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

HangarFlying's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 2,932 posts (2,935 including aliases). 1 review. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 4 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,932 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Regardless of what it actually ends up being, some people will still complain about how broken and OP it is.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The rules as written in the CRB are written in the context of creatures using appropriately sized weapons. The rules do grant an allowance that lets a GM make a reasonable interpretation for situations that fall outside of the standard paradigm.

It is certainly reasonable, and within the spirit of the rules, to allow a standard medium PC race wielding a large long spear—assuming they have a legal means to do so—to threaten at the 10 and 15 foot ranges, while not threatening at the 5 foot range.

EDIT: that being said, I'm not aware of a legal way that would let a medium character do this, so in all actuality, this post is merely for academic discussion.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

That would certainly make sense.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It was finessable in 3.5, and went away in the conversion to PF.

Andoran

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In my experience, the biggest time sink are players fretting about which equipment they want to buy or what spells to pick out. Everything else was ready to go in 5-10 mins.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
fuzzydice82 wrote:

This thread was one of the first relevant links on a Google search for a listing of all the Pawns and Minis for Rise of the Runelords.

Has anyone attempted to update the Original Poster's list with the more recent Pathfinder Battles and Pathfinder Pawn collections? (Including the upcoming Lost Coast set.)

I've very interested in seeing this for RotR, but also for other Adventure Paths and Modules.

I attempted to click on HangarFlying's link above, but I have to request access, and my requests have not been granted after two attempts.

Thanks!

Huh, never noticed that. I will try to fix the issue.

EDIT: Hmmmmm, try this link.

EDIT2: accidentally put the wrong link.
I have the setting set to anyone with the link can get to it without having to sign into Google.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

BLAH BLAH FLIBBITY RAAAAAAWR GRRR FLOPPITY.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What kind of pirate are we talking here? Johnny Depp pirate, or Cartman pirate?

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My initial gut reaction is that it would provoke an AoO, but if you do suck the AoO, you don't lose the extract (like a caster would lose a spell if they failed the conc. check).

I'm not fixated on this position so I look forward to being educated on the issue.

Andoran

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I pretend to not hear the players announce any action during a monologue.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The Crusader wrote:

Interesting. What you are saying is almost exactly the reason I would have thought you could do this.

You can copy a spell from a spellbook - or - from a scroll.

You can prepare a spell from a spellbook - or - .....

They seem to work almost identically, except that the scroll is consumed. I'm not suggesting that you should be able to use a scroll as a single page spellbook. The scroll would be consumed when you prepared the spell.

There is no need to prepare a spell slot from a scroll because you can just cast it from the scroll.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It's a good question. My hunch based on a first read is no. The Undersized Mount feat is taken by the rider. The Mount evolution is for the eidolon and to even qualify, it must be one size larger than the summoner.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

No, but it's a cool concept that might make an interesting archetype.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
Why do people think you can get iteratives with a natural attack via FCT? There's nothing in the rules to support that.

Actually, that is perfectly false.

Feral Combat Training states that to your selected natural attack, you can apply effects that augment an unarmed strike.

An effect that augments an unarmed strike is that when your BAB gets high enough, you get iterative attacks.

Not all unarmed strikes do get iterative strikes: only the ones that are augmented by a high BAB.

Iterative attacks are an effect that augments an unarmed strike, so they are a benefit that is granted by Feral Combat Training.

Circular logic based upon incorrect information leads to wrong conclusions.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I wouldn't have a problem allowing it, but I reserve the right to rule differently in the heat of the moment.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

O.o

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Are you playing the original or the AE?

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There are always other options.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
jahvul wrote:
James Jacobs won't come to your home and slap you if you decide to houserule.

Famous last words...T-Rexs tend to show up in the oddest of places.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If a new edition means a whole new set of rules and changing the rules paradigm, then no, there is not a need for second edition.

