|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
DM Bigrin wrote:
Again, these are awesome, but I did notice a small error on Dungeon Level 2: The dock that the PCs arrive at (L1) is missing. Technically the falls are as well, but that's less of a concern.
[Archives of Nethys] August - October 2014 Releases added: Pathfinder #84-86, Technology Guide, Advanced Class Guide, more...
It has been far too long since I made an update post. Apologies to all the users of the Archives, I was attacked by the Holidays and only recently have been able to make some much-needed updates. Enjoy!
Hey all! Question for those who have begun running this: I saw the recommendation for limiting Androffan to only characters who had the campaign trait for it until 3rd level or so. I was thinking about limiting Technologist in a similar fashion. At 3rd+ level, anyone can take it, but until then the only way to interact with it would be one of the two campaign traits that mimics aspects of it.
Would this be too big of a problem, or is Technologist really not *that* necessary levels 1-3? Keeping in mind that some PCs may have the campaign traits that mimic it.
Hi guys! Apologies for the lack of updates here, or on my front page. I really need to update my front page more often. As it stands, a combination of holiday, workload, and some addictive games (damn you Fantasy Life) got me a bit behind.
As it stands though, I've been busy crunching away again, even if the results may not be fully obvious. I've almost fully added the entire Tech Guide and a few other books that have tech items in, making new tables in the database. Once I make the pages (a much smaller task), those new items will appear all at once on the site.
The place I give the most frequent updates is actually my Facebook page. Check in there if you're ever curious on where I'm at.
Oh, as for the offers of help: I've had a number of them now, and it's extremely flattering. Unfortunately, you guess it pretty much correctly: the only way for people to help right now would be to have access to my database, access which I'm hesitant to give out. The quality control is another issue as well, I'm much harder on myself then I would be on helpers. :)
Anyhow, work is progressing, check Facebook, and more to come! :D
As has been pointed out taldanrebel, normally you can't cast a spell with a Full Attack Action either. The entire point of the Magus's ability is to "break" this rule.
I always felt Bladed Dash was created with the Magus specifically in mind. Makes perfect sense that they can combo this with Spell Combat.
To all of those who use Obsidian Portal: Do you know if there's a way to point the various Links to places external to OP? For example, I have my own forum. I'd like to point the Forum link there, instead of OP's forum. Not sure if I can.
Not a big deal breaker if I can't, just curious. OP does seem nice, although I can see it's going to take a bit of time to get everything setup.
I've been running a long-term online game of Shattered Star on my own forums (over a year now), and while I enjoy the setup, I've been curious about a nicer "campaign front" that I could use for easily displaying characters, maps, etc. Obsidian Portal seemed like a nice setup, but doesn't appear to allow external linking to other forums, and I don't really want to move to another forum.
What do people think of Obsidian Portal? Are there similar sites that help create RPG sites for free/small monthly? I'm technically capable of designing my own site, but don't really have the time to do so.
Thanks for the advice!
You know Ravingdork, I've always enjoyed your posts, and feel your frustration. I can't make any promises, but I enjoy running long-term PBPs. My current one, Shattered Star, has been running for over a year now with regular daily activity. It's full up at the moment, and I have no idea when that will change, but if a space ever opens up I'll be sure to let you know. :)
Small consolation, I'm sure, but I hope it's something.
Ability: "When another character attempts any check, you may display any number of blessings or weapons; for each card displayed, add 1 to the check. Return the displayed cards to your hand before you reset it."
I understand "before attempting a check" or "after attempting a check". With the above wording, we're wondering: can Oloch use his ability after a check is attempted? Is that still part of "when the character attempts it?"
We're starting S&S soon and a couple of us are playing heroes from S&S, a couple are playing heroes from the class decks. We figured we'd just play the heroes from the class decks without mixing any of the other cards in, since all that seemed like it would do is water things down (lots of extra copies of cards that already seemed to be in the base).
