Search Posts
Hi all, and sorry if this is in the wrong place. I recently had a player start in my Age of Worms Golarion game. In my game, I'm using contacts and factions quite a bit, and the player ended up being an adventurer for the Knights of Ozem. I had thought (incorrectly) that there was already a pre-made Faction for the Knight of Ozem, however there was not. Recently I put one together, and wanted some feedback on it. Link is here If the above doesn't work, I'll just post it here, if that's okay.
I recently stated up Dragotha. My plan is to hand out Mythic levels once they AoW Spoiler:
put balakarde's soul back together Here's my finished Mythic Dragotha, any comments/criticisms are welcome. Dragotha Spoiler:
Dragotha
I'm working on Kyuss, and I keep hitting a mental block on him as well.
Hi there, In order 1772326 I pre-ordered the Pathfinder Adventure Path: Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition (PFRPG) Hardcover. Since then, you have put up the special edition, and I'm interested in purchasing it instead. Is there anyway I can switch one for the other, or is it too late? Thanks!
Thank you! I didn't have the books in front of me, and couldn't find the improved part in d20pfsrd
Hi, I'm a little confused as to the rules on the following ability, specifically where I've bolded it.
As I understand it, your Eidolan gains the evolution for free, however you have to pay the Evolution Pool cost to use the new spells? Or do you gain the first evolution for free and then each one you pay extra for?
While converting Demonweb Pits I converted the Cranium Rats swarm. Granted this was one of the first things I converted, so feel free to review/change/discard it. Cranium Rats: Cranium Rat Swarm, Greater Pack
CR 9 XP 6,400 NE Tiny magical beast (extraplanar, swarm) Init +7; Senses darkvision 60ft, low-light vision, scent; Perception +25 Defense AC 15, touch 15, flat-footed 12 (+3 Dex, +2 size) hp 120 (16d10+32) Fort +12, Ref +13, Will +9 Immune cold; SR 26; Defensive Abilities swarm traits, half damage from slashing or piercing weapons Offense Speed 40 ft., climb 20 ft. Melee swarm (4d6) Space 10 ft.; Reach 0 ft. Special Attacks distraction (DC 20) Spells (CL 10th; concentration +14) 5th – (3/day) hold monster (DC 19) 4th – (6/day) contagion (DC 18), fire shield 3rd – (7/day) fireball (DC 19), lightning bolt (DC 19), slow (DC 17) 2nd – (7/day) blur, knock, mirror image, see invisibility 1st – (7/day) charm person (DC 15), expeditious retreat, magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, shocking grasp 0 – dancing lights, daze (DC 14), detect magic, flare (DC 14), ghost sound (DC 14), mage hand, open/close, prestidigitation, read magic Statistics Str 2, Dex 17, Con 14, Int 19, Wis 14, Cha 19 Base Atk +16; CMB —; CMD — Feats Alertness, Combat Casting, Eschew Spell MaterialsB, Greater Spell Focus (evocation), Greater Spell Penetration, Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Spell Focus (evocation), Spell Penetration Skills Acrobatics +22, Climb +23, Knowledge (arcane) +20, Perception +25, Sense Motive +22, Spellcraft +20 Special Abilities Mind Blast (Su) 60-foot cone, at will. DC 23 Will save or be stunned 1d6 rounds.
Agreed completely. They'll have to be wary of what they put in each book though if they approach this method. For instance: In Races of the Wild, there were a bunch of new feats for arrows and some cool new arrows. This was where the book shined (IMHO). However if I didn't care about elves/halflings/raptorians, I probably wouldn't have bought the book. And some DMs are known for throwing out the baby with the bathwater (ex. "Raptorians are overbalanced, banning Races of the Wild"). So to avoid this, is each book going to be made up of modules? So if I bought the cowboy book, will there be a guns module, a gunslinger class module, a gun tricks module, etc.? I could see that working. (Granted I'm just guessing and musing out loud).
I didn't even think about the power level. Food for thought, thank you.
