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

Matrixryu's page

Pathfinder Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 772 posts (2,584 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 4 aliases.

1 to 50 of 234 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Heh, I actually enjoyed watching Avatar in 3D. I think it added a lot to the movie.

Then again, I was the only one among my group of friends who didn't come out of that movie theater stumbling like a drunk. It takes *a lot* to make me motion sick.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kvantum wrote:
Fourshadow wrote:
Perhaps I am thick, but what damage type does a Phytokineticist do? I have read the info 3 times and am still in the dark.
Physical, in either piercing, slashing, or bludgeoning. Autumn is a composite of earth and wood, spring air and wood, summer fire and wood, and winter is a cold and wood composite

I really like the flavor of those composite blasts. I was worried that a fire/wood kineticist would just be like... "I throw burning trees at you for 6d6+20 damage!"

3 people marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:
Justin Franklin wrote:
It has been joked that the warehouse staff has a nigh-incomprehensible formula for what gets shipped when. :)
I heard PMG designed it and Cosmo touched it....

The Paizo shipping formula: no mortal mind can comprehend it. All who look upon it are soon driven mad.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Matrix Dragon wrote:
I may be tempted to make my Kitsune Pyrokineticist into a fire/void type, depending on how well that combination works.

Sorry to steal your thunder, but I was already kitsune obsessed before the first Dragon Empires player companion had come out ;)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Lol, when I saw this archetype the whole "magical girl" thing never even crossed my mind. I just thought it was a very cool and thematic archetype for someone who wanted to run a paladin that didn't receive training.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I find it funny that NONE of the questions that are being asked are about humans or any of the core races. Especially when this book is mostly about the core races.

Paizo! This is your sign that you are missing out on a big money making opportunity by not giving us a non-core races hardcover! ;)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would love it if kineticists could get a power that lets them attempt to banish an outsider regardless of its type. This would greatly help pyrokineticists against devils and many other non-fire typed fire immune enemies.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
Our current campaign is the first time in years that I am not playing as human. It's hard not to when humans have the best options.

This is why my campaigns have houserules to keep people from feeling forced to play a human. It just feels odd that in a world full of fantastical creatures humans are the best (or close to the best) at everything.

I know that Golarion is human centric, but as several other people have said: that doesn't mean I have to like it ;)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have to ask... why do you all care so much about the kineticists single target damage? Not all classes have to be good at that, and this is seriously the thing kineticists are worst at. In my opinion, if you are building your kineticist while only caring about single target damage then you are doing it wrong.

I'm building a pyrokineticist that will be able to do the following by level 11 *at will* without even having to take burn: throw a small fireball that causes all of its targets to save or be blinded, hit enemies with an infinite number of dispel magics (while burning them), create smokescreens, or simply throw 11d6+12 (or so) 10-ft radius blasts at-will. He will have a half-dozen ways to work around fire immunity and stay useful in combat. If this character ever throws a blast only to do damage to a single enemy then he is wasting his round, because there is so much more he could be doing. And this is the least versatile type of kineticist!

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My quick thought on the vigilante is that I think you should focus on making each type of vigilante more based on some of the existing Prestige Classes in the game (such as arcane trickster, shadowdancer, and master spy) rather than basing them on the Base Classes. We already have 1-20 versions of the base classes, and they can just do a 1 level dip into Vigilante if they really want a secret identity.

Use the vigilante as a chance to give us something new and also continue your trend of giving us 20 level versions of the prestige classes. Heck, the vigilante is giving you a chance to make 20 level versions of THREE different prestige classes!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What the... this book didn't even need that big of an errata. These changes are so big and so widespread that the book on my bookshelf is now worthless.

Maybe I should just save myself some aggrivation and not buy the hardcover books until the second printing or something?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey Mark! Just curious, for the Overwhelming Soul archetype, do you think it would be unbalancing to increase the size of the 'internal buffer' that the Overwhelming Soul gets by the character's Charisma Modifier? I'm also thinking of making this ability available at level 1 instead of level 6 of course.

I feel like this would make the Overwhelming soul competitive with, but still weaker than, a standard Kineticist. He would be able to actually use some 'burn' abilities without having to stand still all the time, but still wouldn't be able to do it as many times per day as a standard Kineticist.

