Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Valeros

Golden-Esque's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 764 posts (3,463 including aliases). 38 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 518 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
Unless WOTC changes their business model from 4E/3E, they are probably pretty going to outpace Paizo on rules and character options.

There are plenty of hints that Wizards is still going to focus on Crunch as their game's selling point. For example, what's the #1 reason that Paizo can afford to make their Core Rulebook products available for free online? Their flagship product isn't part of the Core line. When you get down to it, Paizo products two to three Core line products per year. They make their bank on the Golarion setting in the form of APs, Player Companions, and Campaign Setting products. You'll note that Paizo has a much more aggressive release schedule with those products.

On the other hand, we still haven't heard anything from Wizards of the Coast in regards to 5E's OGL (if one will exist at all) and they seem more than willing to commission 3PP to product their APs rather than develop them in house themselves. (I think Kobold Press wrote their first one, right?)

While I'm certainly not qualified to judge either company's business plan for certain, both company's release schedules and OGL policies seem to indicate what each company is focusing on as its primary revenue generator.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Wasted wrote:
How do you overcome the penalties for dealing non-lethal damage with a lethal weapon, though? Assuming you're playing Kenshin and not the Battousai, that is.

There are a couple ways, the most obvious being the Merciful weapon property that he can use. Another is the Blade of Mercy trait, and would kind of fit in with his theme of trying to redeem himself for the evils he did during the war (Blade of Mercy being a Saranrae trait if I recall).

I know there are a host of other ways, but I can't recall them at the moment. Anyway, I'm pretty sure I'll go with the Blade of Mercy Trait for him.

STOP STEALING MAH JOB, DARRELL!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryuko wrote:
Really? The character seems quite lawful to me. His duty is to the church and he finds it hard to abandon orders even when its against his gods teachings. That's hella lawful. Dunno if I'd put him at lawful good, nuetral good or lawful nuetral though.

If he was Good, he would have heeded Kyra's advice and spared the paladin in the face of undeniable proof of his reform regardless of whether he was Lawful Good or Neutral Good. If he took the paladin's life anyway, that would be Lawful Neutral.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Oooh! That was SO good!

I wonder what he chose; I'm optimistic and hoping he chose to spare the paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Kretzer wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Only two posts? I guess taking all the world's blame in exchange for getting kitsune as a PFS race was TOTALLY worth it.
I Blame Cosmo for Kitsune becoming a PFS race.

I blame Cosmo for not having invented a device that allows me to punch John through the Internet without any reciprocations or repercussions.


11 people marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:

Wolfgang...that's great and all, but:

Insain Dragon has kept telling people to vote for whether they want an unchained fighter, and keeps citing those poll numbers. Certainly Odraude's point is relevant if at this point in the forum history a lot of people do their best at this point to avoid any discussion whatsoever of fighters. Which means that the poll is going to select towards people who are very unhappy with the fighter.

Luckily, good game design is never a democracy. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Only two posts? I guess taking all the world's blame in exchange for getting kitsune as a PFS race was TOTALLY worth it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Devil's Advocate:

D&D Next's Fighter has a LOT of shiny, new abilities to it. For example, it can take an extra standard action to attack every turn. (Granted the attacking rolls are WAY different, but it goes to show the level of craziness they put into the class). They also added a "choose your own style" mechanic that works a little bit like a cavalier's order.

The resulting product does not feel like the Fighter class. The Fighter's customization should come from bonus feats, in my opinion. Honestly, I don't think the Fighter needs the massive overhaul that everyone claims it does. Its not on the same level of "Meh," as the rogue and it isn't overly complicated like the Monk.

In my opinion, the fighter only needs two things:

1) Weapon Training needs an overhaul. It should provide a +2 bonus baseline and scale all the way up to +5 so it is comparable to other attack roll / damage roll abilities. It should also allow the fighter to apply the benefits of his "select one weapon" feats to all weapons in a chosen weapon group. For example, if you have Weapon Focus and then take weapon training: heavy blades, your Weapon Focus would apply to every weapon in that group. This was a great idea from Mythic Adventures that really needs to be baseline.

