|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Paizo Pathfinder® GameMastery® Planet Stories® Paizo Games | |||||||||||||||||||
| About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
It means you can wield two of the things, and get your full strength bonus and full benefit of Power Attack with the one in your dominant hand. That might just make the most powerful two-weapon fighting build from a major publisher in the history of 3.x 30gp cheaper, 6lbs less in weight. And you are more responsive - you can fight one-handed if circumstances require it, in a way that you cannot with a double weapon. So, it renders the double-sword redundant:
Seems like you could get those just by adding the Fiendish template onto the original creature. Okay, the Couatl's spell list would need adjustment, but still not enough difference to justify using up a page in the bestiary. I know I'm not James but... What you've done there is compared apples with oranges, ended up holding pears and then complained about the bananas which you think should be mangoes to the kiwi grower who prefers coconuts.
Hadn't seen the ISWG version yet; I'd call that a buff, not a nerf. It means you can wield two of the things, and get your full strength bonus and full benefit of Power Attack with the one in your dominant hand. That might just make the most powerful two-weapon fighting build from a major publisher in the history of 3.x -- for one Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat, you get the ability to effectively double-wield longswords, getting the benefits of Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, etc. with both and only sacrificing strength bonus on the one in your off hand. So it's not a finesse weapon, big deal; there are plenty of other weapons for which you can apply Weapon Finesse.but its a "waste" of a high dex "needed to effectively twf) to not weapon finesse, and hard to do under a point buy (except rangers who can twf for free) It's not meant to be a 'waste' though, it's meant to be a balancing factor in the game. Complaining that a powerful buff could be even more powerful is a bit rich.
Being made out of adamintine makes it an effective weapon So, now we now how things would pan out in your game... In my game, I would let a player try to shoot a manacle from across the room because it would be a satisfying moment of awesome for the player and create interesting in-game situations. Incidentally, how I imagine arrow vs. iron bracket is quite different to hammer vs. rope. The hammer's problem is the shape. The arrow's problem is the fragility and lack of bracing. So, in my game I would not allow a hammer to cut a rope but I would let an adamantine arrow damage an iron bracket because the two are not directly comparable and I can be that flexible. ... ... ... Oh, yeah, why buy adamantine arrows? Eric Clingenpeel already nailed that.
Just a thought, traits are not in the Core Rulebook, are they? Are we using APG traits?
I remember reading the back cover in a shop ages ago but I've never played it. I am tempted, just need character inspiration. hmmm. Spoiler:
I'm thinking a studious wizard who was a noble friend (perhaps cousin with a close relationship) of Talgen and Sharwyn but regarded himself as too studious and academic to help on their frivolous, mercenary quest. Now he feels shamed that he did not accompany them and, with his conscience pricked, he seeks to discover the fate of his friends and, perhaps, to rescue them from the engulfing darkness. This would be a human universalist wizard.
My favorite thing about St. Peter's is the green, flask shaped bottle. Just fits in my hand better than a traditional round shape. The St. Peters organic really very good indeed, their mild is really tasty as well.
'For the Crow' by Roodz Good work, yellowdingo. Crows must be one of the most referenced creatures in art: Ted Hughes' Crow is one of my favourite poetry collections.
I think the idea is that you are a player about to play a ranger in Rise of the Runelords and you see: Spoiler:
Karzoug, Runelord of Greed on reaper as you are browsing for a ranger mini. You then know to take anti-magic feats and choose human as a favoured enemy. You also know that greed might be a theme and could put 2 and 2 together too early for your GM
Fortification is an enhancement, not a material. Your options are things like darkwood, mithril, ironwood and silver. My character went for a +1 Darkwood Light Crossbow as my fancy item.
Invisible Castle will link and record your rolls using bb code for easy Paizo posting. Or you can use the paizo forum's in-built dice roller.
I know this probably goes against the spirit of the thing but I can't see how an int 17, wis 17 character would play to his weaknesses so completely, so I'm going to try again: just to see whether I would get playable stats at a second attempt. str
hmm...