If Paizo is willing to abandon its current requirement to maintain page references in order to allow for a reorganization of the rules, clarifications, while also including some tweaks to classes and/or feats and skill descriptions,I'm not entirely opposed to this.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Should have cast raise thread, then he would have been safe from any reprisal or comments.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I can see it going both ways, but I would personally allow the surge as the rules for confirmation state that you use the same modifiers. It makes sense to allow it because the confirmation roll isn't actually a seperate attack, merely being a second roll to see how well your attack actually did.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My guess is:

Iron Gods:
It'll be a game about the history of the ship that crashed in Numeria.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I've been in a "retro" mood for the last few months and have been looking at various clone systems. Having only flipped through and skimming parts of the PHB, and reading the free download, I do have to say I'm impressed. While I'll never stop playing PF, and likely won't invest in 5e, I'd be more than happy to jump into a game to try it out. I do think it will be a successful system, and that alone is something we should all be happy about.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

SLA that are based on spells with a casting time greater that a standard action are whatever is given for the spell. So, for example, those creatures that have a summon ability (demons, for example) take 1 round to use that SLA.

There is a dev comment on here about it. Might take me some time to round it up.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Da G8keepah wrote:

Thanks everyone for weighing in on this topic.

I think, however, that I did not get my issue across completely clearly. When I said that there will be some players who are sporadic, I meant that they will likely play at most 1 out of 3 sessions. The characters will be more guest stars than normal members of the group.
We will be playing Rise of the Runelords and it is entirely possible, for example, that one player will join us for the first half of Burnt Offerings and then not again until the latter half of the Hook Mount Massacre and then maybe somewhere in the middle of Sins of the Saviors and that's it.
They are players that I would like to include in the group (they are my friends, after all) but they just don't have the time to play all that often (graduate school, etc).
I don't want to penalize anyone for missing sessions. I just want to make sure that the core group doesn't suffer for the inclusion of the others.

Yeah, this is a completely different issue than what everyone is discussing. If they're only going to be at a few sessions, and you know that ahead of time, that is something entirely different than having a player whom you rely on but doesn't show up.

These players could be "important NPCs"—not NPCs from the book, but characters that when the players are absent, they become regular NPCs in town. When the players rejoin, just keep the characters at the same level as the same group.

The other option is to have the characters remain with the group and have other players run them in their absence. It would be more work for the players, but at least you wouldn't have to invent reasons why a character suddenly just shows up.

In any case, you could email a recap to the absent players so they're able to keep up with the story.

Or just have the absent players' characters get murdered in their sleep so you don't have to worry about it.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ashkar wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
The runewell, fueled by the deaths from the goblin attack as well as the deaths upon Thistletop
Isn't Thistletop too far for fueling the Runewell? Or my memory fails me?

Meh. They don't know that.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This would be an exception to the general rule. The only way this ability can work is if the summoner is allowed to do this outside of his turn.

EDIT: there are a number of examples that allow free actions outside of a turn. In short, yes, a summoner can use his Fused Link ability outside of his turn.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I, too, noticed that the images were dark. Neither were they as "crisp" as Paizo images usually are. Don't know if this is intentional or not. Otherwise, this is an excellent player's guide and I'm excited for more stuff.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Good ideas. This is what I'm thinking so far:

1) A few hours after the PCs retreat and things quiet down, Lyrie gets enough courage to poke her head out and sees all of the carnage. She runs to inform Nualia.

2) Nualia becomes upset upon learning that two of her prized pets have been murdered. Realizing that her position in Thistletop is tenuous, she retires to the Cat of Wrat to seek guidance from and coordinate with Erylium.

3) Upon learning that Erylium is dead, she loses her composure in an enraged fit of frustration and cuts into her hand and drains her blood into the runewell. The runewell, fueled by the deaths from the goblin attack as well as the deaths upon Thistletop, disgorges 9 sinspawn (7 from the points the well contains plus 2 for the xp to deactivate the runewell). What Nualia doesn't realize until after she calms down is that in her rage, she accidentally deactivates the runewell.

