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

LazarX's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 26,551 posts (26,956 including aliases). 1 review. 1 list. No wishlists. 12 Pathfinder Society characters. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 26,551 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Rudy2 wrote:
Kyle Baird wrote:
There needs to be a trait that gives a bonus for stabbing a bard during a masterpiece.
"Encore No More"?
"Et tu Brute"?

"Art Critic"?

You sir, win the Mel Brooks Merit Badge for World History.

Grand Lodge ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Acedio wrote:
The ability in question here blatantly and clearly says you get to substitute a bluff check for an intelligence skill check. Period. It may not make sense, it may be way too strong, but that's how it's written. If you want to change it, make an appeal for it in the boards.

You can only make that assumption by narrowly interpreting a couple of lines in the text of the masterpiece and blatantly ignoring the context that the beginning of the text sets it in.

"By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. "

You can not ignore this line, especially it's bolded part. The purpose of the masterpiece is essentially to enhance a bluff, a disguise, a fabrication, or as I've shown before, make such a bluff possible where it would not have been otherwise, not to turn dance into the Library of Congress.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
brock, no the other one... wrote:
d20pfsrd.com wrote:
Any good encryption apps for Android? Got me a Nexus 7 and One X and will be at lots of cons coming up.. should make sure stuffs solidly locked down in case of loss I suppose...
I'm an iDevice / Mac / Linux person myself, so I can't advise. However, my iPad is set to require a pin code to access it and therefore can't be connected to an untrusted machine and have PDFs syphoned off it - can a similar approach be used for Android.

Absolutely. pretty much the same way it's done on IOS devices.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Okay at 50,000 feet what a view wait a second...

*cough*.. *cough* can't breathe, no air.....

*thump*

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
DrParty06 wrote:
Andoran (Liberty's Edge) & Silver Crusade are very popular among paladins. Though you could easily spin him as being an unsuspecting pawn for Cheliax (Dark Archive), Sczarni/Qadira (The Exchange), or Taldor (Sovereign Court). One thing to be aware of is there aren't missions that need to be completed for each faction anymore, just a secondary success condition for the group and the potential to earn additional boons for members of a faction that don't always depend on doing certain things like the old faction missions.

Up until recently, if there was any faction that I would describe as a pack of MurderHobos, it would be the Andorans. The running joke locally was that standard equipment for an Andoran PC would be a watertight bag for the head you'd get sent to collect. When faced with a mission that could be negotiated with peacefully, every Andoran I've ever seen has frequently chosen the violent and murder options. In one instance, the party was being led out of the desert by a water merchant who had a slave it was the Andoran's mission to free. The merchant in question had essentially saved the party's lives because they were lost in the desert.

The Andoran a "neutral good" druid. without preamble, snuck on the merchant and stabbed him through the back on the spot. He did not consider any other option, just cold-blooded murder. With his other actions during the module, he's about the only PFS player whom I've pushed an alignment change (to neutral) on him.

Andoran is supposed to be a "good" nation, but the people who represent her, are a pack of violent scum as far as I can see.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Disk Elemental wrote:
Rudy2 wrote:

Oh, and before you question my right to make that call:

Core Rulebook wrote:
Note that some lies are so improbable that it is impossible to convince anyone that they are true (subject to GM discretion).

Making up random facts about Osirion's history, and trying to convince an Osirionologist that they are true things, in direct opposition to his expertise, falls under this category in my games.

Pageant of the Peacock lets you fool him, though.

But that's not what Peacock says, It doesn't say you're allowed to pull off impossible lies (an effect which would be feat/masterpiece/spell worthy on it's own).

It says you're able to make a bluff check in place of an int-based skill. What you're describing (making up stuff about a given topic) just sounds like a normal use of bluff. If that's the case, then this masterpiece does nothing, which begs the question of why it even exists?

Reread my later posts in this thread. What it does and why it's useful is abundantly clear. If however, your games don't involve social interaction, with the occasional infiltration, and are generally dungeon crawl after dungeon crawl, you're absolutely right. It will do nothing for you.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:

At the same time, the 1967 borders create massive security problems for Israel. Large sections of the country are within 10 miles of the border (target-able by rockets}. Lack of water security. Ceding their very legitimate claims to land.

