|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
One of my players was asking about this.
Gloves of elvenkind grant a +5 compenetence bonus to concentration. It costs 7500 gp.
So normally you would assume they would stack.
There are two other items that grant a +2 untyped bonus to concentration:
The ring of arcane mastery grants a variety of effects and costs 20,000. I'll ignore that for now.
The tunic of careful casting grants a +2 untyped bonus and no other abilities, and it costs 5000 gp, the same as the spellguard bracers.
The fact that the spellguard bracers and the tunic of careful casting cost the same but the bracers do more makes me thing that the bracers should not be untyped. I'm also not sure whether the character in question intends to try to get all of these items for a total bonus of +11 to concentration checks.
What do people think?
Everyone: I intend to close recruitment this Friday. If your submission is not completed by that point, then I will evaluate based only on what you have (with the understanding that you can finish filling in what you need to after being selected). I will decide who gets in either on Friday or this coming weekend.
I am going to assume that submissions on friday are okay. I've been busy this week but am working something up now.
A few questions:
* Is item crafting allowed? (and does the campaign have downtime to use them?)
Deathless Spirit: Particularly strong-willed aasimars possess celestial spirits capable of resisting the powers of death. They gain resistance 5 against negative energy damage. They do not lose hit points when they gain a negative level, and they gain a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against death effects, energy drain, negative energy, and spells or spell-like abilities of the necromancy school. This racial trait replaces celestial resistance.
I may not see your answers in time for the deadline so I'm putting things together and will change them depending on your answers.
I see no reason why our ideas about the Grippli would be incompatible.
Not knowing the geography, I had assumed a large swampy Grippli "Homeland," with a number of tribes living there. There may well be "civilized" Grippli living among humans or elsewhere, but I envisioned a primitive homeland. The tribes need not be connected politically and there need not be any cooperation between them; they can fight occasionally and disagree generally.
The Hr'op-Shtavor would by necessity be considered neutral in such inter-tribal conflicts, and as such make ideal messengers and traders among the Grippli. However, the Hr'op-Shtavor cannot expect to ever gain more territory; their permanent claims may only encompass the area around the Isle of Mists. If the Hr'op-Shtavor ever get too large, a separate branch would have to break off and form a new tribe, and the new tribe would not be subject the the same neutrality.
I had envisioned that the "rivermen" had originally been a small minority of the tribe, but since the area around the Isle of Mists can only support so many Grippli, excess population growth has been channeled to the rivermen, resulting in them becoming nearly equal in population to the islanders.
More remote tribes might make do with local burial sites but would consider burial at the Isle of Mists to confer higher status.
The basis of the lore had to accomplish certain things:
Some fluff about the grave guardians of the Grippli:
HR'OP-SHTA: THE TRIBE OF THE GHOST SPIDER
The Clan takes it's name from the Hr'op-Shta, or Ghost Spider, a small whitish spider that preys on ordinary insects, and is common in the Grippli swamps. In the Ghost Spider the Grippli see the virtues of silence, patience, vigilance, hard work (in building webs), and respect for the dead (since the ghost spider wraps its dead prey in "burial shrouds" of webbing).
The Grippli believe that upon death their souls journey down a great river (the "River of Spirits"), where they must face a variety of trials until they come before the "Great Mother." The Great Mother takes all the spirits of the people, and separates the rhapshta, or "living spirit" (the force which animates the physical body) from the shulshta, or "feeling spirit" (which comprises the mind and personality of the deceased). She returns the rhapstai to the land of the living, where they become part of the next generation of Grippli, providing the animating spark to infants as they are born. The shulstai she judges according to the lives they lived, and sends each one to their just reward in the afterlife.
The journey down the River of Spirits is said to be fraught with danger, and since the successful completion of this journey is not only necessary for the soul to achieve rest, but also for spirits to be granted to the next generation of Grippli children, the Grippli take pains to conduct proper burial ceremonies. When done right, these ceremonies are said to prepare the spirit for the journey down the River of Spirits, guaranteeing its arrival at the Great Mother. These preparations include anointing the body and wrapping it in a shroud. Then the body is placed in a funeral boat which takes it to the Isle of the Mists in the heart of the Grippli Swamp, where the sacred burial grounds of the Grippli lie. The Funeral Boat is largely an ordinary sampan, but has lamps which burn oil spiced with pungent herbs whose scent protects the body against both evil spirits and scavenging beasts.
Since the grippli believe that the body must be properly laid to rest for the spirit to move on, they have a particular fear and hatred for the undead. This is particularly the case with the Hr'op-Shta Clan, whose duty lies in protecting the sanctity of graves. They consider themselves at war with all undead and those that create them.
