| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pants are an illusion, and so is death.
Search Posts
On the PFSRD, under Other Spreadsheets, you will find the Bestiary with Statistics. The BwD has the accumulated statistics of all the Bestiary creatures (as of when it was written), sorted by CR. From this, we see that the highest CMD of a CR5 creature was 31, while the average CMD was 22. The highest Perception modifier was +19 and the average was +11. So you're aromatically beating the out-of-combat flat 20 Sleight of Hand, as well as the average CMD for your level, and beating the highest CMD on a 7+. That's pretty good. The perception is a bit harder to quantify, being an opposed roll. If we assume a 10 for the target, you're also automatically beating the median at 21. Because you want to beat and not meet the Perception, you would need a 6+ to beat the highest CR5 perception. Sounds to me like you have things well in... *puts on glasses* Sleight of Hand.
I want to see the return of Monkey Grip. Or at least take out that dumb sentence which prevents scaling weapons. The (cumulative!) penalties are enough to balance it out. I'd also like to see a book with a bigger emphasis on skills like Complete Adventurer and Complete Scoundrel from 3.5. More uses for skills, especially Knowledge and Profession. Standard DCs for more actions, skill tricks maybe. Also, some higher level DCs (35+) to make skills more useful to high level and mythic characters.
"Uses for completely ordinary livestock" Bow-chicka-wow-wow...
Clearly, what you want is Manacles of Cooperation. As a druid, you can wild shape into some innocuous animal like a squirrel or cat. While in this innocent form, you then sneak into an enemy position and wait for nightfall. When your target is asleep (and thus helpless) you turn back and place the manacles on your target. Now the afflicted creature will never try to remove the manacles and will obey any request you make if it fails a DC11 will save. So just keep asking until it fails the save. And it's available for the low low cost of exactly how much you have (2000 gold).
Catfolk and goblins both have alternate racial traits which grant a climb speed (which you'd have all the time, not just for the duration of the spell). Of course, that's little help if you need to be a different race for some reason, but it is a good way to have a climb speed at level 1.
I plan. Building character is fun for me, so I have several folders of concepts fleshed out for every level. They're fun thought exercises to work on, but I don't expect to ever use them. At least, I don't expect to use them all the way. I can start a campaign at level 8 by pulling one of my pre-prepared level 8 characters, but I can never know how that ideal build will work once it hits the campaign. Maybe I won't get that magic item I need in order to be able to do that cool trick. Maybe we'll need a healer and I'll draw the short straw. Maybe I won't have plot-reasonable access to the trainer I need to multiclass. Planning is a good jumping-off point, but you can't plan for the campaign unless you're the GM. On a related not, this is why I never play below 5th level. If I need to dip a level or two in order to make my character concept work, it's better to do that before the campaign starts. If I don't it might be impossible to fit in during the campaign. I dislike the idea of a character being one class the whole game and then suddenly becoming a wizard out of the blue even though the party is in the middle of the jungle with no books to research.
...So then it'll be a Very Fast Zombie?
It's also pretty much the only way for a character without an animal companion to start with a mount. The cheapest horse you can get costs 75gp, and isn't even combat trained. That's almost half of a fighter's average starting gp, and twice a monk's. So if you were planning on going Sohei (and not abusing the archery flurry) or either of the fighter mounted archetypes you have to suffer through the first (and possibly second) level not being able to do what your character was meant for.
I once had a 3.5/PF goliath fighter specialized for sundering. We started at level 8, so I already had Greater Sunder. The first encounter of the campaign was a bunch of low level bandits with short swords. Naturally, I start off by trying to sunder one of their weapons. I rolled high and did enough damage to kill him with the damage that carried over after breaking the sword. The GM narrated that I went right through the sword and sundered his head.
There's a lot of room for variation here! Maybe they are using Spellcraft and Detect Magic each time. Maybe they're using Appraise to identify the item itself, which they know from legend to be magical. Maybe they're being conned and the PC has good Bluff.
I've wondered about this for a while- If take Rogue Talent as one of your ninja tricks, do you then gain the Rogue Talents class feature enabling you to take the feat? Of course, it would still only let you get extra Rogue Talents, not extra Ninja Tricks. Still, a ninja with multiple Terrain Mastery talents would be nice.
