|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Just played the tutorial adventure, liking it a lot so far. Keep getting disconnected and reconnected to the PlayFab while playing though.
Not sure if it's my internet being awful or something weird with the game.
I've also tried just running off my 4G, because that's way faster, but it has the same issue. :/
I've been GMing for a couple years, but I've only just started bugging my players for in-depth goals and the like and am really attempting to incorporate them into the story. Having never run a game that's primarily driven by the *player's* stories (been mostly running APs for the past few years), what I'm wondering is, when you design these sorts of campaigns, how do you let the players progress their personal stories without resolving them too quickly?
For example, one of my players wants to find and kill the man who killed his father. How do you suggest letting the player progress that story in a meaningful way without essentially having just one adventure where the bad guy is located and another adventure where they kill him?
I'm asking because it seems like, if I let the goals be resolved this quickly and easily, the resolutions will be somewhat anticlimactic but I can't think of how to logically extend the resolution process beyond maybe 1-2 sessions.
Thanks a bunch.
The DC formula is described in the Magic Items section, under "Saving Throws Against Magic Item Powers".
Magic Item DCs wrote:
Magic items produce spells or spell-like effects. For a saving throw against a spell or spell-like effect from a magic item, the DC is 10 + the level of the spell or effect + the ability modifier of the minimum ability score needed to cast that level of spell.
My Self wrote:
Depending on how the Con Damage ends up it might even out.
But usually? Yes.
Steve Geddes wrote:
I think the main way it "advertises" that is by claiming that a 12th level Fighter and a 12th level Wizard have the same CR if the party fights them. Nothing as overt as having a bullet point on the back of the book that says "All classes are really well balanced!" :P
So long as the weapon is one-handed the wizard can cast just fine.
If it's two handed, you can Free Action to take your hand off, cast the spell, the Free Action to put it back on. Assuming you aren't casting any 1-Round casting time spells or spells outside your turn.
Also note that, while many GMs would be fine with the latter option, some may look at you funny. So be warned.
I don't see any reason it wouldn't work.
Heighten Spell increases the level of the Mount for "All effects dependent on spell level", and Alter Summoned Monster just requires you to target a monster created via a Conjuration (Summoning) spell, which Mount is. It then changes the Mount to a monster summonable if you had cast a same-level Summon Monster spell, which Mount is now considered to be.
You would get three attacks. Rapid Shot and the Double Weapon give you one extra attack at your highest BAB.
So you'd go +6(BAB)/+6(Rapid Shot)/+1(BAB).
Keeping in mind that Rapid Shot and using the extra attack from the Double Weapon give a penalty to all of your attacks that I didn't account for above (I was only listing the BAB you'd have, no other modifiers).
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
The biggest issue I have is how some people seem to assume that all character options must be equally powerful. If the game is designed to have imbalances, it really is a feature, not a bug.
I certainly agree. Assuming that the game states upfront that it's designed to be imbalanced. For example, Pathfinder claims to be balanced but it's often very unbalanced (or at least makes no attempt to inform you that it isn't balanced). Ars Magica, on the other hand, is very unbalanced and tells you right at the beginning of character creation that it's not balanced.
I have a question regarding one of the abilities the Draconic Exemplar gets and I wasn't sure where exactly to ask it, so I figured here would work.
The Sweeping Breath Draconic Gift says that the user can "cause a cone-shaped breath weapon to affect a half-circle with the same range." How do you calculate a "half-circle"?
So, about the same frequency of play (in terms of raw hours), but you guys are likely to finish it in something like half the time. Wow. 5e, you're starting to tempt me.
One more question, what would you say is the ratio of goofing off RP vs. progressing through the story for you guys, in terms of time? You've got me curious now.
When someone triggers and Attack of Opportunity, you only attack with one of your weapons.
Attacking with both weapons is always a Full Round Action (barring certain classes/class features that make it so it isn't).
As for why anyone would fight with two weapons? Because it sounds cool and there are a few builds that can make it pretty solid. Sadly, those builds are few and hard to do.
Just curious, when did you start running Runelords in 5e? I feel like I saw you mention it earlier in the thread (or maybe that was Kthulhu? Darned people having the same avatars :P), but that's a lot of pages to go back through and find that specific post. :P
13th Age did something interesting with racial Ability Score Modifiers. Every race provides a *choice* between which of two stats you get a +2 in, with no negative. Then, your *class* provides a choice between two stats to get a +2 in, that can't be the same score as your race improved. Makes it so it's a bit easier to pick an unorthodox race for a class, because your class will give you a bit of a bonus to help you out anyway.
The Saltmarsh 6 wrote:
If some people on the internet not playing your way is enough to be considered a nail through the coffin of gaming, I don't know what to say.
This argument of "there are things you can't control in life, so you should just deal with it" is patently ridiculous, but I keep hearing it. I don't care if I can't control stuff in life. I'm playing a game (and not the Game of Life :P). I don't want my Barbarian to be permanently crippled in what I expected him to be able to do because of one or two or three bad rolls.