There never has been a "Palestinian state". Prior to WW1, it was part of the Ottoman Empire for nearly 400 years. From 1918 to 1948, it was controlled by the British. From 1918-1922, the size of the mandate was Israel+Jordan.

Fact of the matter is that the area known as Palestine was occupied by a Palestinean majority and a small Jewish minority. No matter whether it was called a "state" a "territory" or a "mandate", that was what it was composed of by population, up to the middle of the last century.

At the close of the Mandate, vast numbers of Palestineans were driven from their homes, by Jewish mobs, with the civic and military authorities either looking the other way or actively assisting, and their assets were seized by the emerging Israeli nation. Those who tried to recover their assets and homes were arrested, and then deported.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
GreyWolfLord wrote:

If WW3 happens, it depends on what sparks it on where the battle lines are.

If it is a US Civil War (which could be more likely in the next Century, which is a long time...but trends could be going that way, tensions are probably as high in the US in regards to moral differences as they were in the early 19th century regarding slavery and such...which escalated over 50 years to a Civil War), it is possible that it would be a more of a poor or rural factions vs. Richer or Urban populations.

Despite popular belief, what split the country wasn't so much moral differences, but economic tensions between an industrial North and an almost totally agrarian South. Those differences don't exist any more. The various regions of the country are too tied together economically to make that kind of neatly drawn Civil War probable.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
JaC381 wrote:
ISG says once the Worldwound is dealt with, Iomedae wants to send the crusaders after the devils of Infernal Cheliax. How will the Order of the Godclaw (and the other Hellknight orders) react to this?
Good question! They'd likely end up having a schism and losing their Iomedae members, or the Iomedae members would convert, or the entire organizaiton would go rogue and they'd lose the Asmodeus members, or something along those lines. They would not emerge unscathed in the end.

Could this be why our favorite Chelaxian faction leader had has her faction's goal, prolonging the conflict in the Worldwound?

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Fromper wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Bonekeep with 3 players.
I would give the players an option to run with a preen while noting that this an advanced scenario. If they choose to risk it, I'll allow it.
I think we were considering Harsk as our 4th.
So you wanted to run bonekeep on harder mode?

I know players who enjoy doing so. And besides, it really depends on the three. And while Harsk may fail the standards of the optimizers he's hardly useless.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
jimibones83 wrote:
i just noticed in the angel of death assassin ability it says it causes the targets body to crumble into dust, preventing both raise dead and resurrection, requiring true resurrection to be raised. I guess you could argue the difference between ash and dust, but I remember true res being the only solution to disintegrate in 3.5 as well. long story short, i find ashes and dust to be a similar state of remain and will require true res if anyone is disintegrated, just as i always have. thanx for helping me think guys:)

The Angel of Death ability is a death effect on top of disintegrate, so it is different.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Shadowborn wrote:


And I still hold a grudge against Tom Hanks.

If you're as mature and sane as you claim gamers are... you really should get over it. He was a young unknown actor hired to play a part. You don't refuse work when you're an unknown. He was an actor in the film, not an author. And considering what he has given us..... it's time to move on and rejoin the 21st century.

LeVey's Satanic Bible was intended to be satire, as was the Church of Satan itself. The church was an act of rebellion against the people Heinlien would collectively call "Miss Grundy", not actual worship.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Imbicatus wrote:

In Golarion, all drow are evil. If an elf get's too evil, they turn drow, and if a drow turns good, they become a normal elf.

However, indiscriminately killing evil beings is usually evil.

There is no lore support for a reverse transformation. When a drow becomes good.... they have problems. Which is better than spontaneously becoming an elf in the middle of Drow Capital Cave.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Disk Elemental wrote:
LazarX wrote:


it dies even sooner when it becomes "give the player what he wants, because he can twist rules language creatively."

There's no twisting of the rules being done.

Peacock Pageantry wrote:


For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.

RAW, the masterpiece allows you to make knowledge checks. Saying otherwise is "twisting" the rules.

Does it make a whole lot of logical sense? Not really.

But it's magic, it doesn't have to make logical sense; according to the description of masterpieces, they are supernatural effects unless otherwise stated.

