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

Nakteo's page

162 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

KtA wrote:

I don't think the creators of the helm of opposite alignment put nearly this much thought into it.

Of course not. It's a cursed item. And cursed items are typically bent towards screwing up PCs. That tends to be their main function in the game. Either that or plot hooks...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmmmmm, it just occurred to me that whether or not this would be a violation of a Paladin's......Paladinhood is probably based on his deity's beliefs.

Would his god/dess see it as a great method of punishment/rehabilitation, or mind-rape?

Are you allowing them the chance to atone, or violating their most basic fundamental rights?

Remember, some NG and LG deities are alright with the "ends justify the means" reasoning, while others require you to do everything in your power to uphold order and good in every step of your journey.

It also just occurred to me that this method would probably be used by a Lawful Neutral Inquisitor...

To get back to the debate of whether or not it's moral: That's massively up for debate. It depends on your belief system and whether you feel the ends justify the means or not. There really is no correct answer here, guys. Different people will feel different things, that's just how it is.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Someone probably already posted this, but here goes:

New campaign idea:

There's a Kingdom with a zealous Paladin who forcibly employs this use of a HoOA as a punishment against evil-doers. All of them, from petty thief to mass-murdering psychopath. Altering anyone whose alignment is Chaotic Neutral or Evil-anything. The party meets this man and could become good friends with him until he witnesses a CN party member doing something questionable and either tries or succeeds in "bringing the criminal to justice."

This seems a great way to establish a Good-aligned villain (Lawful Good even) into a campaign. Especially if he refuses to back down while logically and rabidly defending his method as being "The best and only way."

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Every time someone types "rogue" as "rouge" I want to reach through the screen and grab that person's head and push their head into a shallow puddle to drown that person... Metaphorically speaking.


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Nakteo wrote:
I want an AP in Numeria.
Yo Nakteo - a Numeria AP is happening. It's called Iron Gods and will happen next year.

Squee! Err....I mean... Kewl. <.< >.>

I hate powergamers.

I love building powergamed characters, but refuse to play them.

I love Rogues, but hate that they suck.

I love the Tarrasque, but that that it sucks.

I hate Summoners. All of them. Twice.

I hate when GM's don't know what they're talking about.

I hate when people play outside their own sex.

I like blast spells.

I hate GM's who don't know how to say "No" to disruptive players who want to join their game.

I hate the backwards compatibility.

I want an AP in Numeria.

I hate Evil's image as a forbidden alignment.

I hate players who always gleefully jump on the Evil alignment when it's available.

I hate that Necromancy is usually seen as Evil.

I hate Drow as a playable race.

I hate the Tengu.

Strix are stupid.

Most of my roleplaying game experiences have sucked and have left me jaded. ;(

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My 2 cents:

I personally have always had a love of the base races, I don't know why, but they've always appealed to me. In 3.5, I tend to like Humans and Half-Orcs. Pathfinder, my favorites are Humans and Half-Elves. This isn't to say I don't have a fondness for other races (I have an Ifrit in my head that I've been dying to play for.....waaay too long. :\ ) I just tend to prefer the base races.

The only issue I have with exotic races is when the party goes overboard with it. I've been in a few too many games with people who played almost nothing but exotic races for various reasons, powergaming, 'it's cool,' powergaming, roleplaying purposes, and powergaming. And also powergaming. Not to be confused with optimization. (I understand that this is not the norm, this is just my personal experience.) Jumping back to the beginning of the paragraph, when I say 'overboard' I mean that the party looks more like Mommy Fortuna's escaped exhibits than a group of adventurers. We once had a party made up of a Mongrelfolk, a Stonechild, an Illumian, a Doppelganger, an Asherati, a Shade, a Blue, and a Tinker Gnome.

As I said, I have nothing against exotic races, but when everyone in the group is playing something exotic with no rhyme or reason, it tends to seem a bit silly. I mostly agree with an earlier post about there is no wrong reason to play an exotic race. There are, of course, always exceptions to every rule.

