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

Johnico's page

271 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 271 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Nicos wrote:
Athaleon wrote:
Lemmy had it right when he said the only reason so many feats have Combat Expertise as a prerequisite is its name. If it had a name that more accurately reflected what it does (e.g. Defensive Stance) you wouldn't see it nearly as often.
Indeed. Not sure how to make the Devs know that making it prerequisite for so many combat styles is jsut horrible.

Unless I'm wrong, people have been complaining about CE being used as a prerequisite for so many things since the done of 3rd Edition, or at least the dawn of Pathfinder. If their minds were gonna be changed on this, they would've been changed a long time ago.

The Haste and Blessing of Fervor would definitely grant the Shadow an extra attack, but it seems to me that a touch attack like that a Shadow has does not get any extra attacks from a high BAB, as I think it is a natural attack. I'm basing this on the fact that a Greater Shadow has a +6 BAB but still just the one touch attack.

There's three main ones that, while I haven't had everyone yell "NO!" at me, I just haven't had the chance to run them:

Deadlands Set in the Weird West, which is basically the wild west but with magic and mad scientists and demons and stuff like that.

Fallout Or, really, a post-apocalyptic game in general. Part of my problem with this one is finding a good system for it.

Ptolus Because I love the idea of a campaign set entirely inside one city. And I mean *entirely*.

Could be way worse. I once bought a comic where the art for two pages got switched, but the dialogue balloons were on their correct pages.

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I love this feat because it's so absurd.

I hate this feat because it's so absurd.

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Westphalian_Musketeer wrote:

GM says: "I regularly have groups with paladins in them."

GM means: "I have lost all will to put even a remotely puzzling ethical dilemma in my campaigns."

Alternately means: "I've decided not to troll my Paladins anymore and just let them play the game." :P

GM says: "The bar maid seems incredibly taken with you."

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Valian wrote:

- 3/4 BAB classes, except for the rogue, do not really need multiple attacks. Clerics, Druids, wizards etc... they can beef up with spells and special abilities.

Yeah, they do. In Pathfinder, if your plan during a fight is to hit people with sticks or shoot them with arrows, you *need* those extra attacks in order to not be completely useless.

EDIT: Ninja'd by a Ninja

Honestly, I'm perfectly fine with the current model for APs. I've learned that I shouldn't really play APs with my local group much (high-level play gets super sloggy with them), but they work great for my online group.

Claxon wrote:
downerbeautiful wrote:
Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
Claxon wrote:
(with the exception of some bard spellcasting feat I want to say)
Yes, Spellsong. Love that feat. "What, casting, me? Nah, man, I'm just reciting some poetry."

And for all other classes Secret Signs

Secret Signs wrote:

Source Inner Sea World Guide pg. 288, Pathfinder Campaign Setting pg. 57

You are particularly adept at communicating with others via innuendo, gestures, and secret hand signs.

Prerequisites: Int 13.

Benefit: You gain a +4 bonus on Bluff checks made to pass secret messages. In addition, you are adept at hiding the somatic components of spellcasting. If you cast a spell that has only somatic components, an observer must make a Perception check opposed by your Sleight of Hand check to notice your spellcasting. Spellcraft checks made to identify any spell you cast that has somatic components take a –2 penalty.

Ahh, that's a feat I hadn't seen before.

In any event, to make your spell casting concealed it requires a feat of some sort to do so. And this one only works on spells that only have somatic components. And even using metamagic to get rid of the other components wouldn't work by RAW.

And, funny enough, that feat actually makes your spells *easier* to identify if you cast them Stilled compared to if you had just cast them normally (since the opponent takes a penalty when your spell has somatic components, but they make the check as normal if you use Still Spell on it).

Well, technically, two wolves is only CR3, which would be a Hard fight according to the CR, not Epic. But that's beside the point. :P

The important thing is that, if you don't know, the CR and APL system is, basically, stacked in the player's favor. A CR = APL fight is supposed to be fairly easy, and you don't get to an actual fight that's "fair" and could go either way until about CR = APL+4. Yeah, this means that fights can feel fairly easy, but that's the intention. Feel free to consider your party as a higher APL if both you *and* your friends want a harder game.