LazarX took my answer, so I'd have to go with No Evil Characters, including Neutral (but really evil) or Chaotic Neutral (but I am evil tee hee) This would be my one house rule as well. However, I'd word it as "all PCs must be within one alignment step of each other". So you could have a group which is either all good or all evil, but no LG paladins hanging out with CN almost-evil rogues. Which side of the grid would of course be agreed on before the game even started.
The Swarming trait allow the two ratfolks to share a square, but they would still suffer the penalties for squeezing... I thought the whole point of the trait was that they didn't have to squeeze in order to occupy the same space. Otherwise, it's pretty useless even without trying to flank.
Manacles are a classic trick, available and affordable from 1st level. Even better, make them Manacles of Cooperation- once they're on, the victim never tries to escape and you can just keep making requests until they fail the saving throw. Shackles of Compliance are less hazy rules-wise and you get a more powerful Command effect, but only 3 times per day and the victim can try to escape.
Monkey Grip. In 3.5, you could have off-sized weapons and there was a penalty for that. Now, thanks to one sentence added, we have a penalty, an iconic, and an archetype built around oversized weapons which don't work.
You would probably have to go by skill, rather than by class, listing each class ability/ feat/ trait which affects it. I would really enjoy something like that, but it would probably take a lot of effort. Kind of like the X-to-Y list or the racial archetype guide.
There was just a thread about this for CR 2. Lots of good advice on how to bump lower CR creatures up. Also, as I stated in the thread:Lantern Archon! With the Missing Template too, because Navi wan't annoying enough already.
The feat is very vaguely worded, but it looks like the intent is to remove the requirement that your target be within 30' and not to grant free sneak attacks.
Are you the GM? If yes, then that's up to you. You want kitty-eared elves? You got em. If no, ask your GM.
Not to derail the thread, but on the SRD Pathfinder Delver seems to have changed into the Dark Delver. Does anyone know which book makes that change? Is there any difference in abilities between the two?
I sundered a pirate ship. This was in the transition period from 3.5 and we were allowed any books from either we wanted. I was a Goliath Fighter with an oversized adamantine great hammer and both sunder feats (and PA of course). In the first encounter of the game I sundered a bandit's sword and his head in one attack thanks to Greater Sunder. Later, we were tasked with eliminating these pirates but when we got to their hideout they were asleep or something. So I stepped up and sundered a hole in their bow. The ship started listing, pirates were flying everywhere, falling overboard, desperately trying to find where the enemy ship was. It was glorious.
I've never had to deal with a cursed item on my PC, but I've played in a game where another PC was using one. He was a bard who had found a Girdle of Opposite Gender at some point. The player was obsessed with charming/ suggesting NPCs to put it on.
Strix plus anything. Can't beat a fly speed at level 1! Take Hover as your 1st feat and you can float just above your enemies' heads and do whatever your class does without fear of retribution. Strix Fighter with a reach weapon? Strix Fighter with a bow? Strix Rogue (or suitable replacement) who disarms/ steals/ trips with whips?
According to the Book of Erotic Fantasy, Mummy Rot is too. So there is a precedent.
Yes, the RAW instantaneous level up does break characterization. That's because the entire level up system is abstract. It is inherently divorced from the game's world. To give an example, how does your character know it is time to seek out a trainer? The player knows because they reach the set amount of XP, but XP doesn't exist in the character's mind. Does the PC has to return to this NPC and train regularly in between level-ups? What happens when the PC needs to level up in the middle of a dungeon? What if their trainer is on vacation, or gets killed by the BBEG- does that prevent the PC from leveling up? The more try to reconcile the abstraction with the game world, the more one of them is going to fall apart. [edit] Looks like I took too long typing T_T
Perhaps you are thinking of the E6 "Games within the game" concept?
I'd say Magus, but adjust its spell-list to cover those areas that you're talking about... So basically a Samsaran Magus with Mystic Past Life? Sure the CON penalty sucks for combat, but you get a bonus to your casting stat, which Mystic Past Life keys off of. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to get at least 5 additional utility spells to round out the Magus' list.
Don't forget that Sacred Tattoo is a luck bonus, meaning you're protected from Pugwampis right off the bat.