Is there a real reason to shuffle in some of the extra cards from a class deck being used? Right now it's just the Alchemist, Warpriest (both from S&S) and one of the Sorcerers (from the Class Deck). Does the Sorcerer need all his class deck cards shuffled in, or would the Spells and such that come with S&S already be enough?
(Note: We are not playing using any Society Guild rules or anything, just using the class deck characters as extra options atm)
Hmm. Fair enough. I think that's an unfortunate choice of wording, and senseless extra restricting. Feats already include a "requirements" clause after all, which often includes race. Why a feat would be okay for a non-orc in normal campaign games but restricted in PFS is beyond me.
Well, I maintain that the feat is displayed correctly on AoN. As far as I'm concerned, if designers wish a feat to be restricted to a certain race, they need to include that in the requirements. That's what it's there for. :)
Sure. Half-orcs and orcs *do* have access to all the below. That does not mean other races do not, however.
It's like saying "here is a park. ducks can access it." It doesn't say dogs aren't allowed to. It might be implied, but that's what the feat text is for.
In this case, the rule of thumb is to go with what the actual feat says instead of header/flavor/etc. text, as that can often be misconstrued. All the feats in that section list half-orc/orc as a requirement *except* for Surprise Follow Through and it's improved version. I would take that to mean that they were recommended for half-orc/orc races, but by no means are those races a requirement. There are a number of other feats throughout the book though that also have this trend, so it's not a singular error. Some sections will list feats that have the header race as a requirement, along with some that don't.
I would certainly rule this way in PFS as well.
PFS did pretty recently scythe a fair swath of materials out, so it might just be that AoN isn't aware of the change.
This. I check the PFS Legal page about once a month when I do updates, but unfortunately the page does not have the... greatest change log. Whenever I go there, it shows the latest changes in red, but this does not mean they are the latest ones I've seen. It may be that they changed things at -3 weeks, -1.5 weeks, and -2 days. I'll only see the -2 days ones. I don't have the time or desire to go back and re-evaluate every legal item whenever I do a check. :)
In these cases, I generally rely on the community to email me and let me know when something is in error. I may need to make a more prominent button on each page to email me specific errors...
Surprise Follow Through is not an orc-only feat, it's tagged correctly at AoN. You can see the feat on Paizo's PRD here as well. Note that, unlike a number of other feats that require you to be a half-orc or orc, this one does not.
While the header of "these feats are available to half-orcs and orcs" seems to imply restriction, the presence of the "half-orc or orc" requirement in some and not others makes it clear that while all of those feats *are* available to half-orcs and orcs, only some of them are restricted to such.
What do you mean as a dead link? The site looks up to me.
Diego or graystone, would one of you (with both of these books) mind shooting me an email? I didn't have a Module subscription until recently, and while I *should* have had both of those items in my DB, they must have been missed when my helper relayed those modules to me.
nethys at archivesofnethys dot com :)
My main picks:
2. Isometric view. Just a standard really.
3. Leave out Mass Effect style "choices", put in D:OS style choices. Mass Effect made it very clear which path would be "good" and which was "bad". D:OS (and a few other games) are a lot less clear about what personality you're ending up with.
4. Some kind of upgradeable/customizable "home base". Those are always fun.
5. The ability to customize more than just a single character. Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 were great, but I missed being able to customize out more than just my main. TOEE did this right, letting you customize your entire party right off the bat.
I'm with OP, TOEE (at least after the patches) was an amazing example of what a Pathfinder CRPG should go for. TOEE+D:OS would be the golden great of CRPGs.
I <3 99% of the ACG. Only thing I had a knee-jerk-ban reaction to (which, after much though, I did ban in my own games) was Divine Protection. Even if the Cleric only has a 14 CHA (average it seems for all the clerics in my games), that's still a +2 to every save for one feat. Effectively three feats in one right there. For Oracles, it's even crazier. Absolutely must have.