A bunch of stuff that bothered someone Look, here's how these situations go down: You do something that bothers someone. That one thing you listed bothered them, a lot. It could be something else that was not listed, such as something they think of as shallow, like perhaps the way you pronounce words, play your character, eat, etc. Maybe they aren't good with confrontation or communication, or maybe they hinted you shouldn't and you didn't pick up on it. We don't know, we weren't there. None the less, it happened at some point and enough people noticed and were annoyed. Then it snowballed. It always does. Eventually you did something enough that they nitpicked every little thing you did and found fault with all of it. We all do this. I, for instance, don't look people in the eye when talking to them and stare at others when I ask for their turn. This is confusing. Does it bother people? No. If it did, they'd probably get annoyed and also point out that my cooking isn't always great, I tend to pass gas a lot, and I expect some help in the kitchen and don't so much "ask" for help as I "tell" people to help. Getting back to you, yes, some of the things listed seem innocent enough and aren't THAT big of a deal when viewed by us, the internet, without being there for 2 or 3 years. If you want to avoid it, learn from these things and apply that learning in the future. 1. Ask for permission to drink others stuff (we're in a recession, money is tight) 2. Curb your swearing a little in those situations (they could have kids, neighbours, etc. that don't want to hear that) 3. Make sure that any debts are important to YOU and don't wait to be asked. I know debts bug me, and someone forgetting is awkward and annoying. 4. If you are bringing snacks and no one is eating them but you, assess the situation before just giving up. Ask yourself: Is it because you leave them beside you and they don't feel comfortable reaching for your snacks? Did you offer anyone them (every time, not just the first time)? Is it because you eat them all before anyone has a chance? I'm not calling you fat, I do this too. Is it because they are on specific diets? What are others bringing? If I bring fruit all the time, I'm not eating cookies. When you or others reach in to grab a snack, have they licked their hands recently or perhaps not washed? Even if someone did this once it can turn off others to doing this again? Are you buying from a store everyone else knows has rats? It's silly but it could be why. Good ways to solve this are saying "Hey, I bring these [types of snacks] each time however it seems I'm the only one eating them" to them and let them say "Yeah, no one likes those" or "Gee, you're right, we always forget about them" or "Yeah, that place has rats, we thought you knew". If you don't want to change, and feel they are being nit-picky, then move on. Is this going to matter in 3 months? Does it matter what complete strangers think on the internet?
The system's simplicity is the draw for me, and will be for others, I suspect. A 5-page combat section in one place handily beats out 9 pages in the 3.5 DMG + 30 pages in the 3.5 PHB, or 26 pages in the PF Corebook.I really, really doubt that'll last into the final system. At the very least they'll add optional systems for all the things you mention, in which case you'll probably need to reference both. Most likely, all sorts of feats and special rules for those will appear. We've already seen some. It's just that they're currently only on the character sheet, we don't have the rules sections that they come from.If the options are just that, options, then the simplicity will still be there. I don't have a problems with a "complexity module" tacked on. Options can be ignored without having to radically alter the system. I'm kinda scratching my head on this one, because of how we define "options". Perhaps I'm not well informed on DDN. Do the "options" include new classes, feats, or abilities, such as those found in new books like the APG from PF or the Complete series from 3.5? I could see a player being rubbed the wrong way if they found one of the above in a product they bought and wasn't able to use it because the module it came with wasn't being used. I understand that can happen in any game, just the modular method of DDN would promote it more. It also speaks to what GMs are buying versus what players buy (I am a GM and thus bought the GM guide, my players bought the APG, for instance). And to clarify, I mean if they found a psion class or a large weapon feat, for instance, not so much a cowboy class or a spelljammer-esque feat.
Hi all, So far for all of the APs I've run I've painted the last boss miniature. I'm about to start Legacy of Fire once Kingmaker ends. I want to paint up the last boss for Legacy of Fire, however from looking through the Reaper minis, he hasn't been made yet. It'll be a few months before I need something, however I was wondering: 1) Has anyone heard anything about an upcoming Jhavhul miniature? (I'm reaching, I know) 2) What have others used for this mini (assuming that you did use something)?
First question: Have you every played a Civilization computer game? If yes, skip to **. If no, keep reading So in any of the Civilization games, eventually you hit the end of the game, and you're running 20 some odd cities, 40+ land units, 10+ water units, are building a ship to another planet and each turn is taking 12 hours because you have to wait for everyone to move. It turns into this slow, drawn out long winded game of moving tiny things and building up queues and really wish that France and India would stop invading each other just so that turns would go quicker. ** The end of Kingmaker is like that for kingdom building. Your players will take 1/2 an hour to get through one round of kingdom building. They will have more Build Points than they'll know what to do with. Plan on rolling a LOT of random magic items.