It allows you to make Knowledge checks to pull off a bluff, that's what I get from the greater context of the masterpiece text.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:
Disk Elemental wrote:
Rudy2 wrote:


Another player at my table had invested the lion's share of his skill points, and a couple Mossy Ioun Stones, into knowledge skills. He needn't have bothered, since Mr. Bard gave up one 2nd level spell known. That's infuriating.

That's how the game works.

The Ranger outputs more damage than the blaster Sorcerer. Does that mean the Ranger is somehow broken and ban-worthy?

The Alchemist has a higher Disable Device score than the Rogue. Does that mean the Alchemist is "invalidating" the Rogue?

The Dex-based fighter has higher AC than the big clunky Paladin. Does that mean the Paladin shouldn't have bothered?

There's always a "better" way of accomplishing anything.

Agreed - when the rule of the day become 'ban whatever options are better than the options I chose because I'm feeling marginalized' is the day the game dies. And again, this isn't PvP, all the players are working together for a common goal, no?

it dies even sooner when it becomes "give the player what he wants, because he can twist rules language creatively."

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
DrakeRoberts wrote:
EDIT: Reading LazarX's example again, though, I'm still torn as to whether I think this really adds anything not covered by Bluff already. *Sighs* Really unsure now..

To me it does. I will in many circumstances rule that a Bluff DC is simply impossible if you don't have the fundamentals. You can't fake being Einstein to Neils Bohr if you have no knowledge of physics. But with this performance in place, you just might put him off long enough by faking an obscure piece of knowledge to get something done QUICKLY, and then getting yourself out of Dodge.

If I were to pick a character who exemplified this sort of ability.. it would be Inspector Clouseau.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Think of it this way...

If you were going to have him play Munchkin, his WOW experience would be irrelevant, right? Go the same way with Pathfinder. Encourage him to try it as something new, not an extension of one of his video games.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I believe in such a case you simply scratch off all items and get the 500 gold. Because a first level would not be eligible for any of the tiers of a 7-11.

Grand Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Having read the ability carefully, I don't see it as invalidating people who make legitimate skill investment in knowledges. I see it as an art for effectively faking knowledges to bluff someone when you're passing off yourself to be someone you're not, as lack of knowledge is generally the Achilles Heel to many a would-be impersonator. "Yes, I am the art appraiser from Oppara, as you can see from the design elements of this piece of art you have on display here."

It's not going to be of much use when you're faced with a demon you haven't fought before and need to know something about it NOW.

This also means to me that I don't see a valid reason to ban someone with this masterpiece, especially considering what IS allowed.

SLA's giving certain races early PrC access is one of those things that really grinds my gears. But I'm not going to try to ban, or dissuade a player from going that route. Campaign management has spoken on this topic at length and as a PFS Judge, I've made that commitment to abide by it. Instead I focus on the things about the players and their characters I do like, and I try my best to find them.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Illeist wrote:
trollbill wrote:
LazarX wrote:
I've been playing a Paladin in Wrath of the Righteous. I'm armed with Radiance and yet I'm far behind Mr. Enlarging Oread Monk when it comes to damage, unless I'm using one of my limited smites, which puts me just about even.
Ummm...how exactly is the Oread Monk enlarging himself?
If I had to guess, a Mythic did it. (Scroll down to "Titan's Rage.)

That's the one. On the other hand, I'm far more durable than said monk, having taken the Guardian Path. (split patched with Heirophant) Now I'm becoming a Summoning Paladin having taken the Summon Guardian thingy Hierophant power.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Rudy2 wrote:

@BlackOuroboros - I'm not sure how you're extrapolating my mindset from one objection. In any case, believe me, I'm not going out of my way to GM in PFS precisely because you can't go off script. I avoid it when possible.

The question is more a matter of, if I show up to my store, and there aren't enough GMs, and I'm asked to run, is it better to say "no", and have the game not run for sure, or is it better to say "yes, if there is no Pageant of the Peacock"?

It would be better to say "Is there another table I can swap someone with." And there is never going to be a time where I will say that flouting a PFS rule is an acceptable choice.

Grand Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

This is the last word I'll say on this as someone who GMs PFS for NAGA.

If you are assigned to GM a table and you discover that a PC has this masterpiece that makes you so upset, one thing you need to remember is that when you came to that table after signing up to judge. You made a defacto commitment to make sure that table goes off.

