|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
"Also, there's slightly better magic item support for str builds. A str build usually wants their belt slot to be str, or str+ something else. And there's a chest slot item that gives +2 dex. So for a str build, that's neat and sorted - you can buff your primary and secondary without getting into the two stat belts. Or you can do a two stat belt and buff str+con. It's nice.
Martin Sheaffer wrote:
Lost was ABC
I am building a ratfolk alchemist for an upcoming AP, I am going to be specializing in bombs, however I can't make up my mind on whether to take one of the above archetypes.
I like the idea of being able to dish out cures without having to take the infusion discovery, however as bombs are my bread and butter, i like the extra damage from mindchemist..
missed the part about requiring fast bombs,,Thanks!..now to find a new feat...
Our campaigns alternate every 2 AP volumes so currently:
CotCT - book 5
We play every Sunday for 7 hours.
The only AP we abandoned was Kingmaker and that was because GM had too many real life obligations to be able to fully flesh out the AP so we got bored.
True enough, I guess, however I still believe his undead bane weapon is still ineffective.
Short of an errata to clarify "for all purposes", we shall just have to agree to disagree.
This is exactly my point. The bane weapon is a weapon crafted to harm a specific creature, it doesn't care who wields it or who it's wielded on. It has just been pre-programmed to be more effective against a certain creature type.
I still feel that how the ranger perceives the enemy has no bearing on the bane weapon. It is a tool, specifically crafted to be superior against a certain type of creature.
If the wielder can override this, it doesn't make sense to me.
A ranger is fighting a fire-elemental. He casts Instant Enemy and changes the subtype to Undead, all of a sudden, the Fire elemental is taking damage from the ranger's flaming burst longsword?
Because of the "ranger treats as..."
It seems to me that a bane weapon when created, is attuned to a particular creature type to inflict damage against that specific type. Whether the ranger is pretending that the subtype is a different type, has no bearing.
Talon Moonwalker wrote:
Arcane casters can now heal, it's Necromancy now...
Love the idea of switching saves around!
Stable: A character who was dying but who has stopped losing hit points each round and still has negative hit points is stable. The character is no longer dying, but is still unconscious. If the character has become stable because of aid from another character (such as a Heal check or magical healing), then the character no longer loses hit points. The character can make a DC 10 Constitution check each hour to become conscious and disabled (even though his hit points are still negative). The character takes a penalty on this roll equal to his negative hit point total.
I keep a list on my players, detailing the order in which they research about monsters, for instance, the ranger studied monsters firstly looking to see what weapons are least effective(DR), whereas when the wizard studies creatures, he first looks at how they interact with fire.
Prevents metagame or me holding out vital info.
If the roll is high enough, or if there are multiple abilities, I roll.
It sounds like he plays pretty much the same as some of my group plays. The out of character joking around, the asking for healing after battles..minor mistakes etc... and we've been playing reg. for about 15 years!
The difference is our group is on the same page as the game is concerned, therefore with a few minor disagreements, everyone has fun.
Seems to me that your players have different expectations from the game, which makes me wonder. You say you have played with this guy for 8 years, have you been playing with the other players for the same amount of time? I would have thought if you were with the same group for 8 years, they would know what to expect from each other.
I think Kryzbyn has it exactly right. These situations can be best avoided by the rigorous use of mockery and taunting. If it works on the playground it will work in my living room!
Also, after reading a few posts up, I noticed I am wearing my shoes indoors AND walked over the oriental rug at least a dozen times today...some of us never learn...
I think, the behaviour was a little rude, but I also have a problem with people who don't discuss issues and let them fester until its' unbearable and then the almighty boot comes into play.
I guarantee these problems were stewing with the group for at least the last couple of sessions..
OP - grabs a glass of milk
Rest of Group - exchanges knowing looks.
If I have a situation come up with my group, we deal with it. We throw in for food every session, if someone doesn't pay, we call em on it.
If the host said "get yer own damn milk" or "gimme pizza money" then this whole thing wouldn't have ended the way it did.