Of course, the issue is that a lot of this is still theory crafting and I am hesitant to make any big changes before seeing a bit more of the class in action XD

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am lucky what I expended most of my "Waiting for the PDF" energy/obsession on Pathfinder Unchained.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
The vigilante playtest, accidentally to the wrong file!
...It's the playtest's secret identity.

Vigilante Psychics confirmed!?!?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just a thought: the Fey Divine Power alters the character's spellcasting list. Why not just combine Warlock and Zealot and let the character's Power source selection determine whether he is an arcane or divine spellcaster?

That way you can combine their talent lists and don't have silly things like Warlocks being able to hide their spellcasting while Zealots can't.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like how this background shows the difference between a psychic and a sorcerer. It seems that, unlike a sorcerer, a pyschic has to spend a lot of time studying and learning in order gain a propper grasp over how to unlock the power.

I wonder if this means there will be a psychic sorcerer bloodline or archetype to represent those that this power comes to naturally?

Edit: I should add that this iconic background is really cool as well ;)

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Actually, the funny thing is that the dual identity thing seems to fool dieties enough that no one can use commune to ask them what the vigilante's true identity is, lol.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I can't make it more then 5 minutes into the Matrix before I have to shut it off.

Alright, now I *HAVE* to shun you in defense of my namesake D:

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I just realized that my favorate part of the Vigilante class is that now I have the Arcane and Divine Rogue variants that I always wanted.

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I approve of the Warlock Vigilante's ability to hide spellcasting. I really like the design of the class so far :D

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Eryx_UK wrote:
We don't need even more base classes!

Lies! *hungrily downloads playtest doc*

6 people marked this as a favorite.

My confession: I outright refuse to play "Core Only" pathfinder, or any other version of it that signifigantly restricts my ability to customize my character. I am fine with a GM asking me to tone down a character's power or when he restricts a few things for setting reasons, but if he starts doing blanket bans of entire books just for the sake of it then I'm not interested in the campaign, lol.

I would also be extremely happy to continue to see paizo add more and more books to pathfinder for as long as my house can contain the books. The more options the better!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yay! Glad to see some additional Kitsune stuff is coming out and I'm looking forward to trying to use some of the new options on my current one. Not that I wasn't already looking forward to seeing more stuff for my sneakier characters. ;)

It is cool to see the non-core races getting mentioned though. It often seems like a race will only come up in the book that it is introduced in, and then maybe a compilation book, and then never again. XD

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
What are your favorite races Matrix Dragon?

Well, I don't want to derail any more than I already have, but: Skinwalker, Kitsune, Kobold, Undine, Tengu, and Ratfolk.

I guess Kobolds are Inner Sea, but they are usually evil and have a weird/bad stat spread. They are kind of difficult to play in a standard campaign. Hmmm, I wonder how big of a section Kobolds will get in this book.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Matrix Dragon wrote:

I really hope that the skinwalkers make it into this book and get their ability scores fixed. Between witchwolves having an int penalty and many skinwalkers gaining mental bonuses instad of physical bonuses which they shapechange they had a serious case of flavor not matching the mechanics.

Heck, if they fixed skinwalkers in this book that would make it a must buy for me.

There'll be a little bit of finessing for some of the skinwalker stat mods, but we're trying hard NOT to go crazy with unnecessary errata.

In the case of the witchwolf, their intelligence penalties are likely to remain. Note that while they have the word "witch" in their name, this isn't meant to imply that lots of them take levels as witches. And they need ONE penalty at least, and frankly... as far as wolves are concerned... Intelligence is the stat that seems to me to be the most logical choice to penalize.

We're very close to pencils down on this, so if someone wants to make an impassioned plea or argument... now is the time!!!

EDIT: At this point, we ARE shifting the werecrocodile-kin mods from +2 Int/–2 Wis to +2 Con/–2 Wis AND the wereboar-kin from +2 Wis/–2 Cha to +2 Str/–2 Cha... but the other ones seem to be pretty spot on as far as we can tell...

Thanks for the info James! I am glad that those updates are making their way in :) (I hope I didn't come off as confrontational)

Just curious, what are your thoughts on the way that many of the skinwalkers only gain their mental bonuses when shapeshifted? For example, Werebearkin have +2 Con/-2 Cha, and gain +2 Wis when they shapeshift. Wouldn't it make more sense thematically for them to gain their physical bonus when shapeshifted? The way it is right now it implies that they are physically bear-like all the time, and have to shapeshift to become bear-like mentally... which feels off.

