|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
So your group are all cunning linguists, but are they master debaters?
When I GM if the PCs are equivocating in any manner, I'll have the NPCs roll a Sense Motive, which immediately requires that the PC rolls a Bluff. So as Nawtyit said, the Bluff check roll is made in response to the Sense Motive roll.
Not sure if you're still looking for a good settlement source, but Raging Swan press has a great book called Village Backdrops. It has a few villages all ready to go, with flavor and crunch. Very useful for dropping a complete town anywhere in your fantasy/Pathfinder campaign. They have a free version of the product that has a lot of information, might even be enough for what you're looking for. I've found Raging Swan's material to be of high quality, and would highly recommend it. :)
Okay, before I comment on any potential Pathfinder movie, I wanted to point out that there were actually three D&D movies.
Now, if someone were going to make a Pathfinder movie, and make it in such a way as to garner a major box office audience, it would have to be done as a great story/screenplay first and foremost, with actors that have proved their stuff in other serious roles, and a budget on par with the LOTR movies.
As others have mentioned, I, as an avid Pathfinder player, and general lover of fantasy movies, don't really see a need for this sort of thing. I get my kicks from LOTR, Hobbit, and other medieval and fantasy themed movies. Frequently, when I'm watching those movies, I put in the mechanics myself. Sweet arrow to the neck at the end of Robin Hood (the one with Russel Crowe)? Called shot to the neck, at twice the range increment of his composite longbow. Then I start thinking about what level his character has to be in order to even have a chance of pulling off that shot.
So you see, any fantasy/medieval movie can be a "Pathfinder" movie. It's all in the eyes of the beholder. This is where I think the producers, directors, and actors of the three D&D movies failed miserably. They were so consumed with making sure the movie properly displayed its gaming roots, that they forgot to just tell a good story.
I find it a little disheartening that you would come to the forums and ask the question: Is it all right if I do something that will be totally fun for both me and my players?
I mean, that's what the game is all about, right? Having fun? If you think it will be fun for them, and you know it will be fun for you, you should never have to ask other people if it's okay. Just do it man! Now, if you thought it would be fun, but it turned into a disaster, then come back to the forums and say: Tried this, it sucked, if your group is like mine, don't duplicate.
Maybe I should start another thread and call it interesting things you can do with floating disks...
Another query: It doesn't seem to me that there is anything preventing a caster from creating more than one floating disk. There's nothing that says you can only have one floating disk at a time, or that if you cast a new floating disk spell the previous one winks out. So then, adding on to my previous scenario, what if a caster, let's say a 4th level wizard, who gets an extra spell of 1st level because of their intelligence modifier, casts four floating disks, and has four of his companions climb on the disks. Then another of his companions, who is also a caster, for the sake of the argument let's assume also 4th level, casts another floating disk, and the previous caster climbs on that one. Then, caster number two directs the spell to the very edge of the spell's range, where it won't wink out, but he is still capable of directing it. Won't the previous caster's disks all close the gap to maintain a 5' distance from their creator? In which case, you could conceivably, especially at higher levels, have an entire party floating on floating disks for lengthy periods of time, since the spell lasts for 1 hour/level...
Could two casters of level two each cast a Floating Disk and thereby move each other? If caster one directs his floating disk to 10' away, the other caster's disk would try to close the distance to remain within 5', thereby the caster on the other caster's disk would conveniently follow the direction of his own floating disk, on which sat the other caster.
To me the "so what" is that healing is a part of the game that is supposed to cost something: a spell slot, a channel energy use, a wand charge, a potion, the cost of a magic item (or the murderhobo-ing necessary to procure said magic item). I realize a feat is a relative cost, and that divine casters, generally, are feat starved classes, but it doesn't change the fact that once you have this feat, it completely gets rid of "the cost" of healing outside of combat.
I get that whether they left it in on purpose or left it in on accident doesn't make that much of a difference. I guess, for me, it's one of those cases where I'd just like to know, for no other reason than morbid curiosity.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Apparently people keep missing the fact that the actual ability as printed in the brand, spanking new Inner Sea Gods book, doesn't say spell level, it says character level. I'll paste in the exact wording of the ability so everyone can see that, for non-PFS play, you are actually healing half the casting character's level in HP.