I see the situation as thus;
Host to other player "wow that dude is such a cheap-skate, he never chips in for pizza"
Other player " I know right? What's up with that?"
Host " No clue, but next time we play, I'm not gonna bring up chipping in and if he doesn't offer to pay, I'm booting him"
EDIT: I also want to make it clear that I don't excuse the OP's actions, as they were clearly wrong. We used to have a player who never chipped in, with various excuses. Ended up owing the group around 80 bucks all told. He was kicked, and stayed kicked even after he settled his "tab"
And the funny thing about the second instance is that it can easily be the first instance if the DM chooses.
This caused me a ton of grief when we switched from 2nd to 3.0
If any time I would, for the sake of hurrying the game along, do this I would have my players say something to the effect of "Oh gee, glad I put ranks in swim" or "If you aren't going to make us roll a check, can I at least take my ranks out, and put them in something more useful?"
Don't get me wrong, I much prefer 3.5/PF, but there was something to be said about winging it.
Not sure I could go back to playing without a grid though...
I am playing Carrion Crown and finished book 4, and so far we have enjoyed it. Book 3 was probably my least favorite, but as an overall AP it is very fun.
I am also playing CotCT and am in the middle of book 4, this one might be my favorite because the story is really immersive and excellently crafted.
I am GMing Serpent Skull, and am about to GM book 3 in a week or so. It does require a bit of GM work, however the GM threads on these boards are an incredibly useful aid.
The only AP our group didn't adapt to was Kingmaker, as unfortunately, our GM didn't have really any free time to input story arches. It was too much a sandbox for our taste.
I have also read Book 1 of Skulls and Shackles to eventually GM that AP, and I can tell you that it looks incredibly fun, if the pirate life is for you!
I need advice on how you handle purchasing magic items. If I am reading the rules correctly, in a metropolis, the highest value of purchasable item is 16000g. This seems reasonable for lower levels, however it seems to pose difficulties in keeping up with things like DR etc. higher levels.
For instance, I am playing in one game, where we are fighting a lot of evil outsiders, many of which have DR/good. Not having a paladin, we are struggling to get through these encounters. A +1 holy weapon being an equivalent +3 is beyond what can be purchased and therefore unavailable so how does one deal with that?
Same goes for any amulet of mighty fists beyond +1.
In other campaigns whether I play or run it, it seems that crafting becomes mandatory to allow for better magic items. Is that the only way?
Has anyone tried or had success with scalable magic purchase limits. for instance doubling the values when PCs attain level 10?
Thanks for any help!
It depends on the game, because I believe any GM should make sure there are other consequences as addiction would have a strong RP aspect to it.
Any character goals would probably change into getting a fix, if drugs are illegal in the game, then it could lead to problems in urban areas, negative reactions from NPCs who determine the person is on drugs.
Symptoms of withdrawal on those long adventures if they run out of stuff.
Come to think of it, I probably wouldn't allow them in my games as it seems like a whole lot more paperwork for me as the GM.
Honestly, I am not sure whether I could ever go back to actually using pen and paper. Downside is, God help me if my laptop crashes....
I don't know about the harvesting, but I know that eating intelligent humanoids is evil.
The witch hex "cook people" spells that one out. I rolled a witch to play in an upcoming game who will take the role of party "chef". I'm praying that the paladin will never figure out that the Leg of Lamb is actually Leg of Larry!
Between the waves of demons being fended off, you can have the PCs try to topple the remains of the fortress into the crater to "seal off" the portal.
Then they can content with further waves AND falling debris. And if they are doomed to be sealed in also, at least let the bard survive to tell the tale of heroism.
I am wondering how much in game time generally passes before the level 10 "event"?
The reason I ask is that due to many, many PC deaths, the party is lacking in gear. They have taken crafting feats to help get them back up to battle readiness.
I was curious also, as to the speed at which the other factions progress. (unfortunately, due to the many deaths, the PCs arrived 4th)
I read earlier in the thread that it takes a day to research a district, not including encounters and other stuff, so theoretically maybe 15-20 days with encounters and such.
