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

Peet's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 374 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Pathfinder Society characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 374 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

11 people marked this as a favorite.

I have a number of issues with having firearms in a medieval fantasy RPG.

I agree with the above posters about the "storybook" feel of a fantasy RPG, and I think that is one reason.

The technological aspect is another issue; the "early firearms" used in Pathfinder date from 1600 onward and were still in use in the early 1800s in the Napoleonic Wars. More primitive firearms such as matchlocks were in use by about 1450 but these firearms are already out of date in Golarion. The "advanced firearms" date from the 1850s during the industrial revolution. If there are revolvers, how come there aren't Gatling guns? The Gatling Gun was invented about 20 years after the revolver. However, this is not quite as big a deal for Golarion which has many modern inventions, such as the printing press and transparent glass. You may prefer to play an FRPG in the medieval era but Golarion is really set in the early modern era.

The big problem I have personally is that hand-held guns are a big cultural game-changer. They redefine the way warfare works. They are relatively simple to make, and gunpowder is also easy to manufacture. They are simple to use, which means that troops take much less training to prepare for war. Firearms were powerful enough even in the 1500s that one either had to wear very heavy armor or not bother with armor at all. Practically speaking once a culture with decent metallurgy is introduced to firearms, guns should be ubiquitous in that culture within a generation or so. Nearby cultures without the means to make them will also see their value and start trading for them.

Pathfinder restricts guns in ways that are implemented for game balance but make no sense in terms of the game world, and they come up with some contrived explanations as to why this is the case.
* Firearms are exotic weapons, when they should be simple weapons. The big advantage of firearms is that they are easy to use.
* Firearms are ridiculously expensive, when the craftsmanship required to make firearms is not significantly greater than that needed to make a decent sword. If you can get a katana for 50gp you should be able to get a musket for 20gp.
* Firearm ammunition is extremely expensive, despite the fact that all the materials needed to make it are cheap and easy to obtain.
* Practically speaking you need to play a specific class to use firearms competitively, or to even have access to a firearm early in the game. And that class is only effective with firearms. (I would have been much more comfortable with the gunslinger if you could make gunslingers that use other types of weapons).

All these things are in place to prevent the widespread use of firearms in the game. If that is important, why have them in the game at all?

The one balancing factor that would have made firearms reasonable would be to use realistic technological effects. For example:

* Reloading times. A smoothbore musket would take about 30 seconds (5 combat rounds) for a new recruit to reload and fire. A veteran could do it in 20 seconds (3 combat rounds).

* Smoke. Smokeless powder was not invented until the 1880s. Prior to that firing a gun produced a significant cloud of smoke and repeated shots would cloak a battlefield in smoke. Gun rules should include concealment rules based on this.

* Inaccuracy. Smoothbore guns had significant windage (the gap between the size of the bullet and the size of the barrel). This meant that the bullet would bounce around in the barrel on the way out and its trajectory would never line up perfectly with the line of the barrel. This made smoothbore weapons inaccurate generally, though a marksman could gain a familiarity with a specific weapon that would allow for greater accuracy. i.e. If the shooter knew his gun tended to fire a couple degrees to the left he could compensate by aiming to the right. This would be less of an issue with advanced firearms.

Faced with these issues, firearms could be present in games without breaking them and at the same time making firearms not especially attractive for the average adventurer.

Man, I could go on and on. I hope my position is clear.

BTW to the poster who wanted to know what the problem with touch AC is, the issue is that as you go up in level most things get more difficult to do, but your abilities also advance. Monster AC increases, saves increase, CMD increases, resistances increase, and so on. But touch AC tends to go down as you get higher in level instead of up. So at high levels the gunslinger can hit everything including enemies that make other well-built characters struggle.

Peet


The Dark Creeper is the `basic` common version and I think you should base most of your assumptions about the race on this.

When I see humanoids with racial hit dice I tend to assume that they are an abstracted form of an NPC class with levels equal to the creature`s HD. Since a 3 HD dark Creeper is CR 2 this suggests to me that they are either a greater than 10 RP race or their class is a special PC class rather than an NPC class.

It looks like their `class` works like this (based on dark creeper/dark stalker):
HD: d8. BAB: 3/4. Saves: As Rogue. Skill ranks: 2+INT/level.
L1: Detect Magic SLA at will
L2: Sneak attack +1d6
L3: Darkness SLA at will
L4: Sneak attack +2d6
L5: Fog Cloud SLA at will, Darkness becomes Deeper Darkness
L6: Sneak attack +3d6

Not an amazing class, really. Looks like an NPC class to me. Of course for a monster, an ability that is `at will` is not the same as a player `at will` ability since the monster will only get so many chances to use it. Monsters normally get only one encounter per day (or per life!).

The Dark Slayer works completely differently, and frankly I think it probably should be more than CR3 considering it can spam a whole lot of things and its soul harvest ability lets it get temp HP from magic touch attacks, of which it has several. No matter what we do it won`t fit into this paradigm as it gets tons of SLAs compared to other dark folk, and it doesn`t seem to lose anything to get them (except the rag armor ability).

If the Dark Creeper has basic stats it seems to get +4 DEX and +2 CON. If the Dark Creeper has Heroic stats then it seems to get -2 STR, +2 DEX, and either -3 INT or -2 WIS, -1 INT, or -4 CHA, +1 INT, etc. Though CHA is their lowest score other versions have a high CHA but INT is always mediocre so the INT penalty seems reasonable racially.

Considering the powerful abilities they get I think -2 STR, +2 DEX, -2 INT would be reasonable for an `average` dark folk. There is no score modifier that this matches but we could call this a -1 RP.