How you do so is up to you. If you can get another person to judge in your place, then your commitment is meant. But if I find that a judge caused a player to remove his character, or worse caused a table to not go off because of a preference like this, I would have a major talk with that judge. And unless I have a good reason not to, I would move heaven and earth to make sure that that person would not be invited to judge at any future event we ran.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Fromper wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Fromper wrote:
Bonekeep with 3 players.
I would give the players an option to run with a preen while noting that this an advanced scenario. If they choose to risk it, I'll allow it.
I think we were considering Harsk as our 4th.

I would not have a problem with this. The players in such a situation get to choose the pregen. And I'd run with it. And I'd run as written. And if the players do wipe, I'll do my best to help them enjoy the experience.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

When it comes to wonky feats and rules and such you don't understand, as a Judge you have the right to ask the player to provide the source material that's used, if the mechanic does not fall under the area of core assumptions.

Players should keep in mind that at any time they may be required to have such material available. either in the book or from printed pages of a watermarked PDF.

If that material is not available, then you can ban the use of it at the table. Judges should not be using this rule circumvent campaign allowances if the material IS available or can be gotten ahold of. Judges are required to have core assumptions at hand, and should have with them copies of the current Campaign Guide and the Additional Resources PDF.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

If you must insist on pounding this route, I do suddenly recall that the D20SRD.org site should have some variant rules on making generic classes.

Maybe you'll find something there.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Jack Assery wrote:

I want to run a dark souls type game, but really don't want to run in a new system, but rather remove classes from the system itself and award class-based Perks at each level, and trying to grade them.

Ok, so I've noticed the relative power of class powers are tied to BaB, it seems like 3/4 really get the cream of the abilities (opinion). Do you guys think a tree based system would be possible where you could buy class abilities or would it just hopelessly break the game? Any help would be greatly appreciated and if I could somehow make it a classless system I would make it a free pdf for anyone interested in trying it.

Yes... my advice would be to stop trying to push D20 in a hole that doesn't fit, and use a true classless system, such as HERO or GURPS, both of which have modules that fit any genre you want. Another way to go would be Runequest, Element Masters or something similar to that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:
So this thread got me thinking: if a pure-classed Wizard can't cut it as a martial character,

Someone forgot to tell Aroden that. Or Tensor for that matter. :) And remember that Tensor WAS a player character under one of the original Killer DMs, Gygax himself.

It all depends on your definition of "cutting it". Could they expect follow the same route of success as a DPR fighter? Obviously not... but their are wizards who have made a successful account of themselves in the melee field.

There are things that have changed since the days of Tensor that make it a bit more difficult. For one thing the hour per level buffs have essentially been taken away save for Mage Armor and False Life. That's the biggie that changes the whole equation. The challenge becomes at that point to shorten the prep time, yet still make the wizard viable. The Melee Wizard then learns that AC reaches a point of diminishing returns early on and concentrates on hit avoidance, i.e. Mirror Image, Displacement, while looking for ways to shore up his melee contribution.

The MT angle is an interesting one... and it has it's appeal with a greater number of low level spells. It'd be interesting to see someone actually go from level 1 and see how far they get.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
However, they also consistently show that they are primarily concerned with their quarterly market share.

Wizards is in this game to make money. So is Paizo. You don't run a company any other way because rent needs to be paid, and people have to eat. Even Paizo answers to people who hold stock in the company and expect a return on investment. That's the American way. it's also been the way since we stopped expecting hunter gatherers to feed only themselves, and we entered into a goods and services exchange.

The only relevant question that's needed to ask about a company is do they make product you want to buy? All this BS about "trust", "commitment" and the other buzzwords is about a contract that never existed. WOTC would be making 3.5 products today if they had continued to sell well. Fact of the matter is that the gaming budget reached a saturation point with all of the player supplements the game was burdened down with, and module production virtually ceased because the longer lead times were cutting into the more profitable supplement lines, because in the end with a gaming group of 1 DM and 6 players, you could expect to sell 7 copies of a player splat book as opposed to 1 copy of a dm book or a module. The problem is that WOTC never learned to properly manage 3.5's success, a success which came close to killing the RPG division. Paizo, having had the benefit of both WOTC's experience, AND a fresh start, has managed to find a way to navigate that minefield.