2) Class Skill Ranks values need to be revisited. 2 skill ranks per level is as worthless as a d4 Hit Die was back in 3.5 Edition. In my opinion, skill ranks should scale at the same rate as Hit Dice, with 6 ranks per level being the lowest and 12 ranks per level being the highest.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Since so much of "out of combat utility" for most characters revolves around skill points, another thing that I wouldn't mind seeing is the increase of skill points per level to match Hit Dice. Something like this:

6 + Int (Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, Sorcerer, Wizard)
8 + Int (Barbarian, Druid, Monk
10 + Int (Bard, Ranger)
12 + Int (Rogue)

Another thing that needs to be addressed is the fact that skills do not translate well into the combat system, which is one (of many) reasons why the rogue doesn't shine as brightly as other classes. Personally, I'm not sure if Unchained is the place to do much to the skill system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

0_0

John Compton and Mike Brock wrote:
... three new races will be available for play without requiring a special Chronicle sheet: kitsune, nagaji, and wayang.

0_0

John Compton and Mike Brock wrote:
... three new races will be available for play without requiring a special Chronicle sheet: kitsune, nagaji, and wayang.

=0_0=

John Compton and Mike Brock wrote:
... three new races will be available for play without requiring a special Chronicle sheet: kitsune, nagaji, and wayang.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cat-thulhu wrote:
You know looking at the new base classes I hope they don't make the old ones redundant. I'm mainly thinking of the magus, I can't see how he will hold up against the warpriest and the bloodrager. Suppose I'll just have to wait for the final clases.

There is zero chance of either the Bloodrager or the Warpriest replacing the Magus. For one, neither of those classes can use Spellstrike or Spell Combat, the magus's hallmark abilities.

For Bloodrager, the class has a better BAB than the magus, but only four levels of spellcasting compared to the magus's six. The bloodrager is also a spontaneous casting spellcaster compared to the magus's prepared spellcasting. In all, they're pretty different.

For Warpriest, one is divine and the other is arcane. The divine spell list does not have the explosive power of the arcane spell list. They have pretty different roles as a result. Even if the Warpriest had the same class features as the Magus, it woukdn't replace it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:

IMO "Can use certain kinds of Feats" is not a strong enough concept to base a class off of. Again, a Druid could also take Teamwork Feats if he wanted...and then still has Wildshape and 9 levels of casting, along with the same amount of BaB to play around with.

The Hunter just wasn't very well thought out.

I disagree.

The druid CAN take Teamwork Feats, but the Druid can't be guaranteed a teamwork partner who shares all of her teamwork feats for everything. Even if she could be, the druid doesn't get bonus teamwork feats, so those feats count against the feats she can normally select. Plus the druid doesn't give those feats to her animal companion for free, so she would have to spend her animal companion's feats selecting those teamwork feats as well. This is a perfect example of where the parent class CAN do something, but isn't as efficient at it as the offspring class.

I do, however, think that the Hunter's class features are too bare compared to other 6-level spellcasters (Bard, Inquisitor, Summoner, and Alchemist have cool things to look forward to at every level, for example). Hopefully we'll be seeing the final Hunter in the coming weeks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LoreKeeper wrote:
christos gurd wrote:
There going to be any feat rewrites?

This is a biggie, I think. Some feats really shouldn't do what they do. Power Attack is a good example. It is statistically sound with respect to how much damage scaling happens - but it isn't balanced that well in practice. PCs are hitting for 1d8+42. "Tough" monsters evaporate in one round.

The thing is, although it should balance out: the party has too many ways to buff to-hit to the point where a miss (even with Power Attack penalty) is very unlikely - but the damage output is exceedingly high. Not to mention incidentally side-effects, such as significantly reducing the value of DR on many creatures that rely on it as their primary means for defense. CR 8 fighting-type monsters can have attacks that deal 1d6+3 damage; and the PCs that encounter them do 1d6+15.

Increase the penalty, reduce the damage, limit the scaling, add additional negative riders (AC penalty, limited use, limited per-round-use, Standard Action use, 1 round fatigue, not-multiplied-on-crits, etc).

The bottom-line is that the feat is too good; I'm willing to say "fun-diminishing", particularly for something that PCs pick up at level 1.

What I would suggest:

Power Attack
Benefit: You can choose to take a –2 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a bonus on all melee damage rolls equal to your Constitution modifier. This bonus damage is halved if the attack is made with a weapon wielded in one hand.