On the other hand, if we go with the Basic scores and say that they get +4 DEX and +2 CON, but +2 of the DEX bonus is a size bonus for being small, and if they go medium they get a +2 STR size bonus instead (just like alter self).

I think the death throes ability makes sense as a racial power that increases in power with levels. It`s kind of funny but the basic one that Dark Creepers get is actually a disadvantage for them because once you kill one dark creeper you blind the others automatically.

Poison use and rag armor are both reasonable racial abilities and are hardly game-breaking.

The racial skill bonuses are really amazing, except that the amount of skill ranks that the Dark Folk `class` gets are so poor that it just seems like a balancing factor. For example, they get a +4 to perception but never put any ranks in it. The Dark Creeper puts one rank into Stealth but it`s not a class skill! How is this not a class skill for a dark creeper? Really?

I would be inclined to tone down the racial skill bonuses and just give more skill ranks for their custom class and appropriate skills in class.

More to follow...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Kitsune are one of those inherently magical races. Have you considered some kind of spellcaster? Maybe a Magus. As a Magus you would have access to vanish and alter self, both good things for a Kitsune (though disguise self does not seem to be on the magus list, sadly).


An Aboleth religion`s domains would probably include some of:
Law, Evil, Madness, Trickery, Charm, Darkness, Water.

Any others?


Pupsocket wrote:
sunshadow21 wrote:


I noted the social bias because the very nature of the hexes is such that even in a non-historical world, they are still "different" and thus likely going to be subjected to an enhanced level of scrutiny and critique. Encouraging the witch coven to come isn't the hard part; getting them to openly practice would be the harder sell. Even if they are tolerated, being openly accepted as social equals would still be a major challenge.
Witches are not marginalized women singled out to demonstrate the power of the ruler or the unity of the community. They have real, actual, demonstrable power. They have no struggle to be accepted as social equals, they're already on top of the pile.

Yes, let`s not make a connection between people on Earth who were accused of witchcraft and the Pathfinder character class.

On Earth, in the days when people were punished for witchcraft, anybody who was believed to have magic powers would be considered a witch. That means ANY spellcasting class would be considered witches were they to appear on Earth in those times. Even Paladins and Clerics would have to talk very fast to explain what they were doing.

Also it`s worth noting that a `witch` need not be female, on Earth or Golarion. The term does not necessarily mean a female person. At the Salem witch trials seven of the twenty people executed who were accused of being witches were men. Sometimes male witches were called wizards. It`s a modern idea to associate the term witch with women.

Likewise the Pathfinder character class is in no way restricted to female characters. We may assume that because of the influence of the hag races female witches are more common on Golarion than male ones, but there is no requirement anywhere in the character class that a witch be female.


I think we're missing the real question here, which is: Do the aboleths sound like Daleks when they talk? :)

Seriously, a sensible Aboleth adventure would have lots of encounters with pre-dominated monsters. The Aboleth's melee abilities are nothing to write home about and I think that generally they will try to get others to fight for them if fighting is necessary.

I can certainly envision the Aboleths also having a network of servitors who operate underground, similar to the Red Mantis assassins. These agents could kidnap important people and bring them before an Aboleth so that the person could be dominated and then returned to his normal life. Who knows how far such a conspiracy could go?

Do Aboleths have their own deities? OR are they above such things?

What classes do people think will work best for Aboleths?

Peet


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seems to me that in a game with this ability the GM needs to:

A. Enforce the ability's range limit
B. Enforce the ability's duration
C. Make sure that single-enemy encounters are both rare and varied

You do this and it seems to me that the frequency in which the Witch's slumber hex will be game breaking will be small.


Yeah, give me a mithral tower and I immediately want to steal it and melt it down.

One time in a high level campaign we fought a titan who was described as having a gigantic adamantine sledgehammer. After killing him there was a discussion amongst the party members about whether we take the sledgehammer because of how heavy it was (it was supposedly over 2000 pounds), but I pointed out that the adamantine alone was worth more than the rest of the treasure we had accumulated so far in the adventure.

Turned out that it was just a straightforward Maul of the Titans though. What a rip-off!

Peet


The Helm of Opposite Alignment was one of those idiotic things that dates back to old AD&D. In those days there were no rules about cursed items being made by screwing up the enchanting process; items would have a curse on them by design or would be cursed as a result of their environment.

It`s a pretty stupid item to deliberately make though. Imagine the evil necromancer crafting one in order to subvert his arch enemy Bob the Paladin.

Scenario 1: after crafting the helm, the necromancer gets ready to send it to Bob the Paladin. However, he fails to warn his guards appropriately and the leader of his tower guards steals it, puts it on and changes himself to LG. Suddenly realizing the error of his ways he helps Bob overthrow the necromancer and is hailed as a hero in the local town. Maybe Bob even takes him on as a sidekick.

Scenario 2: after receiving the helm as a mysterious gift, Bob foolishly puts it on and his alignment becomes CE instead of LG. Bob turns into an Antipaladin (now named Anti-Bob), leaves his hometown after doing some despicable deeds there, and rides out to meet the necromancer. The necromancer grins evilly as he prepares to welcome Anti-Bob into his allegiance. But Anti-Bob whips out his sword and plunges it into the neck of the necromancer, shouting `Die wizard! All your chattels are now mine!`

Changing alignment doesn`t necessarily change what side you are on or make you friends with people of the same alignment as your new one. It would make a lot more sense to have an item that always changes someone to a specific alignment, rather than the opposite one. Or even more likely, counts as a dominate person on you.

Of course, as of 3.5 the Helm is now a cursed item. But having any given alignment can hardly be seen as being a curse. It`s only a curse if your class has an alignment requirement that causes you to lose class abilities while under its effect.