Inner Sea Gods-italics mine wrote:
Cheese or not, outside of PFS (which has changed how the ability works to spell level), this feat, in the hands of a fifth level caster who has the spell Spark prepared, creates the ability to "spam" heal all party damage without wasting any actual resources.
As someone else pointed out, I'd like to know if that was intentional. Especially since two developers comments from three years ago, make it sound very much like they wanted to change it, but were not going to reprint that book, so they didn't. Inner Sea Gods is a new book, just published, and they didn't change it. Which, as I said earlier, gives me pause. Either they allowed it, knowing what benefit it provides to non-PFS players, or they overlooked it entirely and reprinted it with the same mistake.
This! The Mark Moreland and Jason Bulmahn quotes are from three years ago, where they said they would change it to spell level if they reprinted it, but then they went ahead and reprinted last month and didn't change it.
It was. There are Paizo team posts, they're changing that for PFS play and that is effectively a strong recommendation that everyone change it to use spell level instead of half of character level. They don't usually do errata for books they don't plan to reprint, but they are talking about it because this is a pretty serious bug.
I think you may have missed part of the conversation. Glorious Heat was just reprinted in the Inner Sea Gods book. This book just left the printers not too long ago. The only thing that changed from the original Faiths book to ISG is that they added "worshiper of Sarenrae" to the prerequisites. Yes, PFS has changed the way it works, but the "official" (whatever that means) rules say "half character level" healing. They didn't errata it the first time because they don't change books that won't be reprinted, but then they went ahead and reprinted it in a new book without changing it.
Yeah, what andreww said.
You know the adage that floats around the forums occasionally, that the developers put the rules into the hands of intelligent and capable people...
Sometimes I'm not so sure that's true.
I'd have to disagree with you there, a wand of infernal healing is only going to give six hit points per charge. 1 hp per round x ten rounds in a minute with only one minute of total duration. Getting 300 total hit points worth of healing for 750gp is far less cost effective than gathering together a bunch of fine flammable objects (which nature can usually provide) and getting unlimited healing at 0 cost whenever you want. I can think of a lot of players that have "burned" a feat for a lot less than that.
I realize this thread is both impossible by current science regarding time-space, and probably trollish, but I did want to pop in and say that I have some reservations about the ACG based off of the playtest. I'll reserve my final judgments when I get a look at the completed book in August, but as of right now, I'm leaning heavily towards ignoring it entirely. That, of course, is one of the great things about this game, and one that has already been mentioned. If you don't like something, don't use it; that doesn't mean you should jump on a campaign trail to convince everyone else not to use it too.
Is it intended that with a talent (Glorious Heat), with strong pre-reqs, bring back the banished 0-Levels Unlimited Heals?
They either put it in the book realizing that it provided unlimited healing outside of combat without having to use any "real" character resources, and didn't care, or they completely forgot that it was broken the first time and never took the time to change the original wording. An important part of the supposed intent, for me anyway, is that they did add the line: "worshiper of Sarenrae" into the prerequisites. It means that at some point someone was looking at the feat, and knew that they needed to add something deity specific to it. Either way it doesn't instill me with a whole lot of confidence.
Great, that doesn't change the fact that in the actual pages of the book the Glorious Heat feat says half your level in hit points. Also, the feat doesn't say that you have to keep taking divine caster levels. It just says you need the ability to cast divine spells, and be worshiper of Sarenrae. You could take one level of cleric, and then 4 levels in sorcerer and still be able to abuse this feat. This is something that EVERY table is going to have to houserule according to the predetermined fix. If that's the case, why not just fix it before printing?
I really don't mean any disrespect here, and it looks like you're well on your way to achieving your funding but...
1. I personally have almost exclusively prepainted plastic miniatures, and tipping them over is far less of a chore than finding an appropriately labeled disc in a different location to replace the miniature.
2. Unless a person can't physically pick up a miniature, movement across a grid map should never be hindered by things that are on the grid map.
