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

Nearyn's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 834 posts (837 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 834 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry, I know I'm not part of this discussion, but I feel compelled to comment.

John John wrote:
I don't feel I need to argue that binding efreets (if that's what you are talking about) and gaining access to free wishes breaks the game and that is actually not a common practice.

Using planar binding to bind efreets and getting wishes is not gamebreaking, it's the entire point of the creature. There is nothing wrong with wish, nor is there anything wrong with getting multiple castings of wish through proper use of your ressources. If the players start using the super-powered world-warping wishes, and the GM just rolls over and does not use this to benefit his story, said GM is either bad or lazy.

John John wrote:

The same cannot be said for most of the other named items. They cannot be directly created by the rules in the book.

Similarly its utterly broken to start crafting custom items that grant insight, competence and luck bonuses to attacks, ac and saves.

tosh

John John wrote:
General claims of that's the ac at X level don't usually account for fighting defensively and total defense. Unless you are talking about sth like a crane wing monk.

A character who never fights defensively, or uses the total defense action, is a character who does not fully understand/explore the options given to him, and should not be surprised when flattened by more competent entities in the world.

John John wrote:
I don't care if its a staple item on these boards.

You should, since you're having a conversation on this board.

John John wrote:
Again, giving magic items to monsters essentially increases their power and thus their CR.

Wrong. Monsters have treasure written into their statblocks. Some have predetermined items, others do not, but monsters are not pinatas that rupture with gold and items upon defeat. Running diablo-monsters is not using the monsters to their CR potential.

John John wrote:
Again you haven't proven your statement about consistent or even possible high ac in these monsters.

Yeah, she kinda has.

John John wrote:
Challenge rating is a measure of the monster's power, when you give it magic items you increase its power.

When you give it magic items that go beyond the treasure value it is written with the presumption of already having access to, then yes.

John John wrote:

Tell me where I say that the NPC's should be incredibly stupid, shouldn't use their abilities, shouldn't work as a team, should fight pc's in 1 vs 4 combat as a staple and that we should bar players from having balanced offensive/defensive characters.

Are you making these things up?

From an outsiders perspective on your conversation it is kinda inferred by your insistence that the monsters should just have their treasure piled in the corner, instead of using it. Also I don't think Ashiel is accusing you of everything written in that sentence, rather making a statement about the general level of competence displayed by adversaries. Alot of GMs either don't understand the potential of the system or mollycoddle the sh*t out of their players, fudging rolls, having dragons engage the barbarian in melee, not using the treasure a creature has access to, etc etc etc.

John John wrote:
Why can't the normal barbarian take a hit? Its sounds like you have to optimize to have a fun game.

Fun is subjective. Also I'm not sure you and Ashiel use the word 'optimize' to describe the same thing.

John John wrote:
... a bit funny when you are allowing stuff like celestial plate, am barbarians, planar binding, item crafting, named item enchanting and double items in slots

I cannot fathom why any GM would not allow these things.

I'm not looking to start stuff, and I don't wanna speak for Ashiel, so don't assume that is what I'm doing. I just felt I had to comment, in spite of it not being the topic of the thread.

-Nearyn


I'm not sure I understand the question. Could you spell it out a bit? That way I may be able to provide a more focused answer. Thanks.

-Nearyn


Bacon666 wrote:
Nearyn wrote:

The more detail about the dragons you mean to use, and the circumstance of the encounters that are gonna happen, the more suggestions I can provide.

-Nearyn

Not much planned yet...

Homebrew world where each nation/continent have main race... The players all come from human kingdom in humanoid continent... (both have names, but that irrelevant here...)

Far out in the ocean lies dragon continent. Each element/terrain have a number of dragons of varying alignment native to that terrain.

Each dragon type will have minions/cults of various minor races... (Kobolts, dragonnes etc)

Ok, and are the dragons going to invade, or are the players gonna invade the dragon-continent?