I also read that it takes roughly 30 days to receive an order through the factions.
I guess, in a roundabout way, I am asking if the PCs dedicated 2 weeks or so to crafting, would it essentially ruin the entire expedition, and allow a rival faction to claim the city as their own?
Celestial armor isn't mithral and doesn't follow the normal proficiency rules, thus celestial armor is light and celestial full plate is medium.
James Jacobs wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Yeah, I have read up on the weirdness that is Flurry = TWF
Rope gauntlets are neat, however the EWP would be reasonably unattainable. I am aware that I can probably do a better job with a trip weapon, but I would prefer unarmed so I will bring it up with my GM.
I like the suggestion of making handwraps a double weapon so as not to exploit magic item creation rules.
Thanks for the suggestions!
As far as Boon Companion goes, SKR clarified it.
Benefit: The abilities of your animal companion or familiar are calculated as though your class were four levels higher, to a maximum effective druid level of equal to your character level. If you have more than one animal companion or familiar, choose one to receive this benefit.
As far as the +6 goes, we do fight a lot of undead but the spell Instant Enemy is fantastic!
School enchantment; Level ranger 3
Casting Time 1 swift action
Components V, S
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature that is not your favored enemy.
Duration 1 minute/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
With this spell you designate the target as your favored enemy for the remainder of its duration. Select one of your favored enemy types. For the duration of the spell, you treat the target as if it were that type of favored enemy for all purposes.
I am currently playing a switch-hitting ranger, and am 11th level.
In a party consisting of Magus Paladin and Cleric, I often out damage the rest of the party.
The versatility of ranged or melee, gives my character the advantage in most battles.
With a favored enemy at +6 I have zero trouble hitting and do a lot of damage and with Instant Enemy I ensure that any big bad will be nicely handled.
I selected Boon Companion for a tougher animal, favored defense for a nice AC boost and favored critical for a nice boost to threat range.
I will try to post my build later, but I think switch-hitter is a great party asset.
Just what the title says. Why was XP cost eliminated from certain spells and magic item creation. I always thought it was a great way to keep things in check but now the DM really has to watch how much gold he gives out and keep an eye on the players if they try and find ways to exploit getting massive amounts of gold. I think they should bring back this rule.
Are there trust issues within your group that require so much oversight to prevent abuse?
I have GMed a fair amount of campaigns now, and most have had 1 or 2 players craft magic items.
Not once have I had to deal with abuse. The time constraints are the biggest obstacle, and with the PCs busy with that whole adventuring stuff, there isn't pools of downtime.
I would suggest trying the rules as written out first, as your concern may be for nothing.
I just think speculating that players MAY try to exploit the rules, and basing this speculation on other threads that go above and beyond to TRY to exploit item creation is a stress that probably won't serve any purpose.
Life Oracle works really well, choose feats etc. to be a front line fighter, your revelations will take care of the healing.
Energy Body combined with the grace spell is a nice front line combo, when activated for in a pinch healing of others.
Swift to cast Grace to ignore AoO, walk through an ally's square to heal d6 plus level, then still have a standard for some smackage!
Also you will be the talkie of the party, with your 4+ skills and mega charisma.
There was some discussion on this in the Ask James Jacobs thread. It centered on the lack of Extra Ninja Trick feat. I believe the verdict was GM discretion, can't remember. Either way, I am assuming that it doesn't work for PFS.
In any case, Jiggy is right about the trait. The trait only implies that the Pathfinders showed you a bunch of anatomy books and you studied them, so if you happen to be someone who is particularly good at pinpointing weaknesses (Ninja, Rogue, Vivisectionist etc.) you will benefit from the trait.
How specific do you have to be when stating the conditions of a ready?
Example: An archer readies to fire an arrow at a cleric when he/she casts a spell. The cleric then chooses to channel negative energy. As channeling is not a spell, I would guess that the readied condition has not been met.
Example: An archer readies to fire an arrow at a cleric when he/she uses any divine power. This would be a catch all for channeling, spell-casting, domain powers.
Is the above example allowable? Or should the readying PC be very specific?