paizo.com Recent Posts by Quelianpaizo.com Recent Posts by Quelian2022-05-26T20:40:20Z2022-05-26T20:40:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: So why would anyone use a Doshko (or other Unwieldy melee weapon)Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ul0t?So-why-would-anyone-use-a-Doshko#372017-11-15T18:45:59Z2017-11-09T20:53:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">d'Eon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Dragonchess Player wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<p>Actually, as my math above shows, Deadly Aim never comes online for a Soldier. The -2 penalty reduces your accuracy by 10%, thus reducing your damage output by 10%. To make the trade worthwhile, you need to increase your damage by more than 10%.</p>
<p>The bonus is half your BAB, but using a weapon you're specialised in gives a higher bonus. Coupled with Str bonuses, Deadly Aim is only good if half your BAB is more than 10% of your expected damage.</p>
<p>Since any Soldier should do far more than 10×their level in damage, Deadly Aim is a wasted feat for them. </blockquote><p>Eh, your math assumes a 60% miss chance, though. Depending on how the system plays out at higher levels given monster AC, that may not actually be true. In Pathfinder, a properly built fighter had almost no real miss chance once they got a few minor enhancements. If you consider that we also have EAC to contend with and with relatively minor losses to damage output, deadly aim starts looking really fantastic on energy wepaons.
<p>Also, never underestimate the value of swing damage. Consistency is not important if you decapitate the dragon on round 1. That matters a lot.</p>d'Eon wrote:Dragonchess Player wrote:Actually, as my math above shows, Deadly Aim never comes online for a Soldier. The -2 penalty reduces your accuracy by 10%, thus reducing your damage output by 10%. To make the trade worthwhile, you need to increase your damage by more than 10%.
The bonus is half your BAB, but using a weapon you're specialised in gives a higher bonus. Coupled with Str bonuses, Deadly Aim is only good if half your BAB is more than 10% of your expected damage.
Since any...Research (alias of Quelian)2017-11-09T20:53:11ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: 2011 Ennie Awards- Vote for Chronicles Pathfinder PodcastResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mjsy?2011-Ennie-Awards-Vote-for-Chronicles#22011-07-16T00:08:17Z2011-07-16T00:08:17Z<p>If you enjoy gaming, please vote. The more people vote, the more relevant the Ennies are.</p>
<p>If you're a listener and you enjoy us, we'd love to have your vote.</p>
<p>If you're not a listener, please become one! You can find our episodes here at:</p>
<p>http://www.pathfinder-podcast.com/</p>
<p>The pathfinder community proved to be the roaring voice of pen and paper gaming last year. That tightly knit community is why we put the effort we do into high quality podcasts.</p>If you enjoy gaming, please vote. The more people vote, the more relevant the Ennies are.
If you're a listener and you enjoy us, we'd love to have your vote.
If you're not a listener, please become one! You can find our episodes here at:
http://www.pathfinder-podcast.com/
The pathfinder community proved to be the roaring voice of pen and paper gaming last year. That tightly knit community is why we put the effort we do into high quality podcasts.Research (alias of Quelian)2011-07-16T00:08:17ZRe: Forums/PaizoCon: General Discussion: Attending the Meet and Eat 2011?Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lsvv&page=3?Attending-the-Meet-and-Eat-2011#1382011-06-09T07:26:51Z2011-06-09T07:26:51Z<p>I will attempt to attend this tomorrow, but I don't know if I can get off work early enough to get the 4 hour drive to seattle done.</p>I will attempt to attend this tomorrow, but I don't know if I can get off work early enough to get the 4 hour drive to seattle done.Research (alias of Quelian)2011-06-09T07:26:51ZRe: Forums/PaizoCon: General Discussion: Paizo Blog: PaizoCon Limited Event Schedule!Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lc60?PaizoCon-Limited-Event-Schedule#152011-05-08T23:21:21Z2011-05-08T23:21:21Z<p>I don't see character level given on my events. Considering Yvex's spire is a level 12 dungeon I think that may end up a fatal problem for that event, since I was hoping people would show up with characters.</p>I don't see character level given on my events. Considering Yvex's spire is a level 12 dungeon I think that may end up a fatal problem for that event, since I was hoping people would show up with characters.Research (alias of Quelian)2011-05-08T23:21:21ZRe: Forums/PaizoCon: General Discussion: Paizo Blog: Volunteer or Run an Event at PaizoCon 2011!Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lc3a&page=2?Volunteer-or-Run-an-Event-at-PaizoCon-2011#512011-04-27T01:40:44Z2011-04-27T01:40:44Z<p>A couple of one shots I'd like to playtest away from my players, and an offering of character assistance from the CCW guy!</p>
<p>——</p>
<p>Title: The Long Road Home - Jolumar Catacombs
<br />
System: Pathfinder
<br />
Short Description: You've shipwrecked at the bottom of a bay, and the only way up the sheer cliffs was through an underwater passage leading to extensive caves. Now your only way to the surface is through the ruins of a flooded city! Can you work your way out?!
<br />
Number of Players (Min/Max): 3-5
<br />
Character Level: 2
<br />
Pregens Provided (yes/no): No. Build with 16/15/14/13/12/11, standard wealth by level. Surprise me.
<br />
Maturity Rating (Everyone (6+)/Teen (13+)/Mature (18+)): Teen (13+), but I enforce good gamer etiquette.</p>
<p>——</p>
<p>Title: The Long Road Home - Spires of Yvex
<br />
System: Pathfinder
<br />
Short Description: A lot of people don't respect white dragons and think they are pushovers. I'm here to prove them wrong. Bring your A-game because Research takes the gloves off to defend an iconic monster of D&D.
<br />
Number of Players (Min/Max): 3-5. Nonplayer observers wishing to watch a dragon encounter allowed if they are civil and do not interrupt.
<br />
Character Level: 12
<br />
Pregens Provided (yes/no): No. Build with 16/15/14/13/12/11, standard wealth by level. Surprise me.
<br />
Maturity Rating (Everyone (6+)/Teen (13+)/Mature (18+)): Teen (13+), but I enforce good gamer etiquette.</p>
<p>——</p>
<p>Title: The Long Road Home - Shadowmere Spire
<br />
System: Pathfinder
<br />
Short Description: Are you afraid of the dark? You will be when I'm done with you!
<br />
Number of Players (Min/Max): 3-5
<br />
Character Level: 5
<br />
Pregens Provided (yes/no):No. Build with 16/15/14/13/12/11, standard wealth by level. Surprise me.
<br />
Maturity Rating (Everyone (6+)/Teen (13+)/Mature (18+)): Teen (13+), but I enforce good gamer etiquette.</p>
<p>——</p>
<p>Here's hoping I'm not shooting myself in the foot with this one:</p>
<p>Title: Character Concept Workshop with DM Research
<br />
System: Pathfinder
<br />
Short Description: I get a small amount of requests to help with individual characters from the Chronicles listeners every once in a while. I like to help but it's far easier when we're face to face. Here's your chance to tell someone about your character, and recieve feedback!
<br />
Number of Players (Min/Max): As many as I have time for before I run off to my next game.
<br />
Character Level: Anything below 10.
<br />
Pregens Provided (Yes/No): No.
<br />
Maturity Rating (Everyone (6+)/Teen (13+)/Mature (18+)): Everyone (6+)</p>A couple of one shots I'd like to playtest away from my players, and an offering of character assistance from the CCW guy!
----
Title: The Long Road Home - Jolumar Catacombs
System: Pathfinder
Short Description: You've shipwrecked at the bottom of a bay, and the only way up the sheer cliffs was through an underwater passage leading to extensive caves. Now your only way to the surface is through the ruins of a flooded city! Can you work your way out?!
Number of Players (Min/Max): 3-5...Research (alias of Quelian)2011-04-27T01:40:44ZForums: Rules Questions: Sash of the War Champion without fighter levels?Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lv8u?Sash-of-the-War-Champion-without-fighter-levels#12011-02-12T23:51:59Z2011-02-12T23:51:59Z<p>I'm in the process of making a general plan for my next PFS character. I'm doing some pretty heavy multiclassing and I need to know whether I need to fit a fighter level into the build to use the sash of the war champion (APG 309).</p>
<p>Armor training is pretty critical to the concept as I need access to full movement in mithral full plate. (Starting with Cavalier)</p>I'm in the process of making a general plan for my next PFS character. I'm doing some pretty heavy multiclassing and I need to know whether I need to fit a fighter level into the build to use the sash of the war champion (APG 309).
Armor training is pretty critical to the concept as I need access to full movement in mithral full plate. (Starting with Cavalier)Research (alias of Quelian)2011-02-12T23:51:59ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Word Burning FeatResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lixq?Word-Burning-Feat#62010-11-25T04:24:33Z2010-11-25T04:24:33Z<p>I'm not so certain. The Word Burning feat mentions both spells and spell slots.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Benefit: Each day, when you prepare your words of power
<br />
spells or regain your spell slots, you can choose to expend any
<br />
one spell slot you possess. You gain a number of points from
<br />
that slot equal to its total word cost (see Table 1–1). You can
<br />
apply the points from that <b>spell slot to any other spell</b> that you
<br />
prepare or cast that day, increasing the total word cost limit.
<br />
You can split these points up among any number of <b>other spell
<br />
slots</b>, but none of the spell slots can have <b>a level equal to or
<br />
higher than the expended spell slot.</b> This does not increase
<br />
the maximum word level of these slots, but it does allow more
<br />
expensive words to be combined in lower-level spell slots.</blockquote><p>The wording actually says it both ways, and I'm inclined to take the more restrictive wording as what's actually supposed to happen.I'm not so certain. The Word Burning feat mentions both spells and spell slots.
Quote:Benefit: Each day, when you prepare your words of power
spells or regain your spell slots, you can choose to expend any
one spell slot you possess. You gain a number of points from
that slot equal to its total word cost (see Table 1–1). You can
apply the points from that spell slot to any other spell that you
prepare or cast that day, increasing the total word cost limit.
You can split these points up among...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T04:24:33ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Word Burning FeatResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lixq?Word-Burning-Feat#42010-11-25T04:50:17Z2010-11-25T03:19:16Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">terraleon wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Jason Bulmahn wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
<p>Does that clear things up?</p>
<p></blockquote><p>Immensely. Thank you.
<p>-Ben. </blockquote><p>When applying word burning you apply it to a slot, correct? Say you burned a 9th level slot and applied it entirely to an 8th level slot. If you then took a 4th level spell and added +4 levels of metamagic feats and put it in the word burned slot, you would have 13+32 points, so a 45 point spell with a 4th level word cap, correct?
<p>The other possible interperetation is you apply it to the spell in question, meaning you could apply a 9th level spell to a 4th level spell and get 45 points and then shift the slot up as needed via metamagic?</p>
<p>The first has options for abuse but is much more restrictive. It means that you can't metamagic a 4th level spell with 8th level slots more than +3 levels (As the burning means that the metamagic feats can only bring it up to 7th level before you go above the slots allowed to have 8th level burns applied to them). </p>
<p>If you use the second interperetation, then you could burn a 4th level slot and apply to a 3rd level spell then metamagic a spell well into the 8th and 9th level slots if you found a reason to do so. This one I could abuse blindfolded.</p>terraleon wrote:Jason Bulmahn wrote:Does that clear things up?
Immensely. Thank you. -Ben. When applying word burning you apply it to a slot, correct? Say you burned a 9th level slot and applied it entirely to an 8th level slot. If you then took a 4th level spell and added +4 levels of metamagic feats and put it in the word burned slot, you would have 13+32 points, so a 45 point spell with a 4th level word cap, correct? The other possible interperetation is you apply it to the spell in...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T03:19:16ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Let's make some spellsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2linu&page=2?Lets-make-some-spells#632010-11-25T02:02:51Z2010-11-25T02:02:51Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Research wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote>That seems like a sensible way to fix the problem. </blockquote>It does fix many of them, but unfortunately <i>Research's Lesser Hellball]</i> is built using that restriction. And in all honesty that spell utterly terrifies me. </blockquote>Considering the investment it requires, I'm not that scared of it. </blockquote><p>The thing is I'm pretty sure the caster can do that and still pull off several other spells. It's just the first ridiculously broken spell of many. Consider that instead of maximizing the spell he could instead go for a dazing rod and just stunlock an encounter down. Medium level +3 rods are nothing to a level 17+.
<p>I'm working on some more ridiculous options at the moment, but that was just the first WTF-I-can't-believe-this-works spell I found.</p>Ravingdork wrote:Research wrote: Ravingdork wrote:That seems like a sensible way to fix the problem.
It does fix many of them, but unfortunately Research's Lesser Hellball] is built using that restriction. And in all honesty that spell utterly terrifies me. Considering the investment it requires, I'm not that scared of it. The thing is I'm pretty sure the caster can do that and still pull off several other spells. It's just the first ridiculously broken spell of many. Consider that instead...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T02:02:51ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Let's make some spellsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2linu&page=2?Lets-make-some-spells#612010-11-25T01:53:11Z2010-11-25T01:53:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote>That seems like a sensible way to fix the problem. </blockquote><p>It does fix many of them, but unfortunately <i>Research's Lesser Hellball</i> is built using that restriction. And in all honesty that spell utterly terrifies me.Ravingdork wrote:That seems like a sensible way to fix the problem.