These temporary mental bonuses also cause issues for spellcasters and other classes with special abilities, since they have to be in their beast form all the time in order to keep their bonus spells per-day and such.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Is it bad that I am much more excited about this book now that I've seen that the advertisement for it on the back of the Monster Summoner's Handbook has a two-tailed kitsune? It does make sense that kitsune would get mentioned (or at least get a picture) in a Dirty Tactics book, I'm just surprised that Paizo is actually bothering to acknowledge a Dragon Empires race.

I have a feeling that this is Alexander Augunas' doing ;)

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Every time people talk about eidolon attacks vs a barbarian or paladin's attacks, they never seem to mention how horribly inaccurate the eidolon is. The extra attacks are nice, but they almost never all hit!

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
FLite wrote:
Also, can you help us understand why the decision was made to not allow any of the good races to take the mount evolution?
I'm not sure about agathions. The other ones mostly don't have the correct base forms anyway (and the azata serpentine has arms like the lillend, which would make it both a little odd and kind of risque).

I'd just like to point out that the bestiary entry for Agathions says the following: "Some are more humanoid in appearance, while others spend their entire existence in a form nearly identical to that of a true animal". Since you can effectively have Agathions that are nearly identical to real world creatures, the mount evolution fits them perfectly.

Sooo, if you guys do end up errating away the mount evolution for devils, we'd appreciate it being added for the Agathions ;)

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey! I don't remember seeing a video of anyone getting punched with the gauntlet! I think that has to happen before we donate anything this year ;)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
houstonderek wrote:

Here's one place Hasbro is winning. To the vast majority of the population, if they see a bunch of people gaming, they assume "Dungeons and Dragons". Outside of our bubble, no one knows what the hell "Paizo" or "Pathfinder" are.

Well, people used to think that all video game systems were "nintendos". These sorts of things don't last forever, though it will probably take longer in a smaller market like this one.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:

Mr. Mark Seifter,

Are eidolons allowed to use the variant multi class rules? What about a rogue eidolon?

Lol, we can totally create a rogue rogue eidolon now. A rogue eidolon with the rogue VMC.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
London Duke wrote:
I didnt realize it was only a bonus to melee attacks and damage for the barbarian's new rage mechanic. It does seem like the barbarian's damage will take a bit of a nerf due to not being augmented higher for 2handed weapons combat. Or is the bonus increased when using a 2handed weapon?
It isn't, but even at Greater Rage, that's only -2 damage per hit, which is simply not that big a deal.

The real nerf is that barbarians no longer benefit from the courageous weapon enchantment because the bonuses are no longer moral bonuses. Though, the whole furious courageous weapon thing was kind of silly.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yay! I've been wondering if that is how mithral was intended to work, glad to hear it :D

Just a request: if you do a FAQ about taking 10, please make it cover taking 10 in general and not just knowledge checks. To this day I constantly get into arguments with people who think you can't take 10 on a climb or disable device check because they say "Failing would cause something bad to happen, so you can't take 10". D:

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
QuidEst wrote:

Evolution Surge for breath weapon, or two feats on Extra Evolution, or pick an outsider with flight (although you might end up with a wyvern based on the base type).
Given the limited daily uses, I too usually see breath weapon from evolution surge. Just seems tidier that way.

I've always been kind of tempted to make the Breath Weapon evolution have unlimited (1d4 round delay) uses so there's an actual point to building the eidolon with it, lol. It always lags behind their attack damage anyway.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ick, I don't want to be a downer but.... don't we already have enough information about the core races? We have some races out there that have like, 2 or 3 pages of background, while the core races have dozens or hundreds of pages already.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do agree that these changes to the eidolon were probably needed, but I don't like the fact that the decreased evolution points basically makes the half-elf favored class bonus where you get bonus evolution points *even better*.

It was already hard enough to justify running any other type of summoner.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think I am going to houserule that players can give up feats at a faster rate in order to gain abilities from their VMC picks. I really dislike the fact that you don't really gain the the things that make you feel like a member of these classes until like... level 15 or 19 in a lot of cases. The campaign is basically over at that point.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Interesting fact: The dimensional feat line is so feat intensive that only a fighter would be able to afford to get that, be skiled with a weapon, AND varient multiclass before something like level 15.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
brad2411 wrote:
Fighter multi class to get the conjuration teleportation school of magic and then all the dimensional feats. Or a brawler with that nice.