I still want to play a Lantern Archon. I'd hire a Commoner in a green tunic to carry my stuff in the early levels. Once I could afford them, I'd start buying intelligent magic items with fly speeds so they could follow me around without needing to be carried. Class would probably be Cleric, so I can eventually summon other archons to form a gestalt.
...This player had a lot of interaction with the mule. Removing the mule would remove a good amount of that players actions in game... This is the crux of the issue: how much investment does the player have in the pack animal? Is it a beloved friend whom the player talks to and grooms and sleeps next to on cold nights? Probably not a good idea to randomly kill it. Maybe have it stolen by brigands or trolls and need to be rescued. Just straight up removing something the player has invested significant RP time into will be a major blow to that player. The same goes for abrupt changes in alignment or character background shifts. Now, compare the mule the wizard rented for 5 gold to carry his duffel bag. The player probably forgets it exists when it isn't mechanically important. When the PCs exit the dungeon and find its bones picked clean by an owlbear, the reaction will probably be mild inconvenience and not heartbroken shock.
I actually think that's a decent idea. We're not really talking realistic crossbows here, but then we don't have realistic bows or firearms either. Especially not the bows. I feel, though, that the solution fits really well on the conceptual level. A crossbow is conceptually sort of a cross between a bow and a firearm. Having a little bit of firearm mechanics and a little bit of bow mechanics would suit that concept nicely.
I remember I played a Bloody Skeletal Champion in one of our games. It was hidden by covering myself in layers and layers of bandages, which were washed and dried nightly since I didn't sleep. Even better, just keep casting Prestidigitation on it whenever the bandages start to get soaked.
I like this evil coin idea. It's easy to imagine it 'accidentally' falling out of its owner's hands or slipping through a tear in a pocket or coin purse a la the one ring. Also, it needs telekinesis of some kind so when its anger is aroused it can start throwing other coins from its owner's treasure as an attack. Maybe also have it compel greed from its owner so it has more ammunition/ more other coins to hide amongst.
I miss Monkey Grip. T_T
Ever played with a pixy in the group? Level 6 party, pixy had 1 hd. Sure, greater invisibility at will, but still. 1d6+0 bow damage and barely any magic, plus a grand total of about 5 hit points. I don't mean to argue semantics, but you are missing a couple of details there. Most high LA races got extra racial HD to cover them for their first couple of levels. Gnolls, for example, were +1LA and got 2 racial HD for that level. Pixies, on the other hand, aren't supposed to have lots of HP. They have at-will invisibility, DR10/cold iron, and spell resistance. Also, the LA was only +6 if the pixie could cast irresistible dance, otherwise it was only +4. My point is that the LA system was better than people give it credit for, and certainly better than nothing.
I agree on the level adjustment point. I miss having that simple system for including more powerful races as PCs. My favorite used to be the Goliath from Races of Stone (+1LA), but if you were willing to wait you could play a minotaur (+2LA) or even a hill giant (+4LA). I like the LA system because I like stupid unexplainable menagerie parties. I like having a pixie (+4LA) and a giant in the same party. I like seeing parties made up entirely of gnolls or lizardfolk or DRAGONS. One of the things I really don't care for about Pathfinder is that humans are the only race to play. With the exception of obviously powerful races like Aasimar (who were +1LA in D&D 3.5) there is just so rarely a justification for not taking that extra feat and assignable stat boost. The ARG was a nice step, but the race points are no basis for level adjustment. Hobgoblins are 9 RP and goblins are 10 RP despite hobbos having better ability scores. Svirfneblin are a character race but have a whopping 24 RP. Lizardfolk have a swim speed, natural attacks, natural armor, and only good ability scores but are 8 RP- less than humans and goblins. I know the official Paizo stance on monster races is a resounding "NO!" but it would still be nice to have some kind of balance system for those of us who like monster races. Plus, I still want to play a lantern archon.
Fighter. I want all of the feats and I don't like having to wait for them.
Useless gimp character = REAL ROLEPLAYAR!! "Useless gimp" is just as subjective as "boring" is. Your fighter does not need to have every single Weapon Spec. feat in order to do well in combat. It is the GM's job to make sure combat is not insurmountable to the PCs, just like it is the GM's job to make sure the fighter has something to do during roleplay. If you want to skip Greater Weapon Focus and take Skill Focus: Basket Weaving instead your GM should ease up a little on the monsters and give you some basket skill checks. There is no such thing as a combat-ineffective character if the game is being played properly.
