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

Nicos's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 10,345 posts (16,175 including aliases). 13 reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 30 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 10,345 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

I'd go case by case.


Neils Bohr wrote:
How would the boot blade interact with a two handed weapon?

You can't use both for TWF. Since Two handed weapon use your main hand and your off hand for the attack.


Jiggy wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Jiggy wrote:


Even just switching from "the black one" to "the one with dark-brown skin" would be a step in the right direction. "Black" doesn't actually describe Bob physically and instead puts him in a category with all kinds of cultural and historical assumptions tacked on.
I see no improvement. In this context "black" emcompases more color spectrum than dark-brown skin, which may not fit bob description, and certainly dark-brown skin is less direct than black.

I used "dark-brown" as just an example of a possible skin tone for the description. I originally typed "[insert skin tone here]" but then deleted it and replaced it with an example because I thought it would read more smoothly and make the example easier to follow. I never dreamed in a million years that someone could read that sentence and honestly believe I was suggesting that the entire spectrum of brownish skin tones ought to be collectively described as "dark-brown".

Which is why I'll be ignoring your posts from here on out.

Not sure why you got upset, but as you wish.


Jiggy wrote:


Even just switching from "the black one" to "the one with dark-brown skin" would be a step in the right direction. "Black" doesn't actually describe Bob physically and instead puts him in a category with all kinds of cultural and historical assumptions tacked on.

I see no improvement. In this context "black" emcompases more color spectrum than dark-brown skin, which may not fit bob description, and certainly dark-brown skin is less direct than black.

And you are the ones with the cultural and historical assumptions here since "black" would be pretty much fine in other of places and it would not imply a different culture than the other people around.


Jiggy wrote:
So if you're describing someone's appearance, you need to use direct descriptive language anyway, so neither label is needed.

If, lets say, bob is a black person and he is standing among a group of white people, and someone ask you which is bob? the most direct answer is "the black one". Reverse white for black and black for white and it is still true.

Besides, well, racism is everywhere in the world that is a sad fact, but I've seem that people form the United states tend to extrapolate what is true in their culture to other cultures, and things that are considered bad in the US can be pretty much fine somewhere else.


Some paizo adventures are just like that, press to the wall or not. I've never played one, but I've been hearing "this combat was too easy" complaints since a long time.


Uhm, I think you can't use weapon finesse with a heavy shield and you will have a -4 penalty from twf with it. What are your attack bonuses?


any feat that allow casting when hands are full with weapon/heavy shield?


I'm going Oracle, probably spellcasting focused.


The feat seems well balanced. It allows more options to deliver sneak attack without needing a flanking partner. Replace the rogue by a barbarian, a druid something and the CR 10 creature would have died the same, or even faster.

And PFS have proved to not be a reasonable stick to measure the power of feats.


And there is a discrepancy in the AC from your sheet and the one from the alias. With the black iron armor I'm counting 24 not 22 (plus the elemental resistances).


Did you take into account hte -2 to will save from crossblooded?


Are you buying a bloodline twice?


It seems we are going to have a whole justice league :p

I would probably need until the sunday to do all the math and stuff, but if not necessary at the beginning I could have the fluff tomorrow.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:
Neither does the new Jingasa. Because you probably used it on the greataxe wielding cyclops a few levels back.

*Ahem*, because you already sold it to buy something decent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
And I thought PFS didn't drive errata. :P

yeah.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:


I'm just trying to show that the game is "healthier" with it no longer a luck bonus.

It is just that your heavy armored/ tower shield character is not very convincing. You invested your resources to have a high AC and then you achieved a High Ac, so?. do they have to nerf circlet of persuasion if I build a character that invest most of his resources into never miss a diplomacy check?


there are a couple archetype that do it but only to familiars, I was thinking more like a pomeranian to become wolf or something like that.


Is there a feat/talent/whatever to let one's familiar or animal companion to have a double identity like the vigilante?


Male, Oracle, Half-elf, chaotic neutral...uhm, interesting.


Male 1, Female 2: 1d2 ⇒ 1

Class: 1d12 ⇒ 4
1. Bloodrage
2. Barbarian
3. Slayer
4. Oracle
5. Druid
6. Summoner
7. Monk
8. Brawler
9. Sorcerer
10. Ninja
11. Samurai
12. Paladin

Race: 1d8 ⇒ 2

1. Human
2. Half-Elf
3. Elf
4. Samsaram.
5. damphir
6. Aasimar
7. Tieflin
8. Changelin

Aligment in case is not non-optional: 1d8 ⇒ 8

1. LG
2. LN
3. NG
4. NN
5. CG
6. CN


Yeah, when I have no concept to build the mechanics around I then do the mechanics and build the concept around.


Would you be ok if I decide my class, race and etc at random?


ok. You didn't anything about aligment


So, uhm, it sounds pretty could but

(a) I don't know what are the rules for Gestalt
(b) I basically haven't read any paizo rulebook since the ACG and it will take time to read the Vigilante class seems it seems big and convoluted.

and

(c) You want a marvel vibe or a DC vibe for the Pc? - I'm kidding I have no idea about comics.


Sundakan wrote:


It's a rough WIP currently.

?


Besides being vigilantes, can you give more information about the campaign?


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:


Your definition of "every single person" is awfully narrow - I only see a few people arguing with me here. Common sense should inform you that there are others in my life who know me far better than you, and guess what? They'd be the first to say that I'm nothing like what you've been painting me as...