3. This is the very reason tipping a miniature over exists. It also easily displays this very same idea.
Again, sorry to rain on anyone's parade, but I just really don't see how these tokens are an improvement on anything.
In my campaigns the naming of weapons has always been based much less on what abilities the weapon has, and much more on what gloriously triumphant epic deeds the weapon helped accomplish.
Things like: Fiendslayer, Bonecrusher, Sunderheart, Mages'-end, etc. Barring that, sometimes players will name a weapon in a way that calls to mind its shape, like Fang for a shortsword or dagger, Dragon'stooth for any long pointy weapon, and so on.
With that in mind I would have zero idea how to name any of the weapons you've listed, because I do not know what mythic deeds they've been a part of.
My 2 cp
You know how when you open a plastic bottle of soda/water/whatever, there's a little plastic ring left over? Those can make good markers for who's carrying a light source, where an invisible creature is standing, etc. If you collect a variety of colors, you can start using them to keep track of conditions as well.
Mind... blown. I can't believe I didn't think of that, and now that you told me, I think about all those little rings I've just thrown in the recycling bin over the years. D'oh!
If you don't mind parting with some money, I'd direct you to Purple Duck Games Random Encounters Remastered, More Random Encounters Remastered, and Even More Random Counters Remastered. I have all three books and use them quite often. The greatness of these books is that, between the three of them, they cover just about any general terrain out there. In addition there are several encounters built in to each table that are designed to be non-hostile. Like I said, if you have the coin, well worth it, at least from my perspective.
That's kind of what I thought.
Raymond Lambert wrote:
Actually, I'd like to see that too. I didn't know there was a RAW way to get an eidolon as a companion for a ranger. A point towards how that could happen would be appreciated.
Dude... You killed your 8 year old daughter's character?! That's straight up harsh. You really are the MVP of Death. When I play with my kids, who all started playing right around 7 years old, and have now been playing for a few years, I make sure never to kill them. I want them to have as much fun as possible playing this game, so that they keep playing for life. :) I mean, sure, I've dropped a couple of their characters into negative hit points, but I always make sure there's a way to come back. I don't want to criticize the way anyone GM's, to each his own, and if she's having fun then rock on! However, I just can't imagine killing a young adventurer's character.
As to the original question, I'm not familiar with the original material so I can't help there, but, I'm going to actually kind of reiterate what I said above. At this stage in a young player's game, it's all about fun. Especially since it is a true "home" game. If that's what she wants, and you think eidolon is the best way to go about it, have at it! Heck, I wouldn't even make her forgo her spells, I'd just give her an eidolon in place of her animal companion at level 4. It's a home game, and it's your 8 year old daughter. Give her a chimera as an animal companion if you want. :)
Kyle Olson wrote:
Okay, I'll definitely use that temporary option to deal with this. Thanks for the hint. :)
Thank you for the great update Kyle. Love the fact that conditions can now show up on the initiative window! Speaking of the initiative window... I have one request, not sure how difficult it would be. I really appreciate the fact that you can hide the names of the monsters in the initiative window. There's just one small problem, the names of the monsters/NPCs still show up at the top of the window in the "Active Character" position. This causes a little trouble with metagame. Example: sometimes I tell the players they are fighting, "fleshy undead." As different kinds of undead have different abilities and such, this requires the characters to either learn by doing, or to make a knowledge check to figure out their enemies' weaknesses. I realize good players are supposed to separate the metagame from the game, but when "Ghast 1" shows up in the "Active Character" window, it makes it very hard for the players to separate those two entities. Is there any way you could hide the names in that part of the initiative window too? Sorry to just bring this up right after such a sweet update. :(
It's a long read, but well worth it. Justin Alexander writes a great gaming blog, and has a complete essay on mysteries in rpgs called: The Three Clue Rule. If you are seriously thinking about making this part of your players' adventure a mystery, this essay will be invaluable.
Also, +1 to everything Orfamay Quest said.