Playable now but still a little odd and probably over-powered. I think I've fallen at the first hurdle.
So, how far does the very notion of AM get under some peoples' noses? So far that they twisted the rules, the English language and their knickers into an uncomfortable mess. C'mon, the castys are beating AM now ayway: you don't need to play silly buggers with the rules to be victorious. And, incidentally, this should have been a two-post thread.
I keep seeing people refer to this but searching the boards has failed to produce a definition. I guess from the name its some kind of optimized barbarian/cavalier build, but what exactly is it? barbarians can get pounce. Then they get a mount.Then a lance. that's about it, at high levels it does crazy damage.
so, um... str 11dex 8 con 11 int 17 wis 17 cha 9 I'm not sure this really makes sense as a roguish bard... the dice gods were against me.
How is the caster NOT going to see AM first? AM has never said he's invisible, and he's flying around where there's no cover and little concealment available. The caster, on the other hand, IS invisible. The -1/10 feet rule applies both ways, except that AM is on a large creature, and the caster's not. AM can certainly get bonuses to his perception check, but they're not going to exceed the caster's bonuses by enough to matter (and may not exceed them at all), and the DC to see the caster is MUCH higher. Thus, the caster sees AM first, and can dictate when and how (and even if) the fight will occur. So, wait, it's not fair to suggest that the casty is standing in a field but it is fair to suggest that the casty lived his life invisibly? Surely the reasonable point is somewhere in between? I'm thinking the 20th level caster with down time is either in the wilderness seeking out mysterious arcane ingredients or in his chambers in the Castle of Awesome crafting cool stuff, or perhaps with his love interest on their demi-plane of romance. Meanwhile AM is either cruising on his mount, eating sandwiches with his harem or leading his people on the seasonal (insert environment appropriate creature here) hunt. So, my guess is that they actually meet when AM is cruising and Wiz-woz is out ingredient hunting. So... generic buffs definitely up but probably not wrapped in an anti-AM shell. Probably rocking a fairly generic spell-set based upon going-home-if-things-get-crazy-I-can-always-teleport-back-tomorrow. AM probably isn't constantly triggering items either. Seem reasonable?
When Reaper do specific NPCs from Pathfinder they have stopped naming them (probably to avoid spoilers, or avoid putting off non-AP players) and this is the reason that you are not getting an 'iconic' cleric of Calistria: this is a specific NPC from Kingmaker. Spoiler:
Satinder Morne from Blood For Blood, wielding a fancy-looking magic dagger.
Maybe they both do, but given that he's already holding a crap ton of treasure including other powerful weapons, he should be the one to yield on this item. Her claim is roleplaying, his counters are all based on gaming strategy. If she does plan on taking a weapon feat on her next opportunity, that weakens his gaming argument significantly. And thematically it does seemed aimed for the sun oracle any way. (Although the GM might have used some imagination and altered it to a more compliant weapon form such as a staff.) Katana 50k Boots of Speed 12kAmulet of Natural Armour +3 18k +3 Adamantine Katana 21k +1 Adamantine Axe 5k Gauntlets of Rust (from 3.5) 11.5k headband of mental prowess +2 10k 127.5k of gear is about right (half way between the level 12/13 values. You should sell the axe and get something else (cloak of resistance? +2 mithril shirt?). Is everyone else packing 127.5k of gear? Maybe you should talk to the GM about character wealth: if everyone else was buffed up to 108 - 140 k in equipment then maybe your Oracle would cheer up?
Obviously, we're only getting one side. It seems as though your oracle wants some fuss and attention and has fixated on the sun blade. You can:
How is the oracle's rules-fu? Does the player understand what she will do to party dpr? You could try running the numbers on your dpr vs. undead with and without the sunblade: I imagine the difference would be fairly large. Sometimes you can convince people with stats... Otherwise, I'm at a loss; Sun Blades are 50k for a reason, the weapon they want you to use is 21k because it is much less potent.