It does fix many of them, but unfortunately Research's Lesser Hellball is built using that restriction. And in all honesty that spell utterly terrifies me.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T01:53:11ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Let's make some spellsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2linu&page=2?Lets-make-some-spells#592010-11-25T01:37:45Z2010-11-25T01:37:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Evil Space Mantis wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I think you could still do this at level 7. Word burn a level 4 slot. Put the points into a level 3 slot to create the word of power spell. Then add Intensify on top, which keeps it a 3rd level spell, but makes it fill a second 4th level slot, assuming you have one. And then I think leaves you with a normal, unfilled 3rd level slot in its place? (I mean, thats how normal metamagic works. It seems counterintuitive to me for some reason that the wordburned slot gets moved up and 'replaced', but thats how normal metamagic works so...)</p>
<p>Word Burning and Metamagic Feats have some strange interactions. I think, from looking at it and doing some quick and dirty math, that its balanced, its just a bit hard to get your head around. </blockquote><p>I am fairly certain that you have to word burn to the slot the final, metamagiced spell will take up. IE if you're going to metamagic a 4th level spell up to 8th level, you can only word burn a 9th level spell and apply it to the 8th level slot, and then when the 4th level's metamagic'ed form gets there you can add the points from the 4th level slot and the 9th level slot together.Evil Space Mantis wrote:I think you could still do this at level 7. Word burn a level 4 slot. Put the points into a level 3 slot to create the word of power spell. Then add Intensify on top, which keeps it a 3rd level spell, but makes it fill a second 4th level slot, assuming you have one. And then I think leaves you with a normal, unfilled 3rd level slot in its place? (I mean, thats how normal metamagic works. It seems counterintuitive to me for some reason that the wordburned slot gets...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T01:37:45ZRe: Forums: Round 2: Words of Power Discussion: Let's make some spellsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2linu&page=2?Lets-make-some-spells#582010-11-25T01:20:22Z2010-11-25T01:20:22Z<p>Just to prove word burning + metamagic feats = broken spells, I present to you <i>Research's Lesser Hellball</i>:</p>
<p>Word burning to add a 9th level's points to an 8th level spell slot. Take a 4th level spell and apply empower, intensify, Elemental spell (Fire) to it. 13+32 points of spell. Consider while casting this spell you can apply a rod of maximize or quicken or whatever else you want to do to it because for all intents and purposes it's a 4th level spell, and that's well within a spellcaster's reach.</p>
<p>So we now have an Empowered, Intensified, Elemental (Fire), Maximized 45 point spell with a level 4 word cap.</p>
<p>So let's make it a mass spell, because multiple targets with no chance of friendly fire is always fun. (For some reason mass costs less than small burst. I do not understand why. You can hit far more targets with it after level 10.)</p>
<p>So a Mass (2), Acid Wave (9), Ice Blast (12), Lightning Blast (9) costs a total of 32 word points. At level 15, this spell will do 45d6 reflex half when intensified. When empowered/maximized, this spell does 405 damage on a failed reflex save to 15 targets. And I can do this several more times per day. That's not even using the 13 points from my actual 4th level slot, so I could even go so far as to change this to a medium burst or medium cone and be 10 points under cap which I can freely distribute to my other spells. And I can hold drop my metamagic rod of maximize as a free, pull my quicken rod and do it again as a swift action to clean up the rest. At medium range.</p>
<p>This isn't even the scary part. 405 reflex half is somewhat terrifying, but you might have asked, why the elemental (fire) metamagic? Because Elemental Focus feats stack with respect to multi-descriptor spells, last I checked my APG. So if you decided to make an elementalist who wanted to was super specialized, you could easily spend 8 feats on greater elemental focus (everything) and only turn half this damage to fire and now have an acid/cold/lightning/fire spell at a +8 to its DC, making it DC 22+relevant casting modifier. A sorcerer need only pick up one bloodline feat of Empower spell to to be able to get these feats by 20th level, and a wizard can do it by 15th.</p>
<p>Additionally, if I really wanted to be a jerk to my DM, I could switch out Acid Wave for Terror, lower the damage output of the spell by 15d6, and make it a will negates at a -2 DC. (By the way terror should be Will Partial, as it still sticks a shaken on a failed save.) The problem being that part of the rules say that a save applies to the spell as a whole (Page 3, effect words), and another part says that saves apply to each word (Page 6, saving throw). I assume that page 6's wording being more thorough applies. So now we have again, a 32 point 4th level spell being word burned, it will deal 30d6 of empowered/maximized damage (roughly 270 damage) , and cause the frightened condition. Will partial (downgrading frightened to shaken), and will half for the damage. (135 damage, evasion what?) Oh, and the duration is now instantaneous so the frightened/shaken doesn't go away. (Or never occurs? Not sure.) And of course I can in fact drop my metamagic rod as a free action, pull my quicken rod as a standard, and quicken this spell to do it twice in a round and effectively destroy up to 17 of every single monster that comes directly to mind I've ever encountered.</p>
<p>Yes this takes a ridiculous amount of specialization on the wizard/sorcerer's part. However, the spellcasting DC system has never and will never encourage a spellcaster to do anything BUT specialize, because spell DCs never change except via ability score bonuses and feats. Which is of course the underlying mechanical problem with the entire DC system.</p>
<p>It is important to note that this interaction only occurs when word burning and metamagic spells mix together, and it's a real problem.</p>Just to prove word burning + metamagic feats = broken spells, I present to you Research's Lesser Hellball:
Word burning to add a 9th level's points to an 8th level spell slot. Take a 4th level spell and apply empower, intensify, Elemental spell (Fire) to it. 13+32 points of spell. Consider while casting this spell you can apply a rod of maximize or quicken or whatever else you want to do to it because for all intents and purposes it's a 4th level spell, and that's well within a spellcaster's...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-11-25T01:20:22ZRe: Forums: Council of Thieves: Anvengen’s Edge (Spoilers)Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ktju?Anvengen-s-Edge#122010-10-01T15:02:41Z2010-10-01T15:02:41Z<p>My group has a lawful neutral inquisitor of Asmodeus who picked up the blade after an excellent bit of roleplay with the caged devil. Given that he got the devil to sign a contract with him (A very asmodean act), I decided to let the negative level slide. He's on his way to lawful evil anyway, and Anvengen's edge is all the happier to be in the hands of a devout asmodeus worshiper. If it can shift him fully lawful evil? More's the better.</p>
<p>Now I'm just trying to think of ways to "Unlock" the power of the glaive, to keep it relevant as time passes.</p>My group has a lawful neutral inquisitor of Asmodeus who picked up the blade after an excellent bit of roleplay with the caged devil. Given that he got the devil to sign a contract with him (A very asmodean act), I decided to let the negative level slide. He's on his way to lawful evil anyway, and Anvengen's edge is all the happier to be in the hands of a devout asmodeus worshiper. If it can shift him fully lawful evil? More's the better.
Now I'm just trying to think of ways to "Unlock" the...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-10-01T15:02:41ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Magus Arcana IdeasResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lask&page=4?Magus-Arcana-Ideas#1952010-09-28T13:51:14Z2010-09-28T13:51:14Z<p><span class=messageboard-bigger><b>Spell Conversion</b></span></p>
<p>Pick 1 spell for of each level you may cast. You may spontaneously cast these spells by sacrificing slots of equal or higher level. Whenever you gain access to a new level of spells, you immediately choose a new spell of that level for spell conversion.</p>
<p>This arcana allows a magus to choose his primary combat spells and spontaneously cast them, freeing a his spell preparation to utility and buff spells which can supplement the wizard's utility spells.</p>Spell Conversion
Pick 1 spell for of each level you may cast. You may spontaneously cast these spells by sacrificing slots of equal or higher level. Whenever you gain access to a new level of spells, you immediately choose a new spell of that level for spell conversion.
This arcana allows a magus to choose his primary combat spells and spontaneously cast them, freeing a his spell preparation to utility and buff spells which can supplement the wizard's utility spells.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-28T13:51:14ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Flurry of miscasts, or, being bad at two things is not as good as being good at oneResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbh8?Flurry-of-miscasts-or-being-bad-at-two-things#262010-09-27T12:26:19Z2010-09-27T12:26:19Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Cold Napalm wrote:</div><blockquote>And he can with the magus?!? I'm sorry, but the magus needs to spend 3 rounds to buff up before wading into combat at that level too. Or do the smart thing and be a REALLY gimped wizard and cast BC spells. Which is what makes playing the magus and EK build so bloody frustrating. Your basically a gimped wizard till around level 8. Except the EK is less gimped. </blockquote><p>My playtesting says otherwise. Then again, the guy playing this magus actually knows what he's doing when building melee casters.Cold Napalm wrote:And he can with the magus?!? I'm sorry, but the magus needs to spend 3 rounds to buff up before wading into combat at that level too. Or do the smart thing and be a REALLY gimped wizard and cast BC spells. Which is what makes playing the magus and EK build so bloody frustrating. Your basically a gimped wizard till around level 8. Except the EK is less gimped.
My playtesting says otherwise. Then again, the guy playing this magus actually knows what he's doing when building...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-27T12:26:19ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Flurry of miscasts, or, being bad at two things is not as good as being good at oneResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbh8?Flurry-of-miscasts-or-being-bad-at-two-things#232010-09-27T02:32:06Z2010-09-27T02:32:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Banpai wrote:</div><blockquote>So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?</blockquote><p>Definitely sticking with the Magus. It currently functions far better than the Fighter 1 / Wizard 3 multiclass did. He's not missing entire combats anymore without rolling because he spent 3 rounds buffing before being capable of wading into melee.Banpai wrote:So will your player continue to play the Magus or change back to Fighter/Mage?
Definitely sticking with the Magus. It currently functions far better than the Fighter 1 / Wizard 3 multiclass did. He's not missing entire combats anymore without rolling because he spent 3 rounds buffing before being capable of wading into melee.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-27T02:32:06ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: The problem, and the solution is all in our headsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbkk?The-problem-and-the-solution-is-all-in-our-heads#232010-09-26T14:28:23Z2010-09-26T14:28:23Z<p>I really really like where the Magus is going. I like its spell list for the most part, and I like its various abilities. I think the math itself needs tweaking, and spellstrike needs to land touch spells on touch AC even if a melee attack misses. There's some minor other issues with the arcana.</p>
<p>HOWEVER, the core concept of the class is solid gold and it plays damn well with a few tweaks in the CoT game I'm GMing. The fighter/mage player just converted to magus and is loving it.</p>
<p>The one free hand to cast thing actually does some very interesting things mechanically:</p>
<p>You can't really wear a shield. This is good, because it keeps you slightly behind fighter AC.</p>
<p>You can always choose to not cast and put a second hand on that weapon. Two handed combat is really really good to be able to do on demand, and makes power attack really attractive for this class.</p>
<p>Right now the primary problem with the class is spell combat's -4 is just too much and spellstrike is too inflexible. -2 would probably fix a horde of the class's problems.</p>
<p>Secondary issues are the distinct lack of awesome in the Magus Arcana, but even Jason is asking for more arcana ideas at this point.</p>
<p>Tertiary issue is that the capstone "True Magus" ability is lackluster.</p>I really really like where the Magus is going. I like its spell list for the most part, and I like its various abilities. I think the math itself needs tweaking, and spellstrike needs to land touch spells on touch AC even if a melee attack misses. There's some minor other issues with the arcana.
HOWEVER, the core concept of the class is solid gold and it plays damn well with a few tweaks in the CoT game I'm GMing. The fighter/mage player just converted to magus and is loving it.
The one...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T14:28:23ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Arcana poolResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lb7s&page=2?Arcana-pool#612010-09-26T14:20:53Z2010-09-26T14:20:53Z<p>I am opposed to this by virtue of "Bookkeeping sucks".</p>
<p>Magus is already a prepared spellcaster, and by virtue of that they've got a hefty amount of stuff to track as is. I think most of the arcana concepts are fine, they just need a few uses per day tracks.</p>
<p>As it stands, I would much rather keep the Rogue talent feel of the Magus Arcana, rather than a ki-pool feel. Monk ki-pool works because they don't have a spells prepared list to track, and thus the player doesn't have to continually shuffle through papers and keep active totals.</p>I am opposed to this by virtue of "Bookkeeping sucks".
Magus is already a prepared spellcaster, and by virtue of that they've got a hefty amount of stuff to track as is. I think most of the arcana concepts are fine, they just need a few uses per day tracks.
As it stands, I would much rather keep the Rogue talent feel of the Magus Arcana, rather than a ki-pool feel. Monk ki-pool works because they don't have a spells prepared list to track, and thus the player doesn't have to continually...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T14:20:53ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Standardised Playtest Feedback for Magus in Actual PlayResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lase?Standardised-Playtest-Feedback-for-Magus-in#332010-09-26T14:00:56Z2010-09-26T14:00:56Z<p><b>GM Perspective: Council of Thieves: The Sixfold Trial</b></p>
<p><b>Party:</b> Dwarf Inquisitor 4 (Asmodean worshipper, Fire domain), Human Wizard 4 (Generalist), Halfling Cleric 4 (Irori, Knowledge/Rune Domains), Human Magus 4 (Converted from Fighter 1 / Wizard 3)</p>
<p>One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)</p>
<p>He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword. I'm granting him the proficiency since he had been using a greatsword until this point. In the end it's an effective +1 damage from the longsword a magus has default proficiency with.</p>
<p>Character was actually rolled, so his stats are admittedly higher than most. The relevant ones being an 18 strength and a 15 (possibly 16 after leveling to 4) intelligence. I will get a character sheet copy from him sometime in the next few days. He has fairly high stats in con/dex as well (+2/+3), but that shouldn't effect how the class plays round to round but rather whether it can take a hit. Many of my players rolled fairly well in this game.</p>
<p><b>Series of Summaries of Battles</b></p>
<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>
<p><b>Final Analysis, Thoughts, and Suggestions</b></p>
<p>I was surprised by how effective spell combat was on the casting side, but initially very unhappy with the performance of the melee side.</p>
<p>The player is not a new player and knows he could lose a spell or two during combat. Through more or less the entire Asmodean Knot the player lost very few (possibly none? I can't recall.) spells to defensively casting. He consciously chose to use only 1st level spells during defensive casting periods, to minimize the chance of failure. As a GM, I find this in line with what I expect from this class. The mechanics currently encourage you to only use spell combat with lower level spells such as shocking grasp. <b>This is a good thing, and should stick around.</b></p>
<p>However, the -4 penalty to melee attacks definitely cramped the melee side of the character. At several points in the knot the character would cast a shocking grasp, channel through the weapon, hit touch AC but miss actual AC. Spellstrike is very clear that this would not trigger the resolution of the touch spell. I quickly came to the conclusion that this is a foundation level problem with the class.</p>
<p>I instituted a house rule shortly afterward that allowed the magus player to connect with a touch spell provided an attack cleared the target's touch AC. If the attack does not also clear the target's actual AC, the weapon portion of the damage does not resolve. This improved the flow of play significantly, normalizing the damage dealt to opponents, while allowing for fairly impressive "Spellstrike soft criticals" with some significant damage output. Both the player and I agreed that this improved the feel of the class significantly.</p>
<p>As far as flow of play, the one handed/open hand combat works extremely well when the player knows to shift to a two handed stance with power attack and has the strength to back it up on the damage front. Arcane bond significantly assists with relevant damage output at level four, as well. The ability to slap keen onto a weapon that is typically toting a touch spell around is downright terrifying. Power attacking, arcane striking, two handed shocking grasp imbued bastard sword critical hits end combats. Skip Puree, go straight to liquefy. The damage potential this class has on single targets is staggering.</p>
<p>The player expressed a fairly low opinion of the level 3 arcana choices, which I echo. The low level Magus does not have enough spell slots to use the arcane accuracy or spell shield arcana. Pretty much ever. Both of these arcana are awful and were awful when we saw their precursors in 3.5 in the form of feats. Silent and still magic do not have scaling uses per day which make them unattractive compared to the rogue talents and rage powers these seem intended to match. Broad study only appears relevant to characters that are either ridiculous or completely useless. (Casters do not multiclass well. Never have in 3.x and never will.) Concentrate is one use per day, which is pathetic, but having heard the horror stories of failed spell combat the player took it. Maneuver mastery seems to be the most versatile of the low level arcana and is the only one I currently think is worth taking, as it is a static bonus that doesn't require the expenditure of resources and does not have limited uses per day. Familiar could be worthwhile for roleplaying reasons or if someone really wants the alertness and skill focus aspects.</p>
<p>Current suggestions:</p>
<p>1) Combat casting is a feat tax for this class and one they must address. This feat should be included in the class in the same way that monks get Improved Unarmed Strike. Power attack and Arcane strike are also very feat tax-ish, but the class can function without them, where it absolutely breaks down without combat casting.</p>
<p>2) Spellstrike with touch spells rarely resolves when combined with spell combat due to the removal of touch AC from the touch based spell. Allowing touch based spells to resolve so long as the roll beats touch AC, and then adding the damage from weapon strike if the roll beats actual AC completely smooths magus damage output as far as our group is able to tell.</p>
<p>3) Spell combat's -4 penalty to melee is extremely debilitating. Spell combat should consider spells as a light weapon and begin with a -2 penalty to the attack rolls with the weapon in hand. Most combat based misses were very near misses, and this reduction puts magus attack rolls in line with two-weapon fighting rogues, and drives them to seek flanking positions to counter the penalty.</p>
<p>4) 3rd level arcana options are mostly terrible. Broad study is irrelevant to a pure magus. All of the metamagic options are terrible. Arcane Accuracy and Spell Shield exacerbate the magus's extremely limited casting due to bard progression. Concentrate is bad. Familiar and Maneuver Mastery appear useful on paper, but I haven't been able to test them. Adding a Combat Casting arcana in the same vein as the rogue's "Finesse Rogue" talent can solve the primary issue of the feat tax on this class and give a viable option for a 3rd level arcana. I have posted most of my suggestions for solutions to the Arcana issues in the Stickied arcana thread.</p>GM Perspective: Council of Thieves: The Sixfold Trial
Party: Dwarf Inquisitor 4 (Asmodean worshipper, Fire domain), Human Wizard 4 (Generalist), Halfling Cleric 4 (Irori, Knowledge/Rune Domains), Human Magus 4 (Converted from Fighter 1 / Wizard 3)
One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)
He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword. I'm granting him...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T14:00:56ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Spell CombatResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbed?Spell-Combat#142010-09-26T12:51:28Z2010-09-26T12:51:28Z<p>Spell combat simply needs to go from -4/-2 to -2/-2. Most of the misses I'm seeing when GMing are very slight misses. Make it 0/-2 at 8th, and 0/0 at 14th.</p>
<p>Basically I think the concentration penalty is fine where it is. I'm not seeing the level 4 magus in my game having any problem making his concentration checks with a +3 int modifier. It's attacks that are suffering. You can intentionally cast down a couple levels so that the concentration DC's go down. You cannot lower the enemy's ac very easily. The magus is missing a significant number of his attacks right now. -4 is just too much penalty on a character who already is on 3/4 BAB.</p>Spell combat simply needs to go from -4/-2 to -2/-2. Most of the misses I'm seeing when GMing are very slight misses. Make it 0/-2 at 8th, and 0/0 at 14th.
