|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
That's the thing, the reincarnated druid doesn't call out the specific spells raise dead and resurrection as unusable. It currently says:
A reincarnated druid cannot be raised from the dead or resurrected, though she can be reincarnated.
How we interpreted it due to Paizo's standard formatting is that it is talking about the act of raising the dead, not the spell raise dead. As per their formatting, if they were calling out the spells, I feel it would say something like this:
A reincarnated druid cannot be brought back to life through raise dead or resurrection, though reincarnate can bring a druid back to life.
That's our interpretation of it anyways. I could see how we can get both honestly.
Generally, when it calls out specific spells that may or may not work, it always italicizes them. In this case, it is talking about raising the dead in general, since resurrected and raise dead aren't italicized as spells. So that's what led to the GM's decision that only reincarnate and similar reincarnation spells work and we all agreed. Of course, the healing aspect of Breath of Life would work still.
Considering it's a once a week free auto-rez, that's still pretty good.
Hm, isn't the Kindle Fire just basically a "normal" tablet?
Yeah. It has online capabilities and apps, but it has color and reads better than the standard kindle. I bought it two years ago for a reduced price when the Fire HD came out. I personally only need the kindle to read pdfs. Nothing more. I don't need Hulu or bluetooth. But if you want that, you can get the HD at a reduced price now.
My singular time playing PFS, the GM wouldn't let me light a torch with a fire elemental, since it cannot do that according to the rules. So I'm inclined to agree with Kwauss. I'm okay with players at the very least, using it to make small amounts of water.
Well, it's not really light penalties. No other raise spells work on the druid, including breath of life. So if the druid drops in the middle of the fight, the cleric cannot bring them back to life. I've seen this almost lead to a TPK. Also, dying in the middle of a dungeon can hamper the party, as they have to wait for their buddy to come back (and the villain goes off and does his thing). Sure a scroll of reincarnate would be a good idea, but remember that if they get killed again in those seven days, they die without coming back on their own. I've seen that happen as well.
So, it is a cool bonus, but not the end-all, be-all of the reincarnation druid.
Been doing some work on my setting, especially with astrology. Since astrology and numerology were huge parat of the American indigenous people's cultures, I felt that it was important to play off of this. With that, I have various important cycles and numbers that are holy to the ancients in my setting.
That's all I have for this. I plan on sharing some of the races soon, including the race that ruled over the Kalikal empire. They have an interesting ability called Divine Vigesimality, which I'll leave to your imaginations :)
Also, unrelated, but how unbalanced would it be if a race could cast deathwatch at-wll?
James Jacobs wrote:
Clicking this at 330 am with my headphones on scared the s~%~ out of me. :p
A lot of people ask you what AP you really want to do. I'd like to know, what's one (or a set of) AP that you want to avoid like the plague?
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Actually, that first attack is usually the hardest hitting one. In general, the first attack made is the one that has the highest to-hit bonus. So by negating that one, you've negated a martial creature's highest attacking attack. Or at least one of them. The iterative attacks have a better chance at missing because of their negatives. Now, this won't work the same for all monsters, but it'll work well as you level.
1. I'll admit it's a preference thing, but yes, I feel that magic should defeat magic most of the time. It's something you see in fantasy media and it's really not that far-fetched. A player can still fight magic with magic weapons or items or blessing to defeat magical creatures.
2. That's usually the standard in fantasy literature. Ghosts, shades, and such can't be hit without some form of spiritual item.
3. Because those magical creatures can still be overcome with preparation. Bringing silver or cold iron or holy water. In fantasy, it's not often you see a supernatural hunter come in without the right materials and research. Salt, holy water, a crucifix... it's all staples of fantasy literature.
4. Yes, like I said, I made a mistake about spell immunity. So sue me.
5. Again, I don't have an issue with relying on magic to fight magic. I saw your last post and it feels less like an actual example of gameplay and more just an example of a GM wanted to screw over a player. And before you say it, yes, I understand that removing the fighter's magic items is much easier to do than sticking a wizard in an anti-magic zone.
That said, I feel we can compromise about this issue. I'll be honest, an ability to overcome incorporeal would certain help the fighter, even if it doesn't quite match my personal preference. Maybe the fluff is calling for a blessing from the gods, or, like the monk, channelling chakra/ki/prana/some other mystical, but inner spirit energy. I could dig that, and it'd give the fighter the boost for using a "magic weapon" without "magic". That seems like a good fit, no?
Except you missed the part where JJ said that male superheroes would be relegated to sidekick and marginalized status. Go back and read the quote. There was no assuming that the male superheroes would be marginalized. He literally wrote it. If it was just "superheroes can swap genders" then yeah, xavier would be making a false assumption about it. But there was no false assumption. It's there, in bold for you, that the male superheroes would be marginalized.
Thing is, with cold iron, that was inherently a magical material. Many of those materials had spiritual properties of purification inherent to them. And you see that in Pathfinder with holy water.
Though I agree, that seeing more of that with salt and cold iron and other items would be really cool.