4) Her sudden realization leaves her at a loss for what to do. She now feels that she must retreat to the only known ally that she has left in Magnimar. She leaves Lyrie with instructions to lead the sinspawn into the town above to cause panic and destruction to cover her escape, but to also kill the PCs who had laid her plans asunder.

For the timeline of events, I'm thinking that the 28th of Rova is when the Battle of Thistletop occured. The PC is raised on the 29th. Nualia will get into the CoW 28-29ish. She mopes for a day or two, then orders Lyrie to attack on the evening of Lamashan 1.

I'll worry about Nualia in Magnimar later, but using her in that module sounds good.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

If I recall correctly, the -2 for TWF is already included (at least for Vale) and the off-hand attack should only get the first attack listed.

I'm not really sure why they listed it like that and to be honest, I don't think Paizo has really figured out how they want to indicate TWF stats considering it seems to change.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Had a player die to the Yeth Hounds in the Temple on level 1. The party did succeed in killing them then made a tactical retreat with the deceased character back to Sandpoint. They talked with Fr. Zantus, and he was able to get someone in the next day to cast reincarnate. They were also able to get one restoration, but the player doesn't want to head back out until he's able to get the second.

Those left in Thistletop as an immediate threat are Nualia, Lyrie, and one Yeth Hound.

I'm inclined to believe that Nualia, with pretty much her entire operation destroyed, would be hesitant to stick around, though would still plot some kind of revenge.

I'll post more later, as I'm a bit tired right now, but I'm looking for some ideas on how this would play out.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Name of PC: Variel
Class/Level: Elven Mage of the Veil 3
Adventure: Burnt Offerings
Catalyst: A failure to heed the "Adventure Party Golden Rule" assisted by Yeth Hounds.

Story:

Spoiler:
While exploring the first level of Thistletop, the group encounters and dispatches Bruthazmus, the Harem, and Orik. The group proceeds into the jail cells, with the rogue checking doors as they go along.

The rogue makes an off-hand comment that it's a bit difficult to be sneaky when the rest of the group is so close. The group moves off, back into the central room. The rogue discovers, but doesn't open, the door into Lamashtu's temple.

The party splits up, spreads out, and starts to open different doors. The mage opens the door leading to the Tentamort, discovers it, but does not approach (the Tentamort is oblivious, continuing to catch seagulls). The barbarian remains in the central room. The cleric heads up and discovers the double-doors leading to the Temple.

The rogue meets up with the cleric, and together they open the doors. The cleric moves away and approaches the door leading to the Tentamort area. The rogue moves up to investigate the altar.

Both Yeth Hounds bay. Rogue and barbarian fail their save. Barbarian runs upstairs and away. Rogue runs. Yeth Hound catches up, crits, knocks rogue into negatives. Other Yeth Hound heads up to the cleric, hits, knocks him prone.

Yeth Hounds gang up on cleric, who channels to bring the rogue back up to positive health. The mage moves into line of sight of the Yeth Hounds while invisible. Next round he drops obscuring mist which saves the group from a TPK.

The rogue works back to the altar via the jail cell room to pick up her bow. Barbarian still running. Mage maneuvers to hit both Hounds with Color Spray. Both hounds make the save. Next round, Hound crits against the mage, dropping him. The mage fails his next stabilization roll, which kills him.

The obscuring mist allows the cleric and rogue to hold on long enough for the barbarian to recover and return. Eventually, with the barbarian in the fight, the hounds finally succumb. The group beats a hasty retreat back to Sandpoint. The male elf is reincarnated as a female half-orc.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ReliantLion wrote:
Hello all. I've created pages that go into inserts for a custom GM scree, but only for the GM's side.

What information did you put up for the GM info? Any chance of posting a link to your file?

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Abandon All Hope Ye Who Can Read This.