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The more detail about the dragons you mean to use, and the circumstance of the encounters that are gonna happen, the more suggestions I can provide.

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't agree with the notion of "weak GM". With that said, I don't believe you are doing anyone any favors by shielding your players. Either you shield them, therefore consistently cut down content and challenge, or you shield them for a little while, then stop, and they'll be caught off guard when the campaign suddenly turns difficult now that you are no longer taking care of them.

In short, if the campaign is gonna be hard, better let your players experience that early, so their characters learn to take care of themselves, do their research, come prepared and so on. It adds accomplishment, which is fun, and that everyone is having fun, is all that matters in the end.

But no, you are not being a "weak GM", however I don't recommend mollycoddling your players.

-Nearyn


1) If the kobold is within 40ft of the active ioun torch, it is within an area of dim light, meaning the halfling can observe the kobold and attack it. Since the kobold is in dim light, it is afforded 20% concealment against the halfling.

2) The dwarf has brought a lightsource close enough to illuminate the kobold, placing it in an area of normal light. The halfling can observe and attack the kobold with no penalty except standard penalties for range and shooting into melee.

3) As situation 2.

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Paladins are notoriously bad rulers. Their code of conduct and the standards they hold themselves to, are qualities completely unsuited to rulership of anything other than a shiny lollipop-kingdom, where nothing ever goes wrong and nobody is trying anything nefarious.

If you really want it to, any class can become a ruler, since in most cases, a good ruler is defined by his decision-making, not his personal capabilities.

But when that is said and done, if you want something with mechanics that ties into ruling, I'd suggest Bard or a Cavalier.

-Nearyn


I'll cast another vote for Rise of the Runelords. Presently mastering it, and we're almost at the end. It's been a really fun ride.

-Nearyn


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Exceptional trickshooting. The fact that he is obviously one of the best trickshots in the world, if not the best, yet is still humble enough to recognize that he is not as fit as an archer of the past would have been, is really cool of him. I was astounded that he could pierce armor, because until that clip, I was sure that the bow was either too weak, or that he didn't pull it all the way back.

Really amazing, and exceptionally cool reference for us here in the lands of roleplay, and fantasy archery :D

-Nearyn


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been summoning monsters since my first character, and if there is such a thing as the holy grail of token-mastery, I've yet to find it. However, I do have some suggestions on how to improve the speed with which you take your turns, when you've got summons out.

Point number 1 - highest priority with a fuppin' bullet, is HAVE. THE. STATBLOCK. HANDY. Don't go flippin' through the Bestiary every time you need to summon a creature. Have your laptop glued to the creature page, or have a printout. Which ties into point number 2.

Point number 2 - is to KNOW. YOUR. SUMMON. Get an idea of what creatures you like to summon (in your case Archons) and sit down with the creature's statblock and read, until you comprehend. Know what attacks or tactics you prefer using with said summon and make sure you KNOW the mechanics of said at/tactic, OR have a reference close by so you can quickly find out.

Point number 3 - USE. TIME. EFFICIENTLY. Learn to listen to the combat, and what's going on, while simultaneously deciding what actions your tokens will take. "if enemy #5 doesn't go down this round, my 2nd Archon is gonna try to waste him". Start practicing this kind of thinking every time you are not called upon to take your turn. Sure the actions of the enemy and your fellow adventurers can change what you'll be wanting to do, but if that's the case deal with it then. Use your time when you are not taking turns to plan your tokens' actions.

Point number 4 - DON'T. JUGGLE. DICE. If you have a dice-roller use it. If you have a dice-macro system use it. If you do use dice, either because you have no electronics at your game-table, because you like to throw dice(who doesn't?) or because your group prefers dice to be rolled openly, don't juggle them like you are mixing a drink. Pick up the die. Throw it. Note the effect. Next token.