The funeral boats and the Isle of Mists are the territory of the Hr'op-Shta Clan. Their duty is to protect the burial grounds and ensure the bodies of the dead are able to reach it. Like other Grippli clans, they survive mostly through fishing, hunting, and gathering, and most members of the Hr'op-Shta Clan are proficient in such things. But when required they do whatever is deemed necessary to protect their sacred charge.
The Hr'op-Shta Clan is divided into three groups.
* The core of the clan are the islanders. The islanders inhabit the Isle of Mists and the swamps nearby. They live off these lands but they all train in arms in case they need to to defend the Isle of Mists against an enemy. The permit no outsiders to set foot on the island, and even most of the islanders do not know the route to the heart of the island where the burial grounds lie; only the priests are allowed to know the way. It is rare for a Grippli to be given permission to visit the burial grounds and usually only a chief is ever granted this permission, and even he must be blindfolded when taken there.
* The second group are the rivermen. The rivermen live aboard the numerous sampans that ply the Grippli Swamps (though what constitutes a "river" to the grippli of the swamps differs widely from the standard definition - a "river" to the swamp dwellers is simply a water route through the swamp that is relatively free of hazards). They collect the bodies of dead grippli after they have been prepared by the local shaman for burial, and transport these bodies back to the Isle of Mists. When not transporting the dead, however, they are permitted to use the funeral boats a for trade, and the network of rivermen provide a reliable, if slow, trade network. They also carry messages from one village to another, and therefore also act as a primitive postal network. Though the rivermen are not sworn warriors like the islanders, the trips through the swamp can be dangerous and the rivermen must be tough to survive and to protect their boats and cargo.
* The third group are the retrievers. The retrievers are small in number; when grippli come of age a few are chosen from the islanders and the rivermen to become retrievers, and when they are old enough these grippli are permitted to "retire" and return to their homelands. The retrievers leave the lands of the clan and travel alone. They wander through grippli territory and beyond, following the trails of the grippli who may have died outside their ancestral lands, or in places where their bodies might not normally be found. It is the duty of the retrievers to find the dead grippli who have not had a proper burial, and return their remains to grippli lands. The grippli believe that it is "better late than never" and that if they can return such a grippli's remains to be buried then the soul still has a chance. More than the other two groups, the retrievers seek out and destroy undead when they get the chance, on the basis that necromancy is a kind of disease and it is better to prevent the disease by striking at its source. Since they the retrievers venture outside the traditional grippli lands they are a major source of news and goods from the outside world.
Re: Grippli Rogue
Kenneth Kim wrote:
@Peet: My largest concern is that...
I understand that a +2 to hit is a significant bonus. The feat is what inspired the character idea; when I saw it I started to think about what sort of character would work with it. So it seemed like it would work well with the Knife Master Rogue.
The main complaint that I read about Rogues is that they have too few ways to improve their chance to hit. As a relatively squishy character I envision fighting defensively a lot, and also will be using TWF often. These penalize my chance to hit significantly. At 3rd level, with DEX 18, even with Weapon Focus and Deific Obedience, when Fighting Defensively and using TWF I have a +4 to hit. Also, at our maximum level, Automatic Bonus Progression will never allow me to have an enhancement bonus on my off-hand weapon.
Kenneth Kim wrote:
as an unchained rogue or with the Path of War Deadly Agility feat, you also get Dexterity to damage
I don't know anything about Path of War as I don't normally use 3pp stuff. I have too many sources to research already.
But yes, the unchained rogue's DEX-to-damage is a significant boost. But it still doesn't really add that much.
Consider: with this build you are using daggers all the time. A small dagger does 1d3 damage. So with 18 DEX I get 1d3+4 with my primary hand and 1d3+2 with my off-hand; so 2d3+6 or 10 average with a full attack. Meanwhile the Fighter with Power Attack swings his greatsword and does 2d6+9 damage at 1st level. At 4th this goes to 2d6+12. And he will get a second iterative attack at 6th; I never will (because it doesn't come until 8th level for rogues).
In the end, Sneak Attack still provides the main source of damage for rogues.
I believe the balancing factor here was the fact that the feat only works with daggers. The Torag Obedience works with warhammers but only gives +1. The low base damage of daggers means a bonus to hit has less overall effect.
You're the GM; go ahead and rule one way or another. But I personally don't think it will break the game, and I've presented my reasoning for thinking this.
I'm starting to work on some fluff now.
I'm still fiddling with the two character concepts, but...
Kenneth Kim wrote:
A blaster sorcerer might be redundant when we can have the wyrmer just use his breath weapon every round. And it looks like we also have a Warlock and a Psychic? Probably don't need another arcane caster.
