Lawgiver

James Hunnicutt's page

RPG Superstar 7 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter, 9 Season Star Voter. * Starfinder Society GM. 206 posts (521 including aliases). 7 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 9 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Vesk NG Icon Solarian 10 | SP 81/110 HP 76/76 RP 7/9 | EAC 27 KAC 28 | Fort +10 Ref +8 Will +11 (13) | Init +3 (7) | Perc +7 SM +5 | Resist acid 5, cold 6, elec 5/10, fire 10, DR 5/- | Spd 50', jump jets

Still at Photon Attunement 3

Reflex saving throw with Spellbane bonus: 1d20 + 8 + 2 ⇒ (19) + 8 + 2 = 29

With that roll and the Constructive Interference Revelation, Gremvest suffers 8 electricity damage.

I assume that teleport-and-lightning trick did not provoke an opportunity attack, but please lemme know if otherwise.

With Haste still going on him, Gremvest's movement is 80' giving him ample speed to hustle over the southeast corner of the ziggurat and position himself for a flanking maneuver with his pal Grump.

"Woohoo Grump! We got her surrounded! Give up lady, yer under arrest!"

First attack burning chains with flanking & Flashing Strikes vs EAC: 1d20 + 16 - 3 + 2 ⇒ (8) + 16 - 3 + 2 = 23
Second attack burning chains with flanking & Flashing Strikes vs EAC: 1d20 + 16 - 3 + 2 ⇒ (18) + 16 - 3 + 2 = 33

Fire damage with Plasma Sheath bonus, if 1st attack lands: 1d20 + 18 + 5 ⇒ (4) + 18 + 5 = 27
Fire damage with Plasma Sheath bonus, if 2nd attack lands: 1d20 + 18 + 5 ⇒ (12) + 18 + 5 = 35

Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Vesk NG Icon Solarian 10 | SP 81/110 HP 76/76 RP 7/9 | EAC 27 KAC 28 | Fort +10 Ref +8 Will +11 (13) | Init +3 (7) | Perc +7 SM +5 | Resist acid 5, cold 6, elec 5/10, fire 10, DR 5/- | Spd 50', jump jets

Willpower: 1d20 + 11 ⇒ (8) + 11 = 19

Willpower save 2nd try with Improved Iron Will: 1d20 + 11 ⇒ (16) + 11 = 27

+2 insight bonus on this save if Dortay was using a spell, because I have Spellbane feat.

Another +2 circumstance bonus from Cerebral Countermeasures if this is a mind-affecting effect.

Photon attunement 3.

Assuming he saved, Gremvest activates Plasma Sheath as a move action, then as a standard action, uses Solar Acceleration to do a full attack against Dortay plus Haste himself plus Grump & Patrick for 10 rounds.

First attack holy ghost killer opportunistic malebranche-class burning chains vs EAC: 1d20 + 16 - 3 ⇒ (9) + 16 - 3 = 22
Second attack holy ghost killer opportunistic malebranche-class burning chains vs EAC: 1d20 + 16 - 3 ⇒ (8) + 16 - 3 = 21
fire damage if first attack hit: 2d8 + 18 + 5 ⇒ (2, 5) + 18 + 5 = 30
fire damage if second attack hit: 2d8 + 18 + 5 ⇒ (1, 6) + 18 + 5 = 30

Finally, if what Dortay did was cast a spell, Gremvest probably should have gotten an opportunity attack because his weapon has reach. If an opportunity attack was triggered, here it is:

Opportunity attack holy ghost killer OPPORTUNISITC malebranche-class burning chains vs EAC: 1d20 + 16 + 2 ⇒ (17) + 16 + 2 = 35
fire damage if opportunity attack hit: 2d8 + 18 + 3 ⇒ (7, 4) + 18 + 3 = 32


3 people marked this as a favorite.

contentedly playing Rise of the Runelords via play-by-post on Discord. We recently started Book 3


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:
On a sidenote, someone told me that "4E is good if you change the rules", but when I need to do that, it just means that the established rules are broken.