That is actually kind of frightening. I think we can finally have anime style teleport-step fights.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey James! I'm in a campaign right now where I've been trying to introduce Daikitsu as a more active deity. However, I've been having some problems coming up with ideas for a few reasons and was wondering what your thoughts on the subject were.

1. Diakitsu seems to be mostly a Diety for farmers, family, and craftsman. Nature as well. In what circumstances would she aid or be interested in an adventuring party? Maybe when they are protecting a village or something?

2. Daikitsu is a Kitsune, and her primary worshipers are kitsune. However, she seems to have very little in common with them aside from the whole 'mother of the race' thing. Sure, kitsune are loyal and have interests in craftsmanship, but they seem to primarily be known as enchanters and tricksters. Why do they seem so different from Daikitsu?

I know that Daikitsu is essentially a re-flavored version of the Japanese god Inari and that is why she has her domains, but I am just trying to figure out why she seems so different from her race in the context of Golarion and what it means for them.

3. If Daikitsu worship were to spread into the Inner Sea region, do you think it would change in any way or run into any barriers? I know that Gozrah is very similar, but s/he seems to have little direct interest in *people* the way Daikitsu does, so it seems like farmers and communities would find Daikitsu to be an easier god to relate to.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
C) I don't like the idea of "spell level access = more tails" because it undercuts the idea that nine-tailed kitsune are rare. They should be. Since nine-tailed kitsune aren't even mentioned as being a thing in any of their racial descriptions (but white-furred kitsune ARE, which also comes from Japanese mythology), that leads me to believe that polytailed kitsune are rare enough that they're seen as being myths / stories among kitsune, let along other races.

I can understand that. I guess my aversion to the magical tail feat line (and why I often give the tails to a character for free) is because while the individual abilities sound powerful it is pretty much impossible for a character to get them at an early enough level that they are meaningful.

Actually, my real aversion is that in my opinion a nine tailed kitsune should be *frightening*. It should be an event to run into one. In actuality, in almost every instance, the players would be relieved to run into a nine tailed kitsune because it means he spent his feats unwisely! The idea that a nine-tailed kitsune sorcerer is inherently weaker than any other kitsune sorcerer blows my mind, but unfortunately that is the way things are. So... I just give them their tails for free for flavor sake so they have a chance to go with a real character build.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Every time my new monk uses the flying kick, I am going to make Liu Kang sound effects.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oooo, I hope that this book finally gives spellcasters a way to officially hide their spellcasting without obscure bard feats or mythic powers. :D

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you don't like the summons, why don't you just have the player use one of the archetypes that replaces summon monster rather than just banning the entire class? Spirit Summoner for example.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
That's terrible. I can still sneak attack them, but doing the exact same thing as last round is suddenly impossible because it already happened once?

When it comes to surprise attacks, the fact that it is the exact same thing as last round is exactly why it wouldn't work.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh wow, the Feral Hunter has suddenly become pretty good. The inability to have a long duration summon to use those teamwork feats with was a huge design problem in the original version.

Yay, I need to run one of these now. Thanks for taking the time to make these archetypes more effective :D

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My favorate solution against swarms: summon another swarm and watch them fight it out. Did this on a low level druid once.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

First, you should make it clear before the campaign starts that the fights won't all be tailor made for the party. They may run into something that WILL kill them if they fight it head on.

Second, if the characters are about to fight said unbeatable encounter, give them all DC 5 wisdom checks to realize that this is a really bad idea. By having a roll be involved, that makes it feel like their characters realized this rather than an out of game voice saying "no you shouldn't fight this".

5 people marked this as a favorite.

A lot of people here seem to be forgetting that the demons at least need to have a 'reliable description' of where they are going. If adventruers want to keep a surprise teleport from happening all they have to do is move their campsite. Add something to block scrying if necessary.

Depending on how reliable of a description the GM requires, a king could fool a teleport spell just by moving his bedroom to another part of his castle or changing the furniture every once in a while. Of course, this is completely ignoring the fact that a king should be able to pay to have his castle constantly dimension locked.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
feylund wrote:
how come people think all nongood acts are evil.... neutral is an alignment..
The souls of your enemies may taste like chocolate but consuming them is still definitely evil.

I said it before and I'll say it again: there is nothing in the ability that says anything about any souls being harmed in any way. Aside from it being separated from the body of course.

1 to 50 of 234 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.