In regards to getting a Lantern Archon permanently, you can become a 20th level conjurer, in which case you get to have one summoned monster permanently summoned. Or you can use planar binding spells for a less-than-permanent-but-still-quite-long-duration Lantern Archon. Alternatively you could try to strike a deal with one. Archons are sentient creatures and lovers of good stuff, so if you too are a lover of good stuff, perhaps you could ask one if he wanted to come with you.

Hope it helps. Have fun summoning :)

-Nearyn


In appreciation of your help, I've employed my absolutely horrendously bad sketchUp skills (never has there ever been a less worthy application of the word "skill"), and provide you with an indication of the volume that can be held in certain mundane containers.

Mundane containers
Left to right is: Backpack(2 cu.ft.), small chest(2 cu.ft.), medium chest(4 cu.ft.), large chest(6 cu.ft.), huge chest(8 cu.ft), barrel(10 cu.ft)

Naturally the objects in question would be shaped differently :P

Someone, with more skill in sketchup than me, made THIS, which is a much better indicator for magical containers.

Again, thanks for your help and input :)

-Nearyn


Well thank you all very much :)

You've been very helpful. I'll propose adding the carrying capacity of the assembled creatures together, to my GM. I'm sure he'll agree with you.

Thanks again :)

-Nearyn


Thanks for the responses :)

I'm asking because I tend to keep detailed records of my equipment, and I'm managing our party's loot in a Way of the Wicked campaign.

We're presently sitting cozy on about 1348lbs of material we need to transport to a place where we may sell it (the town we're in is no longer an option). So I'm trying to figure out what I should get in terms of chests, crates, barrels etc. Not liking the idea of putting it all in saddlebags as we have no party member with Handle animal.

-Nearyn


The system tells us they can hold a certain volume of material, but is there any rules(or way to determine) how many lbs a container can hold, if said container does explicitly say so in its description?

-Nearyn


Thank you kindly :)

What you say makes sense. Can you provide citation?

-Nearyn


If several creatures work in unison to lift something heavy, how do you calculate what they can lift, push, drag etc?

-Nearyn


Uwotm8 wrote:
They cast as clerics of a level equal to their CL. They count as a 16th level cleric, in other words.

Then why do certain spell-texts say the spell gets increased effect from caster-level, while others say the spell gets increased effect from level?

-Nearyn

EDIT: nvm, think I got that one figured out.


Ashiel wrote:
They don't really need worldwound tactics. A single CR 16 Planetar can whup the hindside of a balor until the balor decides to run screaming for its mommy. Admittedly it'd be a little back and forth for a bit, but thanks to things like greater spell immunity

Question - does a planetar benefit from the Spell Immunity chain? The spell text says you're immune to one spell for every 4 levels you have, but a planetar does not have levels. It counts as caster-level 16, but does that matter in regards to the Spell Immunity chain?

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you look at a system like Star Wars d20 revised, you have 2 types of hit points. You have Vitality Points and Wound Points. Your vitality increases with levels just like normal HP would do. Your Wound points are equal to your con score. Once you're at -1 wound point you're down and bleeding. Once you hit -10 wound points you die. You can only take wound points by getting critically hit or by losing all your vitality points first. The game system explicitly states that vitality represents the character dodging blows, or turning potential hard-hitters into glancing blows.

Now in pathfinder I've always seen HP as direct, herculean fortitude. A 1st level commoner with unexceptional constitution has 4 hit points. This means a dagger, thrust by someone with a +1 str mod, can drop a commoner to bleeding and dying in one solid hit - I can imagine it'd be the same if I took a solid hit from a kitchen knife.

Now let's say you have a character with 8 hp. He can take 2 of said attacks before the same happens. Is he dodging the first blow slightly? Perhaps, but he might as well just take 2 of the same types of hits. Hit points in pathfinder is akin to having such a thick skin, such immense vigour of body, that someone can legitimately land a downward swing on your naked collarbone with a greataxe, and even though the wound looks horrible, you're still standing because it was only 14 hps worth of damage. You may be laughing at the measly damage if you're high enough level.