BTW, what is an "Aven?"
So yeah, I suppose I can give up on the sorcerer idea for now.
Kenneth Kim wrote:
@Peet: Those are interesting concepts, though I would have to put in more work to accomodate a heavily-Golarian character in this world. Whittle down your list to the character that you'd like to play the most.
4d6 ⇒ (4, 4, 6, 6) = 20 ...16
This would be what... a 10-point buy? Yeah, I think a 20-Point Buy is the way to go here... :)
So... narrowing things down...
I could re-do the halfling rogue as a Grippli. If there was a tribe that was specifically charged with guarding the sacred burial mounds of the Grippli (and therefore would have the same philosophy about protecting the dead and fighting the undead that a Pharasmin would) then that would work well. A significant part of the build is the Deific Obedience feat for Pharasma which would be taken at 3rd level. Obviously the higher level SLA abilities would never come up if we only ever get to 6th level. If you don't want to allow that feat then I would need to re-think this character.
The kobold sorcerer is tough to do, because they are a weak race overall and don't get a CHA bonus. But I was thinking about a golden-scaled kobold (there is a race trait for that). Would you allow a Middle-Aged character? And how would you feel about a fire version of ray of frost as a custom spell?
We can forget about the half-elf oracle. I am submitting that idea in a different campaign.
How about an Azata-Blooded Aasimar Wood Oracle/Rogue?
The idea would be an agile quarterstaff-wielding divine spellcaster. The Rogue would have the skill ranks and gives the Oracle some needed combat abilities (especially since he would be using TWF, which is really hard to build for as an Oracle).
Which also means I have to ask:
Is the party here full? I have never tried E6/P6 but I do like playing at low levels. I wouldn't mind trying this game.
I have a few character concepts that could work here. I am not sure what the party has at the moment. Some of them were based heavily on Golarion lore, but could be convertible into something to do with
One concept I had was for a small Rogue with a Pharasma focus. He talked like a cleric of Pharasma but wasn't one. My original version was a Halfling who was a member of a Shoanti tribe. I played this character ("Morthak Bonerattle") in a campaign that died. I redid the character concept as a Svirfneblin for a darklands campaign but didn't get into that one. I could also do it up as a wayang if those are around. Obviously there would need to be a Barbarian tribe similar to the Shoanti and a deity similar to Pharasma for that to work.
The second concept would be for a Kobold Sorcerer with the draconic bloodline. Basically a fire blaster, maybe with a ray focus. Haven't fleshed this one out at all really but always wanted to play one.
The third concept was for a oracle of the wood mystery, possibly half-elven or maybe Azata-Blooded Aasimar. I tried generating this character once for another game with some weird chargen rules (as "Jan Carpenter") though the concept is pretty MAD that it is hard to do. But I'd be interested in trying it.
What do you think?
I do know that gestalt can present problems for DMs who have to tailor their encounters to a different power level.
I like the idea of Gestalt. But I have signed up for two Gestalt PBP games where the GM disappeared before the first encounter. Once we got a replacement GM, who also disappeared nearly immediately. I think the issue there is that the GMs had not realized how much work was involved before they joined.
My advice would be to use the resources here and elsewhere to try and find two more players that can join your game.
Okay, if small Caligni aren't allowed, maybe a Svirfneblin might work - I want a small race and Kobold won't work very well. Could I assume that there are underground rivers that work as trade routes with boats going up and down them? I am thinking that the character's background will be as a river boat sailor.
This is getting me curious.
Are there any particular themes for the game we should think about? The party starts as slaves. Is it going to be an anti-slavery game? Will there be lots of undead around? Who are the principal
One idea I have is a Duergar Druid with the Skinshaper archetype.
What about a Caligni who is small rather than medium? I have another idea for a Caligni Rogue with an anti-undead focus.
Another thought is a Changeling necromancer with a pro-undead focus (obviously). In case the anti-undead thing would get in the way of the adventure. Are there any hags common to the darklands that would work as a mother to her? Maybe a night hag?
You can't really have an invisible laser that does more than blind people. Laser stands for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, which mean to be powerful enough to burn someone almost instantly, it needs to be visible.
FYI, Fallen Mage: Real world visible-light lasers generally are invisible. The light travels all in one direction so unless the laser beam actually strikes your eye, you will not be able to see it.
Laser beams are only visible to those outside the path of the beam when they strike particles enroute to their target. For example, dust, smoke, or mist in the path of the beam causes some of the light in the beam to scatter in various directions, causing the beam to become visible. Without such interference, laser beams are quite invisible.