Because ghosts and spirits and incorporeality are inherently magic creatures. Creatures of the Ethereal realm that can only be damaged greatly by magic (and even then, by half) and channeling positive energy. It feels like something that to me, shouldn't be overcome with skill alone. I mean, maybe if it was an invoking of spirits to aid him or something, but that's still magic in nature. Sorry I don't agree.
I stand corrected, those are good points. Though for SR, I honestly just assumed that the creature was just immune.
As for that 2,000, a fighter isn't buying a magic weapon just to deal with incorporeals. He's buying a magic weapon to fight things better. A fighter will always be buying that +1 magic weapon. The fact that it helps with incorporeal creatures is a bonus to it. And there are other methods to dealing with ghosts and undead beyond magic weapons. Such as holy water.
But that's also why I think the fighter could use ways to make buying and crafting items cheaper. To lessen the burden of magic item dependence
Also, having done it, the magical oil is a minor inconvenience, if that.
Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
I honestly would not mind if the fighter couldn't cut a ghost or shadow, to balance things the GM should introduce monsters that are immune to magic.
Because it's a false equivalence. A fighter can, with magical items, defeat a shadow. Even with doing half damage, a fighter can still put the hurting on an incorporeal creature. So even though it's an immunity, it's one that can be over come without a wizard, since you can buy the magic item yourself or make it yourself with Master Craftsman.
How would you have a mage overcome something that is immune to magic?
And to be honest, I don't like that. But it's too late to change that now.
Because honestly, every explaination I can think of that allows him to cut through ghost is magical in nature. Whether it's praying spirits to aid him or even just being really good at cutting ghosts.
I like the style of Charles Atlas powers for fighters. Crazy maneuvers, like leaping bounds and catching bullets and cutting bullets mid shot. But I honestly can't think of an extraordinary means for cutting ghosts besides a magic item or weird science gizmo.
Actually, what he said was that superheroes could be genderbent and that the men would be put into margainalizing positions
I'd not mind seeing pretty much ALL the superheroes do a gender change, and make a world where the vast majority of superheroes are women and the superheroes who are men were mostly regulated to sidekick or eye-candy or marginalized status.
Xavier didn't assume that. It was explicitly stated in the quote (bolded for emphasis). And while JJ did say it to get people thinking, it's hard to convey that over the internet (much like sarcasm and humor). So he took it as it was stated.
To be fair, that's pretty much any literary character in existence :)
Yeah, I found one about the kharisiri through that book. Which is a much better word than fish taco :)
To be fair, how else are you going to take down a shadow without magic? A fighter being able to cut ghosts is in itself a magical ability, whether it's a spell, SLA, or supernatural ability. :)
One thing I didn't get a chance to type (was rushing to the bank) was that since the fighter is dependent on magic items, it would be good to have talents/feats/class abilities that lessen the burden. Two I had in mind were:
Quartermaster: Through haggling and thrifty spending, the fighter is good at getting deals for items. The fighter only has to spend XX% of the buying price when purchasing mundane or magic items.
Master Blacksmith: Years of training in the forge allow you to craft items faster, be they mundane or magic. Crafting mundane items (including weapons out of special materials) takes half of the time. Magic items only cost XX% to make, instead of 50%
Or something like that. Definitely not claiming any of this is balanced, but I feel it's a good start into getting the fighter to ease the magic dependence while still keeping the fighter "mundane".
Wish there was a better word for mundane, since with better skills and combat maneuvers, he's anything but mundane. :)
I don't know. One staple I like from fantasy media is the use of magic items by mundane people to take down creatures. It is something I'd like to keep in Pathfinder. It rewards preparation. Kinda like how Batman can still roll with the Justice League for high powered threats and still use gadgets and cunning to fight them.
Course, fighters need the boost in cunning and manuevers. Not disagreeing with that. I'm just not really keen on adding magic to the fighter.
Adam Daigle wrote:
Thanks for the assist, Evil Midnight Lurker! I understand being broke, Odraude. Moving is always more costly than you assume. Here's hoping to things looking up soon!
Thanks. Luckily I'm moving in two weeks. I've got everything set up to move down to Ft. Lauderdale with the girl friend. Just gotta keep an eye out for jobs down there and be ready for when school starts. Chefs are vicious and the ones at Cordon Bleu are no slouch. I'll have less time for RPGs, but hell, I'll certainly make time.
In the meantime, I've got another monster that I apparently finished but never posted. This is the Ñakaq. It's a creature that sucks the fat out of its prey and uses it for macabre crafts. In my setting, these creatures are the spawn of Camazotz, a horrifying bat demon-god of blood and gluttony. They take after their papa quite a bit and will be an intersting surprise to players. While sucking fat seemed silly at first, I decided that to really creep out players, I would describe the oddness of the lairs of these creatures. Soaps made from human fat, greased bells that smell of human corpses... it should really set in with the horror. And the name is a lot better than phishtaco :p
Updated on the first post as well.
Did the players do short adventures, or longer adventuring days with more encounters? The latter is where you will see the healing issues. Players infiltrating a lair but can't make it all the way to the end because of loss of HP. Granted, they can sneak, but all it takes is one f$@+ up...