As to your last question: Is it too much? No. Should you do it? If it's their and your first game, I don't think so. If it's your first campaign, take your time. That way, you and your players can get yourselves used to what you're capable of each level. They have time to absorb and learn their new abilities, and you have time to get used to their capabilities before you level up and throw your expectations out of whack again.

Can we get a link to this other forum? Sounds like it'd be a fun read. :)

This was me as I read through the thread. :(

Still super awesome that you did this, Steve.

If you're looking to go crazy, commission an artist to do a big bad ass group shot of the characters, and get said big bad ass group shot printed out on big ol' posters.

Yeah, I've yet to see a good set of fumble rules, at least for D&D/Pathfinder.

Other systems have had them and done them well, but those always had four main things to make them not-suck:
1) They applied to everyone
B) They got less likely the more skilled you were
Third) They had different levels of fumble, so you could mess up and just kinda lose your footing without stabbing yourself in the spleen
Finally) They almost always say something like "Only do this if it'll make the game more exciting. Use it to add complications, not to screw the players."

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only damage caused by blowing up 340 spellbooks with Delayed Blast Fireballs is whatever damage the Delayed Blast Fireballs themselves would do. A standard spellbook is not magical on its own, so all blowing it up would result in is a destroyed spellbook.

Even if they were, say, all Blessed Books instead of the standard spellbook, still the only result would be that the books are now ash and the Delayed Blast Fireballs do what they do.

I'm going to have to echo the sentiment that concealment does not necessarily negate all forms of precision damage.

There's multiple things that cause precision damage, and they vary on whether they say concealment negates them. I'm inclined to just look at the ability and see what it says it does or does not do, instead of making assumptions based on how other, vaguely similar abilities work. Does it say it's negated by concealment? Then it is. Does it not say that? Then it isn't.

Because there's no actual definition for precision damage, we have to look at each appearance of precision damage separately until such a time that it is fully defined.

And, as for the Shadow Strike discussion, it wouldn't be the first time that a feat was printed in the rulebook line that didn't actually do anything. ;P

I pretty much always play the heroic types, but they're rarely the perfect knights in shining armor. Even my Paladins get pissed off and make enemies and form grudges and can be petty.

Partially why I play the hero is because I can't think of a way to have a character in Pathfinder/D&D and have them be all about the gold and getting money and have it make any sense. I mean, by the time you finish that first dungeon (or, at the latest, hit level 5) you've got so much money you could never work another day in your life and still be fairly comfortable. To me, that means there needs to a be a deeper motivation than "I want money" even if it is just as selfish.

1 - I'd say any of Destruction, Justice, or maybe Protection would be best for that. Unfortunately, getting even a +1 to Destruction takes 6 levels of favored class to get, and Justice and protection would take 10 levels to get a +1. I'd personally probably go with the HP or Skills unless you really like those judgments.

2 - He would get to use Acrobatics, because Acrobatics says

PRD wrote:
You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor

And a Dwarf is specifically not slowed down by medium/heavy armor.

From the section on saving throws on the PRD:

PRD wrote:
Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

Arachnofiend wrote:

Worse, you generally pay to use deeds with your panache pool. So if the Swash got dex-to-damage as a deed, it wouldn't always be on.

And that would be bad.

True, but there are more than a few Gunslinger deeds that work so long as you have a point of Grit left, without needing to spend it. Perhaps this Dex to damage deed would work similarly?

Your question does make sense, but the game doesn't assume that standard skill checks (like picking a lock) are going to give XP, unless maybe said lock is necessary to complete the quest and get quest XP.

Generally, XP is only given for combats, traps, and story. Skill checks, unless they're necessary for one of those things, don't give XP.