Followed by:

Spoiler:
EXPLOSIVE RUNES

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

My hunch would be no. That doesn't mean that a 3rd party couldn't make a 5th ed equivalent using the OGL.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wheldrake wrote:
PRD wrote:
"Once the book is used, it crumbles into cold ash and is destroyed."

Seems pretty clear-cut to me. Get a metamagic rod instead.

If I picked it up as loot, I'd sell it instead of using it.

That sentence doesn't mean that it only has one use. It means that after the uses are used up (how ever many that may be—be it one time or more), it is destroyed and may not be reused.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It says that it works like a metamagic rod, so I'm going to assume that it can be used three times before it is destroyed.

EDIT: Eh, maybe not. The wording is such that it can be used more than once. I wonder if something was accidentally omitted.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Simon Legrande wrote:


Seriously? How many times do I have to say "I DON'T AGREE WITH THE RULE" for people to get it? I think it's a poorly written rule, period. I play it the way I think it should be played.

So then why do you continue to argue against that? So you say you play the RAW interpretation that makes sense, yet you come on here and argue a RAW interpretation that is nonsensical.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Simon Legrande wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Hmm, there is nothing noting you must move the entirety of your Acrobatics check, as a horizontal jump.

I am carefully reading through, and am just not seeing it.

PRD wrote:
For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump (and if the check fails, the distance at which you actually land and fall prone). Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land.
I agree that it doesn't say "must", but it also doesn't say "can". It only says distance = jump check.

It doesn't say "must" because a character doesn't actually jump 20 feet to clear a 5-foot gap. And yes, this is a RAW interpretation, despite what your protestations may be.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Simon Legrande wrote:
I think we all get it. You don't like the jump rules. You don't like people who play by RAW. Good for you. Please now inform the rest of us on what is the correct way to play. I fear I may have been doing it wrong.

I play by "RAW" and a monk with a +20 to Acrobatics wouldn't actually jump 20 feet to get across a 5-foot gap.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I believe you possibly may be referring to the Beginner Box. There is a pre-made scenario available there.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Question about a feat from RotRL:

Spoiler:

Lamashtu's Mark. In the description, it says that the save DC is based upon 10+character level+CHA bonus. Is it supposed to be the full character level, or 1/2 character level?

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Suffice it to say, if the campaign setting being played in is Golarion (and the GM is sticking to canon), then no, a Paladin cannot worship an Evil deity.

If, instead, the GM is using PF to play in a home setting, it is up to the GM to decide whether or not this would be allowed.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Martin Sheaffer wrote:
Misroi wrote:
I just had the haunt go off once the person was in the room. Once they were under the haunt's thrall, I handed them the page detailing their experience.
Which works until one party member refuses to enter a room unless necessary after his first haunt encounter (having to run upstairs to check on the kid).

I figured that if the triggering character wasn't in the room, but was close by, or more specifically had a line of sight to the room, the haunt was triggered and he was affected.

Granted, some of the haunts require specific interaction, but for the most part, they all got triggered eventually. *maniacal laugh*

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What I did was to give the party a "bounty" for every goblin that was killed that was equal to the value of any gear that would have been sold. For those goblins that had gear better than normal, the party either kept it or actually sold it. In the end, the party received their gold they deserved even if they didn't want to bother with the crappy gear.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

This strikes me as oddly appropriate.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Davor wrote:
No, because a Melee Attack and a Melee Touch Attack are not the same thing.

Meh. It's still a melee attack, just not one that requires you to bypass the armor bonus.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Okay, Fretgod, this is what I think a straw man is.

"straw man, noun: straw man; plural noun: straw men; noun: strawman; plural noun: strawmen:

1) a person compared to a straw image; a sham.

2) a sham argument set up to be defeated."

It might actually help if you understood what arguing the straw man actually is before you falsely accuse someone of doing it. [EDIT: There is a link in there...it might be hard to see.]

Just because you don't like the Shamrock's rebuttal to various points that you yourself brought up doesn't mean that he's arguing the straw man.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

*lawyered*

1 to 50 of 2,932 << 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.