Krome's page

Ravingdork wrote:

Lokie wrote:

I believe there was a rule somewhere that 10 items with negligible weight equaled a pound.

That sounds familiar, but I don't recall where it's from, much less whether or not it was applicable to Pathfinder. I'll see if I can track it down. EDIT: I just checked under the carrying capacity/encumbrance rules as well as the weight entry descriptions in the equipment chapter and I can find no mention of a 10 to a lb. rule. This leads me to believe that it does not exist, at least not in Pathfinder.

It was more than likely a 3.5 rule then.

I only recall it because I once created a darkwood chest that weighed under 20 lbs so that I could fill it with potions for my masterwork potion belt, and then store the chest in my glove of holding. The rule came into play because it determined how many negligible objects I could store in my darkwood chest.

either 3.5 or earlier, and yeah I remember that one too...

16 potions equal 1 lb.

They come in 1 oz. vials so it makes sense that they weigh 1 oz. each. The vials themselves, surprisingly, are weightless.

I always assumed that was 1 ounce volume... just a tiny little vial really. Never even considered it might be weight! lol

I use a simplified "burden" rule, where a character can carry up to its STR score worth of burden before being encumbered.

I have a more or less specific chart in my houserule folder but as a rule of thumb:

armor's burden = armor check penalty
light weapon = neglectable (up to 10)
1-handed weapon = 1 point
2-handed weapon = 2 points
food = 1 point per week (trail rations)
food = 1 point per day (perishables)
water = 1 point per day
adventurer's kit (bedrolls, cooking gear, torches etc) = 1 point (summer) or 2 points (winter)

etc.

i find its a happy medium between pound-by-pound calculation and pure DM's fiat.

'findel

ooooh I LIKE THIS!!!!!!!!

As a GM, one of the first things I do is pass out bags of holding and handy haversacks for the express purpose that I don't have to worry about it then. :)

As a player, if I don't have one of those I track meticulously. And I do apply the weight to my cash.

As a side note, a lot of people complain about the weight of coins, but a quick check of real gold coins shows that you get about 50 coins per pound, so it is accurate enough. :)

slicertool wrote:

I realize with everything that you guys have been writing for PF and likely have planned, you're probably busy until 2012 or so. However, I thought I'd check.

I think I also read a post somewhere on the boards where a staffer mentioned that non-fantasy rpg doesn't sell as well as fantasy rpgs.

yeah I have seen that mentioned here and on ENWorld was well. Fantasy is the king. Everything is is just peons.

Speaking of names, one my absolute favorite things about Norgorber is that he's got four different aspects with four different names. Some may know him as the Reaper of Reputation, while others pay their homage to Father Skinsaw. Thieves know him as the Gray Master and poisoners and assassins call out to Blackfingers for guidance.

yeah, the other names are great. But when the clerics get together for their cleric games, they just laugh at Norgorber (course SaranWrap gets a chuckle or two as well- I think she is the kinky goddess) >;-)

seriously... with a name like Norgorber does anyone really HAVE to ask where's the love?

Hopefully when his turn comes the article will say that all this time the name was misspelled and his name is actually HDS&#(*^@#GHDSKJHD (dang it Norgorber must be using a spell to keep his real name secret!!!!!!!!)

Ei! I know that one! Then the witch tricks the inquisitor to burn the summoner for witchery! ^_^

lol

wraithstrike wrote:

From my interpretation the spell is effective in a certain area so the wall of iron should not matter. If the wind wall flowed from A to B then it might work.

If you allow the wall of stone to block the wind wall, then what happens if some obstruction(such as a wall of iron) is already on the ground before the wind wall spell is cast? Does the wind wall start on top on the wall of iron? If so and the wall of iron is removed does it(the wind wall's origin) then go to the ground for a new starting point?

Now we're getting some good quality arguments!

wraithstrike wrote:

The way I see the wind wall just flows upwards, but has no definite starting point.

I'm inclined to agree, though I might rule differently if only to reward my players' creativity (and because beating a lower level spell with creative use of a higher level spell is hardly broken).

I tend to go with this idea. There is no definitive origin point for the wind. And though my gut says the iron wall shouldn't have any meaningful effect on the wind wall, I think I would rule in favor of the party just for the creative use of the spell.

NOW, if the story required the wind wall to win, the iron wall would not be able to affect the wind wall. IF the story was not dependent upon the wind wall, then I'd rule in favor of the players just for the "cool" factor.