That's all just fun-time crazy maths: everyone of European descent is descended from Confusius, Nefertiti, Charlemagne and Muhammad.
If a man insisted always on being serious, and never allowed himself a bit of fun and relaxation, he would go mad or become unstable without knowing it. If someone were to put a proposition before men bidding them choose, after examination, the best customs in the world, each nation would certainly select its own. - Herodotus
A bit long to call a quote, and always worth remembering that he was a terrible rascal, but I love this speech: Soldiers of my Old Guard: I bid you farewell. For twenty years I have constantly accompanied you on the road to honor and glory. In these latter times, as in the days of our prosperity, you have invariably been models of courage and fidelity. With men such as you our cause could not be lost; but the war would have been interminable; it would have been civil war, and that would have entailed deeper misfortunes on France. I have sacrificed all of my interests to those of the country. I go, but you, my friends, will continue to serve France. Her happiness was my only thought. It will still be the object of my wishes. Do not regret my fate; if I have consented to survive, it is to serve your glory. I intend to write the history of the great achievements we have performed together. Adieu, my friends. Would I could press you all to my heart. Napoleon Bonaparte - April 20, 1814
If it had said Romani, Dom, Lom, Banjara, Minceir/Pavees, or Yeniche, i would have a problem. But i think that we are able to, as a community tell the difference between real ethnicites and the concept of "the wandering outsider" I am a fellow Brit (I had already noticed you were one of the crazy gang from some thread many moons ago). I don't have your understanding of the community but the general British context and attitudes are things I am familiar with. I have taught self-identifying gypsies and it made me quite viscerally aware of the bigotry they experience. I have no desire to see it in my fun hobby.
That pretty much spells out regarded as thieves to me.In Golarion aren't the Varisians basically considers Gypsy's? and if so they are pretty much portrayed as thieves. Don't tempt me into an internet sigh, they're terrible things. This product, by its very nature (according to the blurb) declares that gypsy=thief. Golarion has a group of Gypsies who are wrongly discriminated against as all being thieves because of the activities of a minority. One is how they are, the other is how the small-minded and discriminatory see them. I hope you can see the important distinction between those two things.
In Golarion aren't the Varisians basically considers Gypsy's? and if so they are pretty much portrayed as thieves. No, they're not. They have a criminal element (the sczarni. I'm not thrilled by them either) but it is made clear that they have a criminal reputation that is not usually deserved (see CotCT or Humans of Golarion). From Humans of Golarion:
Spoiler:
Varisians wear flowing, beautifully embroidered garments of red, green, blue, and purple, often adorned with strings of coins and tiny bells. Some derisively refer to Varisians as “magpies.” Tales of Varisian thieves running elaborate confidence games in cities, or methodically picking the pockets of all the patrons in a tavern in just a few minutes, add to this unflattering image. The Sczarni are the most notorious of Varisian thieves, and are the reason for much of the Varisians’ reputation for criminal activity. The Sczarni are less nomadic than many of their kin, and tend to settle down for months or years to run their operations. ... Varisians are devoted to their families, and clans are
Varisians are victims of the unjust stereotyping which sees all members of a group tarred with the brush of the group's worst member.
Are you measuring to the eyeline, or using her massive hair? That hairdo is going to distort heights.
If it had said Romani, Dom, Lom, Banjara, Minceir/Pavees, or Yeniche, i would have a problem. But i think that we are able to, as a community tell the difference between real ethnicites and the concept of "the wandering outsider" Wow, I've only ever heard of Romani from that list. In my experience, Gypsy and Romani are synonymous.
So... we're okay with gypsy=thief now? Are we okay with that? Really?
Pett's KQ articles have a really effective narrative voice. Similarly, the selfish adventurer in the werecabbages books (PC Pearls and the other one) is a really effective, lightly comic tone.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