Ugh! Now I feel dirty. I'm gonna go wash my hands now. :/

Or a Falcata.

Entertainingly, the wording on DR/Epic being overcome by +6 total enhancement bonus means that a +5 [Insert +1 ability] [Insert weapon of choice] overcomes most, if not all, DR. Up to and including Cold-Iron, Silver, Adamantine, and Alignment, in addition to Epic.

So, back on topic, is anyone else a bit underwhelmed by the Marshal? Or have I just played with a few not-normal group of people who don't work together very well?

There are ways to sneak Pun-Pun into a game. But it's not advisable, since you're then pitting yourself against the GM. And players only ever win that fight if the GM is either stupid, inexperienced, or incompetent.

magnuskn wrote:
The problem starts if someone really shows up at a game with one of those and expects to be allowed to actually play it. And then shows up on the board to complain about being denied by his (smart) GM. ^^

Yep. Met some of those. I've also met people who refuse to play if they're not allowed to break their characters into the middle of next year. If you're not willing to play the game at the level it's meant to be played, or that which the GM's willing to deal with, you're playing the wrong game. To that end, I hear Exalted's good this time of year... :p

magnuskn wrote:
Stuff...Lots of it.

Thank you, you have been most helpful. All the stuff non-clone related was about what I thought, but I needed a second or third opinion. The clone stuff.....Yeah, I chose not to even really start on that. Lol

On the topic of the Falcata barb, I agree with being against min-maxing shenanananananagins. I personally enjoy bending the system as far as I can to see how loud of a breaking noise it'll make. However, I dislike it when people play such things because it's no fun when one person outshines the party, which is why I don't play them. They're just a lot of fun to build. And then you post them on the DPR Olympics and make everyone's heads explode.

Ooooooooh, DPR Olymipics comma Mythic anyone?

Diego Rossi wrote:
Nakteo wrote:

Also, what if a Tier 9-10 Mythic character (Immortal) doesn't take the Longevity Universal Path ability? Without it he still takes aging penalties and has a max age. Does the character still come back if he dies of old age? Can he die of old age? Also, the image of a Venerable Human [Insert Martial Class here]20/Champian 10 seems hilarious. Heh, "Get off my lawn!"


Well played, sir.

magnuskn wrote:
Dude, you already have the book. Those are questions which are best posed to the designers, the best I could do is give my opinions as a player on them...

Which I would be very interested to hear. Opinions are what I'm looking for until a developer covers them either in this thread, a different thread, an FAQ, or some other medium. :D

And yet another question: With the Enhance Magic Items Ability, when you activate a staff's ability that takes 2+ charges, do you have to spend that many uses of Mythic Power, or just the one?

Plus, with all the things that increase crit multipliers and even one thing that maximizes crit weapon damage, I've had the horrible idea of a barbarian wielding a large falcata... Might be a bit feat intensive...

Also, what if a Tier 9-10 Mythic character (Immortal) doesn't take the Longevity Universal Path ability? Without it he still takes aging penalties and has a max age. Does the character still come back if he dies of old age? Can he die of old age? Also, the image of a Venerable Human [Insert Martial Class here]20/Champian 10 seems hilarious. Heh, "Get off my lawn!"

And another thing: How does the Guardian ability Cling to Life interact with Immortal?

And yet another: How do either of these interact with the Clone spell?

What if you die of old age at Tier 10 after taking Cling to Life and having an active Clone spell?

A question that's been bothering me since I read it..

If a Wizard/Archmage takes Perfect Preparation, and discards his spellbook, as it says he can, does he still have the ability to learn new spells from scrolls and other Wizards' spellbooks? And if so, does doing so still cost the same amount to "scribe" the spells onto his brain?

So, I've been wondering about this for a while now, can one use a "Swift Action" ability as a move or standard action?