I've plotted out how I would run a low to no magic campaign. These are the pitfalls I would remember.
In short, that's what I'd do as a low/no magic setting. Probably would couple it with Incantations for 4 level + spells.
One thing to understand is that many players (including myself) have had very poor dealings with GMs that use low magic. So much so that it's a red flag for me when I read that as a description for a campaign. Many times it isn't even intentional. It's just that the GM takes away magic from the players, but forgets to do the same for the rest of the world. I remember being a level 10 fighter forced to fight some demons and the best weapon we had was a masterwork longsword. Couldn't heal either cause no alchemy. It wasn't fun and by the end of it, we all took leadership and would just throw our followers at monsters.
Most GMs don't put much thought into how removing magic changes the game, so they screw over their players. If you're going to remove things like magic weapons, healing items, and spells, you need to compensate for it with rules that add bonuses to hit and recovering HP. Otherwise your players will resent you when you throw demons and werewolves and dragons and they can't do much because they have no magic.
Rogue Genius Games was able to pull it off without it being unbalanced.
On the other hand, there are those of us that aren't really all that charismatic, or can't speak well when on the spot. I'm no thespian. I'm best described as a gruff, cantankerous old man. That's why I like the Diplomacy roll. It allows me to play someone charismatic, or simple interact with people without penalizing me for my inability to be charismatic.
But that's why I (and most GMs I've enocuntered) give bonuses to people who have roleplayed their way really well. That way, you reward those that try to use Diplomacy well with penalize those that have the inability to.
One template I'd like to see is possibly one for "skeletal insect" undead. Now, the current skeleton template might or might not cover insects cause of the whole "outside skeletal system thing." Some GMs allow it, others don't. I'd like to see one that tweaks it a bit. Maybe a bit more brittle, but more nimble than a standard skeleton.
That and there needs to be more undead bugs. I don't know what, but I have this need to run an adventure with undead bugs.
And just so we can stay on topic...
I've been slowly making a collection of monsters based on Native American legends, American folktales, and Latin American folk stories. It's a bit on a stand still since I'm getting ready to relocate myself to Ft Lauderdale, but the topic is here, with the Bestiary part in the first post link. Once I get everything settled by August 7th, I should be able to post more monsters.
I'd actually like to keep the weapon group bonuses with Weapon Training. I actually like the concept that the fighter can be good with multitudes of weapons, and it still gives the fighter the ability to use one really well. Maybe an option where a fighter can choose a weapon group for a smaller bonus, or choose a single weapon for a larger bonus?
The Evil Queen wrote:
It's the dismissive, elitist attitude you have towards anyone's responses. The point of this topic is to be a wishlist for what everyone wants. To share cool ideas with other people and speculate what's coming next. That means there are no bad ideas here that will some how ruin the Bestiary. If people want more animals, or dinosaurs, or demons, or whatever, then they should be able to express it here without your snide remarks about how bad the ideas are. Especially since you get so defensive when people do it to you. It's very hypocritical and not in the spirit of this topic.
The bestiaries are a product for the entirety of the fanbase, not just only for Sincubus/Ganasgh/Evil Queen/whatever. That means everyone gets to see the creature they like and may not like, but there's something in there for everyone. And that in itself is not going to ruin a product, because it's a product made for all of the fans.
Also, it takes a real narcissist to favorite their own posts with an alternate account.
I actually don't have a problem with a country that bans magic. But, if you ban ALL magic, it becomes significantly more difficult to capture and contain illegal casters. That's why it is a lot better to pick a caster time, like all divine magic or all witches and sorcerers. That's how places like Rahadoum exist. Otherwise, you can just be a caster and fight the police. Which, can be a great way to cause a great caster rebellion.
My thoughts on it: Anti-magic governments can be a compelling story-telling, but generally are used by GMs to screw over players because they hate casters.
The Evil Queen wrote:
That all sounds like really s!#$ty excuses for being a c$+~ to people.
I don't really see how rewriting the fighter would require those other classes to be changed.
Honestly, I could really see them adding fighter talents that replace combat feats. Also, there is mention of the martial maneuver pool that will be appearing in Pathfinder Unchained. But the devs have already said that much of this book is pretty much slaughtering sacred cows that have been bothering people for a long time. And the fighter is one of them. They've already led with the monk and rogue, so I would be surprised if the fighter wasn't in that book in some way.
They been getting feedback for years and yet UK only contained 1 fighter feat but more than 100 wizard spells. :(
It also contained some good fighter archetypes, some good feats for all martials, good new weapons, and (while sadly not a lot of people used this) dueling. Dueling has pretty much changed the way I run combat for the better. Arguably, the tactician fighter is what a lot of people have wanted in a fighter.
Ultimate Combat was for all martials, including ones that can cast spells and spell casters that could be built to be a martial.
I always felt that style of mechanic didn't really work in a party game like Pathfinder, since you'll have a cleric that can heal all of that for you.
No playtest doesn't necessarily mean they still won't be looking at feedback.