  • benefits traditional martial "tough guys", especially barbarians(!)
  • significant but not over-powering bonus
  • scales benignly

If I was redesigning Power Attack, I'd make it a baseline action that anyone could do. I.E. anyone can take a penalty on melee attack rolls to gain a bonus on melee damage rolls. Sure, you'd have to redesign some prerequisites )Furious Focus and Mythic Power Attack and Improved Bull Rush) but overall I think that it would be a step towards giving martials something nice while also letting their feats define their fighting style more. As-is, Power Attack is basically mandatory in my groups by Level 7 or so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You've been a Paizonian for a couple weeks and already the FAQ machine starts churning.

Bless you, creepy unbound outsider from another dimension. Bless you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that the most interesting like was that, "Anyone with rage powers can select skald rage powers."

I wonder if that means that Barbarians / Fighter (Vikings) / Ranger (Wild Stalkers) can select these new skald powers?

I also wonder if this applies to Slayer Talents. Giving the rogue the ability to reselect trapfinding as a rogue talent after he has traded it away for an archetype would be AMAZING.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Merisiel Sillvari wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
4. There will not be new iconics for the classes. We will get some new art for them, but we will not be inventing new iconics.
WHEW!

Merisiel: UNCHAINED

Sajan: UNCHAINED
Amiri: CHAined ...?
Balazar: .... chained in duck tape, then chained again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Amora Game wrote:

Playtest (Current) document Breakdown by class

Conduit = 4 pages
Demiurge = 15 pages
Medium = 5 pages
Metamorph = 7 pages
Mnemonic = 5 pages
Mystic = 15 pages
Plane-Touched = 15 pages
Survivor = 4 pages
Warloghe = 8 pages

Huh, my submission ended up being just as large as Will's? That's surprising. :-P


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder Unchained must be the absolute coolest thing to walk into for a newly hired designer. I can't imagine how cool it must have been for Jason and Stephen to say, "Hey, welcome to the office! Have a seat, we're just tinkering with the ENTIRE WORLD'S PERCEPTION ON HOW TO PLAY PATHFINDER. No pressure."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:

I am kinda of interesting in the Pathfinder Unleashed....but one of the main things I liked about Pathfinder is the backwards compatibility of the game. While I am interested in what they will do...I think most of the options will not be used in my games.

Also I am kinda sadden by the fact they are reacting to what looks like me a vocal minority on these boards about certain classes needing to be 'fixed'. It usually lead to some very poor design decisions as it did with the 3.0 to 3.5 transition.

But I am very excited about the Giant Slayer AP. I am wondering if the next one will deal with Drow, The Darklands and slaves in some way.

I had a similar reaction initially, that the stamp-my-foot crowd "won". However, I trust Paizo to create interesting but not unbalanced options.

Luckily, you are under no obligation to use Pathfinder Unchained because its not a new edition. We don't even know if this stuff will be PFS legal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Tels for surfing without using protection.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Will McCardell wrote:

Hah! It's not often I actually laugh out loud at something on the internet, but thanks Drejk.

Yes, this was heavily influenced by the Allegory of the Cave, and the Theory of Forms & Plato in general.

I would say it's fairly unlike any other class, if only for the fact that the main class feature is the ability to create life in way that can kinda-sorta-maybe be described as the cast-off love child of a tripartite tryst between Summon Monster, an Eidolon's evolutions, and the Words of Power.

It does have some bardic hints, in reference to Plato and Socrates work as teachers and orators, respectively. And the Enlightenments are modeled in the same vein as bloodlines / Orders. So it's obviously not 100% unique, but the main thrust hasn't been done before in a class, best I can tell.

That's okay. I heavily modeled the Mystic after the Qinggong Monk. Plus the Elemental Paths are similar to Mysteries.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Some things I like about this iconic:
— She's a spellcaster who doesn't feel the need to show off her midrift.
— She's a non-human 9th-level spellcaster. (Lini is the only other one of those we've got.)
— Her background, both in terms of halflings and other iconics, is pretty atypical. No dead parents, no angst-driven past, not a slave. Pretty cool, all around. I especially like the contrast she has with Lem, who has all of those things.
— She wears CLOTHES! Honest-to-goodness CLOTHES! Not some sort of magical thinly-cut fabric that requires constant castings of prestidigitation to remain on her body.