Basically I think the concentration penalty is fine where it is. I'm not seeing the level 4 magus in my game having any problem making his concentration checks with a +3 int modifier. It's attacks that are suffering. You can intentionally cast down a couple levels so that the concentration DC's go down. You cannot lower the enemy's ac...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T12:51:28ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: LIVE! From Maine! It's Saturday Night (playtest)Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbqc?LIVE-From-Maine-Its-Saturday-Night#42010-09-26T11:15:25Z2010-09-26T11:15:25Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Hexcaliber wrote:</div><blockquote>Facts: My attacks missed often, but my concentrations were at 100%. I did make poor spell choices for my list, but I also didn't know what I'd be facing at the start of the game day. Acid Arrow is great against casters and Magic Missile is good at distance. If I had the ability to convert spells into say, Shocking Grasp I would've done so almost every time. If I had medium armor then the shield spell would've been more than enough. With a low AC I felt encouraged to buff up, and it was unnecessary. </blockquote><p>This is exactly what I've been seeing with the magus I'm GMing for as well. Smart play can completely mitigate the concentration problem. There is nothing that can be done about the -4 to attacks with spell combat, as modifying opponent AC is rather difficult as a magus.
<p>My suggestions from the GM side are twofold:</p>
<p>First, reduce the melee attack penalty of spell combat to -2 as if the spell were a light off hand weapon during two-weapon fighting. Perhaps only for touch range spells.</p>
<p>Second, I've temporarily houseruled spellstrike and it's done <b>absolute wonders</b> for the flow of play for the magus. When spellstriking, I allow any hit that breaks touch ac to resolve the touch portion of the attack. This seems to normalize damage output to just under what I typically expect from a fighter on most rounds. Generally, the magus either succeeds on his concentration check but grazes touch ac with his sword, or fails concentration and lands his melee attack. Sometimes both will land, sometimes both will fail, but these are rare. Additionally, every once in a while the sword will crit while delivering a shocking grasp and everyone at the table will all gather round with baited breath to see how horribly the target is going to get liquified.</p>
<p>All in all, I think the class is spot on concept, and the math just needs tweaking along with some small changes. </p>
<p>I don't think the arcana system needs to change. Right now it is simple and functions much like the beautiful rogue talent system. Magus does not need a more complex bookkeeping system in addition to being a prepared spellcaster.</p>
<p>The top end ability is mathematically irrelevant though, which should be addressed before release.</p>Hexcaliber wrote:Facts: My attacks missed often, but my concentrations were at 100%. I did make poor spell choices for my list, but I also didn't know what I'd be facing at the start of the game day. Acid Arrow is great against casters and Magic Missile is good at distance. If I had the ability to convert spells into say, Shocking Grasp I would've done so almost every time. If I had medium armor then the shield spell would've been more than enough. With a low AC I felt encouraged to buff up,...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T11:15:25ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Purpose of MagusResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbje?Purpose-of-Magus#132010-09-26T11:03:57Z2010-09-26T11:03:57Z<p>I think the intent is to give access to an eldritch knight style of character from level 1 all the way through to level 20 without forcing a multiclass.</p>
<p>The class is certainly built for it, but right now the numbers don't work out very well. Spell combat needs its melee penalty reduced and spellstrike needs to allow touch spells to deliver even if it only hits touch AC with the weapon attack.</p>I think the intent is to give access to an eldritch knight style of character from level 1 all the way through to level 20 without forcing a multiclass.
The class is certainly built for it, but right now the numbers don't work out very well. Spell combat needs its melee penalty reduced and spellstrike needs to allow touch spells to deliver even if it only hits touch AC with the weapon attack.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T11:03:57ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Magus Arcana IdeasResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lask&page=4?Magus-Arcana-Ideas#1762010-09-26T10:58:31Z2010-09-26T10:58:31Z<p>One new option, and some ideas on fixing some of the current ones:</p>
<p><b><span class=messageboard-bigger>Combat Concentration</span></b>
<br />
Grants the magus Combat Casting as a bonus feat. </p>
<p>This is an analogue of the rogue talent "Finesse Rogue". It would delay effective spell combat by one level in exchange for a significant reduction in the feat taxes upon a level 1 magus, opening Arcane strike to all magi at level 1, rather than only to human magi.</p>
<p>Suggested modifications to current arcana:</p>
<p><b><span class=messageboard-bigger>Arcane Accuracy</span></b>
<br />
The magus may sacrifice a spell as a free action to gain its intelligence modifier as a bonus to attack rolls for rounds equal to the level of the spell sacrificed. Attacks made while this effect is active are considered magical. Sacrificing cantrips in this way has no effect.</p>
<p><b><span class=messageboard-bigger>Spell Shield</span></b>
<br />
The magus may sacrifice a spell as a immediate, free action to grant himself a shield bonus to AC equal to his intelligence modifier for a number of rounds equal to the level of the spell sacrificed. Sacrificing cantrips in this way has no effect.</p>
<p>These changes to Arcane Accuracy and spell shield allow them to perform their function without severely draining low level magi. They also give higher level magi a use for their lower level spells. Chaining the bonus to intelligence modifier alleviates the multi-ability-score dependancy of the class slightly by focusing on intelligence and making extremely high strength scores less necessary. Free action use also allows these abilities to see use in conjunction with arcane strike, where they otherwise would become a "One or the other" problem.</p>
<p><b><span class=messageboard-bigger>Concentrate</span></b>
<br />
The magus automatically rerolls all failed concentration checks. A magus must be at least level 12 to select this arcana.</p>
<p>Concentrate does not alleviate the early level concentration problem at all with a single use per day. I think it'd be much better as a slippery mind analogue at level 12.</p>
<p><b><span class=messageboard-bigger>Silent Magic, Still Magic, Quickened Magic, Maximized Magic, Empowered Magic</span></b>
<br />
Increase the number of uses per day for these arcana to once per day plus an additional use per day for every three magus levels above the minimum level the arcana is available for selection.</p>
<p>These arcana are terrible currently because they can only be used once per session. In kingmaker that might work well, in games like council of thieves it would put the magus into a 15 minute adventuring day. With this modification, a level 20 magus can spontaneously still/silent 6 spells per day, empower 5 spells per day, Maximize 3 spells per day, and quicken 2 spells per day. These do not seem out of line power wise. (In fact... They seem like really good ways for the metamagic system to work <b>in general</b>.)</p>One new option, and some ideas on fixing some of the current ones:
Combat Concentration
Grants the magus Combat Casting as a bonus feat.
This is an analogue of the rogue talent "Finesse Rogue". It would delay effective spell combat by one level in exchange for a significant reduction in the feat taxes upon a level 1 magus, opening Arcane strike to all magi at level 1, rather than only to human magi.
Suggested modifications to current arcana:
Arcane Accuracy
The magus may sacrifice a spell...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T10:58:31ZRe: Forums: Round 1: Magus: Flurry of miscasts, or, being bad at two things is not as good as being good at oneResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2lbh8?Flurry-of-miscasts-or-being-bad-at-two-things#212010-09-26T10:16:06Z2010-09-26T10:16:06Z<p>One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)</p>
<p>He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword (I'm granting him the proficiency since he had been using a greatsword until this point. In the end it's an effective +1 damage from the longsword a magus defaults to proficiency in. This should not effect attack/casting rolls as compared to say, a longsword.)</p>
<p>Character was actually rolled, so his stats are admittedly higher than most. The relevant ones being an 18 strength and a 15 (possibly 16 after leveling to 4) intelligence.</p>
<p>I was surprised by how effective spell combat was on the casting side, but initially very unhappy with the performance of the melee side.</p>
<p>The player is not a new player, however, and knows he could lose a spell or two during combat. Through more or less the entire Asmodean Knot the player lost very few (possibly none?) spells to defensively casting. However, he consciously chose to use only 1st level spells during defensive casting periods, to minimize the chance of failure. As a GM, I find this in line with what I expect from this class. The mechanics currently encourage you to only use spell combat with lower level spells such as shocking grasp.</p>
<p>However, the -4 penalty to melee attacks definitely cramped the melee side of the character. At several points in the knot the character would cast a shocking grasp, channel through the weapon, hit touch AC but miss actual AC. Spellstrike is very clear that this would not trigger the resolution of the touch spell. I quickly came to the conclusion that this is a primary problem with the class.</p>
<p>I instituted a house rule shortly afterward that allowed the magus player to connect with a touch spell provided an attack cleared the target's touch AC. If the attack does not also clear the target's actual AC, the weapon portion of the damage does not resolve. <b>This improved the flow of play significantly, normalizing the damage dealt to opponents, while allowing for fairly impressive "Spellstrike soft criticals" with some significant damage output.</b> Both the player and I agreed that this improved the feel of the class significantly.</p>
<p>As far as flow of play, the one handed/open hand combat works extremely well when the player knows to shift to a two handed stance with power attack and has the strength to back it up on the damage front. Arcane bond significantly assists with relevant damage output at level four, as well. The ability to slap keen onto a weapon that is typically toting a touch spell around is downright terrifying. Power attacking, arcane striking, two handed shocking grasp imbued bastard sword critical hits <b>end combats</b>.</p>
<p>The player expressed a fairly low opinion of the level 3 arcana choices, which I echo. The low level Magus does not have enough spell slots to use the arcane accuracy or spell shield arcana. Pretty much ever. Both of these arcana are awful and were awful when we saw their precursors in 3.5 in the form of feats. Silent and still magic do not have scaling uses per day which make them unattractive compared to the rogue talents and rage powers these seem intended to match. Broad study only appears relevant to characters that are either ridiculous or completely useless. (Casters do not multiclass well. Never have in 3.x and never will.) Concentrate is one use per day, which is pathetic, but having heard the horror stories of failed spell combat the player took it. Maneuver mastery seems to be the most versatile of the low level arcana and is the only one I currently think is worth taking, as it is a static bonus that doesn't require the expenditure of resources and does not have limited uses per day. Familiar could be worthwhile for roleplaying reasons or if someone really wants the alertness and skill focus aspects.</p>
<p>Current suggestions:</p>
<p>1) Combat casting is a feat tax for this class and one they must address. This feat should be included in the class in the same way that monks get Improved Unarmed Strike. Power attack and Arcane strike are also very feat tax-ish, but the class can function without them, where it absolutely breaks down without combat casting.</p>
<p>2) Spellstrike with touch spells rarely resolves when combined with spell combat due to the removal of touch AC from the touch based spell. Allowing touch based spells to resolve so long as the roll beats touch AC, and then adding the damage from weapon strike if the roll beats actual AC completely smooths magus damage output as far as our group is able to tell.</p>
<p>3) Spell combat's -4 penalty to melee is extremely debilitating. Spell combat should consider spells as a light weapon and begin with a -2 penalty to the attack rolls with the weapon in hand. Most combat based misses were very near misses, and this reduction puts magus attack rolls in line with two-weapon fighting rogues, and drives them to seek flanking positions to counter the penalty.</p>
<p>4) 3rd level arcana options are mostly terrible. Broad study is irrelevant to a pure magus. All of the metamagic options are terrible. Arcane Accuracy and Spell Shield exacerbate the magus's extremely limited casting due to bard progression. Concentrate is bad. Familiar and Maneuver Mastery appear useful on paper, but I haven't been able to test them. Adding a Combat Casting arcana in the same vein as the rogue's "Finesse Rogue" talent can solve the primary issue of the feat tax on this class and give a viable option for a 3rd level arcana. I will address the issues with arcana in general in another thread.</p>One of my Council of Thieves players has converted his Fighter/Mage into a magus at level 4. He took Combat Casting, Arcane Strike, and Power Attack. (Human, 1st, and 3rd level feats)
He's currently wielding a +1 Bastard sword (I'm granting him the proficiency since he had been using a greatsword until this point. In the end it's an effective +1 damage from the longsword a magus defaults to proficiency in. This should not effect attack/casting rolls as compared to say, a longsword.)
...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-26T10:16:06ZRe: Forums: Campaign Journals: Yasha's AD&D GreyhawkResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ky3b&page=2?Yashas-ADD-Greyhawk#882010-09-12T02:16:22Z2010-09-12T02:16:22Z<p>Ah well that's too bad. Hope everything calms down for you man.</p>
<p>If we're not doing AoW tomorrow it would be good for me to know. I have friends in town and I would probably duck out and spend time with them. I should be cutting back on my gaming regardless, as I'm simply stretched far too thin at the moment between 3 campaigns, PFS, and the podcast productions.</p>Ah well that's too bad. Hope everything calms down for you man.