Great point. I liked your whole spiel on 4e. I agree with those criticisms. At the time, I was more aggravated by the fact that gnomes, druids, barbarians, etc. weren't in the PHB. And how regimented and boring magic items were.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Tender Tendrils wrote:
McDonalds...

Thank you, good point. And thank you for pushing back against McDonalds’ disgustingly successful PR propaganda campaign against that seriously injured plaintiff. Preach!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to echo everyone's praise for Paizo's hard-working employees & creative talents. I'm sure we're missing many, but I'd like to add:

Joe Pasini:
I've had some interactions with Joe Pasini, and always found him to be incredibly friendly, witty and self-effacing. At PaizoCon 2018 he GM'd the Starfinder delve and I was so happy to be at that table playing Keskodai the Mystic, doing all I could to keep the PCs standing with heals while Joe tried to kill us all. I adore the scenario Cries from the Drift he authored, as well as the wealth of other Starfinder works which he authored or contributed to. Thank you Joe!


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Sara Marie was wonderful here on these forums, and IRL. She taught me how to play Five Minute Dungeon at PaizoCon 2018. What a sad development. You are loved & missed Sara Marie!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Rise of the Runelords, nearly done with Burnt Offerings!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Phaedre wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Perilous Vistas?

It was a four book set from Frog God that each was centered on a type of terrain/environment, and had a bunch of rules, feats, spells, etc. in addition to three or four adventures featuring the same.

Marshes of Malice (swamps/marshes), Mountains of Madness (mountains), Dunes of Desolation (deserts), and Fields of Blood (plains/grasslands).

They were pretty good! I've used some of the adventures.

Huh, never heard of em, thank you for the tip


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
It may just be the 5E juggernaut sapping new players away.

I enjoy 5e quite a lot, but PF1 will always be my fave :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kasoh wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
Glass Cannon?

The Glass Cannon Network is a podcasting/Twitch group that produces Pathfinder 1e, 2e, Starfinder, Delta Green, and other systems liveplay content.

It has a strong comedy vibe and overall, captures the feeling of playing at a table relatively well. If you're in the market for a Pathfinder Liveplay podcast, their Flagship product, "The Glass Cannon Podcast" is a 1st edition playthrough of the Giantslayer Adventure Path and has entered book 6, available for free using whatever podcast catcher you prefer.

Yeah, you nailed it. They take their time. There's over 200 episodes, each an hour+ long, of PF1 action. They took a pause during lockdown, but now are back in the studio back to Giantslayer.

Plus, their pause during lockdown was just a pause from Giantslayer. Over Zoom/Roll20 they played Feast at Ravenmoor and Midnight Mirror, all 1st edition PF. They do Dark Suns for Starfinder, and I don't know the PF2 they're doing but I know they're doing some PF2 on a different podcast too :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HighLordNiteshade wrote:
Evilserran wrote:
I think the forums slowed down a lot, because lots of games slowed down with the birth of Corona.
For some of us, COVID had zero impact because we haven't played in person in years (in my case, not for decades). We've been virtual (with a variety of tools) since 2001. :-)

Agreed. There's a healthy lot of online play these days including PF1. I was recently invited to Play-by-Post Rise of the Runelords per PF1 rules, totally loving it... nearly done with Burnt Offerings!

And I'm still listening to Glass Cannon, still have not got through all of their PF1 content.

I'm so glad these PF1 forums are still humming along


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Tale as old as time. Started with the red box in 1984, loved 2nd ed AD&D, loved 3rd edition, excitedly bought the three core 4e books, loved the art, hated everything else, jumped ship to Pathfinder, happy as a clam.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Artofregicide wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
it wouldn't end any arguments but it would be nice to have.

It would end some arguments, start some others, and definitely be nice to have.

It's also never going to happen, first party anyway.