The Kyonin Mission:
Okay. I didn't know what the Winter Court was so I guess your previous explanation didn't "click" with me. I do know what/who Treerazer is, but most of the Kyonin material I have only skimmed.
Numalar only knows what Alia tells him though, and until now as a player I didn't know either.
I thought though from the hints that you were also looking to recover something from a specific site in the region. Do you still have that mission?
Difference of Opinions:
You may have pegged Numalar as LN, and as I mentioned earlier there are two main reasons why he would seem that way (one of which is deliberate roleplaying on my part), rather than LG which is his actual alignment.
But what if he was LN? We should still be able to work together.
I don't feel that any player should have to submit to any other player. And I don't feel that the point that Numalar could have submitted is valid since Alia didn't back down either. But as I have said before, Numalar is quite willing to submit to the will of the group. Just recently he was outvoted on the "leave Tor et.al. their weapons" issue. And that's fine.
Winning Over Numalar:
For the record though, Alia was not making the kind of arguments that would move Numalar at all. So here are some things that would have had an impact:
"The Levetons will be safe from reprisal because _______." Numalar just couldn't see how it was possible to manage the risk involved with letting the two bandits live. Keeping them at Oleg's made the bandit population almost equal to the guard population, which seemed like a recipe for disaster, as did just releasing them. And Alia didn't seem to have any answers there. But marching the group of bandits to your elf-gate would have been something that Numalar would have considered, had Alia mentioned it.
"I spoke to the bandits and they want to atone for their crimes." The charter specifies unrepentant bandits, and having some evidence that they were repentant would have forced Numalar to take a second look. As it was there wasn't any such evidence and Numalar wasn't willing to just assume that they might repent at some point in the future.
"But you promised!" Numalar keeps his oaths. This one is tricky, because Numalar is wary and doesn't swear an oath lightly. He takes them very seriously. But if you were able to get Numalar to promise something he would feel he had to live up to it, even if it was not in his interests.
Well, someone has to fill the "Ruler" role of the kingdom, no matter what the titles are. Numalar would be good at several roles but was designed with the Ruler role in mind.
That much being said, "First Among Equals" is a hell of a lot better than "I am King, My Word is Law, so Kneel."
It is worth thinking about what role Alia would like to fulfill when the time comes, so you are prepared for it. My guess would be Magister but there are plenty of options.
Hope that clears up more things than it muddles.
Yes, I think it has.
About Kyonin, etc.:
Alright, first off major spoiler: Eventually the characters in the Kingmaker AP get the opportunity to rule the lands they are chartered with exploring.
I don't think the above is a surprise to anyone. Most Kingmaker recruitment threads ask what kingdom role you see yourself as taking.
It makes sense that a lot of different groups want to get their hand in the new kingdom. The various Brevoy factions, plus Pitax and Mivon are the obvious ones. But they need not be restricted to humans. So Kyonin makes sense.
Nevertheless Brevoy is ideally suited to be the "mother country" because the instability of Brevoy provides a plausible reason for the ease of achieving independence and acquiring colonists. Kyonin does not have that problem, so a Kyonin-sponsored kingdom would have a much harder time acting independently.
As a player I want to run the kingdom with as little interference as possible. So Kyonin as a sponsor doesn't seem attractive at all. That doesn't mean that Kyonin can't try to exert influence in more subtle ways.
I am relieved to hear that it is not actually Alia's GM-assigned job to police Numalar's morals. :)
I can understand how you would feel that Numalar is very Lawful. But he is also very Good. He will offer aid to those in need without hesitation and with no thought of reward. He will risk his life for others. He is respectful, caring, giving, and charitable. I could go on and on.
Numalar knows that some people take advantage of such intentions though, so he conceals this attitude with a certain gruffness and feigned indifference. So he often projects LN even though he is LG.
The thing is, the good/evil axis hasn't come up much in this adventure. We haven't met a band of starving refugees or come upon a group of goblins burning down a schoolhouse. So the Law/Chaos thing is coming up more.
I don't think the "gut feeling" thing necessarily works here. Numalar's gut feeling in the case of the bandits was fear - fear that if freed the bandits would return with greater numbers and take their revenge against the Levetons, carrying out threats they had already made. And Numalar, having freed them, would think he was responsible. The "gut feeling" will be different for each character.
Re: Differences of Opinions:
Not spoilering this as I think it is the most important.
The thing is, as characters of different alignments, we are inevitably going disagree on some things. Numalar is not about to become chaotic; he probably wouldn't even hit neutral. I don't expect Alia to change alignments either.
But a party of characters with different alignments should be able to work together. We should be able to "agree to disagree." And the most sensible way to do that is to defer such decisions to the party as a whole, and accept that the party as a group is not always going to want to do what we want individually.