A specific example would be a Paladin wanting to use smite evil, (swift action) lay on hands himself, (swift action, change to move) and take the total defense action (standard) in the same round.

Similarly, could a Paladin lay on hands himself twice in a round, using his swift and standard actions? Afterall, using that specific ability on himself is a swift action, but using it on another is a standard, so are they interchangeable when the paladin uses it on himself?

Could the same paladin use lay on hands on himself, smite evil, and cast a quickened spell? (5th level or higher take Extra Traits feat for the Magical Lineage trait choosing, let's say, CLW and then getting to 14th level. A bit featy but totally doable.)

Yes, all of my examples involve a paladin, but that's just because paladins have that unique takes-two-different-action-types-depending-on-circumstances lay on hands ability. I'm curious about if swift actions can be traded out for other actions for any class. I know that one can't do it with quickened spells no matter what is said here, but I still wanna know about what people think about other swift actions getting used as move or standard actions instead.

At the first town you come to:
Necro: "Got an undead problem?"
Townsfolk: "Yes."
Necro: "I can fix that!"

At the next town you come to:
Necro: "Got an undead problem?"
Townsfolk: "No."
Necro: "I can fix that!"

And now my plan finally comes to fru-...fruitition?...Frution?....Fruction? One of those!!!!!!!!

And I win.

Of course not, 'cause now victory is mine!

In 3.5, I once played an Astral Deva/Knight who went by many names and was celebrated by many races...

To the Elves, he was known as Aeldeth Firryl:Eternal Knight, Dark Stalker.

To the Dwarves he was called Delthic: Iron Champion.

The Dragons named him Malsvir Gixustrat: Evil Disembowler.

But his most widely reknowned name was that name which the Humans gave him: Paul.

Is there any way in the rules for a spellcaster to build an intelligent construct?

LazarX wrote:
Kris Vanhoyland wrote:

I haven't read every single reply, so I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before.

From the top of my head I recall two instances in published adventures where a certain NPC (Keeper Crove from the Carrion Hill module, and the goblin druid Gogmurt from Rise of the Runelords AE) hasn't been sleeping for days, and has simply been casting lesser restoration every day to fight off the fatigue.

That strategy stops when the spells run out. Not resting means that said druid is running solely on either memorised or wand spells.

Druids, as divine casters, don't have to sleep to prepare spells.

Pathfinder PRD wrote:
A druid must spend 1 hour each day in a trance-like meditation on the mysteries of nature to regain her daily allotment of spells. A druid may prepare and cast any spell on the druid spell list...

The sad part about all this for me must be the fact that I've known at least two guys who whenever they played female characters (one of them played them more often than not) they'd play "Look at me! I have boobs! I am amazingly hot and sluttish! And also arbitrarily bisexual! Who wants to sex with me?!"

I personally have never played a female character and even tend to play male char's in video games even when female roles are available. I just tend to gravitate towards playing those characters who I can relate to, which typically means male. That being said, my reaction to a character being reincarnated as female would probably vary greatly based on the GM and how they worded it. Since pretty much every GM I've played with in the last 3-4 years would make it a "random" roll thrown in just because they want to see how I react to it, followed of course with many sessions of "You've got boobs!" comments, I probably wouldn't be very receptive to the idea. Though reflecting upon most of my characters, I think it would have made an interesting plot point in any of their lives, if only it wouldn't be accompanied by incessant player and GM teasing. On a vaguely related note I'm not currently playing under them anymore. Wow. That got a bit ranty. Sorry about all that. :\

I've never actually had a character get reincarnated, or really die for that matter, but it could be an interesting roleplaying experiance, I think. :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

...Because shut up.