Yeah, some mysteries shall persist into perpetuity.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh I thought the OP was more or less inviting people to wax nostalgic about our personal preferences. Is there somewhere else for that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
If Paizo made more 1e products( yeah I know "and monkeys might fly out of my butt"), but if it actual happened, would you buy them?

Yes, definitely.

I continue to buy PF1 materials off the secondary market, but I would buy them new if in print.

Dragon78 wrote:
Also would you be more interested in mostly new, roughly 50/50 new and reprints, or mostly reprints/updated stuff?

50/50


1 person marked this as a favorite.

At the end of my scenario, players rolled for con boons, and my brain went entirely blank. Can someone please remind me how those work? Thank you!

Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Vesk NG Icon Solarian 10 | SP 81/110 HP 76/76 RP 7/9 | EAC 27 KAC 28 | Fort +10 Ref +8 Will +11 (13) | Init +3 (7) | Perc +7 SM +5 | Resist acid 5, cold 6, elec 5/10, fire 10, DR 5/- | Spd 50', jump jets

"OOF!" Gremvest shouts as he's shoved backward by the swirling knife on the "bulky" Ysoki's tail. He uses his move action to jump jet northwest over the gap to the top of the structure, then uses his standard action to Stellar Rush to attack the Red enemy. He attacks twice with Haste and Flashing Strikes (hoping for a nat 20!)

Ghost killer opportunistic nova lance vs Red's EAC: 1d20 + 14 - 3 + 2 ⇒ (8) + 14 - 3 + 2 = 21
Electricity and Fire Damage: 3d4 + 16 + 2 ⇒ (3, 4, 3) + 16 + 2 = 28
Ghost killer opportunistic nova lance vs Red's EAC: 1d20 + 14 - 3 + 2 ⇒ (20) + 14 - 3 + 2 = 33
Electricity and Fire Damage: 3d4 + 16 + 2 ⇒ (2, 4, 1) + 16 + 2 = 25

Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Vesk NG Icon Solarian 10 | SP 81/110 HP 76/76 RP 7/9 | EAC 27 KAC 28 | Fort +10 Ref +8 Will +11 (13) | Init +3 (7) | Perc +7 SM +5 | Resist acid 5, cold 6, elec 5/10, fire 10, DR 5/- | Spd 50', jump jets

Finest Weapons: re-rolling that 1 damage die: 1d6 ⇒ 6

Wayfinders

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Male Vesk NG Icon Solarian 10 | SP 81/110 HP 76/76 RP 7/9 | EAC 27 KAC 28 | Fort +10 Ref +8 Will +11 (13) | Init +3 (7) | Perc +7 SM +5 | Resist acid 5, cold 6, elec 5/10, fire 10, DR 5/- | Spd 50', jump jets

The Vesk Icon starts booming a rock ballad!

"Everyone get ready to rock
we're on a mission to defeat Datch.
This Drake flies like a hawk,
and that Ysoki we gonna catch.
We're here to fight,
we're not gonna run.
Jackojare, your skills are tight,
Jackojare target that gun!"

Gremvest Encourages Jackojare, which should work automatically because my gunnery bonus is +12, giving Jackojare a +2 bonus to gunnery this round.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Have there been surveys about this?

Put me down for "pro boons on chronicle sheets" :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
VestOfHolding wrote:
Oof, look at all the stuff y'all found since I went down with the sickness earlier this week. This is gonna be one heckin' update. Here we go, I did my best to get them all in here:

Wow! Thank you for alll your hard work VestOfHolding! This kind of effort & attention to detail is super helpful. Paizo should put you on the payroll.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm very pumped to see this. Should be stellar


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The more I play Starfinder, the more I like the Stamina-Resolve system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

super cool :)


6 people marked this as a favorite.

