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 2013 Star Voter, 2015 Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 9,644 posts (13,655 including aliases). 4 reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 21 aliases.


1 to 50 of 922 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:

I will point out that the quoted text says "useful", not "good", and is accurate in saying so since it is chock-filled with use... as a prerequisite for other feats.

THey deliver a lot of feat with CE as a prerequisite to make sure that feat is useful...evil genius.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Obviously we need a melee tactics of the inners sea toolbox to fill that gap.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:


And yes there are many questionable rules from the now out of date part of the Bible that refers to ancient Jewish law. I don't seriously expect anyone to live by ancient Jewish customs... not even the Jews.

That part of the bible is no more nor less outdated than the rest. What part of the bible is important and what is going to be conveniently ignored is a personal choice. How are you suppose to tell what intolerance/fundamentalism/discrimination is fine and which is not?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How exactly he get shot in the eye?

Anyways

A) There is no body part damage in standard PF, so He just get the damage and his eyes are just fine.

B) You use the called shot optional rule for it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
The folks who want this spell to be as powerful as Dominate Monster, aren't going to be swayed by any further argument

You do understand that the fact that some people read a spell in certain way doesn't imply they do it because they want to break PF in munchkin/powergaming way right? or it is that just too much to ask?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Will it ever be an expanded quinngong list of abilities?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Ninja ninja ninja, ninja ninja. ...Bard bardbard bard bard BARD bard bard bard bard. Investigator investigator investigator, ranger ranger ranger, slayer slayer.

Dude, don't be rude...alchemist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Saving Cap'n Crunch wrote:


Edit: Ninja'd! Whyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Because ninjas are better.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
VampByDay wrote:
People don't like rogues because they are not as good at staying alive as fighters, and they don't deal their redonkulous damage consistently...Rogues exceed at skills and utility...

This statement have been debunked over and over again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_Blake wrote:

Charm Person does NOT dominate anyone. It just makes them like you more. As a friend, your opinion matters more than it used to. They might listen to your opinion and maybe even do some thing things you suggest.

Except the part when you can give them orders and if they fail the opposed check they obey. That's the actual problematic part that should not be in the game IMHO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marco Massoudi wrote:


-all missing Demon Lords
-the Archdevils
-the 4 (or 5) Daemon Lords.
-lots of Great Old Ones

While they could be cool, that would be like 30 pages that almost never would get used.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quark Blast wrote:

@Tacticslion

... I think you're LG.

That is what he want you to believe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hi mr Jacobs

Can you tell us the top 5 things that made you more proud of your work in paizo?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is no off-hand attacks outside full attacking TWF*, there is no penalty associated to TWF for AoO*.

*(with the exception of two weapon warrior fighter archetype).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
calartnick wrote:
VERY sorry to necro,...

You shouldn't, this is a great thread.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been very lucky with the Mikazemas in the past, due to the generosity of fellow forum members I own some high quality products like Cerulean seas campaign setting, Varisia birthplace of legend and Obsidian Apocalypse among others.

So, to restore the balance I will give one of the following to the first three people that ask for them, (the catch if that is someone else have already asked for one of them the next person have to choose from the remaining.)

1) Psychological Combat
2) Encounter Pages III
3) Alternate Dungeons: Mystic Ruins

And the the first ten people that post can participate in the raffle for one of the following

1) Ultimate composition.
2) Ultimate Ethermagic
3) Retribution—Collector's Edition

I also would like that the happy winner compromise to write a review about their product.

Disclaimer : Between you choosing a product and me buying it it may pass some weeks, or not, not sure at the moment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:


e.g.: People complaining Gunslingers don't take 30~60 seconds to reload their weapons, not caring about the fact that if that were the case, those weapons (and a whole freaking class) would be f&$#ing useless!

I always cared about the fact that PF basically enforce ranged characters to be stand still machine-guns or suck. IMHO, guns and crossbow should be slower to reload but with powerful shots, or something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really dislike selective realism, it application is so skewed.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:

Can we not make this another "I got an Axe to grind about the Advanced Class Guide for.... reasons" thread:-)

this isn't the place for it:-)

Who mentioned the ACG?

Well, here we go: Divine protection vs "no, swashbuckler can't have cha to will because that would be overpowered"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Insain Dragoon wrote:


The ACG isn't impossible to enjoy or impossible to use. It's just riddled with errors, unclear wordings, and unclear intent.

And balance issues and uninspired mechanics I would add. But in order to be not totally negative,it does have nice things and the possibility to have lots of more of nice thing if some thing get polished.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Laurefindel wrote:

In Frodo's Footsteps...