Some things I don't like about this character:
— Her face looks awkwardly rounded under that hood.
— Her stance under that robe looks weird. Almost like WAR wanted to show off at least one foot so he was sure that we knew that Enora was a halfling.
— I'm not 100% sure how those earrings (they're earrings, right?) are staying attached to her body. Maybe Enora learned Seoni's rags to regalia spell to keep them on or something.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Hm, I'm wondering if the blade adept is going to function using the black blade rules. It would be pretty awesome to see some overlap, though as a poor BAB class, I'm just as curious as to how the blade adept is going to use that weapon in combat.

White mage definetitely deserved to be called out: people have been asking for a "white wizard" for as long as I can remember, and adding a new class that can do it without breaking the 3.5 Traditions for wizards is an awesome, awesome way to do this. I'm definitely more interested in the arcanist then I was before!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As low guy on the totem pole, has Jason exercised his power of Boss-itude to try and get you to take the Gauntlet punch to the face for him yet?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So my party is just about at the end of Book 2 (I'm a player). I've been reading through the comments in this thread (though I've skipped most of the play-by-plays to avoid spoilers) and this is my take on the Wrath of the Righteous Adventure Path.

This AP is not designed to be a party-wiper, especially after the party gets its first Mythic tier. Why? Backstory.

This Adventure spends a LOT of time building up the PCs as heroes. We just got to the part where one of the villains even referred to us by title ("Heroes of Kenerbras"). If we had a party wipe in just about any other adventure, recruitment of new characters to continue onward doesn't really hurt the story too much. But a party wipe in Wrath of the Righteos has HUGE complications storywise, especially as the PCs gain more and more Mythic tiers. "Where did this 10th level / MR 3 character come from? How did he receive Mythic power? Why haven't we heard about him by now? Also, this adventure path is HUGE on time limits as a means of building suspense. If we wiped in Drezden, then story-wise the entire place should explode, which either means the GM needs to heavily modify the story, you hit the reset button on the whole thing and try the AP again, or you pick a new adventure to play.

The book does NOT do as many over-the-top ridiculous encounters as it should. Whether or not you are out for blood is your own business, but I personally think that it is WotR's scale that prevents it from being as deadly as it could be. In all, the story reminds me of something out of Wrath of the Titans. Its high-powered and cool to look at, but although there's some suspense you never have any doubt about who is going to win this engagement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:
More questions: In the 3.5 version there was a feat called Practiced Binding, at least I think that was what is called and it gave a +4 bonus on your binding checks. I looked over the occult feats presented on the d20pfsrd and didn't see an equivalent. Is there one in some of the other books?

I think our version of that feat is in Volume 2. About half of Volume 2 is on the D20PFSRD.com site.

Quote:
Villains of Pact Magic and Pact Magic Unbound vol. 2. There is overlap from what I understand. How much and what would be better for a player to get?

Villains of Pact Magic was written for 3.5. As such, Pact Magic Unbound, Vol 2 is going to be better for you unless you want GM supplements, like campaign story hooks and stuff. Villains is AWESOME for campaign seeds.

Quote:
In some ways could pact magic be viewed as a kind of urban or scholarly shamanism?

That's how occult scholars view it. Occult scholars are pretty much obsessed with using Pact Magic to learn esoteric information about history through their eye-witness accounts. Even if it hasn't always been "legal" or "popular," there have been occultists during every known era of the world, so spirits have SEEN a lot of stuff. An occult scholar's job is to interview those spirits and learn what he can from them.

We mention occult scholars a lot throughout Pact Magic lore, but they get an official occultist archetype in Vol 2.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

MINE TOO!

Can we be BFFs now? I promise I won't answer any questions on your forum, ask you rules questions with the intent of attacking my GM with them, or crash a shiny, red spaceship into your abode!?!

Meega, nala kweesta!

Looks up what that phrase translates to in alien.

*Faints*


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Still working on stuff; it's going to be slow because I'm also working on my next Pact Magic product, and that has priority for me.

