|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I'm more concerned about this demigoddess making the proposition. In terms of imbalance of power, this is way worse than, say, an adult propositioning a child. How can your consent be said to be free and uncoerced when, in the back of your head, you can't forget that she could squish you like a bug just by thinking it?
Character who don't get at least 8 hours of sleep a night (doesn't have to be consecutive hours) are fatigued the next day.
In the case mentioned above, the characters who require sleep to prepare spells (Wizards, arcanists, magi, and witches I think are all of them) will need 3 more hours of sleep. All other characters will need 2 more to avoid fatigue.
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
Not to mention "being mean to people because they're different is evil".
That's nice work if you can get it.
Wiggz, the elixir of sex change is clearly the magic item used by
Wrath of the Righteous Vol. 1:
Anevia and Irabeth to transform Anevia into her current body
which inspired a great deal of discussion on the message boards, among which were people asking for it to be given form as an actual magical item. People were INTERESTED in it, and so one of the developers decided to spend some time putting this magical item, which had been hinted at in an AP, and which people were interested in finding out more about, into a rulebook. If this were a magical sword or a helm or an elixir of hair-color-change instead, you wouldn't have cared.
Here's a really simple idea:
Bastard swords, Katanas, etc. are two-handed martial weapons, with the special property that if you have Weapon Focus in them, you can use them as a one-handed weapon, or you can use one that is one size too big for you as a two-handed weapon. Dwarven waraxes have this ability, but also give dwarves the ability to use them one-handed.
They've acknowledged that (read the thread, really) and made the point that creating an expectation of compilations, even an unfounded expectation, could potentially hurt the profitability of the company. They want your feedback on everything they do, EXCEPT this. It's not about whether the compilations would sell (they're sure they would), nor whether they would pay for themselves (they're sure of that too) nor whether they would be profitable (they probably would be, to a degree). Paizo's continued existence really does depend on the subscription model for their APs first and foremost, and doing anything that would provide an incentive for people to cancel their subscriptions in favor of waiting for compilations is something they will never even consider doing. And asking, creating threads like this one, and getting a bunch of responses that chime in saying, "Hey I'd buy that!" might lead to some people thinking a compilation might be coming, and result in them reconsidering a subscription.
So it's not that they're saying, "Please don't tell us what you'd like us to make!" It's that they've said, "Please do tell us what you'd like us to make, except for this one specific thing that we have determined we will never ever make because [reasons] and are worried that getting lots of people asking for might hurt our business model. But other than that one specific thing, we're open to suggestions! We might not do anything with them but we're always listening. Except for that one thing. Please don't ask for that. Anything else, go for it."
I had wondered if you were one of my players from the adult Skulls & Shackles game I'm GMing on a different website, but we don't have any lesbian catfolk. =^.^=
How did a bear get to put ranks in bluff? Was this an awakened bear? If so, I think awakened animals get a language, don't they? *checks* Yes they do.
Evangelist is good if you're a very religious wizard. You end up with the same progression of spells as a Sorceror, your arcane bond and school abilities progress, you still get spells added to your spellbook every level, you get a d8 HD and 3/4 BAB and more skills added, along with the special abilities from Divine Obedience, which of course you'll want to cherry pick one that fits your character. Nethys, for example, has useful ones, and is a logical deity for a wizard.
I would suggest giving the GM the benefit of the doubt, actually.
Talk to him privately. My suggested script is: "I've realized that you're probably doing something to give my character an additional challenge to overcome, and giving an in-game-world justification for why I don't just cause my eidolon to grow flippers, jump on its back, and leave. My only concerns are to make sure that's indeed what's going on here, and to get a bit of guidance from you about how to begin facing this challenge. I've heard that some people really don't like Summoners, and think it's overpowered. Are you having any concerns along those lines?"
Assuming he says that summoners aren't the problem: "Alright, thanks for relieving my worries. Should I start making Spellcraft or Knowledge(arcana) checks, or try to investigate through diplomacy or something?"
If he says summoners are indeed the problem, but he didn't want to take back his previous approval of your character: "I understand that you didn't want to take back what you already agreed to let me do, and I want to make sure both you and I have fun. I can either rebuild my character or work with you to find a way to houserule the summoner into a level of power you're comfortable with."
Suggested rebuilds include a summoning-focused sorceror or wizard. Suggested houserules include changing spells like Haste and Teleport back to the normal spell levels.
If he insists that summoners aren't the problem, but refuses to let you try to figure out the in-game issue, and keeps adding handicaps to your character that none of the other PCs have to deal with, ask to rebuild anyway: "I know you said that you don't care about summoners, but I'm just not feeling this character. What kind of character would you recommend I play that you wouldn't feel needs to have restrictions like this placed on him?"