Regardless of RAW says, sometimes the rules are just plain in the way for a story. Back in the day, (sounding like an old fart) the rules books were a fraction of the size of the Pathfinder Rule Book. That meant the GM actually had to interpret and decide what happened. Now there are freaking rules for everything. Players can go crying to the web for comfort whenever a rule is not in their favor. There are too may rules, too much reliance on RAW and not enough imagination these days :) Okay old fart rant is done. :)

Story, fun and imagination... those should be the deciding factors if something works. Everything else is guidelines. :)

love the mona icon! lol

A summoner, a witch and an inquisitor walk into a bar...

better than riding the miniature purple worms :)

When will this be available on iBooks? I just looked for it and can't find it.

I've been taking a few months off of PFS simply because I had run through so many adventures it was getting difficult to play in games I had not already played.

I know that at the monthly PFS game in our town it seemed like we were having trouble running scenarios for several people without repeating.

Ultimately though I suppose someone somewhere needs to define exactly what is the goal/purpose of PFS. In this topic alone I have seen at least two "purposes." Is it in fact a last resort effort to get people playing Pathfinder, and if so, as a last resort, really should anyone care that much about what happens? Is it simply a tool to drive players to APs where the real money is, and again, if that is the case, why should anyone really care about PFS?

I know that I would be VERY interested in having all of the modules become open for play. The APs would be more difficult in an "organized" setting, but ideal for home settings. And to be honest, I have no problem at all allowing APs be open to PFS, because if the real goal of PFS is to get people playing and having fun, then it is great to open up the PREMIER games to PFS.

YYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To paraphrase the movie 300:

"This is AWESOME!"

LAND SHARK!

I completely understand the feeling of encounter bloat.

To meet the XP necessary to advance a level you need roughly 20 encounters for an average 4 person party.

For example, if using Medium XP progression and advancing from 3rd level to 4th level with a party of 4, there needs to be 16,000 XP awarded. The average 3rd level encounter awards 800 XP. This results in 20 encounters.

To go from 1st level to completing 3rd level (and being ready for the 2nd adventure in an AP) requires roughly 60 encounters!

Now, for me, I shoot the number of encounters necessary to tell the story. I try to pad combat encounters with social ones and award XP for them as well (for a LOT of groups social encounters are really more difficult than combat encounters anyway). Once those encounters are accomplished I might give Story and Roleplaying Awards to advance the PCs to the necessary level.

Building encounters just for the sake of XP is not a lot of fun. IF I can justify all of the encounters for the story, then no problem. But I prefer not to throw in junk encounters for the sake of leveling. Not that Paizo throws in junk encounters! lol Just more in GENERAL usage :)

Ricky Bobby wrote:

emontague wrote:

Maybe I ran into you lately, we had in missouri...

Eddie, this is Jason Stockmann :)

Yes, you I know, using your rogue's name in here.

I have no idea who Kikai13 is, do you?

It's not Larry is it?

Kikai13 is Jason from Columbia. I'm also in Columbia.

And it's why I still play 3.5 :)

one of the problems I have with the whole 3.x rules system is the sheer volume of rules.

Earlier editions had much smaller rule books.

General rules were made. The GM made rulings based upon general rules and the game moved on.

Too many rules for nearly every situation is over kill. Why have a GM at all if there are rules for everything? Just write it up as a computer game and stop printing the books. Well D&D online has done half of it :)

Sunder the ring. Dispel the ring. Disjoin the ring. Use antimagic. Steal (the manuever) the ring.

Sorry, a ring or two doesn't make a troll unkillable.

Steal (the maneuver) the most fun addition to the game in my opinion! lol

but yeah, I can see no way to make a troll unkillable. Something always still works.

A troll permanently reduced to 0 CON still has Regeneration and therefore is not dead, but can not ever regain consciousness short of some outside factor aiding it. Twenty million years go by and the planet explodes to chunks, the star goes super nova, the universe expands until there is no other object within infinite distance of it, and still it is not actually dead...

well truth is doesn't matter... once reduced to 0 CON or whatever, the troll falls, the party moves on, having overcome the troll. XP is awarded. What fate befalls the troll does not matter.

The troll shows up later. The party over comes the troll some other way. XP is awarded and the party moves on.

BTW, Suggestion is a great way to get past a troll with only a +3 to its WILL save...

Specific overrides general.

Now we can argue about if '0 Con is dead' is general or specific, or if 'creatures with Regeneration cannot die' is general or specific. :)

nope no argument at all.

