|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Law: Lawful characters believe that obeying rules
Chaos: Chaotic characters are the opposite of
Neutrality: Neutral characters believe there
(not mine) were the classic 3 of the Basic Set back in the day. Basically Chaos was the alignment of 'the badguys'. The days of simplicity.
The idea of doing good without a concept of law/chaos/etc, hm, potentially tough because it lacks an anchor perspective. What Good are you doing? Your interpretation? A greater power interpretation? A State/country/community interpretation?
That being said, the old standby of Angel and Devil on your shoulders is used to represent the good/evil considerations without law/chaos aspects.
The benefit of magic being you don't actually burn through fuel. I tend to design my magic castles with heated baths, roman heating style, japanese use. Keeps the water cleaner.
In our case, we are using them as heat in a stone castle and not all the rooms have chimneys, so we were womdering if the campfire smokes the place out.
The fun thing about these types of magical fires, it makes things like Roman baths with underfloor heating arrangements super plausible in the setting.
Yknow looking at the OP, its oddly comforting and disturbing that 20+ years later with the alignment system, the same example of CN evilness gets done by players :P
Rogue-type? Check. CN? Check. "Mysterious body count?" Check.
This is almost the classic, "I really want to be evil, but since we don't run evil PCs, I'll be CN and play ...yknow....evil."
I do kinda find it funny when you have characters with extreme damage builds, which might technically be legal but occur through bending of rules (of intent, at least), then wonder why the GM turns around and warps the setting too.
Tho for mythic stuff, when you're not facing mythic stuff, you're going to tend to paste anyway. I'm partial to Blowback myself, "Hah, I hit you and you go flying 50 feet, no save. I don't care how big you are!" Raw damage is ok. I lean towards amusing epic hit visuals :)
At any rate, its solvable with the standard action: "Smack Player behind the back of their head." :)
Heh, this is why in rpgs you tend to have token kids/babies to further plot, but otherwise you operate in a magical setting that doesn't have things like characters ever needing to poop or even bathe, and similarly magically doesn't happen to have kids so scenarios of "Should we murder/cleanse this pre-school?" never come up.
If you want to bring that stuff in, in a way you're purposefully exploiting the idea that the alignment system is kinda screwy and incomplete (and has been for like 3-4 decades) and its going to be a pain when you try to figure it out at the grey levels.
"but its my game!" some might say. "I want to test the limits of alignment and consequences for choices made!" Well, that's great, but in a game where players themselves don't have to really feel/live with the consequences, its hard to expect that from their characters.
By that I mean, I will continue playing a particular character until it is no longer fun for me to play that character, and bearing no real significant connection to the character other than personal whim and interest, I will then make a new character. And if i've just come from an experience where I feel the GM kinda dicked me around with alignment stuff, guess what, if I do play with the group again I'll make a character that won't have those same limitations.
Side note, when you start seeing alot of CN characters in a group, it might be a sign that the players are getting tired of Alignment issues :)
eh, given its single target nature its potentially dangerous and encounter-ending if you get it on solo creatures or susceptible targets that don't use team tactics.
Its worth using on a lone target, much like its worth having the rogue SA them. Its good for use on targets that purposefully put themselves away from the rest of their allies, the sniper/etc, but they're also going to be guys not easily CDG's because of their general distance from the PCs too.
So, this isn't fully formed yet, nor do I know if this will ultimately serve the overall fund of knowledge/be useful. But I wanted to get some feedback on the idea rolling around in my head.
The mythic background count. Its an attempt by me to sort how/why mythic threats appear, and the impact of mythic characters on a setting. Ala "Does Batman curb the craziness, or does Batman ATTRACT the craziness"
So from an external perspective of the setting, mythic background count accumulates usually very slowly, and gets worse as time goes on if left unresolved as the threat increases in potency.
Like letting an evil dragon maintain and keep a lair over the centuries, its just going to get worse.
The same goes with mythics, but also accelerated with a convergence of higher level fate-weaving, artifacts or higher order beings running around.
The normal game allows for the idea that if you set down roots, and make enemies, those enemies can come calling on your home/city/fort/whatever when you're not there. Usually with the way CRs work you can still plausibly have your NPCs hold stuff off when you're not around, at least to the point they can call you back. On the other hand, mythic rated threats are potentially "Wipe out normal army" level and "eat your entire leadership roster you left at the castle". If anyone watched Hercules the Legendary Journeys you notice that when Herc settles down for a season (starts a home, tries to be a good dad), eventually Badness on an Epic/Mythic level occurs. As such, he tends to move around alot, dealing with mythic threats but also not sticking around long enough for his area to become a new target.