For me, Pathfinder is D&D, which is my favorite game of all time. I get nostalgic about D&D. It’s been a consistent & reliable source of fun, socializing, and problem-solving since I was 8 years old. I loved playing with friends out of the red box, then the AD&D books. I have fond memories of drawing maps on graph paper, inventing new monsters, painting minis, and crafting worlds and the people and creature who live there. In 2000, some friends and I purposefully regressed and played AD&D for a while before trying 3rd, which we all happily shifted to. In 2008, D&D stopped being D&D, so I — and many others —shifted to where D&D still existed, Pathfinder. I love Pathfinder because I love D&D, and they’re wrapped up in my head as the same thing. I love D&D. I love wizards, castles, half-elf rangers, gnome illusionists, drow soulknives, mind flayer rogues, Gray Maidens, Harpers, Dragon Highlords, Warchief Ripnugget, Count Strahd, Red Mantis Asassins, oracles, favored souls, alchemists, Sandpoint, Baldur’s Gate, Toril, Krynn, Athas, Golarion, Sarenrae, Pelor, Tiamat, etc. etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Actually, I think the diagram correctly reflects the PF2 version of cover & screening. It doesn't go by corner to corners anymore. Cover now is described as middle of your figure's square to the middle of your enemy's square.

While on the topic, I suggest adjusting these rules a little, because the way they're currently worded, cover is treated as a reciprocal concept, but it probably shouldn't be. E.g., per the PF2 Playtest, if I'm standing behind the corner of a wall and my enemy is standing alone in the middle of a nearby field, very often (depending on the exact angle) not only do I have cover from him but he has cover from me, even though I can see him and he's not hiding behind anything on his end. In other words, I'm being penalized for crouching behind cover, because now we're using the center of my figure's space rather than my best corner to determine cover. As in PF1 (and Starfinder, Imperial Assault, and other combat-style boardgames) I'd like to be able to make tactical decisions that reward a combatant for taking cover while exploiting an enemy's lack of cover. I think the Starfinder rules for cover are pretty solid.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you for highlighting the issue, which will help improve the final text. To avoid ambiguity, pages 8 and 178 should be revised to make them fully consistent with page 292, and they can still be readable, e.g.:

Rolling 20 is better! Rolling a 20 on the die means you succeeded, and you might have "critically succeeded" too. You also critically succeed if your total exceeds the Difficulty Class by 10 or more. More about critical successes is on page 292.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I played in a few playtest games, and the GM obviously pulled punches, so only a couple PCs got dropped. I think if he'd played the monsters as truly motivated to end us, a TPK woulda been very possible.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like Makeitstop's suggestions a lot. I disagree with bringing back Size modifiers, but otherwise I'm on-board. Good work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. Yes
2. No, I like the idea of blending Dex and Perception for initiative.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Three Likes
• Goblins & Alchemists core,
• reducing but not eliminating Attacks of Opportunity,
• all changes from PF1 already found in Starfinder, e.g., removing iterative attacks, bulk, poison/disease changes, no age modifiers, no mechanical difference between small and medium creatures, finesse weapons, narrowing skill list, set number of HP per level, removing CMB & CMD, removing ability damage, etc.

Three Dislikes
• +1 per level to everything,
• essentially zero backwards compatibility,
• +10/-10 for crits. I've never had to pay so much attention to the precise results of every roll. I prefer "He rolled great, the result is somewhere in the 30s, definitely a hit, etc."

House Rules
• No prereqs for Skill Training feat.
• More bonus languages for high Intelligence.
• Un-nerf Spider Climb, Invisibility, and other buff spells. These spells don't make casters overpowered, rather, they help casters boost everyone in the party and enhance group tactical decision-making.
• I'd like to figure out a blend of +1/4 to all skills per level, and still have skill points to allow more customization as characters progress, and to ensure Intelligence isn't a dump stat.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Requielle wrote:

The worst thing to hear at a table of players is "don't help me!". And I started hearing it more and more often as Doomsday Dawn went on. The risk that your helper critically fails is just not one that most people want to take after a while. So nearly every skill check turned into solo time, instead of group time.