Your way works for your game, mine works for mine. I wouldn't have it any other way. :)

Playing in your game, I would accept your interpretation, if you were in mine I would expect you to accept mine.

The LAST thing I ever want in ANY RPG, is for it to be reduced to ONE way of playing. Then it is absolutely no better than a computer game. Even when the designers come on the boards and make "official rulings" it is just their opinions. They may have intended for it to work that way, but any GM any where over rules anything they say is "official."

The way *I* play is with a rule 0, which is "fun over rules all other rules." If the rules say one thing but it really is rather lame in a specific situation, a GM should feel free to over rule it for that situation for the sake of playing a fun game. That's why I like playing Pathfinder more than World of Warcraft.

so here is a question for you.

A troll is starving...

there is no food to be had. It begins taking nonlethal damage. Finally its nonlethal damage accumulates enough to equal its HP score. Now it begins taking lethal damage. Eventually its HP is reduced to negative numbers.

Now, the troll cannot heal this damage with regeneration. Yet, its regeneration is still active so it cannot die... so it descends to an infinite negative HP for eternity but does not actually die?

Is that what you guys are saying?

If so, then just do the easy way to build the troll. He has a ring of fire and acid immunity or something it got from killing adventurers. Now it is immortal. Not even a God can kill it.

Well you can rule it that way I suppose or you can simply rule that 0 CON over rules the regeneration rules, which is what I would do.

Which rule over rides which rule? There is no rule for it. :)

And yes, it would need to be CON drain... maybe

and a troll at max hp but a CON of 0 would still be dead in my opinion.

But hey, that is why GMs are actual people and not machines like World of Warcraft. :)

Having a Con score of 0 is not the same as not having a Con score. That line refers to undead and constructs that do not have a Con score.

You are absolutely right. I am not saying that reducing its CON to 0 means its Regeneration does not work.

I am saying that Regeneration's description says it does not restore non HP damage. And reducing a character's CON to 0 kills it.

So, a troll with 45 hp but a CON of 0 is dead. Its regeneration can do nothing to stop it from dying when its CON hits 0.

Quinten Crusher wrote:

Here is a thought:

I am currently playing a ranger (urban variant, APG)and it's getting close to animal companion time. Looking at the options for someone who is firmly rooted in the city atmosphere, the obvious choice is Dog. Looking at the Ranger's list, there are clearly superior options out there like the cheetah and Wolf. Looking at these I had a idea. Could I disguise the wolf as a dog? Can I use my disguise check? Obviously it's up to the DM, but what are your thoughts? The wolf will start off medium, and become large, making it much more difficult, but until then why not?

Take "Dire Rat" and disguise it as an angry, overgrown Chihuahua.

Or just come up to a guard or whoever and say "It's a dire rat... what I could have a chihuahua if you prefer... yeah I thought you'd prefer a rat too."

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Having a Con score of 0 is not the same as not having a Con score. That line refers to undead and constructs that do not have a Con score.

Correct. 0 is still a Con score. "-" is not a Con score; thus, undead and constructs cannot have Regeneration. A creature drained to 0 Con still has a Con score and thus still has Regeneration, assuming it had it to start with.

And drowning doesn't work because the creature cannot die. Note that healing and death prevention are two separate effects on Regeneration. You can cause unhealable damage without killing it.

Attack forms that don't deal hit point damage are not healed by regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation.

In the description of regeneration it SPECIFICALLY indicates that Regeneration does not heal starvation, thirst or suffocation (drowning is in fact suffocation, a lack of air to breathe).

Also note that attack forms that do not deal HP damage are NOT healed by regeneration. Thereby reducing a troll's CON to 0, means it cannot heal the CON damage.

A character with a Constitution score of 0 is dead.

So a troll that has its CON reduced to 0 is dead. Its regeneration can do absolutely nothing at all to restore its CON points. Not that its regeneration does not work when its CON is reduced to 0. It's just that once its CON is reduced to 0, it is dead.

By the way, for the debate on good movies vs bad movies

I go to movies to ESCAPE real life.

I want to be ENTERTAINED by movies.

Movies like Meaning of Happyness are cute, and inspiring, but not entertaining. Great for a TV docu-drama, or direct to DVD. Not a big fan for the big screen.

Does this mean I am shallow? Nope. I do think critics who bash exciting fun movies in favor of movies that are boring but "inspiring and challenging" are usually self serving, egotistical, snobs.