Here's a teaser:

Archetypes
— White-Furred Oracle, a kitsune bound to a star gem who uses her inner supernatural power to augment her spellcasting.
— Kitsune Bloodline, a sorcerer bloodline available to all characters that focuses on trickery and deception via illusion magic.
— Nine-Tailed Mystic, an archetype for the oracle and sorcerer that allows the kitsune to grow in magical power by growing eight magical tails.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I love the direct developer-to-consumer dialogue going on in this thread, maybe you ought to talk to the Design Team about making an official FAQ sub-forum or something where FAQs could be consolidated for your convenience instead of gathering ideas from a thread with a somewhat antagonistic title, Rogue Mark.

From a psychological standpoint, watching a thread where a question you asked was posted get moved from a general Advice / Rules thread into a FAQ subthread would probably be a good thing as its a noticeable indicator that someone took enough of a glance at the question to decide that it warranted being moved into a new location.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
SAMAS wrote:

Good but disappointing. Too much Planes, not enough People.

I too was hoping for some non-genie variants, maybe a few more feats and spells, and especially more about how the elemental-kin lived and were seen on Golarion. That whole City of Brass section I could've done without. In and of itself it was nice, it just didn't belong in this book.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the book, and some of the things in it will get used by my Undine sorceress, but this felt like the main focus of the book got hijacked halfway through. I love you guys, but you kinda lost focus on this one. 7.5/10

This sums up my thoughts nicely. Too much planes, not enough people.

I was really bothered by the fact that this book focus 10 of its precious 32 pages directly on the planes (12 if you count the Inner Planes map). That's two more pages that could have been given to each race. Between the fact that this book is a "Blood of" book (not an Inner Planes Primer) and the fact that this is a Player Companion book (not a Campaign Setting book), Blood of the Elements lacks focus. I also didn't like that all five races focus their player crunch on one really long archetype. I have the same distaste for the Elemental Commixture teamwork feat as well. The book felt stretched overall, like no one was sure what to talk about. This could be a very real issue considering that the book has a very broad theme (people with elemental blood).

On the map, it is gorgeous but also out of place in a product about NATIVE outsiders. As in outsiders native to the Material Plane. That's the biggest reason I felt this book was so unfocused. It spends 12 pages talking about the planes in a book about native outsiders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Eric Hinkle wrote:
I'll just say that I would love to see a Kitsune player companion book; though I suspect that if one is coming it's a long way off. Heck, we don't even have a Hellknight book yet, and how often have they shown up in the setting?
Me too. Yeah, I think our best shot is convincing Alex to write an "Amazing Races/Kitsune Unbound" supplement for Abandoned Arts or Radiance House or another 3PP.

Well, considering that I just founded my own 3PP, I don't need to write a kitsune player companion for anyone but myself.

Which I'm totally going to do before the end of the year, mind you. ;-)


4 people marked this as a favorite.
zergtitan wrote:
P.S. Still crossing fingers for player companion books for kitsune and changelings. :)

Gosh, if Wes or Patrick or someone asked me to contribute to a kitsune player companion for free, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:
Since I am already the office's "Mark," you're going to have to go by something else. Like "Rules Mark" or "New Guy." Welcome, New Guy!

Seifer's pretty awesome on its own. I vote for using surname nomenclature!

Congradulations on being the last applicant standing, Mark! You have some deep shoes to fill, but I'm sure you'll do a smashing job. Looking forward to the first Rulebook as a Paizonian!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I see Cosmo's been juggling wrenches again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Define 'hitting' for me please?

There's a reason I hate the d20, and that's because it's such a gigantic RNG that reasonable modifiers get lost in the chaos.

+4 Strength+4BAB+1 Masterworked is only +9 vs an average AC of CR 4 creatures of 17. That's missing roughly 40% of the time (30% if flanking or charging) and it only gets worse with higher CR creatures.

@ Jiggy: Myth?

I find it a touch macabre that players who claim to enjoy combat most in the game optimize to end combats quickly.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
El Ronza wrote:

Mastermind archetype.

MASTERMIND ARCHETYPE.

My desire for this book just increased tenfold.

You couldn't have Holmes without Moriarty!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So my family's out on vacation and I've found myself in a surprising lull of writing activity. I've decided to check out two shows that I've head good things about and ... that absolutely no business being mentioned in the same sentence together.

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic and Shingeki No Kyojin (Attack on Titan).

And oh look: Cosmos's got my back. Twice.

Thanks, Cosmo.