If we're not doing AoW tomorrow it would be good for me to know. I have friends in town and I would probably duck out and spend time with them. I should be cutting back on my gaming regardless, as I'm simply stretched far too thin at the moment between 3 campaigns, PFS, and the podcast productions.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-09-12T02:16:22ZRe: Forums: Campaign Journals: Yasha's AD&D GreyhawkArkady Leonov (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ky3b&page=2?Yashas-ADD-Greyhawk#712010-08-16T17:48:02Z2010-08-16T17:48:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Yasha wrote:</div><blockquote>For Arkady's requisitions: •• spoiler omitted •• </blockquote><p>(If it's alright, Arkady would have asked only for what he thought the chapel was willing to give. I thought the garrison would have more supplies.)Yasha wrote:For Arkady's requisitions: ** spoiler omitted **
(If it's alright, Arkady would have asked only for what he thought the chapel was willing to give. I thought the garrison would have more supplies.)Arkady Leonov (alias of Quelian)2010-08-16T17:48:02ZRe: Forums: Campaign Journals: Yasha's AD&D GreyhawkArkady Leonov (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ky3b&page=2?Yashas-ADD-Greyhawk#692010-08-16T06:35:08Z2010-08-16T06:33:09Z<p>Case File: Trent Investigation</p>
<p>Field Report Day 1 Trent Investigation</p>
<p>Arkady Leonov, Specialist Chaplain First Class Order of Heironeous</p>
<p>Marris led to Whispering Cairn entrance. No sources of light detected upon entry. Short exploration into Cairn led to discovery of Curunir and other civilian adventurers.</p>
<p>Initial encounter with civilian adventuring band reveals extreme paranoia and inability to trust one another let alone peaceful military official. Approached and announced self. Small brush with wolves appears dealt serious wounds to assembled civilians. Performed basic Chaplain-level field treatment. </p>
<p>Explained dispatch order to observe and assist as necessary. Civilian assembly understandably skeptical, but reticence quickly became annoying. Young lad Atreus questioned about Ebon Triad. Formal request for Chapel file on Atreus and Ebon Triad filed alongside report.</p>
<p>Curunir claims membership with Black Arrow regiment. Respectable roots, but Curunir himself very cautious. Too many conspiracy tales as child, perhaps. Believed me sent for purpose of harm.</p>
<p>Old man named Dalrack seems to drain own vitality to boost others. Interesting talent, but also dangerously close to dark magics. Wizardly talents are obvious, but actual spellcasting not yet observed.</p>
<p>Halfling civilian named Barl appears thankful to have clerical support in exploration of Cairn. Irreverent to fault but otherwise decent combatant.</p>
<p>Morwel exhibits extreme oddities in behavior. Claims sight beyond standard ranges and lacks proper respect for fire. Elf also shows heavily manipulative nature, possible artifact of upbringing in Fey kingdoms.</p>
<p>Room which civilians occupied enclosed mural of following room. Various lanterns appear lit within painting. Only green lantern in room lit with magical torch. Investigation of yellow lantern triggered summoning of so-called "Deathbug". Deserved name, as poison particularly virulent. Thankfully, poison reversed upon return to chapel. </p>
<p>Additionally, sarcophagus found in chamber turns to each lantern. When pointed at green lit lantern, hole in floor opened and monstrous vermin attacked. Swarm of Acid Beetles nearly kill young Atreus, but quick thinking resulted in improvised flint and steel maneuver with stone floor and shield rim to light oil and burn most of remaining insects away. Dalrack finished off remaining beetles with torch.</p>
<p>Green lantern now hangs over 60ft deep hole to lower level. Investigation resumes on morrow, however group needs reprieve to restore magical energies and the like, and Cairn clearly constitutes greater than anticipated threat, requiring special requisition of equipment from Chapel armory. Requisition requests attached.</p>
<p>Formal Requisition Request:</p>
<p>Chapel File Direct Access or Copy Requested:
<br />
Atreus
<br />
Morwel
<br />
Dalrack
<br />
Barl Burlyfoot
<br />
Curunir "Black Arrow"
<br />
Ebon Triad</p>
<p>Armory Requisition Request:
<br />
20 flasks oil, with fuses (2 GP)
<br />
5 flasks acid (50 GP)
<br />
Grappling hook (1 GP)
<br />
Silk rope (10 GP)
<br />
3 Antitoxin vials (150 GP)</p>
<p>Minor healing potions
<br />
Potions or scrolls for countering, delaying, or repairing effects of poison.</p>
<p>Tools for restoration of abandoned structure near Cairn to use as temporary base of operations for expedition into Cairn.</p>
<p>Authorization requested for advance loadout necessary for completion of mission. Authorization given to hold value of requested items against future combat pay.</p>Case File: Trent Investigation
Field Report Day 1 Trent Investigation
Arkady Leonov, Specialist Chaplain First Class Order of Heironeous
Marris led to Whispering Cairn entrance. No sources of light detected upon entry. Short exploration into Cairn led to discovery of Curunir and other civilian adventurers.
Initial encounter with civilian adventuring band reveals extreme paranoia and inability to trust one another let alone peaceful military official. Approached and announced self. Small...Arkady Leonov (alias of Quelian)2010-08-16T06:33:09ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The Cheater of Mystra in the APGResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3z1&page=6?The-Cheater-of-Mystra-in-the-APG#2932010-08-12T16:39:07Z2010-08-12T16:39:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">A Man In Black wrote:</div><blockquote><p> You don't need this technicality. Blind or being attacked by someone you can't see is flatfooted.</p>
<p>That said, good catch. Sleet Storm is one of my favorite spells, I should have thought of that! </blockquote><p>Actually you do, because the blinded and invisible conditions are the things that give flat-footed status, NOT total concealement.
<p>The only thing sleet storm gives is total concealment. The enemy isn't technically blinded, nor is the creature attacking invisible.</p>
<p>That said, the ice is going to get you flat-footed regardless unless you have a fly speed.</p>A Man In Black wrote:You don't need this technicality. Blind or being attacked by someone you can't see is flatfooted.
That said, good catch. Sleet Storm is one of my favorite spells, I should have thought of that!
Actually you do, because the blinded and invisible conditions are the things that give flat-footed status, NOT total concealement. The only thing sleet storm gives is total concealment. The enemy isn't technically blinded, nor is the creature attacking invisible.
That said, the...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-12T16:39:07ZRe: Forums: Lost Omens Products: Paizo Blog: One Last HoorahResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lbdb?One-Last-Hoorah#132010-08-11T18:16:04Z2010-08-11T18:16:04Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Sara Marie wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Hugo Solis wrote:</div><blockquote> I hope Crystal is ok... </blockquote>Crystal is fine. She re-spawned at the last save point :) </blockquote><p>She didn't prepare dimension door this morning, huh?
<p>Clearly she needs more wizard levels.</p>Sara Marie wrote:Hugo Solis wrote: I hope Crystal is ok...
Crystal is fine. She re-spawned at the last save point :) She didn't prepare dimension door this morning, huh? Clearly she needs more wizard levels.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-11T18:16:04ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The Cheater of Mystra in the APGResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3z1&page=6?The-Cheater-of-Mystra-in-the-APG#2872010-08-10T17:28:20Z2010-08-10T17:27:29Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">james maissen wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Caineach wrote:</div><blockquote><br />
<br />
Honestly, none of those spells seem too strong at all. Silence, like AMF, does not affect the person. It affects the sound they create, and so this basicly does nothing. Its not a spell that prevents someone from hearing. Its a spell that prevents the sonic waves from moving. You can make someone immune. It doesn't mean their sound is immune. Exactly the same as AMF with spells. </blockquote><p>I would say wrong on both counts.
<p>A PC in a silence area cannot cast. A PC immune to the silence can cast.</p>
<p>A party of PCs traveling in a selective silence is far too strong for a 3rd level spell.</p>
<p>And selective AMF is just beyond broken for any level of spell. </p>
<p>-James </blockquote><p>You guys aren't even trying to break this. Consider the implications of selective sleet storm:
<p>40 radius, 20 ft tall cylinder.</p>
<p>Within this cylinder, all creatures lose all sight (Including darkvision).</p>
<p>They are also balancing on the icy floor at a DC 10 acrobatics check. Failing by 5 or more knocks them prone. Unlike grease, they don't get a reflex save.</p>
<p>And since they're actively balancing, they are denied their dexterity modifiers. Unlike grease, the spell does not include the wording that removes the flat-footed modifier when standing still.</p>
<p>The best part? No saving throw, No spell resistance. This happens for rounds/level.</p>
<p>But you have a lesser selective metamagic rod on you, so four of your party members are immune to these effects.</p>
<p>So at level 5/6 you can easily grant total concealment to your allies and make all enemies flat-footed and require them to make acrobatics checks if they take damage with no adverse effects for up to four members of your party. All for the price of 3,000 GP.</p>
<p>Granted, this is a pure RAW interperetation. (Sleet storm is an Area spell, not a target/effect, it's actually an Area.) I'd never allow this to happen in my own house games... but as of right now this is a legal pathfinder society combination and quite easy to obtain.</p>james maissen wrote:Caineach wrote:
Honestly, none of those spells seem too strong at all. Silence, like AMF, does not affect the person. It affects the sound they create, and so this basicly does nothing. Its not a spell that prevents someone from hearing. Its a spell that prevents the sonic waves from moving. You can make someone immune. It doesn't mean their sound is immune. Exactly the same as AMF with spells.
I would say wrong on both counts. A PC in a silence area cannot cast. A PC...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-10T17:27:29ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: APG Rules QuestionsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3fj&page=3?APG-Rules-Questions#1042010-08-09T12:37:52Z2010-08-09T12:37:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tikael wrote:</div><blockquote><p> On the selective spell / antimagic field subject... one interpretation is that the protection from the spell only applies to your allies, not the equipment they carry or spells active on them. So they themselves would be immune to the effects but none of their equipment and spells would be. If anything I would interpret this that they could still cast spells on themselves that had a duration of instantaneous (such as a cure spell or a paladin's lay on hands).</p>
<p>The other interpretation I would find of this is that a metamagic feat is a type of magical effect, therefore negated by the antimagic field. Though it makes sense for a metamagic effect to be considered magical it is actually not stated.</p>
<p>I think how it <b>should</b> work is much like immunity to magic works, and effect of the spell that allows for spell resistance they are immune to. Spell effects that do not allow spell resistance are typically physical effects that are simply propelled or instigated by magic.</blockquote><p>My understanding is the antimagic field doesn't exist for the selected targets. (They're immune to the spell.)
<p>Gear is generally considered part of the character for any effect that doesn't otherwise specify, so their gear is also unaffected.</p>
<p>However, this also means that if you cast fireball into the antimagic field, the people "immune" to the antimagic field are all capable of taking damage from it. Antimagic field only suppresses, it does not dispel, nor does it block line of effect. The fireball is still there, it just didn't have any effect within the antimagic field. The antimagic field is not in effect on the selected targets so as long as they're withing the radius of the fireball from the selected point on the map, they're getting hit.</p>
<p>This also means that selectively immune targets within an antimagic field are legal targets for every single spell in the book.</p>
<p>Does selective antimagic make a lot of monsters less scary? Yeah. But if you throw a mage at that party they're going to find out it's not an end all solution.</p>Tikael wrote:On the selective spell / antimagic field subject... one interpretation is that the protection from the spell only applies to your allies, not the equipment they carry or spells active on them. So they themselves would be immune to the effects but none of their equipment and spells would be. If anything I would interpret this that they could still cast spells on themselves that had a duration of instantaneous (such as a cure spell or a paladin's lay on hands).
The other...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-09T12:37:52ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: APG Rules QuestionsResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3fj&page=2?APG-Rules-Questions#922010-08-08T17:57:44Z2010-08-08T17:56:50Z<p>If I selective spell a sleet storm, do the people I make immune become capable of seeing through the sleet storm?</p>
<p>Of the normal vision blocking spells, sleet storm is the only one that actually is an area based spell that I've seen so far.</p>
<p>As far as I can tell the wording should make them treat the spell as if it wasn't there. Which doesn't make a lot of sense but does make sleet storm a REALLY good target for a selective metamagic rod.</p>If I selective spell a sleet storm, do the people I make immune become capable of seeing through the sleet storm?
Of the normal vision blocking spells, sleet storm is the only one that actually is an area based spell that I've seen so far.
As far as I can tell the wording should make them treat the spell as if it wasn't there. Which doesn't make a lot of sense but does make sleet storm a REALLY good target for a selective metamagic rod.Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-08T17:56:50ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Paizo Blog: Red Mantis Assassin miniResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lbbm?Red-Mantis-Assassin-mini#22012-11-15T22:45:56Z2010-08-08T06:54:12Z<p>.... Shouldn't the sabre be pointed down?</p>.... Shouldn't the sabre be pointed down?Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-08T06:54:12ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The Cheater of Mystra in the APGResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3z1&page=2?The-Cheater-of-Mystra-in-the-APG#652010-08-03T00:45:28Z2010-08-03T00:45:28Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">A Man In Black wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Malikor wrote:</div><blockquote> You know, in reference to some of the spells that people are talking about, such as the varous cloud spells, the CLOUD is the effect, not what the cloud does to you. THe spell creates a cloud that blocks vision, it is the cloud not the effect of the spell that casues the lack of sight. So selecting somone to not be afected by any of the various cloud spells is useless.</blockquote><p>The FIREBALL is the effect, not what the fireball does to you. The spell creates a ball of fire that burns your flesh, so selecting someone to not be affected by the ball of fire is useless.
</p>
</blockquote><p>I'm going to have to agree with this reasoning. Splitting that hair is not something you really should do with the magic system, as that will unleash a pandora's box.
<p>However, cloud spells are emanations around a target and not an "Area of effect" spell. This prevents selective spell from working on them regardless.</p>A Man In Black wrote:Malikor wrote: You know, in reference to some of the spells that people are talking about, such as the varous cloud spells, the CLOUD is the effect, not what the cloud does to you. THe spell creates a cloud that blocks vision, it is the cloud not the effect of the spell that casues the lack of sight. So selecting somone to not be afected by any of the various cloud spells is useless.
The FIREBALL is the effect, not what the fireball does to you. The spell creates a ball...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-03T00:45:28ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The Cheater of Mystra in the APGResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l3z1&page=2?The-Cheater-of-Mystra-in-the-APG#622010-08-03T00:39:46Z2010-08-03T00:39:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Zurai wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Speaking in a strictly Rules-As-Written-(Or-Unwritten)-In-The-Core-Rulebook sense, correct. The <i>only</i> effect of an <i>antimagic field</i> is to suppress magic within its area of effect. It does absolutely nothing to prevent spellcasting within its area of effect, nor does it block line of effect, as long as the spell doesn't have to physically travel through the area of the field. A <i>magic missile</i> would wink out if it touched the field, but you could cast <i>hold person</i> on a target on the opposite side of a field from you just fine.</p>
<p>Or you could just stand in the middle of the field and cast <i>hold person</i> on someone outside the field, since it doesn't interfere with spellcasting.</p>
<p>Yes, that's entirely silly and obviously not Rules As Intended. It is, however, the way the rules are written (or more precisely, how the rules for antimagic in general don't exist, leaving us only the text of <i>antimagic field</i> to base those rules on). </blockquote><p>I'm not sure the magic missile would wink out. I imagine it'd pass through and do nothing to anything within the antimagic field, but once the effect leaves the antimagic field it is no longer surpressed.