"Why do you say that hp work that way? It looks silly to me when I imagine a 6th level fighter literally surviving several swordblows without barely caring, before then dispatching his enemies with ease."

I say hp work that way, because it seems to be what is mechanically implied by certain abilities and game-mechanics.

Take a 14th level barbarian - this guy is a demigod in the eyes of mere NPCs, an expression of battle made manifest in the shape of a mortal man. This dude has 133hp. Now imagine him fighting an old red dragon with the Snatch ability - for the purpose of this demonstration the barbarian is naked. The dragon bites him and grapples him in its jaws, and because of the snatch ability, the barbarian is now held firmly by the teeth of the dragon - meaning he is denied his reflex save vs its breath weapon. So the next round the dragon breathes fire on him - burning him for 16d10 fire damage, that would normally allow a character to throw themselves for dear life, to avoid damage, by granting them a reflex-save, but not this time. This time, the barbarian takes 16d10 points of dragon-fire directly to his person. The dragon burns him, and a 60ft conal area directly behind him for 104 damage. After taking this damage directly to the face, the barbarian still has 29 hp - or around 7 commoners worth of hp. Meanwhile the building behind the barbarian, that also happened to be in the conal area is completely wrecked, the facade visibly melting like chocolate under the onslaught of dragon-fire. But the barbarian is fine.

That is one of the reasons hit points represent a godly ability to take damage and live. Another example would be falling damge. Point remains - you're taking the damage, yet surviving. You're perfectly free to describe your swashbuckler taking 20 points of damage from a longspear as him spinning sideways, barely getting graced by the weapon, before dashing in and cutting his opponent to ribbons - we should not limit the feel a person want to invoke with the character. But just as said player is justified in saying his character gets grazed, he is also justified in saying his character takes the spear directly in the gut, a hit that would drop an ox, then pulls the spear from his body, spits out a bit of blood, looks to the dude holding the spear and says 'my turn'.

Hope it helps :)

-Nearyn


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If encountered in terrain such as swamp or river, crocodiles are scary as heck.

They casually stealth for 23, sneaking silently closer to you in the water, then they strike at you, or a party member that is falling behind, such as small-folk.

Once it strikes it bites down on you in the surprise round, attacking your flat-footed AC for a 15 to-hit average, biting you for 1d8+4 dmg and grappling you with an average grapple-check of 21.

Then comes the actual round, and you better pray that your party was walking right-the-flip next to you, because if you are not immediately adjacent to eachother, and you're in bog, they're gonna have to slowly wade to your rescue, and if you're in river, they'll have to swim to your rescue. Meanwhile, the crocodile continues its grapple and proceeds to pin you, death-rolling you for 1d8+6 with a free trip attack, while dragging you below water.

Now you're pinned, damaged, drowning, sinking and potentially blind, depending on the clarity of the water the crocodile struck from. Your party members can come to your rescue, but even if they can reach you/swim down to you/whatever they're making attacks vs the crocodile at -2 and dealing half damage, that is if they can even see it and not just alot of bubbles and blood in the water.

for a CR 2 monster, I find the crocodile to be rather unpleasant. Not to mention being attacked by a pair - or gods forbid a colony (3-12). :C

-Nearyn


Redemption Engine spoilers, minor:
If we've learned anything from "The Redemption Engine" we've learned that good-aligned outsiders are capable of some sick sh*t, in the name of the "the greater good".

-Nearyn


Would I, as a GM allow it? Depends on my mood, but as a general rule, I'd say yes. Why? Because I don't see a problem with it.

Do I feel that other sizes are overpowered? No. I realize that you may be able to achieve things with a size, that you couldn't without, but no, I do not think it affects the game in a way that I could not deal with as GM.

Do I with your point about APs perhaps being squeeze city, and this not being a detriment, but a side-effect? Yes, absolutely.

-Nearyn


Trueshots wrote:

a halting monk would get this choice on level up:

Add +1 to the monk's CMD when resisting a grapple and +½ to the number of stunning attack attempts per day.