THIS IS NOT DIRECTED AT ANYONE ON THESE BOARDS AT ALL! Do NOT think I am referring to anyone above! Just an opinion in GENERAL of movie critics.

WHY do we need another Superman reboot?

Is the ANYBODY out there that has no clue at all about who Superman is? If so, what on earth makes anyone thing that one person will even go to the Superman reboot movie?

I hear there is a new Spiderman reboot in the works... really? seriously? do we NOT know how Spiderman got his powers?

WHY do we need all these origins movies?

IF we have to have it, just make it a few minutes, part way through the movie, and get on with a new story.

Honestly, been there, done it, seen it. Don't waste my time and money on yet another retelling of the same thing yet again.

Regeneration (Ex) A creature with this ability is difficult to kill. Creatures with regeneration heal damage at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as long as their regeneration is still functioning (although creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature's regeneration to stop functioning on the round following the attack. During this round, the creature does not heal any damage and can die normally. The creature's descriptive text describes the types of damage that cause the regeneration to cease functioning.

Attack forms that don't deal hit point damage are not healed by regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation. Regenerating creatures can regrow lost portions of their bodies and can reattach severed limbs or body parts if they are brought together within 1 hour of severing. Severed parts that are not reattached wither and die normally.

A creature must have a Constitution score to have the regeneration ability.

Okay so anything that does CON damage, isolate it so it can't eat and starves to death, or dies of dehydration. Drowning or any kind of suffocation works.

Coup de Grace can in fact still work.

Coup de Grace: As a full-round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace (pronounced “coo day grahs”) to a helpless opponent. You can also use a bow or crossbow, provided you are adjacent to the target.

You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. A rogue also gets her extra sneak attack damage against a helpless opponent when delivering a coup de grace.

Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents.

You can't deliver a coup de grace against a creature that is immune to critical hits. You can deliver a coup de grace against a creature with total concealment, but doing this requires two consecutive full-round actions (one to “find” the creature once you've determined what square it's in, and one to deliver the coup de grace).

A coup de grace on a troll means the troll WILL survive the HP damage, but it can still fail the FORT save. Nothing in Regeneration says it is immune to dying from a failed FORT save.

One way would be to reduce it to a negative HP... it falls unconscious... stick its head in a puddle of water and continue dealing enough damage to keep it unconscious... it drowns.

Find a way to create a vacuum in a room with it. It suffocates.

Bind it someway so it is helpless, coup de grace, until the SOB fails its FORT save (might take a while).

Disintegrated works fine. There is nothing left for Regeneration to regenerate. I suppose it could be argued that the fine dust regathers, but if I were the GM I would rule against that. As a Player I would look at the GM and say "Whatever man, let's see what's on TV rather than play this."

There are still ways to kill the troll. Take EVERYTHING away and make it unkillable doesn't sound like a fun game to me.

If it were my game, why not.

Course, there would be roleplaying opportunities galore.

-Wolf: "You are NOT putting that sweater and pink bow on me. I am NOT a poodle no matter what your low intelligence thinks."
-Ranger: "Come on, it'll keep the guards off our backs."
-Wolf: "One step closer and I swear I will bite you. You know I have been wanting to since that "stray cat" incident."
-Ranger: "Seriously, I'm a city boy at heart, how was I supposed to know it was a skunk?"
-Wolf: "Cause it STUNK! You pink skins can't smell ANYTHING with that pathetic nose you have."
-Ranger: "Well, this time there will be no skunks. Lots of poodles though. Lots of LADY poodles."
-Wolf: "Remind me to pee on you in your sleep. Get it over with and I will attempt to regain my dignity later."

It's really about having some fun. I could have some fun with it...

You guys apparently don't know beans about what Garys look like. Their bodies are perfect spheres of flame, off of which run long eyestalks that end in naked eyeballs and also several tentacles.

Great preview art, though!

Dang that does sound like a cool monster!

wow these are great!

I throw my iron helm in with monster 1 being some sort of golem an alchemist makes.

Monster 2, whatever the hell it is looks to be JUST the monster I have been looking for! Been needing a new monster for a horror/chtulhu adventure.

Monster 3: about time!

Monster 4: thinking some kind of gem monster. In the Dragons book it talks about different types of dragons, one of them being a few gem dragons. And those were always popular enough to be in secondary Monster Manuals for ages past.