Really this is just a big pain in the butt for players who now have to roleplay a character with basically a new personality. Meanwhile it doesn`t necessarily make the character change sides though he will likely piss off all the other party members. As a GM I get rid of this one if I see it in a scenario.

Peet


Scavion wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Quote:

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity) can channel stored spell energy into healing spells that she did not prepare ahead of time. The cleric can “lose” any prepared spell that is not an orison or domain spell in order to cast any cure spell of the same spell level or lower (a cure spell is any spell with “cure” in its name).

Obscure Object

Secure Shelter
Oh gods YES.

Took me a while but I get it now. Funny.

Maybe there should also be a manicure/pedicure spell.


For a CR 7 critter they can be pretty dangerous. They have an INT of 15 and as such they would use their abilities in an intelligent way. They are also social creatures (they live in cities) and there would often be a lot of them around. A DC 22 dominate monster is pretty scary for a party of 7th level characters; a cleric at that level probably has a will save of +10 and a fighter could be as low as +2.

Being able to use Project Image at will is pretty awesome, as is Veil. However, they are particularly good if combined with other class abilities. Giving them class levels is perfectly reasonable and in fact I would kind of expect Aboleths to have them considering they are an intelligent species. The Aboleth presented is basically your Aboleth version of a L1 commoner in that society.

I think it would be rare to have an Aboleth with levels in a full BAB class. Most of them would take levels in a spellcasting class. Magus might work fairly well, actually, as well as the obvious sorcerer and wizard.

Also remember that aboleths have a lot of slaves that do their dirty work for them. An aboleth city is probably guarded by such slaves.

Peet


Are we allowing the Dervish Dance feat? If you are not doing TWF this feat allows a decent damage bump for a DEX-based character.

Or maybe TWF combined with Quick Draw and make a two-handed chakram-thrower.


Permanent teleportation circles could be used to set up a planet-buster apparatus in orbit. You need to be outside the atmosphere to set it up. Basically the teleportation circle teleports the object to a higher altitude, whence it falls towards the surface. But before it reaches the surface it encounters the teleportation circle and is teleported to a higher altitude. It falls again. Repeat. Eventually the object is falling at relativistic speeds. At this point you move the circle out of the way and let the object strike the planet at 0.1 C.

Larry Niven described this effect in an essay he wrote on teleportation.

The trick is making sure the circle remains in the path of the falling object, since it is travelling at a different speed each time.

Teleportation Circle only works on creatures, so you would prefer a creature that is immune to fire so that re-entry is not a problem. Use a paralyzed fire giant. Of course, at that speed an object probably won't have time to burn up in the atmosphere anyway.

Peet


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AlgaeNymph wrote:
The question about literacy rates has been asked as early as 2008. Guess who answered?

Not actually relevant for this thread, since we are talking about traditional-style names for inns and taverns, and the tradition comes from a lack of literacy. If you assume a largely literate society then you can just use names of bars and restaurants out of your local phone book for inspiration.


The Thing from Beyond the Edge wrote:
You just have to qualify for the new feat when you...

Ah, I believe that you are referring to the retraining rules from Ultimate Campaign. That's not what he is talking about.

In PFS any time before playing your character at 2nd level you may redesign your character once. You can swap out feat choices, but can alter anything else as well, including skills, class, gender, race, or anything else about your character, except for Faction or gp spent. This takes no time or resources to do. The new character must be a valid build.

The idea is that if a player makes some bad choices about their character they can "fix" these problems before 2nd level.

Peet


One thing to remember is that traditional inn/tavern names are based on something that can be portrayed by a fairly simple picture, as most people in the middle ages couldn't read. So a tavern with a green dragon on the sign would be "the Green Dragon." and so on. There might also be a smaller symbol that represents the fact that the owner is a member of the innkeeper's guild, if you are in a country where guild privilege is respected.

Here's some though:
150. "The Hanged Man" (overlooking a town square where executions are held)
151. "The Bawdy Basilisk" (a picture of a basilisk rearing on it's hind legs and winking while wearing a harem girl's outfit)
152. "The Savage Mouse" (a heraldic mouse rampant)
153. "The Broken Wheel" (the sign is just a broken wagon wheel; popular with stevedores and drovers)
154. A town where all taverns by law must be called "The Elephant and Castle."


I find the Paizo version of Dragon Disciple is a pretty decent PrC because it allows the bloodline abilities of the sorcerer class continue to accumulate as the DD levels. The problem with most PRCs is that they tend to drop most class features, and Paizo added a bunch of class features to each class that makes them much more interesting.

For example, if the mystic theurge allowed you to count each theurge level as ONE of your two spellcasting classes for the purposes of class abilities (such as bloodlines, domains, school powers, etc.), it would be way better.

Peet


I stumbled on this website a long time ago and it has a few ideas for creatures native to space:

http://steam-trek.com/flora_fauna.php


Rangers get a lot of skill points so you might want to consider Having an INT of only 10. You are spread pretty thin and may need the points. Likewise having a CHA of 8 is perfectly normal for a Dwarf, and a 7 would not be that uncommon.

If you went that way, you would have a few extra points to bring up your CON and/or STR. A dwarf with a CON of only 14 is kind of sad. Play with it a bit and see what you get. You seem to want to have a lot of decent stats but I think you are spreading yourself too thin.

You could do STR 14, DEX 16, CON 16, INT 10, WIS 14, CHA 6. This would be the kind of ranger with twigs in his hair who understands people less well than he understands animals. Even though you've dumped a stat you are still not playing a super-optimized guy. Of course, your wild empathy will suffer.

The Jungle Guide trait makes sense.