If you take an archetype that changes your stunning fist (example flowing monk, gets Redirection (Ex)) do you get extra uses of redirection instead of stunning fist?

Thanks

I do not believe you do, no. I am uncertain though, so don't take my word as gospel here. Perhaps someone will come along who will provide an answer with a rules citation to back it up and clear it all up. If not, I'd say ask your GM.

hope it helps.

-Nearyn


I am uncertain, as it is not specified in the spell-text. What I will say is that Disguise self is a glamer spell.

Magic wrote:

Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.

...

A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

So you could argue that since it is only spelled out that tactile and auditory elements are not changed, then yes, you smell bad. But there is also basis for ruling differently.

I'd advice talking to your GM about it. Or, if you are the GM, make a ruling based on a combination of what you find most fun and most balanced.

-Nearyn


I do not fully grasp what he does, or how that makes him a dick. Could you elaborate on the issues and why you think they are bad? Then I may be able to provide input.

-Nearyn


Usually a character make perception checks in a reactionary fashion(in which case they are non-actions). In the case you describe, the character is actively scanning his opponents to decide how they are equipped and which is the better item to attack. This is "actively seeking stimulus" and falls within the perception rules. Actively seeking stimulus with perception is a move-action.

hope it helps.

-Nearyn


I suggest confronting the GM with this issue, before the next session. A well run DMPC can be extremely fun and rewarding, but that is obviously not what is happening.

Tell your GM that the DMPC is detracting from the campaign and you'd prefer he was not there. Hopefully your GM will be mature enough to handle it, and roll.

-Nearyn


Both Kestral287 and Eltacolibre make good suggestions.

If you want the players to pick a path, of several paths provided, then you need to make sure that these paths are clear to the players. You have been reminding them of stuff, and feel like that is the same as railroading them, but it really isn't, so do not fear - you are not forcing your players by reminding them of established hooks.

You could try the opposite approach. If your players don't take any initiative then ask them how long they plan to stay and do nothing in the same location. As long as you have made it perfectly clear that there is stuff to do, I'd assume the players will then want to go "Oh! Right! We're not supposed to just sit here for 3 months, umm guys, what did we know about pressing matters we could deal with, right here and now?"

Hope it helps

-Nearyn


Necromancers work just fine at high levels. I'd suggest using animate dead and your escalating animation pool to raise some choice beasties who pack a whallop as undead.

The create undead chain can still be very helpful, even if you don't directly control said undead. It depends on your GM, but there is something to be said for "intelligent undead" not wanting to mess with whoever had so much power as to make them - it's likely said person also has the power to unmake them. And even if this is not guaranteed, an intelligent undead would be wise to make certain, before planning a potential escape from, or attack on, its master.

-Nearyn


@OP: Yes, there are players who don't plan their progression.

I do not agree with the idea that players planning progression is hurting the game or in some fashion lessening potential for growth.

-Nearyn


Why does it matter that you do not have to invest money into spell components to make your spells permanent?

-Nearyn


Nyaa wrote:
Nearyn wrote:
so they can meet some unofficial barrier of entry to the coming challenges
But it's official. NPC amount of wealth is equal ~1CR. PC amount of wealth is equal ~2CR. Monsters' CRs are assigned assuming players fighting them are equipped appropriately for their level.

Not looking to derail, so I'll just say that CR is adjusted based on what gear the creature posseses, not what its enemy posseses. NPCs get their CR adjusted by -1, amongst other reasons, because their gear is not up to scratch. So no, the CR does not take into consideration the gear of the heroes that will be fighting the creature. If the party is overequipped it affects the indiviual party-member's CR, thereby affecting the APL, -not- the monster's CR.

Also NPC wealth is a good guideline, but it becomes quite useless when trying to portray people where the story or setting dictates they should have more gold than indicated. GMs make exceptions for exceptional creatures, and the PCs are nothing if not exceptional.