MLP & AoT Spoilers:

— MLP is cute. The writing's usually good and I love how they incorporate a plethora of mythological creatures into their world. Equestria as a setting is also surprisingly fleshed out, and I appreciate it for that. That said, the show is a little too predictable. I'm used to kids cartoons like Adventure Time keeping me guessing, so having a predictable show is both a bit of a shock and a let-down.

And BTWs, Luna is best pony and I'm sick of the Cutie Mark Crusaders.

— Attack on Titan, like many Animes, starts off very slow. It gets good fast, though, and it is dark. Oh man, is it dark. I think I appreciate it for its dark attitude. Even when the heroes are winning, you never really feel like they're winning enough. They're capturing a pawn while sacrificing a rook. And there are only two rooks on the board. I like it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Tels wrote:
I was trying to find a video of King Candy talking about his fungeon (fun dungeon) from Wreck-It-Ralph and instead stumbled upon Wreck-It-Ralph meets My Little Pony and... well.. I blame Cosmo.
Bah hahahahahaha!

I firmly believe that there is some sort of black voodoo magic involved with that show. That's the only logical reason why so many people are enthralled with it. I refuse to watch it because I'm convinced I'll fail my Will save.

As for proof? The magic is so powerful, it made me watch the above video, despite absolutely not getting it at all.

Of course there is. Its a show about friendship. And friendship is magic.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Dear James Jacobs,

How badly will you flog Tels and Rysky for going hog-wild all over your perfectly organized super thread?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey! Did you know that a blog can apparently publish a product about using Charisma skills in combat? What a crazy world we live in!

After spending a few months working on my blog, Everyman Gaming, I decided that I wanted to try doing some independent work for the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. To that end, I compiled my favorite house rules into the blog's first product: Psychological Combat.

So, what is Psychological Combat? Psychological Combat is a new rules subsystem for using Charisma-based skills to harry and harass opponents. It uses the traditional rules (feinting and demoralizing), adds a new special action that anyone can use (antagonize), and combines them all together under a new statistic: Psychology DC. And if that wasn't enough, Psychological Combat also includes a new morale subsystem, so GMs can use Psychology DC to track how much of an emotional beating their NPCs have taken. For you vets out there, it is directly inspired by 2nd Edition's morale rules and is a reactive system that causes increasing stages of fear based on the ebb and flow of combat.

But what stop there? Also included are new archetypes, alternate class options, feats, and character traits. And just because I'm a swell guy, there's also Mythic versions of every feat introduced in this product.

Beautifully decorated and filled with relevant flavor and illustrations by Jacob Blackmon, I'm confident that these rules will see as much use at your table as they do at my table!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dexion1619 wrote:
Having a great time playing an Occultist in Skull and Shackles, nothing keeps a crew in line like a 7' Mwangi with a poor Fotash Pact lol

I'd love to hear more about your experiences!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liz Courts wrote:
Now back in stock! :D

Hooray! Its nice to know that the United States Postal Raptors don't eat EVERYTHING we send to Paizo.

Spoiler:

Just most things.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Can we just put Quinn on every Pathfinder Product for the remainder of time, please?

I promise I'll NEVER get bored of him!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For all those interested, John, the publisher, reached out to me and asked both Dario and myself for our thoughts on this product. I even gave a bunch of design feedback on the spirits and archetypes. (Though I don't know what suggestions were used.)

My thoughts? It's neat. Check it out and support Pact Magic!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

It also comers into play for the spells arcane cannon, banish seeming, gaseous form, and healing thief, the feats Dragonheart and Witchbreaker, the conductive magic weapon ability and forsaken banded mail, and the fey-taken drawback and noble born traits.

NONE of that is mainstream Pathfinder material (though its all official), but it is a sign of how the Ex/Su distinction can be a useful tool of specific design ideas. I'd hate to lose it.

I would love to see a strong design theme that Ex abilities can do things like reflect spells using a shield, and that martial classes can pick up magical abilities. But I don't think eliminating the difference between Ex and Su is the way to get there.

Between his thoughts here and on his blog, I thought that Sean make it fairly clear that his point wasn't that the Su / Ex distinction needs to go away. Rather, I interpreted it as saying, "Hey, we don't need to keep Supernatural abilities away from 'martial' classes because in the long run, there isn't much of a difference."