While it's true that you couldn't put Bane twice on the same weapon, I think it would still be a reasonable houserule as long as someone doesn't overdo it. ("I want a +1 Longsword of Human Bane, Dragon Bane, Orc Bane, Dwarf Bane, and Animal(Bunny) Bane!") Afterall, most of the time, a player with two Banes on their weapon would only get one or the other, they'd just get use out of it slightly more often, since Bane is a corner case ability to begin with. And I probably wouldn't mind stacking them if both types coincide, with exceptions, like the fighter getting the Bane Evil Outsider and Chaotic Outsider in preparation of diving into the Abyss for a quest line. (If that happened, it would probably depend on the player what I did, since I've known players who come up with things like that and then gloat about how smart they are, in and out of character, and somehow don't end up dead by morning.) Though a reasonable compromise could be cutting the second bane in half if they would both apply, so only +3 and +3d6. Just a thought.

My point is that while it's against the rules, it would rarely, if ever, be game breaking, So a GM Houseruling it within reason wouldn't be a horrible idea. That's my 2 cents.

I'd interpret it as 'What is your favorite feat/s to take at first level.'

Really depends on character for me.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Official Source: Draconomicon.
Item: Dragonarmor of Inviniciblity.
Page: 82.
Is there a picture: No.
Do I care: No.

3.5 Loyalist wrote:

No references at all Ashiel. You say it is in their, yeah? Show me the stats of a dragon in armour or link it. Because it sure isn't in the bestiaries or the monster manuals if we want to go back to 3.5. I know the Draconomicon had plenty of ideas, now present the stats. It doesn't seem like pathfinder has followed the armoured dragon idea and for once I side with pathfinder on this.

A dragon gathers a hoard over time, hmm yep, okay, how does the dragon put on a magic ring made for humanoids? Which giant talon will it fit? Does a dragon wear a cloak on each wing? Because it certainly doesn't fit a huge dragon's back properly if it made for say, an elf.

If a dragon doesn't have servitors, or is animalistic like a white dragon, how does it get giant-sized armour? If it is a black dragon that lives in marshes, how does the armour not rot, rust or foul?

Kay, I have to respond to that.

We'll go with the 3.5 rules on this. According to the MIC, EVERYTHING sizes to fit whatever is trying to wear it. Ma-gic-all-y. The exceptions are weapons, shields and armor that aren't fitted with the Sizing property. And even those things can have their abilities used by creatures of vastly different sizes. I believe the example in the book is a Halfling using the wish in a colossal wishing dagger, or something similar.

Ring? Try putting it on. Its size changes. It could shift from bead to bladeless fan size to fit its user, and then adjust so it fits snugly. And shifts again when you go to take it off.

Cloak? It might not have to size. It could just be a 3 feet by 5 feet rectangle to cloth hanging across the dragon's neck or back. The clasp would size to the dragon's throat.

Armor? I'll let Ashiel cover that one, but simply put, a lot of work by smaller creatures. How does it not rot, rust or foul? Magic/special treatments to prevent it.

Ashiel wrote:
...He has Improved Unarmed Strike and Deflect Arrows, and...

Here's one word to describe my reaction to that: Meep!

Here's a few more: That seems a bit overkill, but totally awesome at the same time. I like the story behind that, and I think that would make a nifty encounter. Personally, I think the dragon should be wearing some form of plate, since that makes a bit more sense to me that if it's actually wearing armor, it should at least make it strong armor. I know that would impose an Armor check penalty, but if you made it mithral and I think there's a low level spell for lowering that penalty in Ultimate Magic... I could be wrong, but I know that spell exists somewhere.

Also, I applaud you and your group for being a mature bunch of people who won't cry foul the first time a Buggeroff Dragon harmlessly swats away the first projectile fired at it every round. It's so refreshing to know that there are groups that function better than the one I play with. *Sigh.*

I would ask one question before fading from this board, since I've contributed nothing towards its point and merely focused on your dragon. What level is your party for this encounter?