<p>It specifically states the effects are not dispelled... so that nice green disintegration ray is surpressed within the antimagic field and doesn't interact with anything, but once it leaves the antimagic field it's back at full strength. (Which I like, as it lets you use the antimagic field to bypass cover.)</p>
<p>That also means that anyone who selectively AMF's themselves and their friends has put themselves in perfect fireball formation, as the fireball detonated inside the antimagic field only affects the people within radius that are unaffected by the antimagic field.</p>
<p>Send some mooks in to hold them down and let the artillery rain.</p>Zurai wrote:Speaking in a strictly Rules-As-Written-(Or-Unwritten)-In-The-Core-Rulebook sense, correct. The only effect of an antimagic field is to suppress magic within its area of effect. It does absolutely nothing to prevent spellcasting within its area of effect, nor does it block line of effect, as long as the spell doesn't have to physically travel through the area of the field. A magic missile would wink out if it touched the field, but you could cast hold person on a target on the...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-08-03T00:39:45ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Vital Strike+Ride by Attack+Spirited ChargeResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l1yx?Vital-StrikeRide-by-AttackSpirited-Charge#112010-07-19T04:08:24Z2010-07-19T04:08:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Name Violation wrote:</div><blockquote><p> http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/officalAnswers&page=4#178</p>
<p>like that?</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote></p>
<p>The game works fine either way. The rules as I see them state that Spring Attack and Vital Strike don't work together, but letting them work together is probably better for the game.</p>
<p>For now, though, the original ruling stands. (But I'll certainly be letting Spring Attack and Vital Strike work together in my personal games!) </blockquote><p>so officially spring attack and Vital strike dont work together, but its not "the most borke thing evar" to let them work.
<p>as for charging, as long as the extra damage isn't getting multiplied(since its above and beyond a weapons normal damage) its not the most broken tactic either. But RAW doesn't let it work </blockquote><p>Actually, just below that quote he corrects himself:
<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote><p>#1: You win the internet for today!</p>
<p>#2:Because it's a good tactic. And because when I'm developing an adventure, I go with my gut more often than a microexaminaiton of every single rule... because that's the only way to get APs out on a monthly schedule. And because, as I've mentioned above, letting Spring Attack and Vital Strike work together is cool.</p>
<p>Since you found precedence where the two feats work together in print, <b>LET THAT BE THE LAW!</b></p>
<p>Vital Strike and Spring Attack were made to be together, after all. :-)</blockquote><p>Emphasis mine. You only quoted half his post, where he was correcting himself.Name Violation wrote:http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/officalAnswers&page=4#178
like that?
James Jacobs wrote:The game works fine either way. The rules as I see them state that Spring Attack and Vital Strike don't work together, but letting them work together is probably better for the game.
For now, though, the original ruling stands. (But I'll certainly be letting Spring Attack and Vital Strike work together in my personal games!)
so...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-07-19T04:08:24ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Does Paizo have official rules lawyers?Research (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0zw?Does-Paizo-have-official-rules-lawyers#62010-07-11T03:37:45Z2010-07-11T03:35:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">polish-jack wrote:</div><blockquote>I need to know what interpretation is correct and the only way the GM will be satisfied with any interpretation is if it comes from an official source.</blockquote><p>Have you tried the "My interpretation is you're a jerk" and walking "official response"?
<p>Don't take shadowdancer with this GM if you intend to play under this DM. Clearly he doesn't like the class. </p>
<p>Especially if he's making an argument based on being an English major. Hell, if anyone made that kind of argument to me as a DM I would stand up, pack up my stuff, and leave the game. Sometimes DMs need to be reminded that the players can always stop playing.</p>
<p>Also, you might consider responding with "That word, I don't think it means what you think it means...."</p>polish-jack wrote:I need to know what interpretation is correct and the only way the GM will be satisfied with any interpretation is if it comes from an official source.
Have you tried the "My interpretation is you're a jerk" and walking "official response"? Don't take shadowdancer with this GM if you intend to play under this DM. Clearly he doesn't like the class.
Especially if he's making an argument based on being an English major. Hell, if anyone made that kind of argument to me as a DM...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-07-11T03:35:47ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic: Heighten SpellResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sg?Metamagic-Heighten-Spell#102010-07-10T08:45:37Z2010-07-10T08:45:36Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Morgen wrote:</div><blockquote> Well save DC's are based off of your casting trait. Maybe you'd enjoy the game more if you raised that up. </blockquote><p>I'd enjoy the game more if the save DC system were consistent, in the same way that BAB is consistent. The save DC system is the only part of the game that wildly fluctuates and whenever someone brings up that it basically can't pace the save bonus progressions effectively people say "raise your ability scores". Magic items should not patch a flawed mathematical system. Fix the inherent problems in the math.Morgen wrote:Well save DC's are based off of your casting trait. Maybe you'd enjoy the game more if you raised that up.
I'd enjoy the game more if the save DC system were consistent, in the same way that BAB is consistent. The save DC system is the only part of the game that wildly fluctuates and whenever someone brings up that it basically can't pace the save bonus progressions effectively people say "raise your ability scores". Magic items should not patch a flawed mathematical system. Fix...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-07-10T08:45:36ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic StackingResearch (alias of Quelian)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sf?Metamagic-Stacking#132013-01-07T09:44:08Z2010-07-10T08:26:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Gilfalas wrote:</div><blockquote> Wouldn't then, by that same logic, mean that you could get free Empower on a Quickened spell? I mean your paying 4 levels for quicken and Empower is only three levels of increase. Why not piggy back?</blockquote><p>No. Empower and quicken specifically state a spell takes up a spell slot of 2 or 4 higher levels respectively. A heightened spell does not specify that one must actually increase the spell level to make a heightened spell. It simply states that for all intents and purposes the spell is treated as its <b>heightened level</b>. This is an important distinction. The other metamagic feats all use the term <b>Levels higher than actual level</b>.
<p>Here we have competing definitions of heightened level.</p>
<p>1)The heightened level is equivalent to 1 effective level increment for each level raised through use of Heighten spell.</p>
<p>2)The spell's heightened level is the resulting level after all modifiers from metamagic or any similar effect is applied, regardless of order.</p>
<p>Option 1 leaves heighten spell rather useless when interacting with the metamagic feat system as a whole. Option 2 basically chains the spell save DC to the spell slot used, rather than the spell itself. It removes the whole concept of increasing the spell level incrementally from heighten spell ONLY, because heighten spell never actually STATES that you must increase the spell level. As written, you could put a "Heightened" acid splash into a 0 level spell slot and you would have no mechanical change.</p>
<p>This opens up an incredibly complex amount of choices to casters, who otherwise have little to no character customization options in the feats department that drastically change how the character plays. It is equivalent in effect on gameplay to Rapid Shot, Two-Weapon fighting, or Vital strike, as it opens up a slew of character customization options to arcane casters who effectively have little to no other way to differentiate themselves mechanically from Another_Wizard_01 besides a couple of "+1" feats in spell focus and spell penetration. The other metamagic feats attempt to accomplish variety in spellcasting, but fail. The lower DCs really make the use of metamagic feats (aside from quicken spell) a typically bad idea.</p>
<p>Even if the developers don't intend for heighten spell to be interpreted in the way option 2 presents, a feat that allows this activity <b>should exist</b>. It fixes the entirely broken metamagic system. Two-weapon fighting suffers similar mechanical penalties until the two-weapon fighting feat is taken. It <b>almost</b> fixes the extremely shaky save DC system. It makes a caster's remaining spell slots in a day consistently describe how many DC X, Y, and Z spells they can still cast before resting. That consistency is key. It allows DMs to more accurately gauge the status of the party's firepower in respect to upcoming encounters. That very much makes the DM's job during play. The consistent DCs also make the player's calculations during their action easier. In general, it speeds up combat by removing a large chunk of complex math from the metamagic calculation, and faster combat is good.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote><b>Heighten spell is a metamagic that works pretty much exactly like any other metamagic feat.</b> You get a benefit for expending the spell with a spell slot cost increase. The only differences between Heighten and the others is that a heightened spell becomes the level you increase it to for all purposes (which is the whole point of heighten spell) and that the spell slot cost increase is <i>a variable value not static</i> on Heighten.</blockquote><p>Well, the bolded part is wrong. It works completely differently from every other metamagic feat. There is no specification anywhere in the feat of a +1 level for a +1 heightened level. You can certainly argue it's implied, but it's never stated. <b>Every other metamagic feat uses a separate paragraph to specifically state the exact manner in which that feat interacts with spell levels.</b> I think it makes just as much logical sense that the heightened level be the level of the spell slot that the spell currently occupies regardless of other modifiers. This should be a clarification errata regardless of which interpretation the devs intended. This interpretation is far more elegant and generates a much simpler rule than the common interpretation. If the devs want to clarify this all they need do is errata in the definition of "heightened level" as either option 1 or option 2. (Or an option 3 I'm not seeing, etc.) I hope that before they do so they play a little with both definitions, and more importantly design encounters under both definitions.
<p>While the second definition is quite a bit more powerful, in my opinion it flat out <b>plays better</b>. Which as far as I'm concerned makes it how I'm going to play it from now on when I'm GMing. If I need to do a little mechanical tweaking to account for it I'll address that as it comes up. </p>
<p>Assuming the second option is not intended, and we're petitioning for an elegant change in the way the system works, I present the following argument: This change doesn't really effect encounters under CR 10, and those are the bulk of the encounters in the Bestiary. Would it affect older modules and adventure content? Yes, but all it's going to do is give a 10-25% higher chance of an arcane caster to be effective in encounters when he has a high level spell slot with a low level customized spell prepared in that slot. They still have to have the spell slots at the appropriate level for the DC, and the real cost of metamagic feats has never been the reduced DC but the fact that you're burning a slot for an empowered fireball that could easily have become a cone of cold if you had spent that feat elsewhere. You're not giving a caster a higher number of super-high DC spells in a day, you're just making sure he always has the same number of high DC spells each day. Consistency makes it easier to gauge a party's ability to deal with challenging fights and makes encounter CR adjustment to fit player skill much less difficult. This strengthens the CR system as a whole, which is good for DMs.</p>
<p>More importantly, it normalizes expected DCs at a given character level. Metamagic without heighten spell makes DCs for a given expenditure of spell slot resources unpredictable. That means that a player who specializes in metamagical alteration of spells can have a drastically different (and almost always lower) amount of high DC spells remaining after a single encounter of an equal CR than a caster who simply uses no metamagic feats. Interpreting heighten spell in the suggested way makes a player's ability to judge their need to rest far less complicated. "How many spells of level X or higher do I have left? If I do not feel I have enough high level spells to affect an even challenge encounter I should rest and recuperate my spells." </p>
<p>A caster who is spending feats to customize their spellcasting should not be forced to penalize themselves for wanting to make their low level spells more interesting. This interpretation does not allow a spell to increase its DC beyond an equivalent level spell, so as far as the monster's concerned there is no difference in the odds to save between the 9th level spell slot used to power a meteor swarm and the 9th level spell slot holding an empowered maximized heightened fireball. The fireball might do slightly more average damage (I think it's something like 11 damage), but they just spent 3 feats to do that. Is that really all that bad for the game?</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote><p>Heighten a level 1 spell to 2 then the cost is one level.
</p>
Heighten a level 2 spell to 7 then the cost is 5 levels.</p>
<p>If you heighten any spell to 9th level you cannot add any othe metamagic to the spell. It is a 9th level spell and you don't have spell slots bigger than that in Pathfinder.</blockquote><p>This isn't actually the only correct answer. Again, this correct <b>only if</b> you're interpreting "heightened level" as option one. That may well be the intended definition. Option 2 is also currently a valid definition as it also presents a consistant and elegant solution. I also believe it simply makes for better play.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Adding on free metamagic slot expenditures would be double dipping and nowhere in D&D Of PfRPG is there any examople of spell level increase cost being usable for two feats at the same time. Using that logic that means that as long as you quicken a spell for 4 level increase you would get stilled and empower for free too if you have them.</blockquote><p>This is a misunderstanding of the interpretation that is being presented and I hope that I've cleared up the difference. All other metamagic feats explicitly describe how they alter the spell level of the spell. The heighten spell feat is extremely <b>vauge</b> about the way it effects spell level.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Bypassing level dependant defenses and increasing save targets are enough.</blockquote><p>In terms of this particular feat in a vacuum? Yes. In terms of system mechanics? No, it isn't. This isn't about whether heighten spell is good on its own. It is. The problem is the entirety of the other metamagic feats are <b>BAD</b> except for quicken spell and perhaps widen spell. Interpreting heighten spell in this way allows for a much smoother integration of the metamagic system into the casting system.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Frankly I to answer the quote I would need to know what levels your campaigns usually play at? Heighten can be frighteningly effective at higher levels. (15+) </blockquote><p>And the other metamagic feats can be frighteningly ineffective at higher levels. I have played casters at high levels (17+ into epic levels) in 3.5. You were lucky to get a saving throw to roll in your favor. Pathfinder has drastically reduced this problem because Mr. Bulmahn is rather good with his math, but IMO this is an incredible chance to overall normalize the interaction with the spellcasting system and make it far easier to design around in the future, before a second bestiary and the high level sections of another AP are published. This change basically means that all metamagic feats become equally effective on a spell whether it be a save based spell, a ranged touch, a melee touch, a no save spell, etc. It makes some very flavorful level 1 spells relevant at the end of the game.
<p>In my opinion, if this the devs explain that this is not the intended use of the feat, they should add a feat that <b>does</b> accomplish this in some book. It will increase the longevity of the spell DC system by a huge amount, because it will allow you to better predict caster fatigue when designing adventure paths, modules, etc.</p>Gilfalas wrote:Wouldn't then, by that same logic, mean that you could get free Empower on a Quickened spell? I mean your paying 4 levels for quicken and Empower is only three levels of increase. Why not piggy back?
No. Empower and quicken specifically state a spell takes up a spell slot of 2 or 4 higher levels respectively. A heightened spell does not specify that one must actually increase the spell level to make a heightened spell. It simply states that for all intents and purposes the...Research (alias of Quelian)2010-07-10T08:26:02ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic: Heighten SpellQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sg?Metamagic-Heighten-Spell#82010-07-09T18:59:46Z2010-07-09T18:59:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote> All things considered, however, when I play a mage, I almost never prepare a spell that allows a saving throw. Right now, my 8th level wizard has Black Tentacles. That's it, that's the only spell in my regular preparations that allows any kind of save at all. Extend Spell is my friend, but Maximize, Empower, and Heighten are all worthless to me as a player. </blockquote><p>And this is really the key here. I think this interpretation keeps the save system from entirely breaking down until 17th level or so. The save system is still inherently flawed, but this allows for a much easier time of predicting when and where that occurs and handling it appropriately as a DM.DM_Blake wrote:All things considered, however, when I play a mage, I almost never prepare a spell that allows a saving throw. Right now, my 8th level wizard has Black Tentacles. That's it, that's the only spell in my regular preparations that allows any kind of save at all. Extend Spell is my friend, but Maximize, Empower, and Heighten are all worthless to me as a player.