The DM has the players evolve in his favourite literary universe in the wake of the the book's main protagonists. Obviously, the players can never meet the book's protagonists, because "it didn't happened in the book". Their actions can never outshine those of the book's protagonists, otherwise the book would have been about the players and not the protagonists. PCs' actions can't change anything that will happen to the book's protagonists either, affect the outcome of the story or meet anyone that the protagonists will eventually meet cause that could alter the story as written in the book. In all other respect the game is just like the book, swears the DM, except that the players know that the real story happens offstage and that their story is doomed to be secondary.

Dragonlancewhat?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:
The fear is that a consumer, knowing there are errata (available) may decline to buy an in-stock book from a FLGS expecting that there's a second printing coming soon.

It is a no win situation it seems, because the other alternative is that the customer may decline to buy it due to the low quality of the product.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The silliness of this thread have reached worrying levels, somebody call the forum police.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Like 12 years ago we were kicked out of a house because one of the players was stealing some starfruit/carambola from a tree of the house next to the one we were playing.

It is funny when remembered, but at the time the host had problem with his mom and the neighbors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liliana Tesseran wrote:

Also didn't realize that both character I just tried to start up RP with in the other thread have dropped out. I feel alone there now lmao.

Same here. I replied to you just to kill some time, as both characters are from sandpoint Is reasonable they know each other.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Coming back to CE, the situation is obnoxious but it would be something if at least no other feat is ever released with CE as prerequisite (unless said feat have actually something to do with fighting defensively).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jodokai wrote:
EDIT: And if Dazing monsters for 1 round shuts down an entire encounter, the Wizard isn't doing it alone.

You probably want to reread some rules before continuing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Xethik wrote:
Charisma is great. It just sadly doesn't work well for melee characters. Cha to AC, saves, initiative, yada yada is all great when you have an offensive ability to grow off of it. I don't know of a consistent way to get Charisma to hit/damage in Pathfinder. Smite gets you part of the way there.

When you are adding cha to so many thing you can happily allow yourself to buy a big strength.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Lamontius wrote:

Strength:

Carry Capacity
Melee attacks rolls
Melee damage
Combat Maneuver Bonus (CMB)
Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD)
Climb
Swim

Dexterity (with a dex to damage build):
Melee attack rolls
Melee damage
Initiative modifier
Ranged attack rolls
Armor Class
Reflex save
Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD)
Acrobatics
Disable Device
Escape Artist
Fly
Ride
Sleight of Hand
Stealth
-2 feats


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It is an horrible feat that somehow just get worse and worse with every new book (since it becomes the feat tax for more and more unrelated feats)

No more combat expertse! - (I can dream)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Female Human Sorcerer (fey bloodline), level 7; AC: 17; Hp: 41; CMD: 17 ; Fort: +10 Ref : +10 (Evasion) Will: +13 (aura of courage, strong willed) ; Perception +5; Concentration +20, Init +2

After 6 unnecessary coup de grace I think it is amorphous


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Koshimo wrote:

ok fine "no because we said so" not because it makes any sense

The rules are crystal clear it doesn't matter if that make sense to you or not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Trogdar wrote:

I think Nicos was pointing towards the fact that caster contributions in combat are more potent for longer(number of levels) IN ADDITION to being the better class out of combat.

There is a range of levels where martial and casters contribution in and outside combat are comparable (assuming no extreme cheese on any part). But then there is a point where full caster just win in both.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
VampByDay wrote:

4)Required magic items

Why does pathfinder even bother offering different magic items for the belt/cloak/headband slot? The game's DCs seem to assume that people will be running with cloaks of resistance and belts to improve your physical ability scores (default, CON) and mental ability scores (Default, WIS.) Sure, a paladin can get away without a cloak of resistance, and a rogue might grab a circlet of persuasion, but almost every fighter is gonna go for that belt of STR, almost every rogue wants that belt of dex, and every caster want to up their primary casting stat. Why even offer other magical items for those slots in the end?

Getting rid of the big 4 (cloack, amulet, ring, stat booster) is one of the best houserule ever.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:

And if they don't satisfy the need for power gamers to be at the top "tier", then I just don't care.

Sometimes I have the feeling that some people believe themselves heroes when they mention "power gamers" in a contemptuous way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ragoz wrote:
Quote:
The simple answer is that it is not OK.
As great as everyone being generic cardboard cutouts is I'm going to say in my opinion having racial differences including stats, spell-likes, favored class, skills, traits, and subtypes creates an interesting and balanced game. Everyone will have something they are better and worse at.

I agree as long as the difference is reasonable, wich is not the case with cases like the barbarian favored bonus for humans and for half-elves. Everyone mileage vary of course.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rhedyn wrote:
Nicos wrote:
It it were a Wow martial option then I would agree, but really that 4th iterative does nothing.

By that level, being a martial does nothing.