Ashiel wrote:
The Tarrasque is a joke. Setting it at CR 20+ is a bigger joke. The party can effectively just ignore or overcome a Tarrasque as early as 11th level. Including killing it for good. That being said, its obscene defenses make it difficult to hurt at all. Let alone with ranged touch attacks which tend to cause energy damage.

I know it's a bit off topic, but I really wanna know. How? O.O

Btw, Pathfinder Tarrasque CAN'T die for good unless there's something in a book that I'm missing.

d@ncingNumfar wrote:
Escaping the Wormwood seems much easier for these races rather than staging a mutiny later on.

I didn't allow any 'Aquatic' races in my S&S game for exactly that reason. There's also the very Very interesting curveball they could throw you if they played an Undine/Gillman/Merfolk with an evil alignment who decided that (instead of simply swimming away and out of the campaign) they weren't going to put up with this crap, got a hold of a handaxe, (or three) jumped overboard and spent the better part of the day cutting a substantial hole in the bottom of the ship. Suddenly you have a sinking ship, and with it, your Adventure Path. Extreme example, I know, but I think it's better if the players don't play (For at least the first AP) something that could simply say "Screw this" and leave. Just my opinion.

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Having the fighter carry a number of nets seems like a good idea.

I was just thinking that having the monk carry a number of nets seems like a okay idea.

Maybe..... If the monk beefed his strength....and took the greater sunder chain....and used spring attack + sunder on the fighter's weapon... which if he succeeds could easily break it in 1-2 hits (If the DM allows Adamantine, then he's adding insult to the pile of dead monks and rogues and I call BS shenanigans.) and then continues his spring attack + strike until the fighter fails a stunning fist save? Only soaking 1d3 + whatever with a crit chance of Who-cares every round and healing as needed. Assumes fighter only has one weapon. If fighter has a bow, break that too, or just take it away from him.

Alternatively, what is the win condition on this? First one to die loses? Kay, Monk takes the Run feat, and uses the run action get away from the fighter, so 450 feet/round barring Fleet. (Cause that would just make this silly.) In order to win, fighter must pursue, right? Monk runs until he finds a river of lava, or better yet, just a really wide river, (at least 80-90 feet wide) and jumps across. Then, through liberal uses of the run action, proceeds to hunt down and destroy every other mode of crossing in a 3-mile radius, forcing the fighter to try to cross using swim checks or by walking. The lava then turns him to ash due to 20d6 damage per round, and monk keeps him there via bull rushing, or Monk keeps him from crossing the river (having spent the several hours it took the fighter to catch up) by throwing dire wolverines at him. Hell, just standard wolverines will do. Also find a way to get the entire lizardfolk nation, who lives in a spot near the river, to attack him while he's swimming across.

Too far outside the box?

My point is that there's more to D&D than combat. If it comes down to a one-on-one death match that you CAN'T win in any conceivable fashion, change the circumstances so that you have an advantage that you can push. Hell, run all the way to town and inform the city guard that a mad-man has been chasing you day and night and that you need protection, then while they're slowing down the fighter, go to your buddies at the thieves guild who send their entire entourage after the fighter, tired of having lost so many of their number in previous pointless death-matches.

Wow, that kind of ran away from me. My point is that fighter wins following strict rules. So change them. I think I'm about to get yelled at for this, since my entire post seems to have gone entirely against the point of this thread.

I have a player who's building a character for my upcoming S&S game. He wants to build a swimmy (APG alternate racial trait that I can't remember the name of) Elf Barbarian (Sea Reaver archetype) thing. I have no problem with this. The issue I'm running into is that he seems to want to dual wield a trident and net. I've looked over the net's rules and it seems to me that they're only even sort of viable up to a certain level, like 7th-ish. After that, if you throw it, chances are whatever you hit with it is going to either going to escape artist out with ease, or, much more likely, cut or burst its way out, leaving you with minus a net. I've looked into the Net feat chain in the UC, and it seems like it becomes usable only once you hit 7th level (6th for a fighter) once you gain the ability to trip and disarm with the net without having to throw it. Since the game starts at 1st level, does this concept even seem viable? And how can one make nets in general viable?