In effect, that the Ex / Su divide was more flavor-based than mechanics-based and that being "Supernatural" doesn't mean that it should automatically be better than something "Extraordinary." In the long run, those words are synonyms anyway. :-P


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Every RPG Hardcover has had 256 pages (except the Core Rulebook, naturally).
APG is 336 pages and bestiaries are 320 pages.

Punch, punch, upper cut!

Ouch. Looks like I'm wrong.

John Kretzer wrote:
Also the Ultimate Equipment book is 398 pages.

KOOOOOOOOOOOO!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Yes, that's my point. It's a fantasy world, even the non-spellcasters don't have to be limited to nonmagical abilities. :)

This is a valid point. The fighter's niche has always been, "Versatile class that excels with a specific type of weapon." No where in that niche does the phrase "no magic" come into play.

To expand even further, would Ray Shield (an Advanced Player's Guide feat) be Supernatural or Extraordinary if it wasn't a feat? By my best guess, probably supernatural because many people would claim that the ability to deflect magic requires magic.

I thought SKR's article was very though-provoking and made sense.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:

Short-term: Players will want to try the new classes.

Long-term: Without house-rules, Sorcerers will never see play again. Same goes for Rogues and Fighters, but that's already the case anyway.

I don't agree with the disappearance of the Core Classes. Arcanist is nice, but the sorcerer can sling spells a lot longer than he can. Also, if you pick the right spells you can have everything you really need as a sorcerer.

I also don't think we'll see the fighter disappear. The fighter is extremely versatile and ironically enough, he's better at doing combat things that don't involve simple attacks than any other class in the game thanks to the obscene number of feats he receives.

Last, I think that the slayer is going to do to the rogue what the magus did to the eldritch knight; the slayer is going to be more commonly played, but the slayer is also going to help define the rogue better. The rogue is squarely the skill expert martial class now. He's burstier than the bard and has all of the social skills that the slayer lacks. She's a better at being a thief while the slayer is better at being a killer.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:


I'm sorry, I'm not overly keen on adventuring in the South Park universe ("Everything can breed with everything else!") - I don't even really like Half-Elves and Half-Orcs. Myth and legend does set a precedent for this concept ("changelings," "mooncalves," various leaders and heroes being descended from gods - I'll admit, the whole "Golarion's Elves are actually visitors from another planet hence Golarion's Half-Elves wind up being a wacky nod to 20th-Century UFO folklore"), but it should be a special, strange anomaly; it certainly shouldn't be ubiquitous.

One thing that you could do that could actually be really freaky / cool is treat half-elves like deep one hybrids from Lovecraft's Shadow over Innsmouth.

In Shadow Over Innsmouth, human/deep one hybrids looked exactly like humans for the first half of their life. When they reached middle age, their ears started to shrink away, their hairlines started to dramatically recede, and they started to grow scales and gain amphibious traits.

For a half-elf, they could look and grow up as humans for the first few decades of their lives with a noticably slowed aging process until, around 50 years of age, their ears started to sharpen, their body hair sloughs off, and their eyes started to grow and darken until they resemble elven eyes (WAR stype). As their minds become increasingly alien, they find themselves out-thinking humans and seek elven societies when they finally bore of their petty human kin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Why? I actually liked that...

I don't know why the decision was ultimately made, but I'd be happy to share the points that I made during the playtest explaining why I thought the restrictions should have been removed (or at least uplifted to Alternate Classes).

— Parent classes weren't equally represented in each class. Shaman was much more oracle than witch; its "spirits" were basically mysteries with revelations renamed as hexes , for example.

— Some parent / hybrid combinations made a lot of thematic sense as multiclass options, such as gunslinger / swashbuckler or rogue / slayer.

— Most classes that included rogue or fighter as a parent felt more like the other parent. For example, swashbuckler's mechanics felt almost entirely like a melee gunslinger, probably because the gunslinger itself was originally conceived as a fighter alternate class. (This is still somewhat reflected in Ultimate Combat's lack of a gun-totting fighter archetype.)

— The concept of "these classes are designed to make some multiclass concepts easier," combined with the hybrid restrictions accidentally creates an image of multiclassing as a "wrong" playstyle.

1 to 50 of 518 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.