If he refuses to allow that, explain that the restrictions on your character, and no others, make you feel singled out, which is preventing you from having fun. If he doesn't care about that, leave. You're better off finding a different game, or having no game to play, than continue playing one where the GM doesn't at least consider making changes when he's informed that one of his players isn't having fun.
I don't see how an eidolon could take the tribal scars feat. The Summoner could, and use lifelink to share his HP with the eidolon when it gets hit bad enough to banish it. I could see this working pretty well: Human summoner with a good con, Toughness and tribal scars could have as many as 20 HP at first level. He's a walking sack of hit points for the Eidolon to draw on when necessary.
He provided it above.
For what it's worth, people have gotten the impression that I don't want the act of drinking an extract to provoke. That's not the case, actually. I have one alchemist character, but I GM as well, and most of my games have an alchemist in them. I just want to make sure any AoOs I subject my players to are legal.
Your GM is doing something to you that is outside the normal rules. There isn't any reason you shouldn't be able to summon your eidolon or a summoned creature. There are two possibilities:
1) He's doing something clever, such as the ship's mage using magic in some way to prevent summoning from occurring on the ship, and you'll be able to use it when you get off the ship. This is a way to give you an additional challenge, make you hate the brutal ship's officers even more, and keep you from, say, evolving your eidolon to have a swim speed and being able to carry you, then you just jump off the ship and get carried to shore.
(In this AP, a lot of the first book basically assumes that you don't have the ability to get off the ship on your own, i.e. no sustained flight at first level, and no permanent swim speed at first level. If a GM chooses to allow Strix, Gathlains, Gillmen, Undines, etc. then she will need to come up with a rationalization for why they don't just say, "Seeya! Wouldn't want to be ya!" the first chance they get.)
2) Your GM hates summoners but didn't feel like just telling you, so he's passive-aggressively nerfing you in the hopes that you'll get the hint and reroll a different class.
I hate the concept of 'hairline fractures'. I'm not saying I don't believe in compound fractures, I'm sure the severe cases prove the existence of broken bones, but what I'm saying is I think the concept of 'hairline fractures' detracts attention from a real serious issue.
As long as you're starting from the position that the disorder in question don't actually exist, you're not going to get much more than snark, or other like-minded people reinforcing your biases.
I've seen you post this story before, but it never fails to bring a grin to my face. Cool story, bro (non-sarcastic).
OK, if you're going to necro a thread, please read it through from the beginning before you do!
Paizo has made it very clear that they will not consider doing an Anniversary Edition of any AP other than Runelords, and actually consider even messageboard discussion of the possibility to be damaging to the sales of their flagship product, the AP line. Vic Wertz, the CTO, has politely requested that we refrain from such speculation (in this thread, in fact) lest people who happen on posts of that nature be confused into thinking that such compilations are in fact in the works or being considered.
Yes, compilations would be very cool, but they aren't going to happen. Sorry. If you like having all the AP volumes in one, you can buy the PDFs and take the files to a print shop and have them print them out and bind them together for you.
Yes, I'm sorry that should have been full-round action, not standard action, as that is actually what it is according to a FAQ answer.
OK, so in this regard they are treated similar to potions, except that, like a normal extract, an additional action isn't needed for an alchemist to retrieve them.
(Normal potion: move to retrieve, standard to drink, FRA to administer to someone else. Extract: Standard to retrieve and drink, FRA to retrieve and administer to someone else.
Rushley son of Halum wrote:
Actually, I'm GMing for alchemist PCs and I want to make sure I don't take AoOs on them that aren't legal.
As you can see from this thread it is possible for reasonable people to disagree on the matter, it isn't as settled as you think.
The infusion discovery does not say that extracts affected by the discovery are treated as potions. I agree that treating them like potions for most purposes makes the most sense, but it doesn't actually say that in the rules.
Moreover, James Jacobs, who, while not one of the rules team, IS responsible for originally designing the Alchemist base class, has said, "Infusion/extracts are not potions, and vice versa." In the same post he recommends allowing an alchemist with an infusion-modified extract of BoL to administer it to a fallen comrade as a standard action.
It seems ambiguous to me. At first glance, the answer appears to be yes, since the class ability says that extracts are drunk like potions. Drinking a potion provokes. However, unlike drinking a potion, an alchemist can get an extract out and drink it in one standard action, or if he has the infusion discovery, can get it out and use it on an ally as a standard action. I've determined this by reading the various threads on the subject that a search of this forum has turned up.
From what I can see, there's been a lot of assuming that extracts share the property of potions that drinking them provokes. And I would assume this is the case for a non-alchemist drinking an extract, since they don't have the class feature Alchemy in which alchemists get to draw and drink extracts as a single standard action.
Yet, it seems unclear. Does anyone have a firm indication that it does provoke, other than the inference that it's like a potion and provokes because drinking a potion does?