That is where this particular subsystem fails at the most basic function of the overall game - cooperative gameplay. If, at the end of the day, the rules punish players for working together towards the goals of the story, it's counterproductive.

QFT. There's nothing more dispiriting than crit failing an Aid or Assist, so players rapidly stopped even trying. Sometimes a crit fumble is funny, but not for Aid or Assist. It just feels dreadful.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
dnoisette wrote:
magnuskn wrote:


I have hopes that James Jacobs may influence the PF2E devs a bit, because on the Roll For Combat podcast he was on, he said that in his ideal vision a caster who goes to sleep under PF1E rules and wakes up under PF2E rules could fulfill his role and do what he does just as well as he could in the first edition. Which is... not the case at this moment.
I'm guessing his opinion is quite unpopular at Paizo because the intent was pretty obviously to have Wizards wake up under PF2E rules and realize their magical connection has been severely impaired.

I dunno if it's an unpopular viewpoint, or I wonder if there's a disconnect between the story writers and the rules writers. Anyhow, here is what James Jacobs said around the 55:30 mark:

James Jacobs: My goal is for when the edition changes it should be pretty much invisible to anything in-world so like a wizard who is inside of his house doing wizardly stuff and the day before Second Edition lands and the day after he won't notice any difference in how things work. The rules for how his magic works will change but his role in the world won't change.

Stephen Glicker: So he goes to sleep and its First Edition and he wakes up the next day its like oh its Second Edition, my stuff works a little differently but it's pretty much the same.

James Jacobs: Not even that he just wakes up and keeps doing what he's doing. Every story we told in First Edition needs to be something we can tell in Second Edition, and vice versa.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slyme wrote:
Bringing back critical failures in addition to critical successes is not fun in my opinion. All it does it punish players for bad dice rolls even more than just rolling badly does already.

Agreed. I’m worried about crit fails for PCs. I took double damage from a monster spell the other day which nearly killed me while I was at full HP. That felt too swingy.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

Upvote Stamina system. It’s fun and works well. You feel tough not needing clerics and medics so often.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Balance is nice but as with all things, in moderation.

When you play the board game Dungeon! it’s baked right in that Wizards are stronger than Rogues and Clerics, but hey, we keep having fun playing Rogues and Clerics anyway.

4e was essentially perfectly balanced, but that felt homogenous and un-fun. 5e isn’t perfectly balanced, but people like it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:
For instance two-weapon-fighting becoming class-locked.

Yeah, I find it ironic that so many feats that previously were general are now class-locked, which I think was meant to encourage characters to "stay in their lane" but then I see many posts about how a lot of players now feel essentially a "need" to multi-class... so if class-gating feats encourages more multi-classing, that's not really confining drivers to their lanes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
So... I just want to clear one thing up. This theory, that we designed the game for PFS, is categorically false. We are trying to make Pathfinder the best game it can be. We want it to work for PFS as well, but the quality of the game is priority 1.

Thank you for chiming in & speaking to that assumption.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Robert Bunker wrote:
The game is mostly finished, the "playtest" is just a preview, and our feedback means nothing.

I don't agree. The developers fixed Signature Skills, at least in part because of customer feedback.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Requielle wrote:
We bought the 4E core rulebook set when it came out, and after everyone in our gaming group read them, we stayed with 3.5E (and eventually moved to PF1E). It looked limiting and videogamey was the general consensus.

Ditto. I bought the 4th ed PHB, MM, DMG, and Keep on the Shadowfell. I found them interesting to peruse, but never actually played 4th because my buddies & I devolved into nerd-rage over the whole thing. I've playtested Pathfinder #2 and like a lot that it has to offer, but I'd like to see a lot of fixes (avoid +x/level to everything, unwind the overnerfing of spells, simplify or nix resonance, make healing easier).


