occur in the messageboards. I am quite certain that at some point in the OP's career, they will encounter someone who will be upset at their choosing to unnecessarily nerf their character. The ability/skill/power of your fellow player-characters does have an impact on your character's survival, so it is not unreasonable to empathize with those who would be taken aback by someone intentionally limiting their PC beyond the norm.
It might make this topic more understandable in we knew the OP's reasons for not wanting to take his/her allotted traits.
Sorry Bob, that came out more harsh than I intended. What I was trying to say (badly as it turns out) was that we should live and let live and try not to be annoyed about other's choices.
Wasn't trying to say you were judgemental or anything. Just a bit of clumsy writing is all.
Maybe the OP doesn't like traits? Can't see why but there you go.
I also respectfully disagree with the last sentence from Bob. I don't care what others do at my table, if they want to play an entirely useless character then that's their choice. I think it's rude to judge people like that.
I disliked the Fae element, it was totally tacked on and not consistent throughout the AP.
The ending should have been the war for independence from Brevoy. The only indication of Nyrissa's involvement comes late on in book 5, before that there is nothing. No other AP waits that late to reveal it's BBEG.
The AP didn't need Nyrissa. Kingmaker consists of two plots that would have made excellent AP's on their own but are not well integrated together.
The problem with Kingmaker as a whole is that the finale is badly tied to the rest of the campaign. Very little in any of the first 5 books actually points to what is going to happen in book 6.
The two threads of the campaign are the Fae and building a kingdom and engaging in the politics of the region. Unfortunately they mesh very badly to the point that they do not integrate at all.
They can intimidate better than any other class :).
I take your point but disagree. What they do better than any class is adaptability. Sure they can't out DPS a fighter or out buff a bard but what they can do is change focus effectively even in mid battle.
This question comes up a lot and every answer on here is both wrong and right at the same time.
The answer is which one sounds right for you. You will get champions of all the adventure paths here, they are all good. Pick one that excites you and your group.
Do some research, talk with your players and then decide which one you want to play as a group.
I will not give recommendations but feel free to PM me or ask me here and I will give you a breakdown of each AP, the positives and the negatives.
I have completed 7 AP's and you are correct in that they are very rarely used with the exception of grab. I have seen the odd overrun and bull rush but not very often.
Poorly designed, but saved by the sheer power of spells.
Er... no.
Of all the APG classes they are the best designed. They are thematic and consistent with a bunch of cool options and several ways they can be played.
I'd love to hear your justification for calling them poorly designed.
The biggest two are that
1: They seem to be designed as archers by the proficiencies, but make really bad ones (no support in class abilities. At the time of publication, there were no teamwork feats that benefited archery)
You don't have to play them as archers but they can make good archers. Teamwork feats are a bonus but you don't need them to make the class powerful. If all you see is archer when looking at the inquisitor then you are missing the point of the class.
deuxhero wrote:
2: Judgement scales badly: +1 and another +1 every X levels is really bland and not very useful due to the slow speed of growth. An ability like this should be boosted by an ability score, benefit the entire party, be at will instead of X per day, flat out scale better or some combination of those (At least it isn't a standard action).
It works well. The point is that you have a versitle buff which you can then stack with other buffs: heroism, bane, magic vestment whatever is appropriate. There is no buff in the game that is as versatile as judgement. When you understand that judgement is not the whole class but merely one of a group of abilities this makes sense.
deuxhero wrote:
The design is also pretty 3.5 and feels weird with PF conventions: Judgement is a x/day with scaling number of uses ability, while PF made all of these into rounds based on class level and an ability score that can be divided in any pattern desired.
Wrong.
Paladin Smite? Cavalier Challenge? Monk's Quivering Palm? Every Cleric domain ability/Sorcerer bloodline ability/Wizard school power with uses per day? I could go on, there's loads of x/day abilities.
deuxhero wrote:
There are also no customizable options not shared by other classes (deity/domain, spells known and, if neutral, profane/sacred)
Not sure what you are getting at here. There's a bunch of inquisitor only spells, they have unique abilities and their versitility is their key selling point.
deuxhero wrote:
Their remaining class abilities run the gambit from good (Bane) to "duplicates a low level spell" (almost everything else)
Stern Gaze? Cunning initiative? Stalwart? Exploit Weakness? Show me the spells here.
deuxhero wrote:
Magus is better than 3.5's multiple attempts at such a class, actually letting you BLEND the two styles instead of use them consecutively. It has multiple viable options, works well with additional material that isn't necessarily made to compliment it and has unique abilities that scale well.
Not in the APG, I specifically mentioned that. Besides every Magus is generally the same. Rapier/scimitar and shocking grasp. Rinse and repeat (yawn). To say that the Magus has more versitility than the inquisitor is just wrong.
deuxhero wrote:
Alchemist is also versatile, relatively original (and yet is still a classic fantasy archetype), very unique in mechanics and work well without even touching its "spells"
Funny you should have a go at the inquisitor for having x/day abilities and then defend a class that has x/day abilities...
deuxhero wrote:
Summoner, while poorly balanced, is an interesting concept and, again, has many options that make no two summoners alike.
Yeah but really unbalanced. Plus again they are not as versitile as an Inquisitor, you can't do a ranged Summoner or a buffing Summoner or a healing Summoner. It's eidolon or bust.
Should PFS be challenging or should progress be achievable simply by showing up?
I only ask because it seems a fair number are suggesting people should progress regardless of player or character ability.
No I'm not. That's a strawman argument.
It is not an argument, it's a question.
Your argument is that:
Dennis Baker wrote:
I only ask because it seems a fair number are suggesting people should progress regardless of you player or character ability.
That's not what people are saying. You are misrepresenting other's points.
Textbook strawman.
Assuming he's trying to defend a position, you are correct.
But what makes you think he's not simply interpreting what some people are saying ("It's too difficult for me to have fun") as meaning exactly what he says? Drawing that kind of inference is not unexpected, after all.
His scenarios are some of those that have a "reputation." They are often pointed at as examples of too deadly or too dangerous. But they are just as often pointed at as being challenging without going over the top, and difficult without being death-dealers.
So, considering the fact that he has a reputation, and that he may want to know whether he should adjust, is he really making an unreasonable argument? Or is he maybe just asking a question that he is genuinely curious about?
OK assuming that is correct here's my take.
When I started playing PFS I created characters who interested me, that had a story and reflected character options that I found intriguing and characterful.
Now I am creating characters in order to get the maximum AC or the maximum damage or the most powerful spells. I have to disregard duellists and Horizon Walkers and all the other characters that I want to play because they are suboptimal and as a result I will just get murdered. I have to flat out reject a good 60-80% of character options for a particular class because they would hamstring my character.
I am having much less fun playing the super challenging stuff. It's no fun for me to be continually dropped and brutalized by maxed out NPC's. There's a difference between being challenged and constantly outmatched. I'm having to work hard to be in the former camp.
FallofCamelot