And if the issue of executions comes up again, rather than reopen the death penalty debate, you could just say "You know how I feel about the death penalty." Because we all do.
You are right that Numalar is set up prominently. He has a high CHA and comes from an aristocratic background. He has good skills for courtly life, and he likes making speeches. But even with that, Numalar doesn't want to lord it over everyone (and neither do I) - he just wants respect. We should be deciding the important things together as a group. That's what Pathfinder is about.
Numalar's background was designed for this in a way you probably haven't noticed. Valdralee, Numalar's model for a perfect society, did not have a king. It was ruled by a council of nine princes. Yes, one prince held the "chair," but they ruled together. When it comes time to actually found a kingdom, this will be Numalar's proposal for the basis of the new government.
The Recent Argument:
I acknowledge that the fault is partly mine in that I brought up executions in that post. I should have been more clear in that I wasn't advocating for the death penalty for them, just saying that if we do it we should own it.
The idea that for due process of law we need a disinterested third party is exactly the argument that would have worked with Numalar. Not sure I would pick Renault though. Maybe Jhod Kavken?
For the record, Numalar thinks that imprisonment is a pretty cruel punishment. Partly because the only prisons he has ever seen are those in Brevoy, and I am sure they are pretty awful (and those in Mivon and Pitax are unlikely to be much better). Seems like you are deliberately inflicting suffering. Throwing someone in there for years only to have him emerge much later a broken man seems worse than hanging in many ways, and Numalar might choose death over such a sentence.
But even good prisons are not a great recipe for reformation. You basically throw someone in a box with a bunch of other criminals. It's possible they can come out worse than they went in. When it comes to the time where we we actually have to set up a justice system, I hope we can avoid imprisonment as a punishment as much as possible. If someone steals farmer John's pig, he should have to work on Farmer John's farm until he pays it off, plus interest.
No hurry to answer any of this... part of it is venting. And some of this stuff deals with things that are a long way off in the game.
Thank you for this post. I do believe we are clearing the air here and I appreciate it. I know you don't have the time that you used to and I appreciate the level of detail you went to.
Opinions and Actions:
I understand we are butting heads over opinions. But opinions should not be the issue.
Numalar is not trying to force the issue with regards to what to do. He is willing to go along with the will of the group as a whole. Numalar is outspoken, but he is not the group's "leader," nor does he think he is.
The whole thing about the death penalty for the bandits was that we voted on what to do. But because Numalar is willing to talk about it, I find he is defending the decision that the GROUP has made, even though he can only offer his own reasons for thinking the way he does. Then I become the target and you seem to treat it as if it was MY decision alone. You didn't spend any time trying to change Zokon's or Celyne's mind on the subject.
Really, aside from a few in-character comments, once the GROUP makes a decision we should move on. If the party had decided to spare the bandits, Numalar would have grumped about it for a moment but then focused himself on making it work.
But though Numalar hasn't changed his opinions, I feel I am working to try to accommodate Alia in actions. Remember hiring the priest to cast heal on Faeria? That was my idea, and I came up with that as a means of trying to accommodate Alia.
So when I talk about compromising, I am not talking about revising opinions. Alia doesn't seem to be changing her opinion either - in fact, her opinions seem to be getting more extreme. But that isn't important. It is the actions that matter.
The Current Argument:
The latest conflict came about when I suggested that as a group we should decide what to do about the prisoners rather than nominate an outside person to be the authority figure. I actually thought you would be happy with that idea considering how much it seemed to piss you off when the bandits were taken to Brevoy. Renault is from Brevoy, and is unlikely to do anything differently.
Numalar's proposal was meant to be a discussion point for the whole party. Yet you pounced on it and seemed to feel that you had to shout me down. I don't know what everyone else was thinking, but it seemed like nobody else wanted to talk about it because they didn't want to get involved in an argument.
Ironically now GGGM has chimed in and pointed out that yes, we are supposed to be doing things ourselves. He actually pointed this out to me privately some time ago and Numalar changed his stance on our role in the game.
Dragging in the death penalty argument was not only counterproductive, but not relevant to the discussion, since we hadn't decided to execute anyone at that point. Numalar was yet undecided about what he wanted to do to them, but was inclined to let them go, probably with some kind of compensation, oath, or something. I recall only Zokon actually said we should just kill them all.
But either way, both our positions on the death penalty are already well known. We don't need to go over them again.
I find it interesting that GGGM asked you to try to be a "moral compass."
But the thing is, Numalar is a deeply moral character. He is basically the "paladin" of the party. Some of his views could be inconvenient for the party (as is often the case with paladins), and in a previous campaign (which died - this was before the current campaign) there were moments where the party had to get Numalar "out of the room" so they could do something that he normally wouldn't stand for, even though it was generally good for the adventure and the party.