It just feels like its us 3 against the DM, and his favorite, but your right.. Perhaps we can jut RP it that way... Sorry, this reply rubbed me the wrong way. It is you three versus the DM. That's not a bad thing. Just because you outnumber the people doing something you don't like doesn't mean you are in the wrong. It means that 3 of you differ in opinion to 2 others. The DM and the player are having fun making his character better by bending the rules. The DM feels you outshine others and has a favourite. Sounds like you have a past together, and the DM didn't like how you played in other games. RP isn't the answer here. Either have an adult conversation and/or find another game. Anything else is just going to annoy you and others.
Really appreciate this KaptainKrunch! Yeah, I'm usually the DM, however I've been able to join a Second Darkness game as a Wizard. Thematically I knew what I wanted to do, however I have no idea which to choose. The updated guide (along with the original) has been a great resource. I don't know if it was covered and I missed it though; is there any thoughts to looking at Wizard prestige classes? Or is that less optimal? Edit: Realized Treantmonk went through a bunch of them already. So to revise my question, even though Wizards don't get new spells/level in their spell book, are prestige classes worth it and are there plans to look at any prestige classes not covered last time?
There was a request for how long each of these took. Age of Worms: Was playing every Saturday and we were in University, so 12 hours 3-4 times a month. We played a total of 5 months each time. Rise of the Runelords: We played 7 sessions, each was 18 hours across 2 days. Total time: 1 year, 2 months. Curse of the Crimson Throne: Again, 7 sessions, 18 hours across 2 days. Total time: 1 year, 4 months Kingmaker: Games are now 1/month, about 11 hours of game time, on Saturdays (we got old). We started February last year, and we're aiming to finish end of May/mid June.
Other than "they took some guys stuff", which you find morally wrong, why do you want them to give it back? Is it too powerful? Did he have an artefact? Do they have too much money/stuff? As many people have said (here and before), Pathfinder and DnD is basically a game where you fight the "monster" and steal it's stuff. Getting "stuff" is part of the game for a lot of players, and taking that part of the game away by guilt tripping players is like taking away combat from the game without telling anyone. For the future: If you don't want the PCs to have a NPCs stuff, then you shouldn't give him it, or you shouldn't have the PCs to apprehend him, and you should have the authorities request his valuables along with him and given the PCs incentive to do so (such as a customizable reward). If you're really worried (and unless you gave them a lot of stuff, don't be), I'd honestly talk to your players, explain you screwed up, and ask if you can Retcon the situation so that the authorities request his valuables and offer the players a reward to do so. Then if they try to lie to get his stuff, you can RP the whole thing and see if they bluff their way out of the situation.
GMed Age of Worms twice (3.5). Both groups TPKed, one at the 5th book and one at the 7th book. GMed and finished Rise of The Runelords (3.5) and Curse of the Crimson Throne (3.p conversion). Currently GMing Kingmaker (3.p). They are starting the 5th adventure on April 24th (I'm using a hybrid of Jason's original and the printed version). I'm aiming to have the campaign done end of May/mid June. Starting on Legacy of Fire (3.p conversion) after Kingmaker is done. I've played in one 4 hour session of Second Darkness (3.p). The DM had to take time off for RPG superstar for awhile, and then there was a break in time so it's on hiatus for a bit.
This is what I am trying to hammer home. A rule was in place that would not allow this type of thing but now that the rule is gone abuse like this can come into play. Rule 0 shouldn't be needed to fix RAW. I understand that: However the rest of my post is illustrating that one hiccup by one character that can (and is) covered by rule 0 doesn't mean the whole system is broken. Allow me to give an example: Imagine for a second that a certain make of car exploded if it went 500 mph. The thing that blows up otherwise makes the car more fuel efficient. In one place on Earth, on a mountain racetrack, which can only be accessed by a group of people carrying the car up in pieces and then putting the car back together, that car can reach 500 mph. This area is ruled by a greedy, powerful dictator who doesn't allow anyone near the racetrack. Everywhere else on the planet the car cannot reach this speed. It is theoretically possible for that car to get to that racetrack and blow up. Should the improvement be taken out of the car? Well to answer that we'd need some better reasons to take that improvement out other than some racetrack that no one will ever get to. Same with your example: It exists, it's just never going to happen. So changing everything to make sure one staff of wishes never happens to a first time DM running a 20th level campaign may seem like we're over exaggerating. If we had more mid-level examples stating "and here's another reason this screws up the game" then perhaps we'd see where you're coming from.