I was actually gonna suggest something like what Nefreet linked. I have a player in my group who has terrible eyesight and needs to basically headdesk in order to read standard dice, so he got himself some of those really big dice to make it easier.

All of the stats for the monsters in a given Adventure Path will be either in the book itself, or in one of the hardcover Bestiaries. If it's in one of the Bestiaries, it'll tell you which one and which page to find it on.

There's also a game called Little Wizards designed precisely for the purpose of gamers introducing their kids to RPGs. Dunno if it's what you're looking for, but it might be worth poking at anyway. :)

The spell specifically says it targets one creature, and that you treat the target (in other words, that one creature) as if it were that type of Favored Enemy.

So, you cast it on one demon, you've got your +6 human bonus against him. You don't have it for any of the other demons, since they weren't targeted.

EDIT: Ninja'd really hard while reading the rest of the thread. :P

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azten wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Azten wrote:
I just checked the PRD and it has the line I put in bold.

No it doesn't.

There's an extra "resistance" there that removes the problem.

Still a possible issue with boiling working on the Red Dragon, but none with lava.

I still see it.

I'm looking at that screenshot of the PRD, second paragraph of "Lava Effects", second sentence, says "Immunity or resistance to fire serves an an immunity or resistance to fire, lava, or magma." Unless that's not the part I'm supposed to be looking at, it looks to me like it doesn't say that Fire Resistance 1 will result in total lava immunity.

An AoO is not an attack action, it's just an attack.

However, Trip, Disarm, and Sunder all say you can do them in place of a melee attack, not as an attack action.

In my current campaign, I have it so that the player rolls once, and if it's less than half their hit die they roll again, keeping the better of the two. Allows for, but greatly diminishes the odds of, low HP rolls.

When we get closer to finishing this campaign, I'm gonna ask them how the group would feel switching to static HP gains at each level. Not sure what formula I'd wanna use. I'm thinking either 1/2 HD +1, or .75 HD round up. So d6 would be 5, d8 would be 6, d10 would be 8, and d12 would be 9, with the latter.

17 people marked this as a favorite.
Larkspire wrote:
I ignore challenge rating entirely,except for counting up xp...but CR appropriate encounters are almost always a pushover (in my experience).

In case you didn't know, that's actually intentional. A combat of CR = APL is supposed to be fairly easy to deal with. It isn't until you get to about CR = APL + 4 that a fight is truly fair and likely to go either way.

As for the rules that bug me, personally... the whole concept of the "big six" and necessary magic items. Or, more specifically, that the game assumes you have the big six, but never outright states it, nor tells you what the game math assumes you have.

To use a somewhat extreme example, two 10th level parties, one who gets nothing but interesting magic items like Capes of the Montebank and Gloves of Storing and other things like that, and the other gets nothing but the big six, are going to be completely different in terms of capability. But the rules make no indication that that's the case. The closest thing is the suggestions on building PCs after 1st level.

What I prefer is either like 4e D&D where they basically tell you what kind of +s the game math assumes you have at a given level, or like most other RPGs where the game is designed so you don't need magic knick-knacks, they're just a nice bonus.

I love giving out cool magic stuff, I just want the game to tell me either A) We balanced this assuming they have +X gear at Y level or B) We balanced this assuming no magic stuff and anything you give is just a cool bonus.

So, just as an example, I'm going to assume you're a fighter with a mundane longsword in one hand, an 18 strength, no feats except Vital Strike, or anything except Weapon Training, your Strength, Vital Strike, and your Base Attack Bonus.

You Vital Strike as a Standard Action, leaving you with your Move Action to run around.

You only get one attack when you Vital Strike. This attack is at +11 (+6 Base Attack Bonus, +4 Strength, and +1 Weapon Training). On a hit, you will do 2d8+5 damage (1d8 for the Longsword, plus another d8 for Vital Strike, +4 Strength, and +1 Weapon Training).

If you perform a Full Attack, that's a Full Round action. You have no actions you can take on your turn this round except your Swift Action and Free Actions, as a Full Round Action consumes both your Standard Action and Move Action to perform.