At 10th level a Magus gains Fighter Training which allows him to use 1/2 his level as a fighter level to qualify for feats.

So far I find these feats are the only ones (from the core rules, too tired to look up APG feats) that might be affected by the ability.

Critical Mastery- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 28
Disruptive
Spellbreaker
Greater Shield Focus
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Penetrating Strike- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 32
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Specialization- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 24

This ability essentially grants access to a whole whopping 5 feats. Seems a real disappointment for 10th level. That is when I usually start anticipating a power boost to the COOL stuff.

Honestly, kill this ability all together. Let the Fighter still be a Fighter. A Magus is not a Fighter, he is a Magus. I'd rather see something to enhance his Magus Arcana.

Regarding Magus capstone... (possible alternatives)

1. True Magus as an ideal of Fighter/Magic User (i.e. best of both worlds).
- continuous Freedom of Movement
- minor form of Dimension Door
- ability to act after Teleport/Dimension door
- select touch and personal range spells cast as swift action

2. True Magus as an embodiment of arcane champion (arcane paladin).
- continuous True Seeing
- touch spells require only a swift action to cast
- Spell Resistance
- at will, x/week, Contingency

3. True Magus as a swashbuckling legendary hero.
- ability to cancel spells and spell like effects at will and at a range as an immediate action
- ability to produce antimagic effects
- ability to detect and use extradimensional spaces
- ability to cast charm spell as a silenced stilled and quickened spell

Regards,
Ruemere

I do find the capstone ability to be rather... lackluster at best.

Not big on Dimension Door or Teleport options. Mainly the "flavor" doesn't jump out to me. It seems "random" to me. True Seeing would be cool, but I would suggest it as an earlier ability more in line with a Paladin's Detect Evil. It is okay, but lacks the CAPSTONE feel for me. :)

Canceling spells and spell like abilities is MAJOR LEAGUE. Probably even too powerful for a capstone ability. Dragons would tremble and most high level monsters would be cake walks.

I DO like continuous Freedom of Movement. I have played level 20+ fighters that were rendered almost useless with Slow spells and similar spells. Kind of lame for an Epic Fighter to be laid low by Slow! lol

SWEEEEEEEEEET

I already have an idea on this guy. Dang it anyway though I was just getting into my Cleric of Asmodeus!

UGGG

but yeah I HAVE to try this out!

Krome wrote:

Honestly I would not even bother taking Combat Casting as a Feat for the Magus. I'd find the Magus Arcana Concentrate to be more useful, and would likely use the feat to enhance my combat abilities instead.

Concentrate is far more useful to me, it gives you a second roll at a bonus, rather than a single roll at a bonus. There are not a lot of low level Arcana that I could not live without, so Concentrate seems to fill the need for Combat Casting.

But that is just me.

So far, yeah I like the Magus.

Question is this available for play in PFS?

Concentrate is 1/day though, isn't it?

yeah ... sorry I edited too late. :)

Like I said in my edit, I think such a fundamental ability should at least be INT mod + 3 per day.

At 10th level a Magus gains Fighter Training which allows him to use 1/2 his level as a fighter level to qualify for feats.

So far I find these feats are the only ones (from the core rules, too tired to look up APG feats) that might be affected by the ability.

Critical Mastery- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 28
Disruptive
Spellbreaker
Greater Shield Focus
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Penetrating Strike- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 32
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Specialization- impossible for Magus to qualify for until level 24

This ability essentially grants access to a whole whopping 5 feats. Seems a real disappointment for 10th level. That is when I usually start anticipating a power boost to the COOL stuff.

As far as Spellstrike goes, it seems to scream for a Metamagic Feat similar to Reach (from APG) to reduce the range of spells so it can have an even broader range of spells to work with. I know there are more touch spells coming, but feat to reduce the spell range opens up even more options.

Honestly I would not even bother taking Combat Casting as a Feat for the Magus. I'd find the Magus Arcana Concentrate to be more useful, and would likely use the feat to enhance my combat abilities instead.

Concentrate is far more useful to me, it gives you a second roll at a bonus, rather than a single roll at a bonus. There are not a lot of low level Arcana that I could not live without, so Concentrate seems to fill the need for Combat Casting.

But that is just me.

So far, yeah I like the Magus.

Question is this available for play in PFS?

[edit]

Concentrate is usable once per day... as an Arcana that seems rather lame when it is fundamental to the niche. Prefer INT Mod + 3 times per day, like most other fundamental abilities are.