My main concern is that the player is one who seems to build ideas and concepts he seems passionate about, until he actually plays them and decides it was a stupid idea and wants to change the entire character to the oft repeated chorus of "I'm useless." I plan on talking to him about it, maybe suggest a fighter would be better?

Also, Net Adept gives the ability to use a net as a one-handed melee reach weapon, how does this work out when you have no other Net chain feets to back it up, when the net does no damage, and you can't throw it with one hand? (Since the Net and Trident feat gives you that ability.)

Hmmmmm, I will certainly look into thinking on this. Thanks bunches!!! :)

Cpt_kirstov wrote:
Nakteo wrote:

I just got back from Kinkos and was going to simply scan the maps from the AP and blow them up to directly turn them into maps. I thought it was a good idea, until they told me that I'd need a signed release form from the copyright holders to do such. And after looking at the form, it looks like I'd need to get a new one for every single map I wanted to print out.

Kinkos seems to be the strictest of the print shops when it comes to this. Staples has the release for the PDFs from the FAQ in their national database, so you should be able to use their print shop

You may have just become my hero. ^.^

So, one of my difficulties with running adventure paths is maps for areas that the PC's are going to run into and explore. I want them to be as close to the maps in the books, while not burning an excessive amount of my time or money in the process. (I pick up most all of the flip-mats and tiles that I think will be useful, but that only goes so far.) A long time ago I was going to run a Kingmaker game (Which sadly never got off the ground.) and I drew out fairly detailed maps of a couple of the areas, complete with color, which was great....except that it took me about 6-8 hours of concentrated work per map, something I'd rather not repeat. I will if I have to, but I really don't wanna.

I just got back from Kinkos and was going to simply scan the maps from the AP and blow them up to directly turn them into maps. I thought it was a good idea, until they told me that I'd need a signed release form from the copyright holders to do such. And after looking at the form, it looks like I'd need to get a new one for every single map I wanted to print out. The alternative was that I could copy and blow it up bit by bit until I've got a patchwork map over several pages, which my math tells me would cost around $20 per map, give or take several mistakes (which I'd have to pay for) due to it being an insanely inexact process.

I am very open to suggestions at this point. What methods have y'all GM's used in the past for your adventure path games?

I'm sorry, I was a little rushed when I posted that last. I'm interested in further ideas along those lines, and I'm curious about how that might manifest over the first 20 days.

Michael Radagast wrote: could also have Scourge take a cruel shine to one group, playing it against the other. For example, the second-day encounter...*one* of those groups is going to be late! :P

Interesting, tell me more. o.o

All very interesting ideas. Thanks y'all. :) If anyone has any more ideas, don't hesitate to post.

Should I do anything with the number of NPC's on the Wormwood or Man's Promise (pre- and post-capture) since it seems that they might just flat outnumber the enemy pirates in the final encounter and have a severe edge in numbers alone in the taking of the Man's Promise.

So, I will soon be running a Skull and Shackles game, and I'm curious about what kind of changes should be made to the AP to account for a party of 7-8 PC's. Any and all suggestions, specific and general are welcome.

Thanks. :)

Darkholme wrote:

It IS one of the better classes. But the classes are not created equal in Pathfinder. There are different "Classes" of classes in Pathfinder.

You have Rogue and Monk at the bottom, Summoner and Druid at the Top, and everything else fits somewhere in between.

Where's AM BARBARIAN when you need him? ;)

setzer9999 wrote:
Ugh! I hadn't even though of that for magic missile... that's nasty!

Yeah, RAW it kinda works. RAI, I doubt it, but if you can find a GM who'll allow it, more power to ya. :)

I say 3.

A munchkin says "put 5 in against Force Energy for immunity to Magic Missile." ;)

1 to 50 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.