Instead of worrying, just use a Helm of Opposite Alignment to get your lich back to normal.
Larger teepees and yurts typically have fire pits in the middle. It's really just a matter of size and proper setup.
Learning to program (not going well). TONS of ideas in my head. Same here. It's mostly a situation of having games I want to play which don't exist. I look at a game I've played or watched someone play and think "Ooh! That would be so fun in a sci-fi setting instead of medieval," or "That game mechanic would work so well in real-time rather than in turns." I hope that one day I can get a good enough grasp of coding to breathe some life into these ideas. I would never be so proud as to expect to make money off of it though. I think it more as an artistic pursuit.
...Hat or Disguise. the ability to change my appearance at will has helped me in many situations with characters that can't normally disguise themselves at will. whether or not they are disguise specialists. it's rare i find a foe with true seeing, but the main use, is to make my already human looking planetouched females even more human looking versions of themselves. or to pass my barbarian or ranger off as a wizard or sorcerer to deceive people. Ditto the Hat of Disguise. It's just too useful for its cost. I love to play non-human characters, and I love playing in parties which are insane menageries of half-breeds and monsters. The humans in that hamlet with levels in the commoner archetype 'dirt farmer' usually don't enjoy it as much.
The king was secretly a lich and came back later on his own. He has killed everyone else who was present at his death, and still rules the kingdom as if nothing happened. Except that now the PC is the only one left who knows he 'died', and thus may figure out his secret. This solves the return, the superpowers, and him becoming a villain. Also, if your PC ever tries to return home nothing will have changed and everyone will think s/he is a raving lunatic- prompting the local guard to swoop in and force an encounter with the king.
15 goblins gives just over 2000 XP- that's a CR 5 encounter. And that's assuming that the warband doesn't have a higher-level leader. If they do, it's likely a CR 6. Your PCs are all level one, so the encounter is either 4 or 5 CR higher than their average level. The CRB sets "epic" hard encounters at CR 3 above the party's average level. Tl;dr you have way too many goblins.
The Robe of Vermin cursed item (it's near the bottom) knocks your initiative by -5 in addition to its other ill effects. Also, the Lovesick drawback from Ultimate Campaign gives a -2 to initiative.
Quick question: the Filcher rogue archetype gains Improved Steal and Greater Steal as bonus feats which both have Combat Expertise as a prerequisite. Obviously no one wants to take Combat Expertise, but the archetype lacks the "need not meet prerequisites" language seen on Monk bonus feats. Is that language implied, or do Filcher rogues just have to take Combat Expertise at some point in order to access their class features?
A really easy way to generate cursed items is by just looking at the Conditions page and the Universal Monster Ruleson the SRD. Pick an effect you like and then think of what possible thematic reason could generate that effect. For example, maybe the item gives you a limited use breath weapon, but each time you use it you become nauseated from having fire or acid or whatnot spewing out of your mouth. A gaze attack and the blinded condition would work well too, ala Cyclops from the X-men. You can also mine some fun design space by having the item's benefit heal its downside- perhaps a weapon with a constant bleed effect while equipped which grants fast healing for a number of rounds after drawing blood with it. I like the golem/ mummy thing, but I agree that it needs a bit more connection between the benefit and the consequences. Maybe it summons an undead under their control and a corresponding ghost which will try to return its body to rest? Maybe the mummies generate some kind of visible effect if they touch the golems to alert the players that they are related?
Let's say you, as the GM, decide that zombies are rare. DC 15 just to know what it is, 20 to find out it shambles, 25 to learn it's undead, 30 to learn it has darkvision... Good to know, but not what the PCs actually wanted to learn (that it has DR 5/slashing).Darkvision is an undead trait and wouldn't qualify as 'another piece of information'. Ah, but the list of undead traits is out-of-character knowledge. My point isn't that the darkvision or any other piece of information is worth a specific DC. My point is that the GM decides what is or isn't and so can decide that the 45 you just rolled gets you nothing useful.
|