I have an iPad so the PDF is perfect for me. As far as the Bestiary in general yeah worth it. Monsters are really more level appropriate now. It dove me nuts fighting a high level monster and have it be a cake walk.

New monsters... Linnorn is worth the price alone. Heck I think an ancient red dragon would tremble at the thought of tangling with. a Tarn Linnorn!

I think it depends upon how much work as GM you want to do. I can see starting Rise of the Runelords or Crimson Throne at maybe 5th level. You would need to rework the stat blocks and possibly change goblins for some other monster but the plot itself for all of the APs work for any level. The only changes necessary are to stat blocks for the most part.

Mine other sources for easy statblocks and you are set.

The combat rules are used as a simple abstraction of reality, not a substitution nor an all encompassing representation of reality.

When combat spontaneously combusts it is an opportunity for common sense and and judgment to be made.

There should not be rules for everything. If there were, it would be no better than playing a simple computer game.

One guy would cast resistance every minute of everyday, and then he would cast guidance aswell just incase he had to do a perception check.

It was more the rp element then anything.

I can see it while wading through a dungeon where you expect combat at any moment and casting cantrips at each door or chamber, but during the day in general IS ridiculous.

Rather than limit the number of times a cantrip can be cast, I'd just point out that by renewing the cantrip through the day he has to use up 10% of his day just casting spells. To illustrate just how difficult that would be I'd have the player have to renew the spell in real life for an hour and see if he could manage it, tracking every minute and "casting" for 6 seconds of every minute.

Also, when it came time for him to make a Perception check, or any other skill use, I'd probably have him roll at a -2 penalty for being distracted, concentrating on timing his spell, rather than paying attention to what is going on around him.

When he is in the bar I'd have patrons give the stink eye for constantly casting spells, figuring he's up to no good, probably pick a fight with him. Merchants would throw him out the door figuring he's casting some spell on them. He'd probably end up in jail before long.

I'd let him do it if he REALLY wanted to, but there are consequences for every action. Just think about what the consequences are and make him pay.

Very much what Sean said.

Fun first.

If they have to go to someone else to get it translated it could be a lot of not fun.

HOWEVER, it could be turned into a great plot hook. An entire side plot could develop of the PCs searching for someone to decipher the code. Make it something more than just a simple Diplomacy roll to find the sage. A whole series of Diplomacy, Bluff, Knowledge- Local, Arcana, History, Religion, Nobility, even Perception can be used in a series of encounters leading to the deciphering of the book.

Now, if *I* were the GM, I would encourage the PCs to go that route rather than let a simple low level spell rob the players of a great roleplaying opportunity.

Now how would I justify not letting Comprehend Languages translate it all to one language so it can be deciphered?

I would have no problem with the Characters making multiple uses of CL to translate the book into one language. They could then read the text and get a general understanding of what was written. However, the code would then be impossible to decipher from that one language.

Why would the code be impossible to decipher? Because the spell, essentially transliterates the text from one language to the next, substituting one word for another as written. "The ability to read does not necessarily impart insight into the material, merely its literal meaning." So it does not "translate."

Even if it were "translated" remember the old phrase, "lost in the translation?" There are nuances to every language that are lost when translated. Greek had how many words for Love? And yet translated into English they all become simply Love.

The code itself, to me, would simply be "lost in translation."

I would allow the spell to be used, under no circumstances would I not allow them to try. They would get a single document in one language. And then no matter how well the Rogue rolled, he would never be able to succeed. I would try to find a way to "drop a hint" that perhaps finding a sage would help.

From there I would let it lead to a series of meetings, lots of social encounters, let the PCs use LOTS of skills, to eventually lead to a sage.

The sage looks at the document, looks at their translation and giggles, then explains their error. So, now the players are clued into the reasoning behind the curtains, so to speak.

NOW, if your group does not like roleplaying, and prefers straight up hack-n-slash, then I would skip this all, give them the answers after a couple of quick rolls and be done with it then lead them straight on to the next fight.

Obviously I prefer the longer route :)

By the way... to read up on some skill uses that would make this a memorable addition to the game check out 4th Dimension's Skill Encounters- Non-Combat Challenges . I think this would make an excellent addition to this situation. I am not affiliated with them :) but do give it a perfect 5 stars (except for the yellow pages... I mean really...yellow?) lol

The industry has lost two great icons of late, McArtor and Logue, due to moving on. Darn shame I must say.

I hope they come back.