So trying to tell Numalar that his actions are "wrong" is just going to piss him off. But remember his sense of right and wrong is weighted heavily by his sense of responsibility.
Executing someone for just cause is not a good act, but it is not evil either. It is essentially neutral, just as killing someone in battle is. Not executing someone, and giving them the chance to reform IS a good act. But only if doing so doesn't lead to harm to others.
So Numalar looked at the situation of the bandits and thought, "Can I allow these men to live safely? If so, how?" And frankly, he really didn't see how he could do it, not with the resources at hand.
But that doesn't mean his actions are evil or immoral.
If the party had voted to spare the others, he wouldn't have liked it, but he would have tried to make sure that the bandits weren't a danger to anyone else as much as he could.
The way to get Numalar to change his mind on that issue would have been to go to the prisoners and try to actually get them to repent. If they did so, and it seemed genuine, it would have gone a LONG way towards changing Numalar's mind.
Once we actually HAVE a kingdom, discussions on crime and punishment will be very fruitful.
There will be a couple other things to say but I will post those later.
Okay, I spoke to GGGM before posting this, but I think it's time.
Alia of the Blade wrote:
Okay. I'm going to call it here. We are going around in circles and I feel like I am beating my head against a brick wall. So I am going to step out of character and address you player-to-player instead of character-to-character.
Alia of the Blade wrote:
Yours are. I'll keep brief where possible
My posts are getting long. The reason for this is that I feel as a fellow player you deserve for me to give clear and cogent answers to your points rather than some kind of rude dismissal like "no you're wrong."
I am trying to be respectful. And from the tone of the remark above and others like it, I don't feel I am getting that respect in return.
Somehow I find myself dragged into the death penalty argument again, even though I wasn't even advocating that at this point. Numalar still needs more information to form a definite opinion as to what to do. And we are just repeating the same stuff we have already been over.
Ultimately here is what I feel is the real problem.
I understand that you are in the process of creating a vivid character and the more you play Alia the clearer her personality becomes for you. And that's great.
But the problem is that Alia seems to be operating at cross purposes with the rest of the party. In two ways.
1. Alia feels passionate about her opposition to the death penalty, except in extreme circumstances. The problem here is that the basic premise of the adventure involves it. The Royal Charter that the earlier characters all signed mentions it explicitly, and the charter serves as not only a mission but an introduction to the adventure. It tells you that this is something that will sometimes be necessary. The earlier characters were all designed with this understanding.
Had Alia been present at the beginning of the adventure, and refused to sign the charter on the grounds of her opposition to the death penalty, then she would have been excused from the adventure, and you would have got to roll up a new character.
But instead your alternate origin gave you an end run around the charter. I had thought when you joined us that gradually your character's goals would fall into line with the rest of the party's in a roleplayed transition, and that eventually you would get your own charter like the rest of us. But it feels like you are digging in your heels and just pushing harder in the opposite direction.
This is Pathfinder. We're not supposed to be constantly agonizing about whether to kill things. And it's getting frustrating.
2. The second issue is your Kyonin "mission." Every time you bring up the idea that Kyonin should move in and take over, I feel like you are trying to sabotage the mission that I know as a player I will receive but as a character I don't know I will even get yet. It puts you in competition with the rest of us, only our roleplaying hands are tied because we don't yet know that your "elven enclaves" will make it more difficult for us later. It seems unfair. Theoretically Numalar shouldn't care about Kyonin enclaves popping up because as far as he knows he will never actually have a stake in the Stolen Lands.
If the group decided that we were happy with being a Kyonin-sponsored kingdom, I think GGGM is a good enough GM that he could wing it. I GM the majority of games I play f2f and I have to acknowledge that he is better than me at it. I don't say that lightly, and it is not the case with any other pbp GM I have so far.
But I do NOT want our kingdom to be New Lothlorien. I want it to be uniquely ours, a vibrant, squalling mess, and not a copy of anything. A human kingdom works for this because they tend to be inclusive. I'm happy to have elves in it, but I don't want a new elven kingdom. I don't want a gnome kingdom either! Numalar was made to work with the way the AP is designed to ultimately develop.
And I can't express these opinions in character, because Numalar doesn't know that the kingdom phase is coming. Only you have that information. I'm also starting to think that I am not the only one who is bothered by this.
At this point I don't know how to resolve this. I have tried to find ways of accommodating you without compromising Numalar's values. I do know that these arguments are starting to make the game not so much fun for me any more. And that's a problem. I put a LOT of work into Numalar and had been looking forward to playing him for a long time.