The consequences however of those years means that the fan base instead of moving together from one edition to another is now permanently split. Split between, Paizo, 4th edition folks hoping for the kind of break that 3.5 players got (which unfortunately they're not going to get), and old style gamers who rejected everything after 2.0 and those who left for other gaming pastures long ago. That hold Humpty Dumpty of the early TSR days is not going to be put back together. And despite the recent flowering of alternative games and companies, it's now a crowd of players catering to a smaller and more heterogenous market.

I would say that just as computing is now solidly in the post-PC age, I think that we are now starting to enter the post-d20 age as well. Instead of trying to ride the coattails of D20, we're seeing more movement on alternative gaming systems such as Cubicle 7, and the revived Storyteller lineup.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Fromper wrote:
Bonekeep with 3 players.

I would give the players an option to run with a preen while noting that this an advanced scenario. If they choose to risk it, I'll allow it.

Grand Lodge ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Rudy2 wrote:
I understand I won't make friends, but I'm set on this. This is an ability that should not exist. I am willing to risk my ability to GM on that proposition, though I'll try to avoid conflict where possible.

You don't GM in PFS, Mike Brock and his folks are the GMs, We are Judges. If you can't live with a decision made by campaign management, then maybe you should consider whether PFS is right for you.

It is the height of arrogance to say that you're going to turn away players using an approved rules set. And you are making a mountain out of a molehill. For all the hullabaloo over this ability, I've yet to run a single table with a bard choosing it. I'll save my banning of them for when I'm running my own.

I'm not ecstatic with a lot of things approved in the campaign. But it it is out of place for us as Judges to decide which rules we're going to abide by, and which rules we're going to flout.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Pan wrote:
Many folks have mentioned being turned off/away by WOTC products and/or decisions in the past 5-10 years. Many folks mention that they don’t trust WOTC any longer it’s quite evident that WOTC lost much of its social capitol. My question is for folks who say they no longer trust WOTC, is there a way for WOTC to repair their rep with you and what could they do to make that happen? Is it possible?

I don't see trust as a relevant issue. If people were expecting that WOTC was going to produce 3rd edition for ever... the fact that we WERE in a third edition was lesson that change was inevitable. People were leaving WOTC before 3.5 closed down, but it had nothing to do with "trust" issues, just people exploring other options than a d20 based war-game with roleplaying tacked on.

Thing is these days is that like other things people have turned Anti-WOTC into some sort of movement grounded more in religious hysteria than any form of logic. 3.x was a bubble waiting to burst... it was increasingly becoming unsustainable. The OGL games were bleeding customers off of WOTC with no return, much how Apple nearly lost its business to the Mac clone market they had created. And like WOTC, the only way Apple could fix things was by making a very unpopular decision.

If WOTC brings out a good compelling product this non-issue of trust will go away...like it should.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Belazoar wrote:
I don't know if the market was larger or just limited. This was before MMO, cept for MUDs, but when I was in high school I remember internet time was charged by the minute, and computers werent things most people had.

I was referring to the paper and dice gaming market.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

This is a repost of a thread somebody else posted on Giant in the Playground here. It's too political/religious for Giantitp, but not for Paizo, and it is an interesting question, so let's have at it.

So, for those who played RPGs during the whole "D&D eebul satanic!" scare, what was it like?

It's a bit of an exaggeration to say that there was an Anti-RPG Hysteria during the early decades of gaming. It's more accurate to say that there were people who were hysteric, and there were others who either over-reacted to that hysteria, (like TSR), and those who tried to profit from it. (the infamous Mazes and Monsters movie). I've had one college campus preacher call me a devil incarnate when he learned that I was GMing one of his group who was turning down one of his activities for one of mine.

The fact of the matter is..... that for all of the "hysteria", the market was larger than it is today. RPGA clubs were a major thing and people were paying membership fees yearly to subscribe to Polyhedron, they were buying gaming materials by the truckload. Compleat Strategist for instance had 4 stores in the NY-NJ area during that time as opposed to being down to one store now.

For the most part, while there were the occasional wing nuts and the slings and arrows, it was a good time for gaming. It never got near to the point that the comic book industry did, where things became so desperate they started regulating themselves with the Comic Code Authority to prevent the government from imposing it's own rules.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

Person one is right. Person one is displaying exactly what the text parses out to. Let me also illustrate another point on how this works.