There may be a feat somewhere that makes Handle Animal into a WIS skill instead of CHA which would make the above build better if you planned on using that skill. There may also be a feat that does something similar to this with Wild Empathy.

Other feat ideas would be to choose a feat that supports the combat style you intend to pursue.

The guide archetype is interesting but remember that Ranger's Focus only works on a specific creature at a time rather than a type of creature. Also abilities that allow you to share a favoured enemy bonus with allies would not work with Ranger's Focus, because it does not grant a favoured enemy bonus - it is something else entirely. Unless you GM will allow a houserule that will allow those abilities to affect ranger's focus as well.

Peet


In the old days in sandbox games I would have let the player come up with his "I am here to kill one of you" character, let the rest of the party beat him to a pulp, and then ask him if he wants to make a more sensible character. This I call "learning through experience."

Of course, in those days I had a lot more time to kill than I do now. Games like that can get bogged down pretty easily. Nowadays I would take more of a coaching approach to having my players create characters.

But I agree with many posters here that if the GM allowed a character to be designed with the concept that he wants to kill one of the other characters, then that's a GM green light for PvP at least in this circumstance. You might want to check with your GM how he feels about it in the future. If he is opposed to it then you might suggest he speak to the guy who designed the android character about the design of his next character.

If one character seriously threatens to kill another character, PvP has already begun. If the characters are trying to create dramatic tension then that's fine but they should work it out before hand. That's pretty rare though, and normally when threats start being made the GM should be intervening if he doesn't want PvP in his game.

Vampire: the Masquerade had a really handy rule about character generation. At the start of a game the characters must collaborate on a story about how they as a group became friends. This means that all the characters HAVE to be friends at the start and they have to figure out their own reasons why. This is a rule I have often used in other games such as Pathfinder, and it works well.

Peet


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Nim Folkor wrote:

I am really surprised that there wasn't a cleric/wizard hybrid class. I think that this is definitely needs a good hybrid version because the multiclassing route doesn't work well. Mystic Theurge requires a multiple levels of weakness at the beginning before it starts to pay off.

Does anyone have ideas on how a hybrid version could work?

Yes, it's called Witch.

You have dominate person, heal, black testicles, raise dead, scrying, teleport and plane shift. There, all the most important features of Wizard and Cleric in one full casting class.

Black Testicles? Is that some sort of Necromancer's STD? :)

Yeah I LOL-ed when I saw that.

I think it a result of the force effect of a nut-punch from a bigby's unsportsmanlike fist spell.


I do like the Trojan Cow idea. The idea that Dragons might become paranoid about eating the local cows is awesome.

But could a red dragon just use his breath weapon, but not open his mouth, and then swallow?


Remember for PFS that you can change your character once retroactively at any time before you play at second level. So if something isn't working you can change it. But some players use this feature to make their 1st level characters survive better.

For example, maybe there's one not-especially good feat that for your build you really need at 1st level. Well you could give your PFS character Toughness and then just before getting to 2nd level swap that out for the feat that you need for later.

I saw one PFS guy play 1st level as a barbarian so he would have max HP and then he totally changed his character to a Magus 1/Rogue 1. The only thing that was the same was the name (and probably the faction). A little cheesy but perfectly legal in PFS.

Peet


Ilja wrote:

Spell specialization does not provide a bonus; it is not doubled by Spell Perfection. It is not +2 caster level, it's "Treat your caster level as being two higher for all level-variable effects of the spell."

So it's 18+2+1+(1+2+2)*2=31.

I have to agree with Ilja here... going by the above wording Spell Specialization does not help overcome SR, since that is not an effect of the spell at all; it is a function of your casting ability and which spell you use is irrelevant to SR (for example, spell level has no effect on SR). Mind you, with the feats you have you still shouldn't be too bad off and will beat SR most of the time anyway. A +31 is still pretty awesome.

Ilja wrote:

Sorry, no can do. A Dazing Elemental (Cold) Fireball with magical lineage would take up a 6th level slot, so you could at most heighten it to 6th level for a total slot level of 9th (as limited by spell perfection)

So it's 10+6(level)+12(cha)+4(gsf)=32, vs a saving bonus of +19 or so (+14 naked +1 belt of physical perfection +4 cloak of resistance).

Also note that being able to heighten spell with spell perfection is a very, very gray area of the rules; ...
However, one could as easily just have the Dazing part be free and end up with the same result; heighten to 6th, turn to cold, apply dazing.

Yeah this works... since heighten and dazing would both be +3 level here you don't lose anything; it works the same way.

Quote:
if that fails, switch to a Greater Metamagic Rod, Elemental (acid) and quicken the same spell out of a 9th level slot.
Now we're entering shroeder territory - you stated you fired two of them, and when I showed you that wouldn't work that well you start ret-conning your actions....

If you have multiple elemental spell rods/feats it does make sense to quicken one element and then fire another element with the regular shot, that way you have two chances of getting through. However the quickened one won't be heightened, presumably.

Ilja wrote:
But I assume this means that a metamagic rod of elemental acid is what you have in your gloves of storing?

That would make sense. No reason not to.

Ilja wrote:

If our dragon has a belt of dex +6 and a cloak of resist +5, it gets a reflex save of (oh are we doing ancient dragon? I was looking at the great wyrm from the srd) +21. It needs to roll a 14 or better now.

I was looking at the great wyrm too, and stated a belt of perfection +2 and a cloak of resistance +4, eating up 32k of however much it has. I'd say likely things it would have spent cash on include a few metamagic rod, a bunch of retrainings of it's feats (because right now they are kinda crappy picks) and a few defensive items, most notably a ring of freedom of movement.

Lightning Reflexes would be a decent feat, under the circumstances.