So back to the mythic background count:
I was thinking of an abstract idea of having a background count that gives/explains why regions pop up, how they can be managed and a mechanic of 'suppressing your mythic qualities' to have less of an impact on the background count. Kinda a mechanic to roll in why a pissed off mythic threat doesn't just roll into your hometown/kingdom beyond having to rely on the GM to not be a douche. It also then allows mythic chars to manage their impact a bit, so if they do want to stick around and draw a mythic threat so they can 'reset the count' to make the region safe again for a bit, they can do so.
Late to this party, but, like all alignment constructs, its easily considered evil from our 'real world' point of view, but gets murkier in a game setting. Hell Knight actions may be entirely pragmatic and within the confines of legal precedent of their setting, Are they Evil within the game context? Word of Devs seem to be no. So its easier to just take it for that and not think too much on it.
I like looking at Hellknights like 40k Space Marines. Also as a highlight of the internal struggle they have to face to not fall to "Chaos" because of their daily activities. In the following of their duties they can easily fall and slip to evil. Especially when you start classifying enemies by 'non-alignment' kinda things. But that's also slippery.
Favored enemy: undead? Sure that's generally good and straightfoward. Favored Enemy: Filthy Barbarian/Xeno Scum. That's where it gets tricky. If you're comfortable putting innocents to the sword, men, women, children, noncombatants, because that's what your Order tells you, that's slippery.
RPGs have never done a good job with "long term psychological effects based on behavior and choices". Those that even include them tend to go heavy handed, ala Rifts or Call of Cthulhu, where basically a bad act can make you go nutty. But stuff like, "What are the long term effects of a guy that slaughters tribes because they're barbarians and does so for 10+ levels?" RPG answer? He gets lewt! and XP!
Sounds fun if you start incorporating mythic stuff. Also consider that the same thing that happened the last time the Scarwall was taken could happen: The Orcs decide to do something about it. Sure they decided to stay hands-off after the last time, but if they find out the curse has been lifted/souls freed etc etc, it'll be a tempting target again.
Heh, the outcome of this is funny to me. Lets replace an evil monarch that basically sold their soul for power, for another evil monarch that sold their soul for power!
Especially since the last evil oppressive regime killed like half the city! The idea that the populace would 'clamor' for the equally evil King with a devil consort, yeah, that makes sense.
But hey, its up to each game group to play it how they want.
In particular, since the actual description wasn't provided in the sourcebooks, I was considering what would happen if you took Castle Andachi located in Ustalav on the border of Ustalav and the Orclands. It was a border castle/fortress, which I'm making assumptions with:
1)Gothic style like its contemporary neighbors of the time.
3)Its still noted as defensible.
I mean sure, I could make it anything I want, but in the event that Paizo does end up describing/mapping the thing, I wanted to try and be logical and draw on precedent of the region.
Personally, if in the northern hemisphere I would have it facing south and in the southern hemisphere I would have it facing north. That way when it snows your draw bridge de-ices faster and less of that pesky snow to shovel.
Seriously? I'm from Hawaii, we don't get snow stuff, so if you're kidding or not :P
Not sure if this is covered in a sourcebook, and I couldn't really find anything specific in my websearches, but...
When building a castle, lets say early stages where its intended to be a primary fortification as opposed to the centerpiece of a larger city, what direction would you place your front gate or front gate + barbican?
If your enemy was generally considered to be coming from one direction, say your western neighbor has a history over the generations of sorties in, etc. Would you place your front gate towards the west? The east? A different angle?
A benefit of the barbican + front gate situation is theoretically a bigger potential defense screen from that particular angle, understandable since that's the main way in.
Would a north or south orientation be better for a compromise of ease of friendly access (from your east, or returning scouts from enemy-west)?
Would you want your front door facing the enemy, ala, "Go for it, I dare you!"?
The potential issues I see with this are more Player oriented than player-character. Its outcome will largely depend on the group's preference and playstyle. Forcing a group to go against its style can work, in fact it can result in some extreme fun, on the other hand it may go badly. They may get bored and irritable, doing silly things in a passive aggressive way to indicate they're not interested, or they may flat out tell you.
Also, you need to be clear on what you're expecting the Players to figure out, and what the PCs are supposed to figure out. From a PC point of view, its easy, its all mechanics. If on the other hand you're expecting the players at your table to figure it out with their real life melons, that can have a wide range of results.
In a way its why I wonder about the way Mythic is mixed in with 'normal' progression. As a GM you're already concerned about gang focusing on a BBEG by a party. If you're running part of the "1/3rd of encounters should be non-mythic" you almost need to make them noncombat because otherwise the application of some of the mythic stuff vs non-mythic foes vastly changes stuff.