11 people marked this as a favorite.
BPorter wrote:
Davick wrote:
When I've playtested casters I didn't feel bad or mediocre. And the people I've seen who have made those complaints have framed them as not being as overpowered as they were. To borrow a phrase "a loss of privilege is not discrimination". Casters were too good. Lowering their power level is not inherently over-nerfing them.

THIS!! A thousand times THIS!

well I don’t think anyone’s arguIng spells shouldn’t be reduced somewhat, but the OP did a thorough job showing the level of nerfing felt extreme, and affected multiple aspects of most spells. I think some of us were hoping for a scalpel rather than an ax. Or, boost martials to cure any sense of imbalance rather than so much nerfing to magic


5 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
An upgraded version for the 3.X skeleton worked twice already, with D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1E. If the writers would have removed many of the kinks and artifacts which still are in PF1E (infinite money loops and so on, hyper-optimization), implemented the good stuff from Pathfinder Unleashed (automatic bonus progression, new action economy) as baseline and beefed up high-level monsters to be sturdier against the rocket tag-ish damage output PC's simply have there, I would have been very happy to buy that new edition.
This is pretty much identical to my thoughts. I was hoping for a 2e that really built on the PF1e/3.5 system, not something that departed from it so radically.

This is how I feel as well. Plus, include the good stuff from Starfinder.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Almarane wrote:
Here are my notes for the latest Twitch Stream

Thank you for posting!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:
Aaargh! I feel like I should know what 'WBL' means, but it just won't come to me. :-(

I'm pretty sure WBL = Wealth By Level


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
I did tell you guys a while back it would be significantly reduced and then Dan saw you guys asking in the stream and asked me "But how significantly does that mean when you say that it sounds like a lot?" and I said "Significantly reduced." I figured no one can say total removal is not a significant reduction ^_^

Thank you sir for your hard work & dedication. I appreciate your commitment to the editorial process, and checking in with us here.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think players like bonuses, rather than limitations and constraints, which I think might be a reason folks have a distaste for Resonance because it feels confining.

Try this on for size:

Wands and certain other magic items could have a certain trait (maybe call it the "resonance" trait) meaning they have X charges per day, and you generally keep X a very small number.

Characters get to add their Charisma bonus to X. With a switch up like that, Resonance would feel more like a bonus, not a constraint, and it would still discourage people dumping Charisma.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like Starfinder's Stamina system a lot. Makes it fun resting 10 minutes after a big fight.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
John Mechalas wrote:

Magic is tactical, not strategic

The 1-minute durations are the best example of this. Remember those sessions where the party had a good idea what they were going up against, and could sit down and plan out what spells they'd need based on the enemy's capabilities? Gone. You can plan out the spells, of course, but unless you can time the game to within 10 rounds, the most you'll get is one buff or debuff.

What bugs me the most here is that this sort of planning is a large part of the fun in our group. Watching that plan unfold is a close second.

QFT


1 person marked this as a favorite.

1) Skill Points. Short of bringing back Skill Points, please remove prerequisites for the Skill Training feat, make at least 1 Signature Skill an open choice, and take other steps to increase skill selection & diversity.

2) Bring back the days of natural 1s sucking on their own without the added insult & injury of critical fails. Please remove or tone down critical fails, especially for Aid and Assist. Those are fun-killers.

3) Getting racial abilities at character generation. i.e., each race should be locked into a few ancestry feats at character creation, then choose 1 other ancestry feat at level 1.

4) Taking 10.

5) Unwind +1 per level to everything. 4th edition had +1/2 per level to everything, and it's the same basic concept. Ultimately, I was hoping 2nd edition Pathfinder would be somewhat backwards compatible, with modest tinkers (like PF1 -> Starfinder).

I don't want to sound like I'm a negative nelly though. I like a lot about the new ruleset, esp the 3-action economy, diminishing attacks of opportunity, omitting surprise rounds, and everything borrowed from Starfinder. Basically, I like the changes to combat tactics, but would prefer adjustments to character-building.

1 to 50 of 70 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>