So, you take an improvement to BAB when it does not matter, but are behind most of the time when it matters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Humans being the best race for every calss is basically false.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

as a side note, the ACG was the perfect place to to do an arcane/divine hybrid class instead of another warrior-priest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:

Why are PrCs sooooo much worse that people are saying that they are "garbage" and such?

Are people really unable to handle level appropriate encounters with PrC characters? Does having to do a couple levels of some casting class instead of picking a drow or whatever really ruin your ability to participate at an adequate level in the game?

Before 10-12th level or so, MT are indeed unable to handle appropiate encounters. IMHO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyrrion wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

I am still curious of the intent behind this change.

Intuitive ruling.

I seriously thought this was the way it was supposed to work prior to reading the FAQ. It never made sense to me that having an SLA (which doesn't even really count as a spell to begin with since you don't need any of the components) would put you on the same level as someone with X-level spellcasting.

It Was the way it worked before that FAQ. that FAQ was actually a change to the rule.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

I'm not looking for a solution to this: obviously, there is none.

There is no solution because there is no problem to start with...this is just an RP opportunity. Just make sure t not punish the paladin if end in the middle of a no win situation.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It is clear that playing with or without traits are both valid choices.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nimoot wrote:
... You'd think that could prepare him for anything players could throw at him. Two of the party members actually helped create 3.0/3.5 D&D as well...

He could very well be able to deal with whatever the players throw at him, that have nothing to do with actually wanting to deal with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
claudekennilol wrote:
I'm not seeing a rules question so I'm just going to assume it's this: "Is my DM allowed to tell me that I can't pick traits during character creatation?" The answer is "Yes, refer to rule 0."

I think the default rule is no traits (unless extra trait feat). The 2 traits at character creation are an aditional post-CRB optional rule.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even without mythic there is a point where PF is a superhero game.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Takeme Onadate wrote:

For example: the Satrap of Qadira accidentally looses a succubus in Katheer, and has the palace eunuchs find her and whoop the tar out of her with saps and clubs to be brought back for a spanking, figuring their condition precludes any feelings of 'passion' for the succubus. Is the succubus up the creek regarding her ED?

Any succubus worth her salt will be inventive enough to be stoped by that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Cayden Cailean


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:


Likewise, I find you guys' stance on this to be very verisimilitude shattering.

i feel the same for the poor tonws filled with 50,000+ gp.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For random stuff that you have favorite in the past for making you smile, laugh or you just agree with.

Toz:
TOZ wrote:
Sarrah wrote:
I built a L11 rogue not too long ago that could do 300+ DPR.
Words are wind.

Lincon hills on stuff we see everyday on the forum:
Lincoln Hills wrote:

We all know 'em. Here, I'll lead off with a few - but please, try to keep them good-natured. Plenty of other threads where the claws come out.

1. "Your argument has convinced me. I see now that the position I took during my first post was in error. Although I am of course reluctant to seem weak by allowing your argument to change my opinions, your superior grasp of the rules - to say nothing of your courtesy and your masterful skill at debate - have swayed me. Thank you for helping me understand!"

2. "Since all situations regarding paladins require a fairly complete knowledge of your GM, your group, the in-game situation and even how late in the session the incident occurred, it would be presumptuous of me to apply general truisms to your particular situation."

4. "I'm worried that my anti-paladin has done too many lawful and good things. Please analyze the following situation..."

5. "Is it morally wrong to loot the dead? Because we're now sixth level, and I can't help noticing that I'm still using my starting gear."

MIkaze giving an example I agree with:
Mikaze wrote:

NPC: Why should I help you, when your very presence has brought us only pain and loss? Tomorrow I bury my only children, slain because of this curse your greed has unleashed upon our village. All after we welcomed you among us. Tell me, why should I offer you anything more than prayers for your own deaths?

Alexandros Satorum wrote:
I use diplomacy on him.
GM and other players: >:(

Thornborn with a nice poem:
Thornborn wrote:

When one grapples succubi, go right for the pin

No, do not linger in the clinch, it's not a fight you'll win
Don't kiss the supple demoness, as from you your strength drains
And grinning, she will sup her fill, and discard what remains

So, when you grapple succubi, try coming from behind
And, quickly, now, control the head, of beauty most unkind
And keep those luscious lips well clear, of all your flesh, my son
They're simply just too perilous, for all they seem like fun

ROberta Yang -WHY THE ROGUE IS NOT UNDERPOWERED:
"Rogues are uniquely good at UMD because everyone else is so good at having actual class features that they don't even need to bother putting ranks in UMD" - an actual argument people are making in Rogues' favor

Doobledug - The ukraine thingy:
'You just don't in the 21st Century behave in 19th Century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext,' Mr Kerry told the CBS program Face the Nation."

[Laughs until he passes out]

1 to 50 of 922 << 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.