This lets you make two attacks.

The first is at +11 (+6 Base Attack, +4 Strength, and +1 Weapon Training).
The second is at +6 (+1 Base Attack, +4 Strength, and +1 Weapon Training).

Each attack does 1d8+5 damage (1d8 for the sword, +4 Strength, and +1 Weapon Training) if you hit with it.

And, as a little extra thing you might not know, if you Full Attack you can choose to abort the Full Attack *only after the first attack* and have your Move Action to spend instead. You can't abort after you make your second attack.

Hope that helps clarify things even more for you. :)

I'm already enticed here, but are there more classes on the way than the three released so far? That may change this from a "Cool, maybe later" to a "Must get now!" :P

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And, even if you assume that NPCs use the Profession skill for income, that's (assuming they take 10, have it as a class skill, Skill Focus, one rank, and at least a +1 to Wis) still only ~9 gp a week, which is 468 a year. That's about quadruple Abyssian's number, so it'd take him *still* about 13-14 years.

You cannot gain the +1 hp from Favored Class going into Pain Taster, for two reasons.

One, because it isn't your Favored Class, Barbarian is.

Two, because Prestige Classes cannot be chosen as a Favored Class.

Kthulhu wrote:

After reading some of Guillermo del Toro's demands for the "At the Mountains of Madness" movie, I'm glad it never got made.

An not JUST because I think the story is absolutely unfilmable.

What demands were those? I was curious but skeptical after hearing that del Toro wanted to do At The Mountains of Madness, but haven't been keeping up with it much.

I don't know how many people here are fans of his, but I felt somebody should post something regardless. Even if I'm the only one who would recognize him here, I feel the need to talk about it and says something. I dunno, I'm rambling, and have never been good at writing things involving feelings.

Justin was an incredibly entertaining, positive, and upbeat producer of videos showing import games that people can play without knowing any Japanese. I didn't know him personally, but everybody who did calls him one of the most friendly, lovable people they'd ever met. Nobody had a bad thing to say about him.

Tragically, he took his own life Thursday, January 23rd. He's left behind a wife and many loving friends and family.

Justin's wife, Jenny, making the announcement wrote:

It is with a very sad heart that I must confirm my husband, Justin Carmical, sometimes known as the Jew Wario died on Thursday, January 23rd.

I also have to confirm he shot himself, but he was not alone, he locked himself in the bathroom and I was on the other side of the door talking with him. He knew I loved him, HE KNEW ALL OF YOU LOVED HIM. You all made him so happy, every time he was recognized from his videos, it made him giddy with joy.

His last recording was a song with Johnathan Mann, I don't know if Johnathan knows. He recorded it the night before.

I am surrounded by family and friends, and am taking this one moment at a time, remembering to breathe. I want to share with you what the Chaplain said to me, it was a momentary mistake, hold on to the good memories. I will post an update once a decision has been made about funeral arrangements.

If I need anything I will let you know, just hold on to each other and love each other, and thank you all so much for loving him so much.

URL added by me, to the video in question.

For those of you unfamiliar with his work, here's an introduction to his work.

For those of you unfamiliar with him, here's an introduction to who he was.

I don't know if this post will fall on deaf ears, but I felt I should mention it. I didn't know him, but the world became a little less awesome the moment he left it.

Peace be with you, J-Dub. And all my best wishes go out to your friends and family. I hope you've found peace.

Timebomb wrote:

Of note is that usually an item should occupy more than 50% of the character's wealth (main exceptions being for shiny plot items).

Minor note here, but I'm pretty sure that Timebomb meant that one item should NOT occupy more than %50 of the character's wealth.

Seems obvious to me, but wanted to clarify just to be safe.

Cool, thanks everybody.

PRD wrote:

Greater Grapple (Combat)

Maintaining a grapple is second nature to you.
Prerequisites: Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6, Dex 13.
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to grapple a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Grapple. Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple.
Normal: Maintaining a grapple is a standard action.