One thing to remember with touch-range spells is that the touch-attack is a separate action from the casting (though all included within 1 SA). So, the caster (1) casts the spell (which is when a counter spell could be done), and then (2) makes the touch attack. If done together in the same action it provokes two AoOs. After casting a touch-range spell, the caster can "hold the charge" indefinitely, but the spell is already cast, so no longer able to be countered. So, I say, countering a touch range spell is not laughably infeasible.
You've got too many AoOs here.
d20pfsrd.com-Touch Spells in Combat, emphasis mine wrote:
Making those free touch attacks as part of a touch spell does NOT provoke an AoO as it is considered an armed attack.
Edit: Also wanted to say thank you Jiggy for this excellent and concise guide to light and darkness.
Edit 2: Just realized wisepeppy was talking about a ranged-touch spell, in which case there ARE two AoOs. On my first read through I thought he was talking about a regular touch attack, not a ranged touch.
Kyle Olson wrote:
Sent you a couple files anyway, use if you need them.
Thanks for all your work on this FREE program. I realize the android and ios versions aren't free, but the pc version of this program started and remains free, and I'm to the point now, where I don't think I could actually GM a game without it.
Hexes are defined as "magic tricks," that use up a standard action, but do not provoke an attack of opportunity. Casting spells does provoke. Based purely off of this, I would say a hex is not "cast." It's a pretty semantic argument, but in the case of rules that are, at times, very semantic, judgements must be made based off of little things like this.
Thanks for the great update! I have a small bug, not sure if this has been mentioned before, but with some of the portfolios I import from Hero Lab there's an issue with attacks. For some reason it turns the "x" for the critical multiplier into a little diamond with a question mark in it. Any weapon attack that imports with that mixup won't actually work in the automatic dice roller. When I right click, select roll, select attack, it shows up as an "empty" button. Meaning I can click it, but it doesn't actually do anything except put the character's name into the dice engine. Anybody else have this issue? Is it something I'm doing with Hero Lab?
Silent Image says that it can take up four 10 foot cubes, plus one 10 foot cube per level. As I imagine that on a grid map it is four 5 foot squares connected, 2x2, to each other, in width, height, and depth. At first level a caster can connect five of those same sized cubes to each other. That's a pretty darn big area. Am I correct in my understanding of the geometry there?
Broken Prince wrote:
I mean yay, but if the rules were followed to the letter a lot of that simply should not have worked - silent image certainly cannot replicate a goblin army.
I'm going to "third" this. Some of the things that happened there went well outside of the RAW adjudication. The crafting and illusion are the two most prominent examples. I'm also going to point at the rogue's climb check. That's a STR based check, and if I were GMing I'd be setting the DC at a minimum 25, for "A rough surface, such as a natural rock wall or a brick wall." Each set of the rogue's movement speed up the outside wall requires a separate check, and if he fails he's then taking some damage, or making an insane (45) DC check to catch himself. That right there would have given a lot of players pause to think.
Kudos to the players for ingenuity. I love to award thinking like that as a GM, but I also make sure everything they're thinking of fits mechanically within the rules.
Edit: Just noticed you said the rogue had a climb speed... which discounts all my above problem. Still, the crafting and illusions needed some adjudication adjustments.
I put them in plastic sleeves inside a three ring binder numbered/alphabetically just like the list on the back of the box. I have the numbered/alphabetical list inside the front cover and the inside pockets of the three ring binder. I used the sleeves they sell that fit hobby cards like baseball or MTG cards. For the Huge size pawns I actually used sleeves designed for photos, not sure the size, and I don't have it here with me, maybe 5x7, whatever it is it fits two huge size pawns right next to each other (with a bit of squeezing), and has two pockets per sleeve, so I get four pawns per sleeve. I just have the bestiary box set and it takes up two three ring binders, again not sure the size, but they're pretty big, 2 or 3". This system, while time consuming to set up, is absolutely ideal because I know exactly where every pawn is, and they are easily accessible. Of course it also takes up quite a bit of space in my bag, but I went to using a portable luggage cart a long time ago, because I have a huge tackle box full of all my prepainted plastic minis. :)
Edit: Forgot to mention that the bases all fit into the tackle box where my minis get stored.