Stuff happening to kill my Barbarian in the course of the game? Fine. Being useless as a frontliner because I happened to roll a 1 on just a couple die rolls? Not fine.
I'm not saying you have to take the average or whatever. Keep rolling hit points if that's what you find fun. :)
But don't pretend I'm somehow a lesser gamer because I think this particular mechanic is bad.
D&D and Pathfinder being pretty high on the system complexity scale, finding things that are simpler should be fairly simple.
For anime, I really like Big Eyes, Small Mouth a generic system designed to have an anime feel. Haven't had much chance to play it, but I quite enjoy it. It's also got a lot of optional side-bars and rules to slide the complexity and grittiness up and down.
I've also heard good things about Ironclaw for furry type stuff. Haven't read it myself, however.
How will make-up help them survive the dungeon? :P
Bob^3 covered your poison question well, so I'll just answer the treasure one.
You are correct on all your numbers (CR3 at medium advancement = 800 gp, incidental halves it and makes it 400).
The gp value you're left with is the total gold for the whole party, not per person. Just remember to throw the occasional high treasure encounter at the party to compensate for the low treasure fights.
Let the players divvy up the cash as they see fit. If they're like most groups I've seen, they'll give everyone an equal share of the cash and hand magic swag to whoever needs it most.
I think Daneel was just bringing up Staggered since the GM used the fact that Staggered specifically says you can still take Swift/Free actions while being restricted to a single Move or Standard meant that Nauseated does not allow Swift/Free actions, since it similarly restricts your actions but doesn't include the language allowing Swift/Free actions.
As the others have said, by RAW, Move actions are it. No Swifts, Frees, or whatever else.
Secret Wizard wrote:
Remember, it says nothing about REDUCING the time needed to take a 20, which takes two minutes for Knowledge checks.
Not necessarily. Making a Knowledge is listed as not taking an action, meaning it takes no time. So, wouldn't taking 20 on something that requires no action take no time (since 20 * 0 is still 0)?
We let players take 10 on Spellcraft checks to ID items. It means the caster can just tell the GM "I get everything CL X and below" and we get on with the game. Experimentation to ID items could occasionally be fun but too often devolved into a checklist of common silly things to check. I'm not sad to see it go just like describing exactly how you search the room.
This isn't even something players need to be "let" to do. They can just do it. :)
In my game, I usually just assume that the highest spellcraft character takes 10, everybody else who can aids, then I tell them everything they identify with that spellcraft number, which is most things. The players then decide for the following days how they're going to try and identify the items.
Telling them "you identify all the swag except this one thing" usually gets them a little more interested in that one thing and learning what it is.
The ways I've seen it done (other than just taking average or average+2, that still involve rolling):
Player rolls and the GM secretly rolls. The player decides between what they know they got and whatever the GM may have got.
Roll normally. If you roll under average, roll again. Keep whichever of the two is higher.
I prefer the average or average+number methods, personally.
Except that this literal reading of explosive runes doesn't work (the dispel magic thing). There's nothing in that sentence that says Greater Dispel Magic doesn't work, it's only explaining what happens if you screw up a dispel.
Also, yes, Greater Spell Immunity makes you immune to Dispel Magic, but not Greater, because it specifically says you are immune to the one chosen spell. There is nothing in Explosive Runes that says Greater Dispel doesn't work. Saying "you can do X" doesn't mean you can't do Y, when Y is something you could normally do anyway.
I can erase my sentence with the eraser on my pencil, but I could also use white-out if I wanted to.
To stop explosive runes abuse, just use a literal reading of the spell. It specifically states that only dispel magic and erase can magically trigger it. It does not mention greater dispel magic. That means you can only dispel 1 set of runes at a time. The precedent is like spell immunity which makes you immune to 1 specific spell, but not variants of the same spell.
Greater Dispel Magic says it functions like Dispel Magic. You're really grasping at straws here. Also, that line isn't there to explain you can disable Explosive Runes with Dispel Magic, since you could anyway. It's to explain what happens if you fail.
I keep coming back to this. You ask for rules cites and then never give one yourself. So, tell me where exactly the action required to read something is described? I don't care about your explanation for your assumption. Give a page number.
1) Mirror Image lasts minutes/level. Having it up before a fight is perfectly reasonable most of the time.
2) I wouldn't call a 33% chance to hit significant either.
3) Stop bringing up toddlers. You're the only one bringing them up, and only in an effort to make Anzyr's position look ridiculous. It's damn near the definition of a strawman. There's a huge difference between a 2 year old human reading common and a 30 year old Air Elemental reading Auran.
4) Care to do the same for your assumption that reading the letter "A" on a sheet of paper takes a Standard?
5) I'll leave Anzyr to explain that one, because I don't know either. :P
6) It's 21 damage that is getting through basically all damage mitigators (DR, Energy Resistance, etc.), with a 100% chance to hit. Regarding handing out the Runes, read Anzyr's post again. He's making no such assumptions and is summoning them the round the explosion happens. He's using Acadamae Graduate to summon as a Standard, then handing the Runes as a Move, so the Elemental can Move up and read as a Free.