Are there any items that protect against being stunned or dazed in Pathfinder? There were in 3.5. Obviously those are of great value generally. Being a BBEG ought to mean protecting yourself from a save-or-die.

Ilja wrote:
Also, you have not stated how you see the dragon through the thick smoke. Note that darkvision, true sight and similar methods do not work. I'd say the most likely way to see the dragon is to somehow get access to a red dragon yourself and communicating with it.

The Echolocation spell? Probably cast on a familiar rather than yourself, since the range is pretty short (only 40 feet). Or quicken a gust of wind instead of a fireball?

It is a tricky one, I admit.

Peet


Mithril would actually be worse for an ordinary firearm, since you want to increase the weight if you are looking to reduce recoil. An adamantine barrel would be good as the rifling would wear out less quickly, so the tolerance for harder armor-piercing ammunition would be greater. An adamantine breech could probably handle a bigger charge propelling a bullet. Fire-forged steel might have applications in reducing barrel warp due to heat.

Mithril could be very useful for aircraft, where weight is a very large factor. A mithril frame with adamantine armor over top would work very well for combat aircraft.

In fact, mithril would be very useful in a lot of engineering, where the weight of the structure limits the size. A mithril suspension bridge could probably be twice as big as a steel one using the same tensile strength.

Of course, that's a lot of mithril.

Obviously adamantine is useful for anything where hardness is an issue, so any armored vehicle would benefit from it.

Frost-forged steel might have some interesting applications in refrigeration. Likewise fire-forged steel would be useful for radiators and heat transfer systems. You could probably build a pretty efficient Stirling engine using them.

Living steel would be good for gears, ballbearings, washers, and other metal mechanical components that tend to wear out a lot.

Peet


BTW,
Just asking... how many simulacra does the dragon get?


Ravingdork wrote:

Hands down the best way to kill a dragon is to throw dust of choking and sneezing in its face then coup de grace it (over and over again if need be) with the Dastardly Finish feat.

I seriously doubt you will find a better one-two combo.

I love this one!!! Hilarity ensues!!!

The question I have is: how are you keeping yourself out of the area of the dust of choking and sneezing? If you cast it into the air, you will be within it's area of effect. If you have it in a little bag and throw the bag at someone then you are not casting it into the air, which strictly speaking means it doesn't work, since you have to cast it into the air.

On second thought, if I was the GM I probably wouldn't permit this on the grounds that cursed items backfire on the person using them; that's why they are considered "cursed." The curse would overcome the intended use, even if the user knows about the curse. In this case I would probably say that when you try to throw the bag the dust spills out and affects you. The curse refuses to be "cheated."

YMMV, but in a game I run the only way to use a cursed item as a weapon is to get your enemy to use it.

Now here's the question then:
How much would this item be worth in gp if it was a non-cursed item intended for use on an enemy? 5d4 rounds (average 12.5) stunned on a failed save?


Also realized for the initial calculation I was empowering both acid splash spells instead of just the non-quickened one. Can't edit the old post for some reason so here's the new calculation:

Kobold Sorcerer 20 (black) with Crossblooded Draconic/Orc will get:

Favoured Class Bonus: +10
Orc Bloodline +1 damage per die
Draconic Bloodline +1 damage per die
Havoc of the society trait for +1 force damage
Acid Flask + False Focus +1 extra round of damage
Spell Perfection (acid splash)
Extend Spell lasts 4 rounds (free because of spell perfection)
OR Quicken Spell (free because of spell perfection)

The initial hit will do 1d3 + 13
Each subsequent round of damage will be 1d3 +2 since only the *per die* effects will affect further rounds of damage. So with one extended and the other quickened we get a total of 6 rounds, two of which are initial hits.

That`s (1d3 + 13) x 2 + (1d3 + 2) x 4 = avg. 46 damage for one round of spells. Not bad though the damage is spread over multiple rounds.

If you empower instead of extend you get only 2 rounds for each spell but I think you end up with more: (1d3 + 13) x 1.5 + (1d3 + 2) x 1.5 + (1d3 + 13) + (1d3 + 2) = 47 damage average. About the same.

Interestingly this ends up working out to the same as ray of frost because two of the feats don't work for this one, which seems to balance out the extra round of damage we get from the acid flask bonus.

If Vital Strike is allowed you can get an extra 1d3+2 for one casting with either .


Umbranus wrote:

What I didn't get is how you get an additional round of damage through a flask of acid when you use the ray of frost. Doesn't that only work with acid splash?

And if you use acid splash instead I think point blank shot will not work because it is no ray and as such no weapon damage. Same with flagbearer.

Whoops, yeah that was a typo. The third example is acid splash, not ray of frost. Good point about PBS and Flagbearer. Will edit that.

It's a little weird that acid splash doesn't count for that though. You still have to make a ranged touch attack.

Vital Strike is interesting... the issue with it is the use of the language "attack action." Can spellcasting also be an attack action? I'm not sure. If it could then you would get an extra d3 + whatever bonuses per die you got. Of course, then you would really want it as a ray caster as it would make your polar rays do double damage. I'm guessing based on this that Vital Strike probably wouldn't count.

Winter witch is interesting but the Frozen Caress takes a swift action, which means we can't quicken for a second shot.

Admixture wizard gets the same bonus as a kobold favoured class bonus does but has to level dip, so the total bonus is less. As for his spells being more useful, sorcerers and wizards picks spells from the same list.


I agree that the fighter did kind of screw things up here.

Charge + grapple would have worked very well. Yes the baddie gets an AoO, but you are supposed to be the tank here.
Charge + attack would still have been good and could have forced concentration checks on the skeleton.
Move and attack while fighting defensively would still have worked and still allowed him to threaten, though the enemy AC would be an issue.