Glad PFS already banned it. I don't know a single Oracle player that wouldn't want their CHA as a boost to every save.
Don't forget any spontaneous caster spell that has a metamagic feat applied to it. Those become "full round actions". Not "1 round" casting times, but "full round actions".
As I illustrated above, there is a very note-worthy difference. The former happens on your turn without a chance for the enemy to interrupt, the other requires you to be undisturbed for a round until your turn comes around again.
If a spell's normal casting time is 1 standard action, casting a metamagic version of the spell is a full-round action for a sorcerer or bard (except for spells modified by the Quicken Spell feat, which take 1 swift action to cast). Note that this isn't the same as a spell with a 1-round casting time. Spells that take a full-round action to cast take effect in the same round that you begin casting, and you are not required to continue the invocations, gestures, and concentration until your next turn.
Joe M. wrote:
If there are any spells with a "full round" casting time that's not the "1 round" cast, I'm not aware of them.
Well, I'm the guy to find out. :)
As it turns out, there aren't a lot of "full-round action" spells, and lots of "1 round" spells. As far as I know, the difference was:
Full Round Action: Starts on your turn, ends on your turn. Take a full round action, it finishes before the next person in initiative goes.
So, it is a worthwhile difference to note.
1 Full-Round Action:
Aura of the Unremarkable
Crown of Glory
Dirge of the Victorious Knights
Blessing of the Mole
Blood Crow Strike
Call Lightning Storm
Cloak of Dreams
Conjure Black Pudding
Create Soul Gem
Curse of Magic Negation
Enlarge Person, Mass
Infernal Healing, Greater
Pesh Addiction, Lesser
Rain of Frogs
Reduce Person, Mass
Spell Absorption, Greater
Storm of Vengeance
Summon Cacodaemon, Greater
Summon Elder Worm
Summon Flight of Eagles
Summon Genie, Greater
Summon Genie, Lesser
Summon Greater Demon
Summon Infernal Host
Summon Lesser Demon
Summon Lesser Psychopomp
Summon Minor Ally
Summon Minor Monster
Summon Monster I
Summon Monster II
Summon Monster III
Summon Monster IV
Summon Monster V
Summon Monster VI
Summon Monster VII
Summon Monster VIII
Summon Monster IX
Summon Nature's Ally I
Summon Nature's Ally II
Summon Nature's Ally III
Summon Nature's Ally IV
Summon Nature's Ally V
Summon Nature's Ally VI
Summon Nature's Ally VII
Summon Nature's Ally VIII
Summon Nature's Ally IX
Zone of Silence
Is it? That's the only reason I commented. His response says it's "full-round" which *is* different from "1 round". It's nit-picky, I know. I'm sure he meant that it's 1 round, as the spell. Just wanted to clarify. :)
And yeah, I agree. Makes it a bit harder to use those summons in combat. Guess the key is to do it early before teleporting in? haha.
Joe M. wrote:
That actually just seems to complicate the issue. The summon monster spell is "1 round", not "full round action". I've actually wondered about this myself, being in the middle of Wrath of the Righteous. :)
As I use VTT's, I'm interested in this. Is it at all possible to provide, maybe with the PDFs, maybe as a separate purchase, the original higher resolution map files for any individual AP? You, presumably, already have them before compressing them into an AP, and those higher resolution files would be worth a lot to those of us on VTT. Then you wouldn't need to increase the space in a PDF. :)
I'd love that, personally.
Oh, and for what it's worth, I think most people using VTTs on MapTools/Roll20 generally go with 50-70 pixels per 5 inch square, which may not be too far from what you have available pre-pdf packaging. Even if it's smaller then that, anything higher resolution then what's in the AP would be fantastic.
I think the question is: what if? I thought this thread was interesting and read through a lot of the earlier bits. I carry some PDFs on a flash drive here and there too. It sounds like people were worried about being banned from products because one or more of their PDFs surfaced on a pirate/torrent/whatever site.