And this is really the key here. I think this interpretation keeps the save system from entirely breaking down until 17th...Quelian2010-07-09T18:59:20ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic: Heighten SpellQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sg?Metamagic-Heighten-Spell#62010-07-09T18:30:07Z2010-07-09T18:20:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kalyth wrote:</div><blockquote><p> This was always the way we have inturpreted Heighten Spell. If I maximize (+3 Lvls) a Fireball (3rd lvl) and have the Heighten spell feat then the DC of the fireball is set at its maximized level (6th). If you have to add spell levels solely to raise the DC, for instance to get the above result about (6th level fireball spell) you would have to use a 9th level slot, its not worth the feat or the higher level spellslot. </p>
<p>I have always understood Height to be like the Meta-Meta-Magic Feat. </blockquote><p>Yeah. I like how this seems like it should play.
<p>In practice, arcane casters have about 10-15 spells per day that can get DCs into the range where they're relevant vs equivalent level monsters. (their top 2 or 3 spell levels) Interpereting the feat in this manner allows a caster to slowly become more exhausted as the day progresses, by chaining the DC to the <i>spell slot level</i> instead of the spell level. This means players have a much more accurate prediction and a much more CONSISTENT prediction of just how much heavy firepower they have left and DM's can also make their own determinations on that front, helping prevent players feeling like they have to rest before they actually do and DM's from misjudging the resources left to the party and hitting them with an encounter during watch rotations because they think the party doesn't need to rest at the moment.</p>
<p>It also make sorcerer casting more flexible as you can use your feats to get the most out of your limited spell selection. A wizard can customize to the exact spell, but that maximized empowered heightened fireball really can macguyver into the meteor storm slot when you need it, freeing up vital high level spell slots as a sorceror for more interesting spells.</p>
<p>The only worry I have is if this might force some readjustment on mob saves. However, I think it makes the arcane caster saves far more predictable over the course of the day and as a DM allows you to better build encounters and be able to predict the outcomes of said encounters. The casters now have X chances to do DC 17 spells, Y chances for DC 16 spells, and so on.</p>
<p>It also allows, from a player perspective, far more customization of your own spells, which is a HUGE PROBLEM I have with the current casting system. Caster feats are <i>boring</i>. The ones that are interesting (metamagic feats) always seem mechanically debilitating to the point that while they're cool, they're ineffective. This allows low level spells that you would never otherwise see at high levels to see play above level 10. And I think that's better for the game overall. Does it require a bit of math adjustment on the DM's part? Maybe. But really is it all THAT big a deal? Nah. The sheer amount of cool stuff that can come of interpereting the feat this way far outweighs the damage it could do to the system in my mind.</p>
<p>What I might end up doing if saves got out of hand under this interpretation is mess with some of the DC boosting effects. Most of those effects are LAME anyway, as +1 feats are basically bad for the system. I probably wouldn't bother, but it's something I would leave open if it got out of hand.</p>Kalyth wrote:This was always the way we have inturpreted Heighten Spell. If I maximize (+3 Lvls) a Fireball (3rd lvl) and have the Heighten spell feat then the DC of the fireball is set at its maximized level (6th). If you have to add spell levels solely to raise the DC, for instance to get the above result about (6th level fireball spell) you would have to use a 9th level slot, its not worth the feat or the higher level spellslot.
I have always understood Height to be like the...Quelian2010-07-09T18:20:21ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic: Heighten SpellQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sg?Metamagic-Heighten-Spell#42010-07-09T17:40:49Z2010-07-09T17:40:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Morgen wrote:</div><blockquote><p> My high level sorcerer in 3.5 just assumed anyone would make the saves on his spells so he didn't care and enjoyed using metamagic. Couldn't start with a 20 charisma like the gray elf wizards started for intelligence so why bother? Best to focus on having a good time and being prepared for unusual situations. Metamagic helps really get a bang out of fireball or black tentacles so it was alright in the end.</p>
<p>Honestly your much more likely to have monsters fail their saving throws due to them being debuffed and forcing rerolls onto them then raising your save DC's like that. </blockquote><p>Yeah, but I think this interperetation makes more intuitive sense to someone who comes in without the baggage of 3.5 behind them.
<p>Wait, why is the archmage's grease spell just as easy to resist as the level 1 character's grease spell? Because he snapped his fingers to make it happen? Even though he burned the same amount of arcane power he would use for a spell that could freeze a small town?</p>Morgen wrote:My high level sorcerer in 3.5 just assumed anyone would make the saves on his spells so he didn't care and enjoyed using metamagic. Couldn't start with a 20 charisma like the gray elf wizards started for intelligence so why bother? Best to focus on having a good time and being prepared for unusual situations. Metamagic helps really get a bang out of fireball or black tentacles so it was alright in the end.
Honestly your much more likely to have monsters fail their saving throws...Quelian2010-07-09T17:40:49ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Metamagic: Heighten SpellQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l0sg?Metamagic-Heighten-Spell#22012-11-15T22:44:07Z2010-07-09T17:02:17Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">gbonehead wrote:</div><blockquote><p> So it's long been a complaint that spell DCs lag due to metamagic. Consider an Empowered, Maximized Fireball - the caster is burning an 8th-level slot for a base save DC of 13.</p>
<p>But what about Heighten Spell?</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">PFSRD wrote:</div><blockquote>A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level. <b>The heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level.</b></blockquote><p><b>Important:</b> Note that it does not say "increase the slot by the number of levels you increase the spell." It <i>does</i> say that the effective level is now the level you prepared it at.
<p>So if you now Heighten the <i>fireball of doom</i>, you've now got a base save DC of 18, at the same slot.</p>
<p>There's nothing in the RAW that says in what order you have to apply the metamagic - so I say apply Heighten last. It's not like it's game-breaking - it just means the save DCs for metamagic spells don't lag. </blockquote><p>This is in fact an interperetation I had not considered before and fixes many of my issues with the metamagic system in general.
<p>Towards the end of 3.5, if a metamagic feat was a +2 or higher level adjustment and it wasn't Quicken spell, it wasn't worth taking. You'd never land your saves.</p>gbonehead wrote:So it's long been a complaint that spell DCs lag due to metamagic. Consider an Empowered, Maximized Fireball - the caster is burning an 8th-level slot for a base save DC of 13.
But what about Heighten Spell?
PFSRD wrote:A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving...Quelian2010-07-09T17:02:17ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to take down a much higher CR enemy--suggestions?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l02d?How-to-take-down-a-much-higher-CR#82010-07-07T18:02:52Z2010-07-07T18:02:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Warforged Gardener wrote:</div><blockquote>With an AC that borders on untouchable and fighting skill that would likely drop any member of the party in two rounds, how does the group defeat a much more dangerous foe? </blockquote><p>I do not know the level of your party, so I am throwing out spells that are 3rd-5th level. If lower, attempt to replicate the effect with mundane alchemy etc. Remember, if you're preparing traps gold funds suddenly matter a whole lot!
<p>First rule of High CR monsters. Don't attack them, attack around them. Use conjuration effects, falling rocks, traps, any anything EXCEPT your own attacks. Keep him far far away from you and don't allow him to close the distance.</p>
<p>If indoors, collapse a cave onto him. If outdoors? Abuse fly and win the game. If he can fly, don't fight outside. Summon walls of ice/thorns/stone/iron/force and box him in. Stone is preferable because you can then stone shape the wall and just throw murder holes into it. You can also aquire some extremely EXTREMELY scary inhaled/contact poisons to make the trap brutal. Even if you can't get crazy poisons remember that as you apply more doses the save DC goes up and up.</p>
<p>You can also set the inside of the trap to do all kinds of ridiculous effects like the various cloud o' doom effects: Acid fog, incendiary cloud, ice storm, and the nefarious cloudkill. Your noncasters can stand at the ready to collapse ceilings, drop boiling oil, etc.</p>
<p>If you MUST enter combat, Ray of enfeeblement and ray of Exhaustion (twice if necessary to get him to fully exhausted) will kill any single foe's ability to do much of anything. When your strength score is under 5 it's REALLY hard to do damage. Power attack turns off if your strength drops lower than 13, Deadly Aim turns off if your dex drops under 13. All of the high Dex feats like two weapon fighting and the archery trees? They turn off too.</p>
<p>There's always enervation to throw flat -1d4 and 1d4x5 HP <i>drain</i> all around.</p>
<p>Remember, when dealing with anything that can probably cut you up faster than a salad shooter DO NOT ENGAGE. If the plan fails, run. Running is OK, and it is extremely difficult to outrun any party who really wants to get away. There's a reason Teleport is a standard action (if you have access to it).</p>Warforged Gardener wrote:With an AC that borders on untouchable and fighting skill that would likely drop any member of the party in two rounds, how does the group defeat a much more dangerous foe?
I do not know the level of your party, so I am throwing out spells that are 3rd-5th level. If lower, attempt to replicate the effect with mundane alchemy etc. Remember, if you're preparing traps gold funds suddenly matter a whole lot! First rule of High CR monsters. Don't attack them, attack...Quelian2010-07-07T18:02:52ZRe: Forums: Advice: Is sundering a mean trick to pull on player characters?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxnh&page=3?Is-sundering-a-mean-trick-to-pull-on-player#1392010-07-06T09:14:11Z2010-07-06T09:10:46Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><p> It's not just that. Sundering is weird. I don't mean mechanically (though it is). I mean the actual thought process behind it. Why on earth would a monster or, hell, even almost any normal fighter, try to sunder an item rather then just <i>murderize the guy using it?</i></p>
<p>"That man is trying to hit me with his sword. Rather then killing the man, I think I will attempt to kill his sword! Surely then he will feel so ashamed that the battle will immidiately end!" </blockquote><p>The thought process is more like:
<p>That man is hitting me with his sword. OH GOD IT'S GLOWING AND IT BUURRRRNSS OH GOD OWWWW.</p>
<p>STOP POKING ME <Bends sword in half>.</p>
<p>There, little man is now trying to punch me to death with his hands? Thanks, I needed a massage. Would you mind standing in front of my huge toothy maw so I can roast you before my midnight snack?</p>
<p>Intelligent critters using sunder makes sense.</p>
<p>The "broken" quality really allows for use of sunder without making the game fall apart. A broken sword is still a usable sword, it's just kind of bad at its job compared to a sword that still has an edge. Same with armor and other items. Sundering an item to the broken state often is fine, so long as the party has a mending spell around. You don't need to have exceedingly high caster levels to bring something back from the broken state. This is where you should stop if using the skill in moderation.</p>
<p><i>Destroying</i> an item is different. Bringing an item to zero and permanently destroying it is something best used to bring up an entirely new story arc, where people go off to fix (and in fact upgrade) their broken item. This should be done by major villains and NPCs you intend to use throughout your game who your players should want VENGEANCE on. You will make your Players HATE these enemies. You will make the fighter characters HATE these enemies in character. "YOU BROKE MY SWORD". This can be good for a game so long as you can effectively direct the hatred at the NPC, rather than at you as the GM.</p>ProfessorCirno wrote:It's not just that. Sundering is weird. I don't mean mechanically (though it is). I mean the actual thought process behind it. Why on earth would a monster or, hell, even almost any normal fighter, try to sunder an item rather then just murderize the guy using it?
"That man is trying to hit me with his sword. Rather then killing the man, I think I will attempt to kill his sword! Surely then he will feel so ashamed that the battle will immidiately end!"
The thought...Quelian2010-07-06T09:10:46ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Sly DrawQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kywg?Sly-Draw#62010-06-28T14:01:34Z2010-06-28T13:59:42Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Magicdealer wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Here are the mechanical benefits of the feat:</p>
<p>When you draw a light weapon, you may make a Sleight of Hand check instead of a Bluff check to feint in combat. Other feats and abilities that affect a feint still apply to your feint.</p>
<p>So, switch bluff for sleight of hand.</p>
<p>Thats.... about it.</p>
<p>Nothing there about it changing action types, so it doesn't. </blockquote><p>Fair enough. Fixes that problem. I do wish they'd have indicated a time frame where the sly draw switches the check. I suppose it should be directly after.Magicdealer wrote:Here are the mechanical benefits of the feat:
When you draw a light weapon, you may make a Sleight of Hand check instead of a Bluff check to feint in combat. Other feats and abilities that affect a feint still apply to your feint.
So, switch bluff for sleight of hand.
Thats.... about it.
Nothing there about it changing action types, so it doesn't.
Fair enough. Fixes that problem. I do wish they'd have indicated a time frame where the sly draw switches the check. I...Quelian2010-06-28T13:59:42ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Abusive Use Of Bard AbilityQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kyyb?Abusive-Use-Of-Bard-Ability#52010-06-28T13:56:41Z2010-06-28T13:56:37Z<p>First, its not free. He has a limited amount of those per day and they need to occur prior to incoming damage to do much.</p>
<p>I don't know if I would view this as a problem, but if it's really disrupting everyone else's gameplay by trivializing encounters the best solution would be to rule you can't "change" a performance without actually changing the type of performance you're playing. I don't see the raw specifically commenting on that aspect of the ability, and it's a perfectly reasonable interperetation in my mind.</p>First, its not free. He has a limited amount of those per day and they need to occur prior to incoming damage to do much.
I don't know if I would view this as a problem, but if it's really disrupting everyone else's gameplay by trivializing encounters the best solution would be to rule you can't "change" a performance without actually changing the type of performance you're playing. I don't see the raw specifically commenting on that aspect of the ability, and it's a perfectly reasonable...Quelian2010-06-28T13:56:37ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Are the Magic Users Good Enough?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kyxd?Are-the-Magic-Users-Good-Enough#132010-06-28T13:46:27Z2010-06-28T13:46:09Z<p>Indeed. It's less a problem of their power level and more that they just require a lot more context to plan actions. Casters are very much a thinker's class, and a well thought out caster can wreck things equal its CR with a little luck and preparation. Once your players wrap their heads around their spells they'll usually realize just how powerful spells are.</p>Indeed. It's less a problem of their power level and more that they just require a lot more context to plan actions. Casters are very much a thinker's class, and a well thought out caster can wreck things equal its CR with a little luck and preparation. Once your players wrap their heads around their spells they'll usually realize just how powerful spells are.Quelian2010-06-28T13:46:09ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Sly DrawQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kywg?Sly-Draw#42010-06-28T13:41:32Z2010-06-28T13:41:32Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Magus Black wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Depends:
</p>
Page 201 Pathfinder 'Player's Handbook'
<br />
"Feinting is a standard action."</p>
<p>If you have the 'Improved Feint' feat it becomes a 'move action'.</p>
<p>And certain prestige classes (non-core mostly) can even speed it up further.</p>
<p>So the answer is that it depends on whether or not the're trained in the art of feinting. </blockquote><p>The point being the feat as written indicates the feint check as part of drawing the weapon (a free action). Are you saying this is not a correct interperetation?Magus Black wrote:Depends:
Page 201 Pathfinder 'Player's Handbook'
"Feinting is a standard action."If you have the 'Improved Feint' feat it becomes a 'move action'.
And certain prestige classes (non-core mostly) can even speed it up further.
So the answer is that it depends on whether or not the're trained in the art of feinting.