Allowing the skeleton to get summons off right away may have tipped things though.

I don't think that casting will save spells on the fighter is especially 'meta'. You cast will save spells on guys who look 'dumb'. You cast reflex save spells on guys who look 'slow'. You cast fort save spells on guys who look 'frail'. Any offensive caster ought to know that this is the best way to use his spells.

Frankly if the skeleton had simply channelled negative energy offensively twice that could have been a TPK too though.

Peet


Point Blank Shot and Sneak Attack would work. Arcane Trickster is an idea. Though if were talking Level 1 then that's not an issue.

I don't see how magical lineage helps because the damage from Acid Splash or Ray of Frost does not scale with level; caster level does not matter. Extend spell does not do anything because the spell duration for either spell is instantaneous. If you are using an acid flask for

Weapon specialization will get you a +2 and so will greater but they are fighter feats... how do we get them without fighter levels? Or are we planning for a 4 level or more fighter dip?

Crossblooded Orc/Draconic(Silver) is not bad but since you will only ever get one die of damage Crossblooded Orc/Brutal will be better, giving you a +3 instead of +2.

Kobold Sorcerer 20 (white) with Crossblooded Draconic/Brutal will get:

Favoured Class Bonus: +10
Brutal Bloodline +2 damage
Draconic Bloodline +1 damage per die
Havoc of the society trait for +1 force damage
Point Blank Shot +1
Liquid Ice +1
Flag Bearer Feat +1
Arcane Strike +5
Spell Perfection (ray of frost)
Empower Spell x 1.5 (free because of spell perfection)

So that's (1d3 + 22) x 1.5 = avg. 36 damage

He could quicken instead of empower but then he wouldn't get arcane strike (both arcane strike and quicken use the swift action). So with one quickened and one empowered that's (1d3 + 17) x 1.5 + 1d3 + 17 = avg. 47 damage - yeah, worth it. The quickened one alone does 1d3 + 17.

Aasimar or Tiefling Sorcerer (Crossblooded Draconic/Brutal) 3/Rogue 7/Arcane Trickster 10 would get:

Brutal Bloodline +2 damage
Draconic Bloodline +1 damage per die
Havoc of the society trait for +1 force damage
Point Blank Shot +1
Liquid Ice +1
Flag Bearer Feat +1
Arcane Strike +3
Spell Perfection (ray of frost) Qualify using the Magical Knack trait
Empower Spell x 1.5 (free because of spell perfection)
Sneak Attack Damage 9d6

So that's (1d3 + 10) x 1.5 + 9d6 sneak attack damage. Avg. 50 damage assuming you can get the sneak attack damage.

If you can get sneak attack on both attacks then you quicken one and empower the other so no arcane strike. (1d3 + 7) x 1.5 + 9d6 + 1d3 + 7 + 9d6. Avg. 86 damage.

OK so I figured out how you were getting 4 rounds of action - strictly speaking this might not work because the listed duration of the spell is instantaneous. But if your GM allows it then it works like this:

Kobold Sorcerer 20 (black) with Crossblooded Draconic/Orc will get:

Favoured Class Bonus: +10
Orc Bloodline +1 damage per die
Draconic Bloodline +1 damage per die
Havoc of the society trait for +1 force damage
Point Blank Shot +1
Acid Flask + False Focus +1 extra round of damage
Flag Bearer Feat +1
Spell Perfection (ray of frost)
Extend Spell lasts 4 rounds (free because of spell perfection)
OR Quicken Spell (free because of spell perfection)

The initial hit will do 1d3 + 15
Each subsequent round of damage will be 1d3 +2 since only the *per die* effects will affect further rounds of damage. So with one extended and the other quickened we get a total of 6 rounds, two of which are initial hits.

That`s (1d3 + 15) x 2 + (1d3 + 2) x 4 = avg. 50 damage for one round of spells. Not bad though the damage is spread over multiple rounds.

If you empower instead of extend you get only 2 rounds for each spell but I think you end up with more: (1d3 + 15) x 1.5 x 2 + (1d3 + 2) x 1.5 x 2 = 63 damage average. Yeah, that`s better.

Not bad but the arcane trickster does it better assuming you can get your sneak attack in.


Dasrak wrote:
Quote:
Spell Perfection (Chain Lightning)
Your bloodline gives you the ability to convert any elemental spell into lightning damage. This means that it's largely pointless to learn lightning-damage spells.

This is a good point, except that the OP is using the Primal bloodline, which does not give you this ability. It instead gives you a +1 damage per die of that type.

For the record though the chains of fire spell does exactly the same thing only fire damage (and less range). It is an Ifrit race spell but if your GM allows it and you have the ability to swap elements this is a good one.


This is not a serious idea but I thought it would be amusing.

The idea is that a "De-Feat" is a special feat you can take at first level that has a negative effect, but taking it grants you an extra feat. So a "De-Feat" would be about equivalent in value to a feat, only would make things more difficult.

For example,
De-Feated Initiative
You get a -4 penalty to initiative checks and gain no benefit from the Improved Initiative feat.

De-Feated Reflexes
You get a -2 penalty to reflex saves and gain no benefit from the Lightning Reflexes feat.

Please post some funny negative feats!

Peet


I think I will make up a "Rouge Rogue" archetype to address this particular fact. And it will suck even more than a regular rogue.


Dominigo wrote:
I have seen a wish for to additional arms get granted back in 3.5 so the character could use multiattack,

In 3.5 there was a second-level spell called Girallon's blessing which gave you two extra arms, and the spell could be made permanent with a permanency spell, so this is actually pretty reasonable for a 3.5 wish.