A 20th level character with a static constitution, will have the same total hit points no matter when she took the toughness feat, whether it was level 1, 5, 7, or 19. If you work it out as to why, you'll see why Person 1 is the only right answer.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
CommandoDude wrote:
Like I said. If you're expecting a low int to be crippling to a warrior, I'll expect to see Wizards in wheel chairs from now on due to low str..

Cutting your strength to the bone in my world? Expect a fine edge inspection of your inventory. (remember spell books, clothes, and coin have weight!) And you'd better run like hell when shadows are encountered.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Scoundrel the Tiefling wrote:
I'm not talking about mechanics. I'm talking about how often they have put out a new edition. 3.5, 4th and now 5th ed so soon? I think that's Hasbro's doing.

It's not arbitrary. WOTC dumped 3.5 because they were 1) losing gamers to other systems entirely and 2) losing 3.5 gamers to OGL clones being put out by other companies including folks who were doing things such as playing Warcraft d20, and Everquest D20, and BESM d20, games that did not result in money going into WOTC's coffers.

They took a long hard look at why young gamers in particular were either not picking up 3.5 or leaving it altogether, including major issues involving character balance and so they created 4.0 in an effort to address those concerns. It was the largest redo of the game system, even more drastic than the switch from 2.X to 3.0. That switch caused many of the older gamers to become a fertile core market for Pathfinder who also found different ways to innovate the game for a crowed beyond the grognards who were looking for a 3.75.

4.0 was an attempt at making the most equal version of D+D to date. It tried to address power levels between martials and casters, and to eliminate the necessity to stick a player with "the cleric healer" role. However the changes involved getting there resulted in a bleed off of players that was not made up for by new players coming in.

5.0 is an attempt to bring back some of that old market while still expanding into the new. Time will tell how far they succeed in doing so.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Snorri Nosebiter wrote:
does Steve Rogers become Falcon then?

No he becomes Guy with a Ninety Year Old Body Sitting On the Sidelines Man. The old guy with a cane? that's Rogers with the loss of his Super Soldier serum.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
CommandoDude wrote:

Stats should never affect roleplaying period - unless the roleplayer wants them to.

There are ALREADY mechanical penalties in place for low stats, people don't need to invent more.

Roleplaying low stats as average or better is like ignoring the fact that you're missing an arm and expecting to wield two handed weapons as normal. The problem with Pathfinder/3.x is that the skill modifiers can dwarf the modifiers for actual mental or physical ability. And there are players more than willing to cheese with those mechanics.

A person with a 4 int isn't Einstein. There are reasons that I put floor limits as to how low a character stat can go. This thread exemplifies them.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

If your payment methods have been declined you should be getting emails from Customer Support.

Reply back to them.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

I don't see the issue. The blind oracle never gets vision beyond 60 feet, the wasted oracle still takes extra non lethal damage, the speaking in tongues oracle will always be hampered in combat communication, the curses aren't supposed to go away, they're the price paid for the magic bestowed.

It's not the only feature that's mainly a liability or a limiting factor, the Aura of Alignment for certain divine classes comes to mind.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Karui Kage wrote:
Yeah, no Guard trick. Attack, Flank, and Down are the only tricks it knows.

The various tricks come into their own at the right situations.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

Does the deaf oracle curse really do nothing to counteract the -4 penalty on opposed Perception checks for being deaf?

That sucks! I feel kind of like they were trying to give some interesting abilities, but ended up doing little more than counteracting the penalties they gave, and not even all of them.

It's not a curse if it doesn't handicap you in some way.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Blindmage wrote:
I'd say Durnik from The Belgariad series by David Eddings would be a very high level commoner with some interesting abilities thanks to his career and life choices.

Don't you mean the Mary Sue/Gary Stu set of novels? Eddings can write passable prose, but I could never get a sense that the characters were ever under serious threat. Unless they were on the wrong side of the author.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:
Odraude wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:

It seems a lot of people are confusing fatigue based casting with point pool casting; The two are NOTHING alike. In fatigue based casting your actual physical ability is diminished as you cast, while in point pools your physical ability never diminishes... you can try to reskin it as fatigue but when you can swing a sword just as well at 1000 points versus 0 points your argument fails miserably.