Ah, there it is. Thank you for pointing that out. It's a cute little trick he's found. Ridiculous, time wasting, and utterly never allowed in any game. Nonetheless it's quite smart and would raise some concern. You are correct: There's nothing in RAW stopping someone from doing the Staff of Wish save for GM limitations that are inherent to each step in the process. And XP costs would stop this one example from coming true. Is there another such example of this issue that hasn't become apparent? Perhaps it would be best to convince us with other examples that could happen at lower levels (where most players play) to see how damaging the lack of XP in costs could be. I'm not saying that this example isn't shocking: Rather I'm pointing out that this is a 20th level hack that requires a player to amass 410k in diamonds and spend 1300+ days crafting one magic item. A novice DM may fall victim to it (The big evil waits 4 years to enact his plan against the strongest adventurers ever...), however it is quite the extreme circumstances.
I wouldn't allow this kind of crap at all. I'm just stating that if there is a way then the DM shouldn't have to invoke rule 0 to combat this kind of behavior. In game boundaries and rules should be in place. So... wait. I think I'm confused. Are you currently arguing right now about a 20th level build that can make a staff of wish that contains 60+ wishes/day? And if so, how do they use fabricate to abuse to make this? What I'm saying is you don't have to use rule 0: There's actual building rules in place to ensure that players can't make such items.
Wait a second... let's back the bus up before we get to hot under the collar. Staff of Wish with 60+ wishes/day? To start, looking at the rules, any item that is made by a player that doesn't exist in a book already is subject to the GMs approval. So if you're the GM (which I assume you are, apologies if you are not), then you've approved that the 20th level player with 880,000gp can buy such a staff. The Core details that for a balanced approach you should only allow a player to spend up to 25% on other magic items, or 220,000 gp. I'm going to assume you've waived that rule or decided to not employ it. A luck blade with 3 wishes costs 142,960. For simplicity sake let's say the 3 wishes are about 100,000 gp. That's 3 one time uses of wish for 100,000 gp. Staves normally are limited to having only 10 charges. I'd have to assume that any 9th level spell wish a component cost of 25,000 in a staff would take all 10 charges (please correct me if I'm wrong, I couldn't find something comparable to wish in a staff). So we have the ability to cast 60+ wishes a day with a staff, which since it's a staff is rechargeable. It has about 600+ charges, and thus is more powerful than the staff of the magi and the shadowstaff, both of which are artifacts. At the very least that item is the greatest artifact ever (and thus is impossible to create). If I was in your position, the problem isn't XP costs in Pathfinder. It's that they are attempting to make a 100 quadrillion GP artifact. If the players argues, explain that this would break the game and give them the artifacts listed as examples as to why this is broken. Apologies if you meant wand of wish.
Three things come to mind: 1. The barbarian will have to be close to people to break their stuff. What kind of fight set up are we looking at with the barbarian? Is he starting 20 feet away? Does he charge and hit someone first round? Does the party have a wizard or is sneaky? 2. My players (and I) would not have fun in a game where I spent a long time writing up magical items to have one (or more) of them destroyed in the first encounter. Or to put it bluntly: If I asked you to spend 2-3 hours making a cake, and then threw it on the ground (giving you a chance to catch it), would you have a good time? 3. Are you going to tell the players that sundering will be a main aspect of this game? That will make them knowledgeable and less likely to be angry.
Do you really need it? I mean, it's resist energy. A wand or scroll plus some sleight of hand or a ring or two of resist energy and no one is going to be the wiser.
mage armor (3rd) (on the witch spell list) resist energy (5th) (not on the witch spell list)fly (7th) (on the witch spell list) fear (9th) (on the witch spell list) spell resistance (11th) (not on the witch spell list) form of the dragon I (13th) (not on the witch spell list) form of the dragon II (15th) (not on the witch spell list) form of the dragon III (17th) (not on the witch spell list) wish (19th) (not on the witch spell list) Note that expanded arcana doesn't let you take from other class' spell lists. However Witches get UMD as a class skill. A wand of resist energy would last until he hits level 11.