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I realize this may fall in the category of non-answer, but I advise you to forget about Wealth-By-Level. Beyond determining starting-gold for characters beyond first level, I do not use it in my games.

If my players want to go renegade and rob a customs-house, a mint, a merchants-guild, or the royal treasury, I am not gonna deny them the loot, nor am I going to say "yeah, you robbed the vaults of the eastern-sea trade-prince Harad, you find..." *checks WBL table* "...2.000gp for each of you".

I am presently running the Adventure Path Rise of the Runelords, and my players spend their cash on whatever their characters would. They don't stubbornly pour the money into improving their gear, so they can meet some unofficial barrier of entry to the coming challenges. And if they find they really need improved gear to fight what's ahead, they don't bash their face against the challenge, but instead step back a second and try to improve their equipment by whatever means they can.

If my players are undergeared, I don't dump piles of treasure in front of them with a scribbled note saying "hint hint" on it. Their characters are responsible for taking care of their own stuff, including finances and equipment. And if my party is overgeared... so what? It's not like they'll ever reach a point where I cannot challenge them, should I find it necessary to the campaign narrative or tone, that a certain fight should be challenging. I am the GM, I will never run out of options for challenging my players, no matter what gear they carry.

So in summary: I advise you to use WBL for character creation beyond lvl 1, and nothing else.

Hope it helps.

-Nearyn


I guess that would depend on a combination of the players, the characters and the encounter itself.

A player who has gotten it in his head, that whatever the GM drops in front of him, is within his capacity to defeat(not counting exceptional luck, or clever in-world thinking), will probably need to have it made abundantly clear, in a very direct way, that by playing in the campaign, you risk facing down creatures way above your paygrade. Off the top of my mind, you either do this by flat out telling the players that they may experience such encounters, and that you do not intend to hold back if the players decide to piss off a CR 20 foe at APL 10 or you inform them through in-world occurences. If you want to inform such a player through in-world happenings, the only thing I can think of is A) beating the snot out of your party (lethally or non-lethally) or B) hope the players possess enough system-savvy to recognize that their lvl 4 characters probably don't stand much of a chance vs that Wendigo you just sprung on them, and instead opt to run for dear life.

Characters are trickier than players, because you risk having fearless characters in your party, or characters who for some reason do not fear death, are looking for tougher and tougher opponents to beat, or simply don't allow themselves to shy away in the face of imminent asswhoppage. With such characters there is nothing for you to do, except encourage change in the character, use leverage against the character ("will your battle-code allow you to drag your allies into certain death with you, despite them not following your ways?"), or roll for initiative and see who comes up stronger, the character or the enemy. Nothing else for it, really.

An encounter can be made so as to provide a hint that it is too much for the party to handle. This is especially true for enemies who like to "play with their food", or animals who may stalk around the players for a few rounds, after making their initial attack. The point is the same in most of these encounters. You attack the players, you let them see that you're only rolling 2d6 for damage, so that when you tell them that they recieve 30 dmg, someone at the table does the math, realizes that whatever they're fighting gets minimum +18dmg per attack, and then decide that now would be a good time to leg it. If you do this, just make sure you set the encounter in a location where the players can escape on their own, so they get it through their skulls that it was not just a case of you telling them how to escape, but they themselves who had to realize that now was the time to get out. Having magic escape-portals open to save them will not teach them anything. Having someone succeed at a perception-check/engineering-check to realize that "that stonework up there looks awfully old and rickety" and realize that they can dump it between them and their enemy, thereby giving themselves time to escape, will teach them to take care of themselves, and pick their fights more carefully next time.

Hope it helps.

-Nearyn


Deaths Adorable Apprentice wrote:
Nearyn I love the white dragon and you have just given me a fun enemy and I thank you. The friend who is doing the play test likes the colorful one, a lot. And the traps is brilliant and I will do that as well.

My pleasure. Good luck with the game :)

-Nearyn


Interesting idea.