Hah, BBEG, I shoot him and he goes flying 60 feet, no save :)
Yeah, AC is rather diminishing returns in higher level play. Your primary AC might be huge, but so's an opponents attack ability, especially if they target things like Touch AC.
I'd say if you're not a target intended for getting hammered on, and a mage, things like Mirror Image is good. Blur/etc can be good unless everyone is already running anti-concealment buffs.
Stoneskin is ok, not as powerful as earlier versions, but still gives you sorta Temp HP. Throw in something like shield of arrow deflection or some of those arrow attractor charms and you'll be ok for a few rounds. The goal is to be less-hitable due to circumstance and give your team time to blaze the enemies.
Heh I had a question about this one too, tho I'm kinda leaning to, "Yknow what, all the mythic abilities are a little nutty." If you did wanna make some sorta rule maybe:
Initial knockback is determined with your size vs the target's size. For each size increment greater the blowback distance is...(halved?), so if you're medium and target is large, and you're tier 8, instead of 80 feet that's 40 feet. 20 feet for a Huge, 10 for a colossal, etc. Though it does nerf it pretty hard.
Its kinda a toughie, but the challenges of things tends to be built around the idea that the characters are not only the appropriate level, but not of truly silly build, and have access to roughly their estimated loot rating. You can run high or low, but then run into issues of too easy encounters or too 'oops I just TPK'd the party' encounters. Something like a ghost would be a holy(un) terror in a low magic game.
Not sure if this is the right subforum. Buuut.
In general I really like the adventure path series. They're great level 1 to level 13-15 stuff (now with mythic!). My only regret is in a sense they're also self contained. If you play out 1-6 of a series it'd be difficult to transition those chars to the OTHER adventure path series, save perhaps the 'last module' of each series. But that's sorta jumping into a story without knowing the context.
Has anyone good rules of thumb/attempts in adjusting the various series that you could plausibly run the same characters through multiple series?
I know some of the first module parts of the series would be problematic for higher level chars. "What do you mean mook pirates knocked me out and shanghai'd be?" "What do you mean, trapped on a deserted island, I have teleport" other than the 1st modules, anyone have any experience re-tooling the series for higher than designed characters?
Seems a pretty easy way to get an epic quality level ability.
Personally I'd go with
Those within your dragonbane aura gain the same protection that you do.
Prerequisites: Aura of courage class feature, caster level 8th.
Benefit: When fighting dragons, your aura of courage expands to a 20-foot-radius emanation, and allies in the aura gain a morale bonus on saving throws against dragon breath equal to your aura of courage’s bonus against fear effects.
Normal: The aura of courage is a 10-foot-radius emanation, and grants a +4 morale bonus on fear effects.
As in, "allies now also get +4 morale bonus vs dragon breath weapons", and the rules didn't anticipate the stack with Fearless aura.
Yeah, I'd say "Any" starting at Book 2 of the various series. The drawback being that if they aren't characters specifically associated with the story-chars, there will be some GM modding required.
I also like Kolokotroni's idea of fast fowarding, saying they WERE involved in the earlier chapter stuff, maybe give them some of the related bonus traits, etc, and then just go from there.
You can summon and dismiss your eidolon as much as you want, though the general ritual takes a decent chunk of time, and assuming you don't want to burn the summon eidolon spell unless it was REALLY needed.
So yeah, it becomes a choice, do you want to have 'less hassle' but more potential risk, by dismissing your eidolon while you walk around the city, or have it ready/next to you, but also making your travel very fricking obvious? :)
Was there any further clarification on this? I could see it in terms of "Witch Hex stuff is not stackable with itself, other than Cackle adding duration"
I'd see no issue with the Fright hex stacking with other fear effects, even the cause fear spell, which could stack with itself.
Heh, for a Hexcrafter Magus I see a fun use with this hex and a "Cruel" weapon.
Sorry for the slight necro, but I was just about to ask questions similar to this anyhoo.
As for ranges listed in the OP, for the Nagant pistol, would that be the max range or first range increment? Not saying its super accurate, but Wikipedia puts the effective range of a Nagant pistol at 50 yards, or bout 150 feet. If we brought it back down to rules for advanced guns compared to starters, you'd get a range 20 with max of what 200? which sounds potentially closer.
The d20 modern stuff puts pistols around 20-40 for range increment.
So, quick question re: Burden of Sin (Sp)of the Sin Eater.
If the Sin Eater transfers over the harmful quality from a recipient, and they themselves are Immune to such a quality, does that basically mean they just did a 'Break Enchantment' type effect or Curse Disease or whatever, with no actual downside?
So, Sin Eater that for whatever reason is personally immune to disease or poison or somesuch, transfers over the quality from a victim and is....unharmed?