So what can we do? Are you willing to build some bridges, and if so how do we do that?
@Peet: I gave some thought to what Hotaru brought up. I'm not sure if it truly fits what you are going for, but companion figurine feat could also set you up on the familiar thing.
I had originally figured that I would go with the Falconer archetype of Ranger as my gestalt class, which provides a bird animal companion (which is small) but I think this is probably a bad idea mechanically and I don't really need three ranks of ranger in gestalt.
My submission will have the haunted oracle curse and so he will be frequently haunted by a spirit that manifests as a silver raven (probably only he can see it). I want something unusual to spark an interest in the silver ravens in the character, so he will take this as a sign.
The companion figurine idea is neat but I will have to pick up the figurine first. Does the companion figurine improve as you gain levels? I can't find that in the text.
Lost 33 wrote:
Current Submissions: ** spoiler omitted **...
GM: I'm getting the feeling you missed this one:
Okay, the campaign trait Ozak would take would ideally be Robot Slayer, but Against the Technic League could also fit. Either would be based on a hostile encounter as Ozak crossed Numeria. The rest of the traits don't really fit as he isn't from Torch and isn't much of an academic.
So with the right link it should be:
Ozak Daggertooth – Half-Orc Inquisitor / Slayer (Robot Slayer or Against the Technic League)
Peet: I see nothing objectionable there.
I am sending you a PM with some stuff about the character that will need to be approved - I don't want to make an alias for the character yet. I haven't bought mundane gear or done the fluff yet but the build is done I think.
Are you using Background Skills? If so I would take craft (carpentry) and perform (wind) but I can't afford those skills under the normal rules.
Lost 33 wrote:
@Peet: There’s no reason a non-technological focused creature can’t run in Iron Gods. In fact even through the campaign is technology themed, it would be odd to find that many competent technologists at once in Golarion.
Okay, the campaign trait Ozak would take would ideally be Robot Slayer, but Against the Technic League could also fit. Either would be based on a hostile encounter as Ozak crossed Numeria. The rest of the traits don't really fit as he isn't from Torch and isn't much of an academic.
I know that Iron Gods has sci-fi and technology as well as the normal Pathfinder stuff. Do you recommend playing a character that is designed for that? I have a gestalt Half-Orc Slayer/Inquisitor of Gorum that I am keen to play but the only campaigns I have gotten him into have died. He has nothing to do with Iron Gods per se, though his origin is nearby (he was originally written for Kingmaker which is just next door) so I won't have to change much.
The character is Ozak Daggertooth. I will have to rejigger the starting ability scores but otherwise he is mostly ready.
Wow, 45 is a lot of points.
Probably would go with:
I don't have to dump CHA that much but he was designed that way originally.
Hi there, DM Camris.
How would you feel about an Aasimar (Azata-Blooded) Oracle of the Wood Mystery? He would have the "Scion of Humanity" trait but instead of making him look like a human I would go with looking like an elf.
The character concept is a bit vague at the moment but I can put it together if you think this would work.
Still over a week. With all the quality submissions already made, I will probably start the 48-hour countdown on monday 28th, ...
Glad to see this is still open.
1. If we are taking a gestalt class for 3 levels, do the 3 levels have to have the same Gestalt class? Or could you do 2 of one class and 1 of another?
2. How do you feel about applying weapon finesse to a quarterstaff, or an Unchained Rogue that uses a quarterstaff? Strictly speaking a quarterstaff does not qualify for the Rogue's Finesse Training as it is a two-handed weapon, but I figure mechanically counting the two ends of a quarterstaff as light weapons isn't mechanically any better than a rogue with two shortswords - as long as you don't try to use it as a two-handed weapon that gives 1.5 x DEX damage which would obviously be offside.
3. I am trying to figure out a way for my character to gain an animal companion or familiar as an oracle of a mystery that does not grant one. The companion I have in mind is an albino (i.e. silver) raven. I don't expect to be delivering touch spells or using it as a combat buddy (except maybe to provide flank once in a while) - I am more interested in it as a messenger and as a symbol. I was considering the Falconer Ranger archetype but this would be as a gestalt class meaning that the companion would never advance. Would you allow a revelation to be spent to give me such a companion?
This would seem to be a good campaign for the Vigilante class from Ultimate Intrigue. So far I have only seen the playtest version though.
I have a character that I did up for PFS and then hardly ever played that would be good for this campaign. He is an Aasimar (Angel-kin) Bloodrager with the celestial bloodline. His background was never that well fleshed out but he is of Kellid Stock from the Realm of the Mammoth Lords. I would have to figure out why he would be in Kintargo.