The point being the feat as written indicates the feint check as part of drawing the weapon (a free action). Are you saying this is not a correct interperetation?Quelian2010-06-28T13:41:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Down with Gish threads... long live the Magus!Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kybe&page=6?Down-with-Gish-threads-long-live-the-Magus#2632010-06-28T13:36:55Z2010-06-28T13:34:44Z<p>I'm rather dissapointed in those saying that giving the magus a reason to leave and go EK is a bad idea. If a player is willing to dip into EK and deny themselves a capstone class ability and a caster level for the sake of an extra attack? More power to them.</p>
<p>I'm also very interested to see the meshing of the Magus and the Arcane archer. I really do like the Bard -> arcane archer builds and I think the magus could easily accomplish this type of build more effectively.</p>
<p>Giving the Magus 3/4 BAB makes mechanical sense. You now have a reason to class into the EK and specialize in beating things with sharp objects, or into the Arcane archer and specialize in shooting them with sharp objects. If you gave it full BAB you would completely marginalize the eldritch knight as a customization option for the class. Giving it full spellcasting progression effectively trades school specialization for 3/4 BAB and class features. I would make that trade in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>Narrowing the spell list too far pigeonholes the class into a single character concept. Its spell list should complement but otherwise angle away from the bard. If a bard is good at it a magus should avoid it, and vice versa. (Exceptions of course for primary utility spells such as detect magic, mage armor, and the like)</p>
<p>So what I want to see:</p>
<p>What I do see as a problem with 3/4 BAB is less in the numbers and more in the feat progression options. You're going to get stuck waiting until level 6 for great cleave and spring attack, and level 8 for greater combat maneuvers, lunge, improved two weapon, etc. Possibly level 7 or 9, respectively, if the class doesn't recieve ranger/monk/etc bonus feat progression. (Which I firmly believe it will need to work as a flexible class.)</p>
<p>I want to see levels in magus count as and stack with fighter levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats. I want to see the major combat trees appear on a 2,6,10,14,18 bonus feat progression, and allow them to ignore prerequisites for those bonus feats. An archery progression, a two weapon fighting progression, Weapon master progression (power attack into weapon specializations and the like), spellcasting progression, etc.</p>
<p>I want to see a feature similar to fighter weapon training that gives an overall +5 to attacks and damage but is unlinked to the type of weapon you're using. Let it stack with arcane strike. If you want to get really fancy, make it like a paladin's divine bond. Start it at 5th. This ensures it always falls on a level which is not a spell level, but doesn't give the magus the ability to break magic DR early on which would trivialize many low level encounters. It also hard caps the ridiculousness from this and magic weapons at +5 to attack with some crazy arcane effects to assist. Alternatively give them access to a familiar which expands their spells known in the same manner as the witch from the APG playtest along with a +3 to a relevant combat skill like acrobatics, sleight of hand, bluff, and such. Call it Bond of the Magi or something. Don't let a familiar flank. Keep them to reach 0ft.</p>
<p>On Defense, I want one of the following options:</p>
<p>1) Arcane Armor training, giving the Magus the ability to move about and cast freely in medium armor at level 6 and heavy at level 12 (just before their 3rd and 5th spell levels). I am wary of giving them full dex in their armor, as that's a fighter's special awesomeness. Full casting seems perfectly appropriate. Not to mention that as a MAD class straining their ability scores to encompass dexterity as well might not end well on all fronts. Most dexterity issues can be solved with mithril armor just like we used to do in 3.5 anyway.</p>
<p>2) Make them an unarmored class and give them an AC bonus based on their casting stat.</p>
<p>Personally, I think #1 is the best option. The monk-style insight bonus would be neat but lead to all the problems inherent with monk AC. Not to mention it steps on the duelist's toes.</p>
<p>At level 1 I want the ability to channel touch attacks through a melee weapon instead. Put shocking grasp on my spell list. It'll be my 'smite' attack.</p>
<p>At level 5 I want to be able to hold the charge on a ranged touch attack if I miss.</p>
<p>At level 10 I want to see the ability to lower your BAB by 5 for a round to cast a standard action casting time spell as part of a full attack action provoking no attacks of opportunity. Specifically lowering your BAB by 5 to prevent people getting around negating the penalty with haste effects.</p>
<p>At level 15 I want to see the ability to cast spells with a range of personal as a swift action.</p>
<p>At level 20 I want the ability to link spells to critical hits in some manner, similar to the EK. I think that capstone is particularly elegant for an offensive caster in melee.</p>
<p>Should the class get ALL of these? probably not. But hey, at least I'm not worried about a d10 hit die. Seriously, take the toughness feat or ask for it as a bonus feat option. Same difference.</p>I'm rather dissapointed in those saying that giving the magus a reason to leave and go EK is a bad idea. If a player is willing to dip into EK and deny themselves a capstone class ability and a caster level for the sake of an extra attack? More power to them.
I'm also very interested to see the meshing of the Magus and the Arcane archer. I really do like the Bard -> arcane archer builds and I think the magus could easily accomplish this type of build more effectively.
Giving the Magus 3/4...Quelian2010-06-28T13:34:44ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Are the Magic Users Good Enough?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kyxd?Are-the-Magic-Users-Good-Enough#72010-06-28T11:07:26Z2010-06-28T11:06:46Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Brendan Flood wrote:</div><blockquote>The major source of contention amongst them is that they are worried that magic users, primarily the sorcerer and wizard, will run out of spells too fast and be left to their unlimited, but weak, 0 level spells. The fighter and other melee can keep fighting on with their weapons that are often higher than a D6 and gain multiple attacks per round. Magic users are limited to base D6 through their progression and have limited uses of the higher spell levels per day.</blockquote><p>First off, remind your players that wizards and sorcerers aren't about doing a massive amount of damage. Arcane casters are the "Oh Sh-" classes. They take smaller actions to do what they do than a fighter, and rarely worry about positional requirements. They make up for a lack of endurance with the ability to completely end encounters with a standard action or two.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>Having never played Pathfinder, I am left without a good answer on this subject. Should I allow my players to refresh their spell count more than once per in-game day? Or do wizards and sorcerers rarely find themselves in a lurch spell-wise (I know they got a boost in hit die, but they really can't do much weapon damage, especially up close). How do you guys think these two classes play?</blockquote><p>Yes, for the first few levels your characters playing wizards and sorcerers will feel strained and unable to play long adventuring days. (Rather, long dungeons) Give them a couple anyway so they can get a feel for the concept of spell conservation. There will be encounters where a mage really doesn't NEED to throw a spell in. Magic missiling a rat will certainly help but if the fighter has the entire thing in hand, it's better to throw some 0-levels around and use the specialist/bloodline X+3 times per day ability.
<p>As a DM, it's important to keep tabs on your player's spells remaining every once in a while. If your players who play casters aren't forceful people the fighter can start pressuring the party into fighting when they really shouldn't. As a GM you should give the players some kind of option to rest once you're obviously running them ragged. If your players try to rest when they don't really need to? Give them a random encounter.</p>
<p>As your players level up, they'll stop running out of spells so often. By the time they hit level 5 (or 6 as a sorceror) they're not really going to burn through their entire spell selection in a day. They'll probably use up all their big guns but the lower level stuff will get them by until they realize they need to stop and rest.</p>
<p>Also, as was said above: Encourage non-traditional spell use. A player should not be punished for creativity.</p>
<p>Oh, one last thing. If lack of spells actually does become a problem, show your players the pearl of power magic item. Since it doesn't prep another slot, but rather refreshes an old one, it gives a wizard far more flexibility in their spell selection. They can memorize one of each relevant spell and then play much like they had 2 of each prepared.</p>
<p>A wizard should seek one of these for each of his spell levels, though a GM should be VERY careful about when they give them out.</p>Brendan Flood wrote:The major source of contention amongst them is that they are worried that magic users, primarily the sorcerer and wizard, will run out of spells too fast and be left to their unlimited, but weak, 0 level spells. The fighter and other melee can keep fighting on with their weapons that are often higher than a D6 and gain multiple attacks per round. Magic users are limited to base D6 through their progression and have limited uses of the higher spell levels per day.
First...Quelian2010-06-28T11:06:46ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Cleric Alignment of a NE Deity?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kybx&page=3?Cleric-Alignment-of-a-NE-Deity#1272010-06-28T10:30:56Z2010-06-28T10:30:56Z<p>It's also entirely possible to play a priest of a god and not be involved in the organized church.</p>
<p>Regardless, the RAW allows a neutral cleric of a NE deity. The odds of a cleric <b>staying</b> neutral are rather low.</p>
<p>This is part of the reason you can play clerics of Asmodeus in Pathfinder Society.</p>
<p>As a neutral character of a NE religion you are literally walking a tightrope every day. Want to see an excellent example of that tightrope? Go read the Erevis Cale books from forgotten realms. Cale is a barely neutral cleric who has to deal with his NE god of assassination constantly screwing with him and trying to trick him into slipping further toward the evil alignments.</p>It's also entirely possible to play a priest of a god and not be involved in the organized church.
Regardless, the RAW allows a neutral cleric of a NE deity. The odds of a cleric staying neutral are rather low.
This is part of the reason you can play clerics of Asmodeus in Pathfinder Society.
As a neutral character of a NE religion you are literally walking a tightrope every day. Want to see an excellent example of that tightrope? Go read the Erevis Cale books from forgotten realms. Cale...Quelian2010-06-28T10:30:56ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: XP for traps and obstacles?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kyw8?XP-for-traps-and-obstacles#52010-07-04T06:22:15Z2010-06-28T06:01:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">srd5090 wrote:</div><blockquote> What about if they get caught by the trap, and don't die, any XP for that? Essentially XP for surviving? </blockquote><p>Considering that roleplaying around a combat encounter should give the EXP for the combat encounter, so long as they actively deal with the trap and bypass it, they should get the EXP for it. They're taking time at the table to address it.
<p>Though, good traps are designed to force players to interact with it. They don't have to solve the thing, they just have to find a way to "beat" it, whether that be entirely bypassing the trap or disarming it.</p>srd5090 wrote:What about if they get caught by the trap, and don't die, any XP for that? Essentially XP for surviving?
Considering that roleplaying around a combat encounter should give the EXP for the combat encounter, so long as they actively deal with the trap and bypass it, they should get the EXP for it. They're taking time at the table to address it. Though, good traps are designed to force players to interact with it. They don't have to solve the thing, they just have to find a way to...Quelian2010-06-28T06:01:50ZForums: Rules Questions: Sly DrawQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kywg?Sly-Draw#12012-11-15T22:42:40Z2010-06-28T03:09:11Z<p>First off, here's the feat:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Adventurer's Armory wrote:</div><blockquote><p><b>Sly Draw</b>
</p>
You can draw your weapon with suchspeed and finesse that your opponents don’t realize they’re threatened.</p>
<p>Prerequisite: Quick Draw.</p>
<p>Benefit: When you draw a light weapon, you may make a Sleight of Hand check instead of a Bluff check to feint in combat. Other feats and abilities that affect a feint still apply to your feint.</blockquote><p>My question is pretty simple: What action does the feint take?
<p>As written, I'm seeing this feat giving you the ability to feint as a part of the act of drawing a weapon. Which the prerequisite of quick draw gives you as a free action.</p>
<p>This usually isn't that big of a deal. Normally people only draw a weapon once or twice in a combat, as weapons tend to be enchanted pretty heavily.</p>
<p>However: If, say, a rogue were to hide several daggers on their person and use quick draw/sly draw to simply continuously feint with each attack, strike their opponent with a sneak attack, then drop the weapon (Free action) to draw another one.</p>
<p>I don't see this being particularly broken as later you're certainly going to have monetary issues with getting enough enchanted daggers and/or other light weapons to keep up with AC values, especially on Rogue BAB.</p>
<p>What say thee, rules experts?</p>First off, here's the feat:
Adventurer's Armory wrote:Sly Draw
You can draw your weapon with suchspeed and finesse that your opponents don’t realize they’re threatened.Prerequisite: Quick Draw.
Benefit: When you draw a light weapon, you may make a Sleight of Hand check instead of a Bluff check to feint in combat. Other feats and abilities that affect a feint still apply to your feint.
My question is pretty simple: What action does the feint take? As written, I'm seeing this feat giving...Quelian2010-06-28T03:09:11ZRe: Forums: Advice: How to make the players afraid?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxsa&page=2?How-to-make-the-players-afraid#532010-06-24T10:20:24Z2010-06-24T10:18:44Z<p>In the seven years I have played D&D, I have fled from a total of two encounters.</p>
<p>First was the Kraken in the lake, which only one party member was foolish enough to approach after being told there was NO wildlife in the area. He died horribly. This was specifically to teach that player that yes, the sorting algorithm of evil doesn't apply here. He had been rather adamant about "the DM won't throw something we can't handle at us". We rewound after the player got the point. </p>
<p>Don't do the above. It ends badly.</p>
<p>The second was when another DM hit our party with a vampire monk around level 12. We were pretty much badasses as a party at this point, but the vampire monk quickly reduced our paladin and a couple other party members to 3 negative levels from instant doom. I called "EVAC" and thanked my stars I had a teleportation prepared. Got us about 100 miles clear.</p>
<p>You want to scare your party? Have a monster that very clearly drains their ability to fight. Bring the wizard and cleric under their respective int/cha scores needed to cast spells. Bring the fighter so low on strength/dex that TWF and Power attack turn off. Give them a clear method of escape. Make the beast extremely slow and obviously unlikely to give chase. Basically, you need to make it rather obvious that it's the best option.</p>
<p>Below level 5, it's best to penalize a score with a minimum score of 1. Don't target constitution, as you may accidentally slay a PC outright.</p>In the seven years I have played D&D, I have fled from a total of two encounters.
First was the Kraken in the lake, which only one party member was foolish enough to approach after being told there was NO wildlife in the area. He died horribly. This was specifically to teach that player that yes, the sorting algorithm of evil doesn't apply here. He had been rather adamant about "the DM won't throw something we can't handle at us". We rewound after the player got the point.
Don't do the...Quelian2010-06-24T10:18:44ZRe: Forums: Advice: Shipwreck startQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxxr?Shipwreck-start#242010-06-24T09:43:02Z2010-06-24T09:43:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote> The tricky thing about shipwrecks being an adventure start is that if you run them out and the PCs stop the shipwreck from happening, then you don't get to run the shipwrecked adventure.</blockquote><p>Depending on how the shipwreck is set up you can almost always ensure that the ship does in fact wreck. Cinematic wave crash, a wall of rocks appearing from the mist, etc. can all provide an unavoidable stop to the encounter.
<p>Will the players become upset that they were railroaded into a shipwreck? That depends on your players. Generally it's a matter of presentation, and really making sure you frame the "win condition" for the encounter well. There's no enemy to kill here, but instead an objective: survive as long as possible. If you start the encounter out with an extremely damaging event for a ship the players often realize that the ship is likely going down. A ship can only take so much damage, so eventually a storm that's likely to wreck a vessel will win. Especially if players start a campaign at level 1 where casters cannot simply wave their hands to save the day.</p>
<p>Keeping the railroad from being demoralizing to your players requires GM interaction and communication, as always. Getting to the end of the shipwreck encounter ensures the crew can swim to shore, have time to load into lifeboats, or something similar. So long as the players see some kind of positive outcome to their efforts they can take comfort in that result.</p>James Jacobs wrote:The tricky thing about shipwrecks being an adventure start is that if you run them out and the PCs stop the shipwreck from happening, then you don't get to run the shipwrecked adventure.