I am in a 3.5 campaign that has just reached 19th level. I used one wish for a stat bonus, but aside from that we used one to restore our dead wizards special item abilities. The GM created a number of powerful items, one for each character, which could be upgraded, but death would re-set the items back to their original state, and we used a wish to restore the items upgrades after he died.

The other one was a wish scroll that I used to add Gargoyle to the list of creatures I could shapechange to - my character is a Silver Dragon and they have an inherent ability to shapechange into medium or small humanoids or animals, but gargoyle is a monstrous humanoid. The GM came up with the character who was originally an NPC and there are apparently rules for playing dragons as characters.

Peet


I would recommend against using the stuff in Ultimate Campaign for most games. Ultimate Campaign undermines a lot of core concepts of the game, and tends to do so in ways which aren't very well thought out. It should be considered "variant rules" at best.

Diego Rossi wrote:
A amulet of +4 natural armor is fairly cheap. 8.000 gp (crafting cost) for a +4 to AC isn't a bad deal.

FYI the craft cost of such an amulet is 16,000. The Retail cost is 32,000.

In my mind one of the best roles of the crafter is upgrading items you already have. You probably don't need to buy a +4 amulet of natural armor or make one from scratch; you will probably find a +1 or +2 amulet - just upgrade that one.

Also, if your GM is cool with it you should look into taking effects of minor items and add them to other items, by increasing the base cost of the minor ability by 1.5. Check with your GM though.

Peet


With this character, if you see a shadow I advise you to run like hell. Strength damage will cripple you fast.

Are you using traits? Try the planar savant trait for a big boost to knowledge:planes.

Dazing spell is great but only really useful at higher levels. Disrupting is kind of neat, but if I'm reading it right it needs to be used in an ongoing spell to really work. In my mind its more fun using metamagic on your blasting spells (you already get a damage bonus for lightning) which are instantaneous. Intensify spell is a +1 and will bring your electric burning hands up to 10d4+10 and your lightning bolt up to 15d6+15, once you are high enough level.

If you are going to be the party face you will need more skill ranks. I would swap INT and WIS. You generally need Spellcraft and probably knowledge:arcana. Add knowledge:planes and you only have one more skill point left per level (two if you put your favoured class bonus into skills, which you probably should). UMD is useful but less important if you have a cleric in the party.

Skill Focus - Knowledge:Planes is a bloodline feat so you might want to consider getting it that way. Aside from Weapon Finesse and Dodge most of the bloodline feats are decent though.

You will probably want Elemental Spell:Acid so you can swap out lightning for acid if you need to. If something is immune to lightning it is unlikely to be immune to acid. If you are just looking at low-level spells though you could stick with rods for a while. Lesser elemental rod only costs 3000 gp.

As for spells, gust of wind is appropriate though it isn't that powerful. Vanish is handy for first level though if you have
invisibility that may be redundant. Mage armor might be good. Grease is a sorcerer standby. Also there's Mage armor and anticipate peril is good for this kind of character. Another one you should consider for 2nd level is Eldritch Conduit. This one allows you to enchant another creature (including an ally) and then cast a spell using them as the source. This keeps your electric burning hands useful at higher levels since you can cast this on the fighter, and then burning hands the enemies in front of him, so you don't have to get close.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think there's any point in banning entire books. Just ban the text from them.

The artwork is fine though.


The catching cape grants concealment against missile attacks only, but can be used as a swift action. Boots of nightmare are only on for 1 round but activate as a swift action.

The mirror is neat but it has to be held to work, which means it's not that good for a fighter. I would not recommend mistmail as while you are using it for the miss chance you lose the AC bonus from the armor. I think mistmail is mainly meant for rogues.

Stormlure is an amulet that is neat but only works against ranged attacks.

Cloak of flash and shadow and haunted boots are decent spell-in-a-can items.

A potion of blur costs 300 gp, and lasts for 3 minutes, but takes a standard action to use.
A potion of displacement costs 750 gp and lasts for 5 rounds.

Peet


If you are required to make an ability check, can you just refuse and "take 0"? Initiative is an ability check.

Kind of like allowing yourself to fail a saving throw.

Peet


So there are no plane of fire races that are "typically" good?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The primary limits for crafting are money and time. The GM has control over how much of both of these are available. So I don't really envision this being a real problem. If the GM doesn't want players to do this, then they have to rush off on the next quest and only have time to stop for a day in town to resupply.

If you are running a sandbox game then the economics of things need to be adjusted heavily anyway, so houserule away.


My first thought was the Peri but they are actually from the outer planes. Azers could potentially be good but are usually neutral, and Efreet are obviously evil.

Any thoughts?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We need a new spell: Wall of Irony. :)


Umbral Reaver wrote:
I ban all players.

Well one player is OK. Everyone else has to GM at the same time though.


I am pretty open to ideas if they work.

I agree that the GM should ban any material for which he does not have the text available. However for myself, if the material is on the PFSRD I am usually okay with that since I GM with my laptop open and with wifi access.

3pp material does need to be analyzed a bit more carefully but I would not personally ban it out of hand. I understand why a lot of people do though and I support that. I think that 3pp are best used for adventures and monsters rather than rules and character builds.

I agree that the GM should ban abilities that he feels slow the game down too much. Summoners that conjure a lot of critters do this and unless the player is very competent I wouldn't allow that. Leadership also has this effect. If a player has a cohort that cohort should be very easy to play. For this reason I often encourage players to play spontaneous casters, though I don't require it.

I also feel that a GM should place limits on a character if that character is outshining the rest of the party. Not for any rules reason but just to make sure that everyone is having fun and contributing. I expect the players with good system mastery to help the weaker ones come up with ideas.