Looking at the list there are two choices for dragons: Faerie dragons can be CN, and Pseudodragons are NG. You could DM fiat that he has an exception to one of these that's evil.
At that point you have a pretty well polished character. What level would he be? And what level will he be when the players should find out about his deception?
Quick question about the above: I've read these, and... Dark Moon Vale Series Spoiler: I found the general setting/outcomes of the each adventure in this series was a downer. Was this more in the background or is this my view of small towns creeping in or did the players notice it and not feel as "rewarded" with the outcomes?
Given the low score in Charisma, I'm thinking either wizard or witch. Wizard would be interesting because then the NPC needs to spend lots of time studying and "tricking" everyone and keeping this a secret. Witch would be interesting because in a bid to hide his past he made a sinister deal. Take the nails hex to substitute claws and use spells to cover up the rest. Perhaps a snake or Compsognathus familiar that he tells everyone is attached due to his strong dragon bloodline.
My group played 16 hours across 2 days for a monthly session and would go through 1 book per session (give or take). So Rise and Curse took us 6 months of these sessions, or 96 hours. We're now playing 8-10 hour sessions per month, and they are 2/3's done the 4th module of Kingmaker. We should be half way through the 5th after March, and done by May.
If it helps, on January 12th in this thread James Jacobs stated that there would be no subsystems for future APs, which you could infer to mean there are future APs. Granted, if there are no future APs, there wouldn't be any sub systems either...
I used to play in games where a minimum 3 page backstory was mandatory, and in some cases the DM was amazing enough to build off all of the plot lines inherent in these backstories to make a game that made sense. It got out of control quite often, with players accomplishing more and more, becoming gods, etc before 1st level. Then we started on APs, and have found a nice balance with the traits and creating a simple background. The games actually last longer and the characters are less like to break into soliloquy's concerning their 80 year quest to find the grail and become the deity of Frogs again (or some such nonsense).
I swear I've written a reply 12 times, and deleted it 12 times. The article itself misses on some points and hits on others. I think there are some things that the entire geek culture should think about. Not having every single female character oozing raw sex OR tied to a man and little else would be good for everyone (better writing). I have met women who don't talk in sexual innuendo or require me to be around to have opinions, and that aspect would be nice to see in geek culture. Granted that would be nice outside of geek culture too, however that's a rant for another day. Not automatically giving female character cleavage and instead learning some rules of fashion/armor and why those rules exist would also be nice, as it roots the game with some realism. Yes, realism. I can't believe in a world where I can use magic to do almost anything, have monsters walking around of genius level intellect, and that has a decent amount of egalitarianism, however no woman in the 8000 years of the world didn't think "You know, having no support for my breasts hurts when I run/ride/jump off dragons backs. I should invent something to help this issue." I can believe in all that and someone figured out some sort of female undergarment. Granted it doesn't come up to me as I'm a male, but it does come up for women. Think if all the games you played had vegan men. You'd think it was ridiculous. Yes, vegan men exist. No, not all of us are vegan. That being said, I don't think immediately changing everything in drastic fashion and printing female specific products is the answer, as Chimpanzee Psychonaut has written. Having niche products inherently leads one to sell to the niche group that gives you money, and some majority of our niche group don't see what the fuss is about. As a company in geek culture, you shouldn't have to take a financial risk to put something out that is morally good and no one is going to buy. That won't change anything and you'll just keep seeing the same thing. The answer also isn't tell anyone to leave if they don't like it and doing things the same way is the answer. That leads to stagnation and the culture doesn't grow and dies out. The article leaves out a good answer. Am I going to not buy Arkham 3 (for instance) because of this? Or change the way I run games? Probably not. But am I going to sit back like the article writer and say nothing until my girlfriend leaves? What are you, stupid? We're better than that! If a woman asks why Wonder Woman wears very little, and someone says "You're dumb because you're female and don't understand, leave", it should be up to us to better explain each side of the debate, and debate it. We should step in, mock the shizznit out of the person who said that for having little tact and ability to argue, apologize for them, and then argue something along the lines of what I've said above, allowing for education as to why it's the way it is. I mean, the above image posted that changes the 4e book doesn't seem THAT drastic to me. I'll still think the same way about the rules either way
On the message boards there is a conversion posted for taking Legacy to 3.p, however Legacy of Fire plot spoiler: the different evil cultists in it may be a little intense for kids, so you may need to do some rewrites on the second book.
|