I use my iPad off the shelf and while I don't have a huge wait time for rendering, perhaps a second or two is all, I do believe that the PDFs could use some work to make them more user friendly (weird fonts I am looking at you!)

And like Victorious said, yes I can read the actual book, but carrying around dozens of books, or printing out several PDF books and carrying them all around is ridiculous in this day and age. I am just too old now to carry fifty pounds of dead trees around with me. :)

I will throw in support for Skinwalkers as well. Just darn scary to me.

Any variant on lycanthropy. I'd really like to see variations on werewolves and such.

Perhaps not exactly a monster but COULD be sort of... a definitive location (like Castle Ravenloft had so much character and flavor and just plain cool looking as a map) that is a massive haunt, alive, cursed whatever. The House of Usher comes to mind, Amityville Horror.

I play a LN cleric of Asmodeus in PFS.

The character is an Ulfen from Lands of the Linnorn Kings. His lawful tendencies, or rather passion is what spurred him to follow Asmodeus In a land of chaos he urged his father (the chieftain) to issue written laws that all men must follow, and not rule by decree and force of will alone as was common in his lands.

Obviously this was not well received. :)

For MY cleric of Asmodeus, it is the lawful nature, the strict hierarchy, that he found appealing. Asmodeus promises law and order. Many people find that comforting and go out of their way for it, even if it is not Good. After all the rulers of Rome were not exactly good guys, but they did promote law and order out of chaos.

Now, its fun to play the cleric of Asmodeus in PFS. Whenever I run into an NPC and we talk and then he attempts to kill the party (nearly every session) I point to my holy symbol, wag my finger at him, and tell him I will now kill him for his betrayal and consign his soul to Asmodeus. So, I put a skill point in Perform (Last Rites) just for giggles and grins.

The character has no opinion, or rather could care less about, Good vs Evil. To him it is Law vs Chaos.

And he is one fun character to play.

This is what I know

Nick Logue is one of the BEST RPG writers in the industry.

He is very busy with his new job.

I sorely miss him, his adventures and his posts.

Life happens.

And lastly I know that when he writes or produces anything else I WILL buy it and welcome him back to our geeky fold with open arms.

LazarX wrote:

You don't need rules to create an item that you're placing there just to harm the PCs, that they won't be able to use or sell.

I have been in games where neutral characters sold on evil items to "collectors".

Yeah exactly I do expect the PCs to grab it and sell it.

ZomB, (love that name) this is pretty much the same math I came up with just I was calling it a rod.

I figure the same costs for the spell and weapon part of it. I figure +2 is always on, so I come up with 33,785 (essentially 33,800). You got me looking at the differences between rods and weapons now, and really I don't see much of a real difference at all in form and function. Like a Rod of Alertness is essentially a +1 mace with some spell powers, and Rod of Flailing, or even Rod of the Viper. They all just seem to be a weapon with spell effects added.

I like the idea of calling it a rod, more for flavor than anything else. Simply because magic rods are almost nonexistent and an after thought (except metamagic rods).

are there some extra cost for rods that I am missing?

This may have been answered elsewhere and I apologize if it has (my Search Fu turned up nothing).

First from the PRD it says that "Rods are scepter-like devices that have unique magical powers and do not usually have charges. Anyone can use a rod." So.... they can do just about any spell effect you want to throw in it is what I get out of it without a level limit.

In contrast, Wands are limited to 4th level or lower and require a caster or UMD to activate.

so... other than the cost, is there any reason why I cannot make a Rod of Harm with the metamagic feat Range (from APG)? This spell level would effectively be level 7 for Short Range.

Then, say modify the Rod to perhaps 1 use per day (because it is a NASTY item), only usable by evil creatures (similar to Rod of Viper being usable by evil only). Additionally the Rod functions as a Mace +2.

Now, if so... how do I figure out costs on this thing?

[NOTE: this is for a BBEG not for a PC. The PCs will loot the item, no doubt, hence the usable by evil only]

northbrb wrote:

but other than this one feat i haven't seen anything in pathfindaer that states that only crossbreeds with humans exist, why not just open the feat up to any race combination, sure some of them might be silly but its not like you are getting a lot for it. you gain the ability to use feats and prestige classes for both your races but things like favored enemy and anything else that targets your race will count for both.

In D&D every pc half race has been half human. Pathfinder is not D&D, but uh well if it walks like a duck....

except for dragons of course... but that is another mater entirely. :)