I ban things that do not fit into my campaign world. So no gunslingers, for example. That seems to be a pretty common one. The problem I have is with the firearms themselves rather than the class, so if someone wanted to build an archer using the gunslinger rules I would be open to the idea. If I did allow guns they would not have all the weird restrictions; they would just be another weapon and practically anyone could use them. Historically when handheld firearms became practical they became the preferred choice for whatever people were being outfitted to fight.

If you have a cool idea though for something I never thought of for my world then I might work it in somehow rather than ban it. My personal campaign world was designed to accommodate a lot of races so most "regular" races are OK, but the "advanced" races like Drow & such I ban for balance reasons. If we started at a higher level I might allow them but I usually start at level 1 and they are a little too powerful early in the game. If someone really wanted to play a race like a Drow I might say that it will cost him his first feat and see if he still wants to go with it.

If you can write a good story around something and roleplay it well I would probably allow it, even if I think it is a bit OP. On the other hand, a player that comes up with a DPS-machine that doesn't have a name will get a cool reception from me. Uniqueness is important for me so if two players have the same idea then whoever has the better story for his character wins the "bid."

Peet


Commonly the creatures you will fight at level 10 will have an attack of between +13 to +20 depending on type and number. The BBEG might have more.

An AC of 40 means you will almost never get hit. This is pretty hard to arrange though at your level.

An AC of 30 will mean you get hit probably less than half the time. This is pretty decent.

An AC of 25 will get hit a fair bit; an AC of 20 will get hit most of the time. This can still be workable if you have lots of HP and your party has a lot of healing handy.

It really depends on whether you are carrying a shield or not. Having a shield means a secondary source of enhancement bonuses, which means a considerably higher potential armor class.

If you have full plate, a heavy shield, and no dex bonus your AC will be 21.

+3 to the shield and the armor each will cost 9,000.
+2 amulet of natural armor and ring of protection are 8,000 each.
This is more than half your WBL and brings you to AC 31.

The Sash of the War Champion is only 4,000 and enhances your armor training ability (if you are a basic fighter without archetype) by 4 levels. That will increase the max dex bonus of your armor so if you have a decent dex you can do that. Mithral armor is also good but is quite expensive for heavy armor.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/r-z/sash- of-the-war-champion

At your level though you should start thinking about gaining abilities that give your enemy a miss chance, like blur or displacement. As you increase in level you will gradually lose the AC vs attack rating arms race, and these abilities will do more for you at high levels to reduce the damage you are taking. Likewise if you can find ways to get DR that will do a lot for you.

Sadly, 3.5 had armor properties that did these things but I'm not sure where to find any for pathfinder.

Peet


pibby wrote:
Can any of these caster level feats apply to crafting magic items? Like can you make certain weapons and armor much earlier than normal?

Permanent items can allow you to qualify for feats so I don't see why not (though if you lose the item you lose access to the feat until you get it back). However, it would be reasonable to say that only a caster level bonus that applies across the board would count. Something that gives you a bonus to spells of a specific school or subtype of spells probably wouldn't.


MorganS wrote:
Scavion wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Beads of Karma are not one-shot

Indeed. They are 1 use per Day for 10 minutes.

They are however only usable by someone capable of divine casting.

They're usable by anyone capable of making a DC20 UMD check. What makes Prayer Beads of Karma reasonable, is that activating them requires a standard action!

Quote:
Command Word: If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it.... Activating a command word magic item is a standard action ....

Actually the Strand of Prayer Beads is a little weird this way. When you have them in your possession, the first time you cast a divine spell you suddenly know how to activate it. But it doesn't actually *require* divine casting to use; divine casting only gives you the *knowledge* of how to use it. Once you have the knowledge you can use it at will.

So I would say that without divine magic you would need to make the *first* UMD check to get the knowledge of how to use it. Once you know how you can use it no matter what your class. If there was some other way to learn how to activate it (like simply being told how by the crafter who made it) then you wouldn't even need a UMD check.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Weirdo wrote:

Wall of Iron is instantaneous, which means it creates a large chunk of essentially normal iron - a minimum of 39600 cubic inches, or 11,259.1 lbs, or 1,125.91 gp worth of iron.

Do you think the spell would be a decent source of iron for a metal-poor region?

We had a similar discussion about Wall of Iron (in the forum) about a year ago.

The simplest solution we found is to say that the iron in the wall of iron spell has impurities that make it not better than iron ore when used to make stuff, so you had to purify it first (using the normal methods used when purifying iron ore). That cut the value of the iron in a wall of iron to 1/3 as you need a lot of work to turn it into iron ingots.

It is questionable if Fabricate can turn the iron in a wall of iron (or iron ore) into iron ingots.
It say: "You convert material of one sort into a product that is of the same material."
Iron ore isn't the same material as iron ingots. It contain iron plus other impurities that you want removed. The spell turn A into B, not A into B (iron) + C (impurities) in two separate piles.

Even worse if you are speaking of steel. Basically it is iron with a specific amount of carbon in it. If you have iron ore and carbon you can produce steel by hand, but if the take Fabricate RAW you can't produce steel with it, as you can't take 2 materials and fuse them in a different product.

Yeah, we talked about this once in this thread:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q0on?How-to-corner-the-pig-iron-market#1

At the very least you should be able to retrieve 250 gp worth of usable iron out of it, since that's what the material components cost. In an area with little iron but a decent supply of gold this might be viable. 250 gp buys more than a ton of iron.

The funny part is that the iron made by the spell can't be made into anything... except walls. Obviously they work fine as a wall so it's not clear why they can't be used for something else.

If they had just made the spell not permanent that would have solved the whole thing.

Peet

1 to 50 of 374 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.