A player of mine is playing a grappling Barbarian guy, and we're having a little debate about how it works. I've bolded the main bit that we're talking about, and hoping to have it resolved before he hits the level where he starts using it.

Let's assume that he rolled his Move action grapple and decided to Damage the monster. Now, he wants to Damage the monster again. Does he

A) Have to make another roll to do the second Damage. This is my opinion, since it says that it allows for two grapple checks to be made.

B) Automatically does the second Damage. This is his opinion, since it says that you aren't to make required to make two checks and only need to roll one to maintain.

Thanks for helping clear this up, in advance. :)

I imagine that it works much like armor spikes: both hands are taken up by your two-handed weapon, so you can't use it to Two-Weapon Fight. You could still Two-Weapon Fight with it if you were using a weapon in one hand.

My groups (I have an IRL group and an online group) tend to average 1-2 months for each book.

Regarding the Ice based casters... so long as they have spells to use when up against things resistant/immune to Cold, they should be okay. Just keep in mind that there are going to be a *lot* of things resistant or immune to Cold.

This has been brought up a lot, and is something most everybody has agreed would be pretty cool if it happened.

Unfortunately, as the bag said, they wouldn't really be able to use any of the rule set, and that's something for a game developer to come to Paizo about doing, not really something Paizo's gonna knock out on their own. :/

Also, by the rules, I don't think that your character's weight counts against your carrying capacity.

For western stuff, I loves me some Deadlands.

I'm having a similar issue with my Magus in a game I'm playing in. Though only in combat. Outside of combat I roll fairly well.

My GM went insane and gave me a magic sword that attacks Touch AC, we're about level 4, so Touch AC is averaging 12 or so (with many of our opponents being really dexterous and having a 14), and regular AC is something like 16-18, sometimes a little higher.

Since I've gotten that sword, I can't seem to roll higher than a 6 on my d20 for attack rolls. It's shenanigans.

Edit: Yet I use the same dice when I GM, and they really want to kill the party!

Scavion wrote:
doc the grey wrote:

But why isn't the class that's really really good at beating people up...

Because actually, most monks are pacifist guys who don't actually know how to fight.

The whole bad ass monk phenomena is based off a few extremely particular monastic traditions.

I assume you're talking about real-life monks here. To which I must respond: So what if the bad ass monk phenomena is based off of a few extremely particular monastic traditions? Or that real monks are mainly pacifists?

It's those bad ass monks that the Monk class is designed to emulate, so the Monk should be really good at beating people up.

Crits with properties like the ones you mentioned, Bigdaddyjug, are just like regular hits. A flaming bow that crits still only adds +1d6 fire damage. The general rule for crits is that static bonuses get multiplied, bonus dice do not.

Ameiko's got Versatile Performance (String) which lets her use her Perform check in place of Bluff and Diplomacy.

Take your 53, minus 10 (5 each for bluff and diplomacy), leaves us with 43. 40 skill points normally +3 favored class for Bard = 43.

The Deluxe Explorer's Edition is how I got into Savage Worlds. I don't know what they changed between the original Explorer's Edition and this one, but here's what I can tell you.

It's still only $10.
The art is good and colorful. The whole book is glossy and colorful.
I believe they added in some of the races from the companions (the Rakasha and Elves and stuff, for example, in the book).
It's got the errata and updates the system has received since it came out.

WNxTyr4el wrote:

I looked more into it and I'm not sure if I like how it's split across so many expensive books :(. <snip>

Unless I'm wrong and there's only one book you need really to play.

If you're talking about Shadowrun, don't worry, you only need the core rulebook (the big one that's just called "Shadowrun") to play. All the other books that say something like "A core shadowrun supplement" or "A core Shadowrun book" aren't actually necessary. Useful, yes, but not necessary.

There's nothing in the description of the archetype nor the blade that grants proficiency.

1 to 50 of 271 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.