If someone lost their flash drive and some of those files re-surfaced, would they be banned? What if they had reported losing it before hand, would that be taken into consideration?
Genuinely curious here. The rest of the discussion is fascinating, but I'm more interested in real world application :D Let's assume that I password protected the flash drive too and it got broken into still (which isn't *that* hard). In the end, it's all my word that's what happened, so what is Paizo's response?
The difference I called out is that summons, being magically summoned, seem to have some knowledge of who your enemies are. Otherwise, they would attack your allies, right?
Animals, normal everyday animals like would be used with Handle Animal, don't have a necessary knowledge on who is your friend and who is your foe. If "Attack" also doesn't imply "Don't attack unless I point", then you risk your animal charging at any new person you meet.
Attack party members? Probably not if the AC has spent enough time with them. But Attack *needs* to also infer that they won't attack without your command on a specific target. Can you imagine the druid who can't enter towns or use diplomacy on anyone because his lion keeps charging?
"We were planning on attacking them-"
Just an example.
Again, *I'M NOT HARD SET ON THIS*. Not sure if you guys saw my above responses, but I ruled for my own game that the druid could point at a specific area that he could smell the enemy in, and the spider with tremorsense could attack.
Would I have let him do that with a creature that had no way to sense invisible creatures though? Probably not. :)
I always thought of summons a little differently. They had an innate understanding of your enemies, communication or not, and thus could charge in and fight effectively.
Handle Animal/trained pets, on the other hand, are trained to attack who you direct. Otherwise they'd attack whoever they wanted, like a wild animal. They don't have the "connection" that a summoned animal does.
Personally, I think the text is to indicate that a trained combat animal won't attack something unless you direct it to. That's how it's able to avoid attacking new people you meet, even if they may be threatening. It's trained to hold until you command it.
The pointing at a target thing, as I said earlier, can likely be looked past with certain circumstances (tremorsense, etc.), I only quoted it to explain how this issue first arose, not to get into an argument about "may" and "may not". :)
As before, thanks again for the help.
I'm not sure I agree with that line of reasoning. I interpreted it as you "may" point to a creature to attack, or you "may not" and it won't attack.
Otherwise, if it's just an option, then logic follows that your creature can choose to always attack everything willy-nilly, even without a command. Having it only attack on command and to targets you designate is the entire point of the trick, to prevent it from rampaging around a town.
Again, going by just RAW here. I do agree that the druid in question should be able to (and in fact was able to) designate an area where he knows an enemy is at, one that his spider can sense, and have it work. Just arguing semantics at this point, my main question was answered.
I agree with the intent of most of these responses. The initial confusion, for what it's worth, came from this:
As stated, for the attack trick to work, you need to be able to point at a target. I do agree that some creatures can "see" invisible creatures and a druid who can pinpoint a location should be able to direct it, but by pure RAW (not always the best), you need to be able to point at the creature.
Not saying I agree, just saying why the thread was initially started. :)
Actually, in this case the spider has 1 Int (that's why it has more than a single trick).
I told him that if he could figure out a general region that he was in, then he could direct the spider. Basically option 2 above. So he'll spend a move action to sniff the direction, his other move action to move close enough to pinpoint, then free action to sic spider on him.
The druid in question has a Vermin companion, a giant spider. He knows there is an invisible enemy in the area, though the druid can't see him. The spider has tremorsense 60 ft.
1. As the spider *can* pinpoint the invisible enemy, can the druid order the spider to attack him even without knowing himself where he's at?
My initial thought is no, Handle Animal says the druid needs to point to/specify the target. However...
2. If the druid in question has scent, and was able to pinpoint the target himself (moving close enough), then could he point at the empty square and order the spider to attack that, knowing that the spider could still tell there was an enemy there?
Leaning more towards yes on this one.
Any thoughts would be most helpful :)