As I already said, I don't want to resort to plot magic if I don't have to, especially if there is a way to do it at a reasonable caster level without plot magic. The enemy doing this would not be the BBEG but a minion, so I don't want to invest too much into some "special power."
Not specifically, no, but since the enemy caster will be comparable in level to the PCs, I do want the potential to be there.
Is it something you want the Players to be able to do themselves in the future?
If the players want to spend the resources to be able to do it, sure. Though none of the people in the party are really configured to do this without some jiggering.
Is the control of said beast something that will hinder the enemies (as in, do they have reduced amounts of gear themselves because they spent wealth on the worm)?
Yes. Maybe not in gear, but in terms of actions or participation, possibly. I originally envisioned the encounter having the controlling caster controlling the worm at a "safe distance" away, but still within LOS.
You are the GM, you don't have to be fair or follow the rules when you don't want to.
I understand this, but I do want to, which is why I created this thread. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear earlier.
I would have had the bad guy obtain a variant awaken spell that can affect purple worms.
And then give him class levels! How about bard? Sid the Singing Sandworm, at your service!
Seriously though, I don't think I need an intelligent worm. If I take a Lamia Matriarch, and give her sorc levels and the serpentine bloodline, That should be enough.
Yeah, I considered that, but I don't like to resort to that if I don't have to.
Serpentine Bloodline Arcana allows you to treat Magical Beasts as Humanoids. So... at 10th level Sorc, Dominate Person.
Or Charm Person at level 1! This is good, and I could have the controller be a Lamia Matriarch, so the serpentine bloodline is a natural one for her.
The 20 STR Aristocrat wrote:
I don't want a 17th level druid doing the work here - a bit out of the league of the players. And for plot reasons I would rather have the worm be a semi-permanent companion rather than a summoned creature.
Diego Rossi wrote:
The difference between enlarge person and dominate person is an interesting one. I think that instinctively GMs would rule against dominate person continuing after death, without necessarily articulating why. So if you then say that enlarge person should work the same way you get a bit of traction.
But there are two things that make me think they would work differently.
1. Dominate person is a mind-affecting spell. Turning a dominated person into a mindless creature would presumably render the spell useless. If the spell allows you to control the target's mind, and target no longer has a mind, then the spell should not do anything any more. The spell may still be active, but I can't see it doing anything.
i.e.: If you chop the legs off of someone, their expeditious retreat spell no longer has any effect. But if you then cast regenerate and restore their legs, and the expeditious retreat spell's duration is still ticking, then expeditious retreat still works.
2. Dominate person cannot be made permanent. Really the issue is the permanency spell, not the enlarge person spell.
* * *
As a GM, in my games I would probably allow Permanency to continue working, on the grounds that you spent gold on a permanent effect.
Permanency is not as good as a magic item, since it is vulnerable to dispel magic. But nevertheless, if I was going to impose a "permanency expires upon death" rule, I would feel obligated to warn players about that before they cast permanent spells on themselves. If I didn't explain this and then dropped it on my players when their characters died, they would have cause to be pissed.
Yeah, the Dune thing was kind of in my mind in the OP. Though those would have to be colossal worms at least.
Maybe he doesn't. Maybe the worm is just a savage beast to be pitied, for the bad guy is keeping it managed through cruel methods. When he opens the cage door, the worm explodes out in a rage-driven attempt to end the suffering. As long as he doesn't stand in its path, he's safe. How will PCs feel about ending its life to end its suffering?
That's not bad, but I want the worm to pop out of the ground and attack a specific group (the players), with the controller being at some distance. This will require a bit more finesse than that, so magical control or training will likely be necessary.
The "bury itself" ability of the Giant Emperor Scorpion would lend itself to them being good guard animals. They could remain buried at "watchposts" the giants want guarded.
They are also large enough to ride. I don't want to introduce colossal creatures at the moment, so huge is big enough for me. I could use the young template if I want "easier" ones.
Yeah, this is not bad. Probably you would use charm monster at first, but then use handle animal to train it.
In the Purple Worm entry in the Bestiary, it says:
"They make popular guardians for those who have the magic to control them..."
I would like to have an encounter in my game where the players are attacked by a purple worm that is controlled by their enemies.
So what kind of magic would you use to control one?
Dominate monster would obviously work, but it is a bit too high in level. The six-person party will probably be 11th level when the encounter happens.
Charm monster would work, but how do you communicate with a magical beast? I don't think speak with animals works as that specifies animals. And the worm is not intelligent, so tongues won't work either. And awaken cannot target a magical beast to make it intelligent.
So how would you do it? I want the enemy caster to be able to actually direct the worm to attack something.