Well, funny thing...psionics actually does have options for the fatigue based thing, or pushing yourself beyond your limits. Options such as Body Fuel and Overchannel both allow you to go above and beyond. In the case of Body Fuel, you literally begin burning off your physical ability scores, killing yourself in exchange for juice, while Overchannel allows you to suffer damage to increase the potency of your powers.

A near equivalent would be if sorcerers could burn off their ability scores to cast more spells after they ran out of slots, but AFAIK, no such mechanic exists that gets used much.

I always felt that style of mechanic didn't really work in a party game like Pathfinder, since you'll have a cleric that can heal all of that for you.

Well the funny thing is that they took that into consideration. In the case of Overchannel you eat some damage to get a small bump in manifester level (kind of like caster level) which could be used to bump your powers up a little more, or get a +5-15% chance to pierce spell resistance, but it's not something you're going to do heavily.

Are you kidding? with abundant healing around, the only thing that stops most psion players from over channeling is the worry of running out of psi points.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
lemeres wrote:
Balgin wrote:

Given the title of the thread I feel the need to quote scripture.

"Greather love hath no man than that he giveth his life that others may live."

I don't imagine a paladin consuming the flesh of others. He may, however, offer up his own life so that others would not fall victim to the knife. He would not condone the act of cannibalism and try to talk people out of it but if they were dead set on it and could not be disswayed then he might make the ultimate sacrifice to protect the innocent little cabbin boy.*

* Probably not that innocent actually.

That is noble...but what if he is 'needed'. Lets assume that he is the only character with a score over 10, and that he is the only one with skill points in profession(shipwright). Or if they are lost and adrift on a life raft, he is the only one left with ranks in profession (cartography) and knowledge (geography). I know, unlikely, but it would be justification as to why he was at sea in the first place, since he was the only one in the order with experience with the sailing.

That could put him in the position of the only person with the ability to save most of the survivors. But that is only if he has the strength to take action.

That's where the decision to forebear and have faith in the god(ess) steps in and says "No. faith provides." I know that for those of us determined to maintain our cynical jaded street cred that this is an unacceptable answer, but I think the time has come to accept that this has become a circular argument and agree to leave this topic be.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Ciabola wrote:
lazarx that's kinda what I was was thinking.

In that case, it's a matter of choosing what kind of flavor you're looking for... your alternate lists are essentially bard, and witch. Magus and summoner don't have anything you don't have already.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Lenthalia wrote:

It's been established that the Crafter's Fortune bonus can be used for day job rolls.

Assuming the scenario ends in a town of 5,000 people, can a player purchase a Crafter's Fortune spell (10gp) to use on their Day Job roll? This is definitely profitable for those with a reasonable check bonus.

No, because spell effects from NPC's end at the close of a scenario. If you want the skill bonus, you need to be able to cast the spell yourself.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Lenthalia wrote:

Here's the sitch. Demon-spawn Tiefling, intelligence 5, paladin. Has 1 skill point per level because that's the minimum.

Later gets a Scarlet and Blue Sphere Ioun stone imbedded in his tough hide. This grants a +2 enhancement bonus to intelligence, bringing him to 7, and also has an associated skill.

So, does he get the skill ranks from the item, even though bringing his intelligence to 7 would still put him at the minimum of 1 rank per level?

Note that I only even consider this to be a question because it means that a character who achieved intelligence of 7 via an item could have more skill ranks than one who has intelligence 7 naturally. The same could apply to intelligence 9 as well, if you consider characters with a natural 5 intelligence too much of a corner case.

Int headbands don't grant skill points, only fixed ranks in skills, so yes you're good to go with getting the skill ranks hardwired into the item. Yes, you're exactly right in how you state things, but skill ranks and points aren't an issue here because that headband does not grant points. This is one of those areas where Pathfinder isn't 3.5.

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

As a general rule, yes. As frequently later sources correct errors in earlier ones. such as the infamous staff price goof in the APG.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Zathyr wrote:

Sweet unholy thread necromancy!

I'm guessing the whole Dimensional Agility line of feats didn't exist yet when this was started.

Fighters however kind of lack the pre-reqs to make that chain of any use to them. Unless they're building their way to Eldritch Knight.

1 to 50 of 26,551 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.