FOrum people are not to be blamed if you didn't invest some ranks in your writing skills


Vendrick El'druin wrote:
"Tsk. Well, I'll leave a message to come see me when they return."

boo coward


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't see the problem of a character that invest most of his resources into having a high AC to actually achieve a high AC. And still find no reason to destroy the item the way they did it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:
I understand this errata did very little to make bad items viable and did a lot to make good items into bad items.

Broken items are no longer broken.

They are broken just that now they are broken in underpowered direction.

James Risner wrote:
Insain Dragoon wrote:
I understand this errata did very little to make bad items viable and did a lot to make good items into bad items.

Broken items are no longer broken.

TriOmegaZero wrote:


The difference is just too great. It's very hard to make a character that might get into combat and not use full plate/tower shield.

Really tower shield?, it seems e play very different style of games.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

... Dunning-Kruger effect ...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MisterSlanky wrote:

This argument makes the assumption that unless it's cheap, and amazingly powerful, it's not useful.

No it doesn't, ANd even if it were you're still miss the point that destroying the item was not the right choice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MisterSlanky wrote:


Objectively, if every person that had a Jingasa goes to no hat, there is not a net decrease in diversity. There is an equal transfer of diversity from "hat" to "no hat".

no because when you had 5k available there wa the choice between the Jingasa and, perhaps, putting another +1 into your main weapon. Now it is not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

EVEN If there were 12 other good options for the nerfed item it is still a bad design to nerf the item to the ground, because having 13 good options is better than having 12 good and the 13th to be garbage. So the very lazy policy of nuking the items down and not caring is just bad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If the problem is that every character is buying the same thing in the same slot, then make more than one thing that people want to put in that slot.

Which brings the spinning back around to the "big 6 items".

Which will lead to "use ABP"

Which will get interrupted by a rant.

The writing of this show is getting really predictable.

In a group we've been using an automatic bonus progression since 2012 or so, and still struggle to find good items, there are few that are worth their price.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
Sundakan wrote:
So why not cut out the middle man and just ban everything that wasn't in 3.5?

I'm not sure if you are being serious (as not understanding why this is different).

Or if you are just being snarky for fun.

Or something else?

Your reasoning is very weird. You get an AC of 35 using other means and the items that rise it to 36 is the problem?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I thought that the idea of ultimate equipment was to introduce new items.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And was the Jingasa the guilties thing for that AC? because without it AC 34 is still beyond the number you are giving.


Going with the reviews, of that length I can remember the northland saga, rise of the drows, cyclopean deeps, way of the wicked and the zeitgeist AP.


I would like that people who already bought the book to do more reviews, I like the theme of the book but the 2 star review discourage me to buy it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
graystone wrote:
I don't find options that are a waste of space/ink 'better' in any way.

100% of my characters had the Jingasa.

100% of my melee characters had the feather step boots.
One of my characters had the cap of the freethinker.

Some of my character has some of the other items.

I loved many of those items.
I also understood they were broken.

Well, they are broken now but in the opposite direction, that is pretty much not an improvement at all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
What I'm bothered by is the ascent (which I was there to observe all of) of a narrow, ordered way of thinking and speaking that doesn't play well with anyone who doesn't speak and think their way, and winds up marginalizing the rest of us wherever it takes firm root because it demands understanding without extending any.

I say that describe your stance accurately.


looking my Pms I could not find one.


graystone wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
If an item is so good that everyone buys it, then it's probably a problem.

The reverse is also true. If an item is so bad, no one buys it, then it's probably a problem. Sadly, it looks like they just switch one problem for another. There is a middle ground, between too good and 'nuke from orbit' nerf, that errata/FAQ keep seeming to miss.

The thing is, and it seems to be a recurring theme in paizo erratas, that underpowered worthless options are only a problem for the customers who now have some wasted ink in their book or some wasted bits in their PDF, for Paizo worthless options just mean less complains about OP things.

The erratas seems to be designed to quiet complains and not to improve the quality of the products.


Did you made your mind of what to do with the level up rynjin?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Ring of Protection, cheaper yes, but takes up a ring slot.

you have a better idea to use the ring slot for comparable price?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jaçinto wrote:
... so we find the things that stand out as a gem and use them because they are good.

Everyone knows that If you ever choose something for its mechanical advantages then you are a munchkin powergamer MMOplayer who don't know how to roleplay talkien-esque characters.

=========================

Joke aside, the problem is not that they changed the items that were perceived as too good, but that they nerfed them to the ground, I don't know how people can actually defend that the book know have (more) words that are just there just to fill pages.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
And a 100% chance to negate a critical hit once isn't?

No, at 5000 gp it is not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Stratton wrote:
Thomas Graham wrote:


Using that logic..we should ban adamantine weapons, swarm bane clasp, golembane scarab, cure light wound wands, wands of infernal healing, rings of protection, cloaks of resistance. They are all 'must get' items.

Your hyperbole non-withstanding: some of those items are absolutely necessary. If you want to kill a golem, you'd better have an adamantine weapon. Healing is a part of the game, and if you can't heal yourself, providing a wand for others to use on your behalf is a good way to do it.

Those items aren't "too good."

They are under the definition of "almost universally chosen by everyone who could", at least the cloak definitely is.

1 to 50 of 10,345 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.