At a young age, one dragon would collect choice bits of mechanical items. Wheels and axles, pulleys, music boxes, any item that has moving parts basically. This could then expand into a fascination with clockwork-devices, leading to a lair basically looking like the inside of a clocktower and a elaborate watch-maker shop.

Another dragon could be interested in figurines, starting out collecting dolls and eventually turning that into collecting porcelain figurines, and figurines crafting from rich metals, woods other substances, and finally escalate into stealing large statues and littering its lair with figurines of all types, sizes and motifs.

A fascination with musical instruments turns into kidnapping the greatest musicians in the land, as well as taking many musical instruments and devices.

A dragon that collects traps would have a rather dangerous lair. If it started out collecting a mousetrap or some poacher traps and then later turned its eyes to some of the more nasty traps in the books, it could not only have a well-defended hoard, but also indulge its obsession with traps.

A white dragon could collect people. As a hatchling it started out belching frost on a rabbit or somesuch, and found a morbid satisfaction and beauty in its frozen, horror-filled expression. So as times goes on it starts collecting a whole menagerie of frozen animals and people, eventually starting to think of live people, heroes and important figures in present-time history as collectibles. So it kidnaps kings, heroes, great philosophers, inventors, revolutionaires, and of couse the occasional princess, and freezes them, so they can be added to its collection.

perhaps one dragon starts out stealing a windchime made of coloured glass in its youth, and it becomes fascinated with the spinning colours, leading to it collecting objects of intense and vibrant colours, eventually filling its hoard with illusion-items and items of kaleidoscopic colours and patterns.

One dragon could collect certain kinds of artwork, such as paintings, beautiful metalwork and so on. It starts out by collecting something simple like beautifully patterned cloth, torn from the bodies of rich merchants it ate, and later starts stealing the greatest works of art it can get its claws on, putting them proudly on display in its lair.

hope it helps

-Nearyn


Very nice aspiration Rhaddrain.

I'll present you with my advice for aspiring GMs, here

If you need some specific info, don't hesitate to ask.

And good luck with it all :)

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When I GM, I usually establish the following rules to my players:

A)You may make a character of -any- alignment, but I do not want any disruptive characters.

B)You can add as much flavour and ideas to your characters as you will, but I expect you to make compromises with your character, for the benefit of the group and the story, if necessary.

C)[if playing an AP] If guys still make the story, you push it along. But as we've agreed to play <AP name>, I expect you to help progress the story in the AP, although you are free to make what extra adventure you will on the way. If I feel we're getting too far from the established plot and it's about time we get back, I'll tell you.

And since I started doing so, I've had minimal problems of the kind you describe.

-Nearyn


Okay I'll do that. The information is a bit conflicting, because his summon ability reads the same as normal ice devils, but his tactics block reads 2d4.

-Nearyn


My players are in the Heptaric Locus in Xin Shalast, and are likely gonna encounter Gamigin(The Ice Devil Sorcerer). Gamigin's tactics involve summoning 2d4 Bone Devils, but an Ice Devil's summoning ability reads:

1/day—Summon (level 4, 2 bone devils, 50%)

Can someone please tell me if an Ice Devil -can- summon 2d4 bone devils, and if not, if I should let Gamigin summon 2d4 BDs or 2.

Thanks in advance for your lightning-fast, helpful response.

-Nearyn


I'd let the player make his case, it sounds like it could be fun :)

-Nearyn


3 people marked this as a favorite.

If you make a FAQ thread to clear it up, PM me, and I'll drop by and leave a click.

A good one to you, as well :]

-Nearyn


DominusMegadeus wrote:
Nearyn wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:
Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:

How about trying to redeem your mother?

I'd consider that a valid reason to associate with an evil character.

You are not fighting a greater Evil. You are fighting an equal Evil.

Wouldn't that depend on how mean your mother is? O.o

-Nearyn

The Evil you are 'fighting' by redeeming your mother is herself. Your Mother = Your Mother. Not a greater Evil than the one you are working with.

Hhmmmm, but what if your mother's redemption would mean a great triumph for good? Like you're telling an inverse version of the story of Faust? :P

That'd be a great story, I think. I'd at least have fun with it as a player or GM. A paladin is so outclassed by his opponent (who just happens to be his mother), that he decides to travel with her and act as the angel on her shoulder, chipping away at the evil around her heart even as she subdues a nation :D

Nah, but I'm just having some fun before leaving the thread. I've provided opinion and RAW, so there's not alot else for me to do here XD

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:

How about trying to redeem your mother?

I'd consider that a valid reason to associate with an evil character.

You are not fighting a greater Evil. You are fighting an equal Evil.

Wouldn't that depend on how mean your mother is? O.o

-Nearyn


I think the reason they say you should seek out an atonement spell is that paladins should ideally not surround themselves with evildoers, and if they do, it would be flavourful and feel "right"(?) if they sought out atonement for having to do so.

But there is already plenty of consequence for the Paladin in the Associates rule: you'll notice that the rule prevents them from making use of non-LG henchmen, followers, and cohorts. That is the ACTUAL impact on the Paladin class that that rule has.

There is no consequence for associating with evil, it is merely bad form, and you'll probably want to atone for it. Why you would want to atone for it, I'd argue is completely up to you. Maybe you feel like you're risking tarnishing the name of your order a bit? (like a cop being seen talking to a known gangster may tarnish the name of his department?). Or for any number of reasons.

Point remains however that there is no consequence for associating with evil, outside of GM Fiat.

-Nearyn


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You are plain incorrect DominusMegadeus, I'm sorry to say. I'll make the effort and provide a screenshot, gimme a second.

EDIT:

Here you go Screenshot from the CRB

Screenshot of CRB

The exact same font, written in the exact same way as every other entry in the class. They are two seperate entries. Associates is no more a part of Code of Conduct, than Code of Conduct is a part of Holy Champion.

If Associates WAS a sub-set of Code of Conduct it would have said.

hypothetical rules that do not actually exist wrote:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

A paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Additionally, while she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

But I have already provided you with the screenshot, so I don't know why I bothered typing that last part.

-Nearyn


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 5 people marked this as a favorite.

Nononononooooo~~~

Do NOT make that mistake. Who the paladin can assocaite with IS NOT part of the paladin code of conduct. The two are completely seperate entries in the Paladin-class.

You cannot logically tie the two together any more than you can consider the Code of Conduct a part of the Holy Champion(Su) power.

-Nearyn


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, firstly we can at least be happy for the paladin that his career is not in danger based on his associates, since it is not part of his code. Even if we look at the full text

Paladin wrote:
Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Secondly, I don't think being your mother's son counts as adventuring with/working with someone. Nor are you encouraged to smite the wicked woman :P

Even if we assume the Paladin is actually adventuring with his mother, why would he give a rat's ass that she pings evil? It's not like there are any consequences for associating with evildoers. At worst it's considered bad form, but if the woman pings evil, yet remains his loving mother and doesn't actually act evil, then why would the paladin have cause to act? :)

He would not.

-Nearyn


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@Rhaddrain:

Best way I can think of, is making sure the Evil NPCs don't act like A**holes. It is true that some players have evil-phobia, but in my experience, players would rather be buddies with the potentially evil sellsword/thieves guild enforcer, who's willing to share a beer and a story, over a game of darts, than they wanna be buddies with Sir Stickintush, chaste, preachy paladin do-gooder.

-Nearyn


3 people marked this as a favorite.

First off, Unless my mother is a cleric or evil outsider (and assuming she doesn't smell like gravedirt ;) ), GO MOM! :D You've got 5HD?! That's pretty darn impressive.

Second, I continue with my life and don't treat her any different, that is, provided that she pings evil, but has always just been a devoted, loving mother.

After all, alignment only represents a character's morality, not whether they are willing to act, based on said morality :]

-Nearyn

1 to 50 of 834 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.