Depending on how the shipwreck is set up you can almost always ensure that the ship does in fact wreck. Cinematic wave crash, a wall of rocks appearing from the mist, etc. can all provide an unavoidable stop to the encounter. Will the players become upset that they were railroaded into a...Quelian2010-06-24T09:43:02ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Episode 02 of Chronicles: PF Podcast with Jason Bulmahn is now up!Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kyfb?Episode-02-of-Chronicles-PF-Podcast-with#22012-11-15T22:39:32Z2010-06-24T04:28:42Z<p>Character Workshop builds are now posted on our D20radio <a href="http://www.d20radio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=114&t=6027" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Forums</a>.</p>Character Workshop builds are now posted on our D20radio Forums.Quelian2010-06-24T04:28:42ZRe: Forums: Advice: Shipwreck startQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxxr?Shipwreck-start#202010-06-22T07:16:30Z2010-06-22T07:10:48Z<p>Don't just handwave the shipwreck. Play the shipwreck out as your initial encounter. Give the ship an appropriate amount of HP. Now play up your storm:</p>
<p>Set up an encounter in an extreme thunderstorm.</p>
<p>Every round everyone makes a DC 5 acrobatics check or the slippery, moving deck knocks them prone. Watch deadliest catch. That's what your players are dealing with in terms of boat being tossed about.</p>
<p>First thing that goes wrong: Lightning bolt to the ship's primary mast. It topples over and is dragging the ship down with its rigging. The players must cut the rigging free (by slicing the 10 ropes that bind it(or using escape artist to untie knots and free each rope), and using strength checks to push the mast over the side. Each rope attaches at a different point on the boat, forcing players to move over crates and other hazards on the boats surface.</p>
<p>The main mast dumps the ship's lookout into the ocean when it falls over. If the players rescue him they get better chances at finding useful items washed ashore.</p>
<p>Each round the main mast isn't freed the ship takes 5% of its hp in damage. At 50% damage the cargo hold is breached and cargo starts falling out of the ship.</p>
<p>Additionally, you're following the coast and the coastline is ROCKY. Someone has to get up onto the rigging on another mast and spot for the captain so they can navigate the rocks. Every 1d4 rounds a rock will come up dead ahead, 6 rounds of travel out. A DC 20 perception check spots the rock. Perception checks are made each round by the lookout. The DC decreases by 3 each round. The ship can avoid them if they are spotted at least 3 rounds out. At 2 rounds out, the captain grazes the rock and does 2% damage to the ship. At 1 round out, the damage increases to 5%. If the player fails his final perception check the rock appears out of the backside of a wave and the captain nearly capsizes the boat in emergency evasive maneuvers, dealing 10% damage to the boat and requiring a DC 10 acrobatics check to not fall prone and slide 5 ft toward the side dipping lowest. (GM's call)</p>
<p>The guy on the rigging also has to deal with effectively being on a lightning rod, especially if he has metal on him. Make him dodge a few 1d3 damage lightning bolts with reflex saves for half, and each one makes holding onto that rigging slightly more difficult, requiring a DC 10+2 for each lightning bolt that has damaged the rigging.</p>
<p>Once the ropes are clear and a few rocks have passed (basically as soon as it gets repetitive) the encounter ends with the players getting capsized by a massive wave.</p>
<p>Add up the amount of damage dealt to the ship. Figure out a table beforehand of what gear you want to give them access to on the beach. Figure out what is absolutely necessary, and what would be nice. For each 10% of HP remaining to the players open up new options (Starting with simple weapons and light armor and ending with masterwork exotic weapons, medium armor, and alchemical supplies if they aced the entire encounter!)</p>Don't just handwave the shipwreck. Play the shipwreck out as your initial encounter. Give the ship an appropriate amount of HP. Now play up your storm:
Set up an encounter in an extreme thunderstorm.
Every round everyone makes a DC 5 acrobatics check or the slippery, moving deck knocks them prone. Watch deadliest catch. That's what your players are dealing with in terms of boat being tossed about.
First thing that goes wrong: Lightning bolt to the ship's primary mast. It topples over and...Quelian2010-06-22T07:10:48ZRe: Forums: Advice: Arcane Archer viability?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2k16e?Arcane-Archer-viability#362010-06-22T00:57:16Z2010-06-20T07:10:12Z<p>I actually have come to like the Bard 8 / AA 10 progression, finishing with two more bard levels.</p>
<p>It's not the most broken thing in the world but when you consider all the tricks, buffs, and sheer amount of skills a bard gets you do end up with a rather versatile character.</p>
<p>I also like that the class appears to play like support artillery, and you can effectively work with multiple non targeted spells that don't give saves and still do incredible stuff. Specifically, the Arrow of Mass Cure Light Wounds, Good hope, etc. is a great infantry support spell.</p>
<p>Granted this particular character is in kingmaker, where bards are rather useful to have around.</p>I actually have come to like the Bard 8 / AA 10 progression, finishing with two more bard levels.
It's not the most broken thing in the world but when you consider all the tricks, buffs, and sheer amount of skills a bard gets you do end up with a rather versatile character.
I also like that the class appears to play like support artillery, and you can effectively work with multiple non targeted spells that don't give saves and still do incredible stuff. Specifically, the Arrow of Mass Cure...Quelian2010-06-20T07:10:12ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Broken Bones?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxqx?Broken-Bones#122010-06-20T06:57:37Z2010-06-20T06:57:36Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">HalfOrcHeavyMetal wrote:</div><blockquote> I'd treat a broken bone, especially a major break like the leg-bones, as 'exagerated constitution damage', meaning that it will take at least a week per amount of constitution you believe the player has lost for the body to recuperate. Cure spells set the bone, but it's still quite a traumatic injury and I'd also argue that the Cure series of spells would do little more than just mesh the bones together, not actually 'heal' the break. It will take time for the body to fully recover from this.</blockquote><p>I like repurposing it as strength damage. Also note that falling objects have rules for hit point damage dealt with regard to distance fallen. Strength damage reduces effectiveness in melee, hobbles them if they wear armor, etc. That seems extremely appropriate.
<p>In doing this you give them an out via restoration and cures. (If a group is burning 5-6 spells to get a guy back out of a broken leg and has to stop for 2-3 days? That seems enough of an impediment in a world where people can light things on fire with their mind.)</p>HalfOrcHeavyMetal wrote:I'd treat a broken bone, especially a major break like the leg-bones, as 'exagerated constitution damage', meaning that it will take at least a week per amount of constitution you believe the player has lost for the body to recuperate. Cure spells set the bone, but it's still quite a traumatic injury and I'd also argue that the Cure series of spells would do little more than just mesh the bones together, not actually 'heal' the break. It will take time for the body to...Quelian2010-06-20T06:57:36ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Does Tiny Hutt stop incorporeal creatures?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxqo?Does-Tiny-Hutt-stop-incorporeal-creatures#112010-06-20T06:39:33Z2010-06-20T06:26:45Z<p>Could always try to throw a resilient sphere down on a good section of the party, and hit the shadow too. Then it becomes a 1 vs 1 or 1 vs 2 fight. Force effect stops the shadow from getting out for a while.</p>
<p>Granted getting more than one party member into sphere configuration is hard.</p>
<p>Also, if he's using the thing to scout excessively, might I suggest writing the words explosive runes into some notes the shadow reads?</p>
<p>If your sorcerer has a cleric ally, death wards stop the shadow cold. Really the divine caster is your best counter here.</p>Could always try to throw a resilient sphere down on a good section of the party, and hit the shadow too. Then it becomes a 1 vs 1 or 1 vs 2 fight. Force effect stops the shadow from getting out for a while.
Granted getting more than one party member into sphere configuration is hard.
Also, if he's using the thing to scout excessively, might I suggest writing the words explosive runes into some notes the shadow reads?
If your sorcerer has a cleric ally, death wards stop the shadow cold....Quelian2010-06-20T06:26:45ZRe: Forums: Advice: Is sundering a mean trick to pull on player characters?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kxnh&page=2?Is-sundering-a-mean-trick-to-pull-on-player#912010-06-19T14:31:29Z2010-06-19T14:30:41Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote>(I suppose I can make it up to him with the dragon's treasure hoard that it was forced to abandon.) </blockquote><p>This.
<p>"You stole my ship!" (You broke my sword!)
<br />
"I'll get you another ship!"
<br />
"Which one?"
<br />
"That one!"
<br />
"THAT ONE?!"</p>
<p>Remember that by breaking his weapon you have decreased his inherent wealth and now need to bring him back up to equivalent wealth by level in order to keep the gameplay at a balanced level. If he specifically got that sword forged and spent time getting it to exact specifications, you NEED to give him a direct upgrade or at the very least a side-grade.</p>
<p>The sundering in itself wasn't a jerk move. Sundering almost never is as long as you use it sparingly. It's the sunder-then-never-replace that's a jerk move. A paladin functions on having a good sword. Make sure he gets a replacement weapon that works with his weapon focus feats and whatnot.</p>
<p>If he took an heirloom weapon trait from adventurer's armory, and now can't repair it magically, give him a quest to get it put back together. Go find the hermit elven mage-smithy in the far corner of blahdeblahland and bring him a magical fruitbat to use as an apprentice's familiar or something.</p>
<p>Remember, when trying to gain the assistance of high level mages their time is worth far more than their gold, so if you make your players do some extra easy roleplaying of a couple weeks game time in out of combat stuff you can certainly justify a higher level mage assisting.</p>Ravingdork wrote:(I suppose I can make it up to him with the dragon's treasure hoard that it was forced to abandon.)
This. "You stole my ship!" (You broke my sword!)
"I'll get you another ship!"
"Which one?"
"That one!"
"THAT ONE?!"
Remember that by breaking his weapon you have decreased his inherent wealth and now need to bring him back up to equivalent wealth by level in order to keep the gameplay at a balanced level. If he specifically got that sword forged and spent time getting it to...Quelian2010-06-19T14:30:41ZRe: Forums: Advice: How long do you spend writing your own campaigns/adventures?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kx4r?How-long-do-you-spend-writing-your-own#272010-06-17T12:24:32Z2010-06-17T12:24:32Z<p>Depending on how long I intend to run a campaign I could bang out an adventure in a couple days to as long as 2-3 years.</p>
<p>I have one right now that should run from 1-12. I don't intend to finish it before next summer. Our group has plenty of backlogged adventures to play and I'm just slowly working in little modifications every few days, spending 1-2 hours a week on it at this point. This is something I want to be able to hand to another person and have them be able to "Get it" and tinker and play with.</p>
<p>In the past, I've slammed through a one-shot design in a day or so. These runs I am usually flying by the seat of my pants. I've got some stat blocks made and a general plan, but 90% of GMing one shots is playing off your player's actions. It's very similar to how organized play works out.</p>
<p>Really, it depends on your goals, and if you have a player group that immediately wants to run your set of adventures. If the primary DM for my college group called me and said "I have a story I'd like to run" I would be constantly trying to get updates, and he would probably work on it more. I know the quality of his work. Newer GM's don't always have that "5 people waiting for you to hurry up and RUN THE THING" factor.</p>Depending on how long I intend to run a campaign I could bang out an adventure in a couple days to as long as 2-3 years.
I have one right now that should run from 1-12. I don't intend to finish it before next summer. Our group has plenty of backlogged adventures to play and I'm just slowly working in little modifications every few days, spending 1-2 hours a week on it at this point. This is something I want to be able to hand to another person and have them be able to "Get it" and tinker and...Quelian2010-06-17T12:24:32ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Let's Dish GishQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwqt&page=11?Lets-Dish-Gish#5462010-07-31T03:43:52Z2010-06-16T08:03:40Z<p>The only ones I could think up that hasn't appeared are:</p>
<p>Strategist
<br />
Tactician</p>
<p>I like them because they don't have an alignment connotation, involve combat prowess, and hint at some mental ability.</p>
<p>Tactician might step on Cavalier toes far too much though.</p>The only ones I could think up that hasn't appeared are:
Strategist
Tactician
I like them because they don't have an alignment connotation, involve combat prowess, and hint at some mental ability.
Tactician might step on Cavalier toes far too much though.Quelian2010-06-16T08:03:40ZRe: Forums: Advice: Talkers and Fighters II: How to become more of a talker?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwb5?Talkers-and-Fighters-II-How-to-become-more-of#192010-06-11T08:50:35Z2010-06-11T08:50:35Z<p>It all comes down to this: Forcing roleplaying will tie you up harder then just not worrying about it. You've been given some pretty great suggestions so far about when to interject but in reality you're just going to come across a moment where your entire character will click into place.</p>
<p>I usually have no clue how I'm going to play a character for at least 3 long sessions. I just took a fighter I was playing the other day and multiclassed into ranger. Why? Because I was able to tame a "wild" animal with handle animal, and I had been using survival all over the place as I was the only one with a decent survival. Suddenly my character got far more interesting than "I have daddy's broadsword and I cut things". He found his schtick. (Though being nigh unkillable when he got jumped solo by a trio of bandits helped.)</p>
<p>It took me nearly 5 levels to figure out how my stormlord would play out, and I had to /switch gods/ on that character and completely lose my divine ranks, sacrifice three feats, and lose a couple levels to really figure out what I wanted to do. In the end, it was the most memorable character I've ever played. (That campaign went to 15 and ran for two years.)</p>
<p>Focus less on your character and more on the world you're in. Engage the GM. Your character will evolve. Your GM is spending time creating a world. Dive in with both feet and he'll appreciate that you're appreciating his work. Everyone will be better for it, and I <i>absolutely guaruntee</i> that you will have a far more entertaining character that you feel works better than if you just made "The halfling dancer" and played up "I'm dancing because it's what I do".</p>It all comes down to this: Forcing roleplaying will tie you up harder then just not worrying about it. You've been given some pretty great suggestions so far about when to interject but in reality you're just going to come across a moment where your entire character will click into place.
I usually have no clue how I'm going to play a character for at least 3 long sessions. I just took a fighter I was playing the other day and multiclassed into ranger. Why? Because I was able to tame a...Quelian2010-06-11T08:50:35ZRe: Forums: Advice: Rolled barely higher than commoner stats. Help this character not fail at everything.Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvrt&page=2?Rolled-barely-higher-than-commoner-stats-Help#912010-06-11T06:22:29Z2010-06-11T06:22:29Z<p>He's not MAKING me do it. I could whine and get new stats I'm sure. I don't intend to.</p>He's not MAKING me do it. I could whine and get new stats I'm sure. I don't intend to.Quelian2010-06-11T06:22:29ZRe: Forums: Advice: Am I being fair?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvzf&page=2?Am-I-being-fair#582010-06-08T23:33:41Z2010-06-08T23:33:41Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Abraham spalding wrote:</div><blockquote>I realize, however that's the way people are suggesting capping this, so I used similar terms for them. Personally I think the Hex is fine as is (and almost useless overall anyways). </blockquote><p>Situational to be sure. Useless, I think not.
<p>Definitely doesn't NEED a nerf.</p>Abraham spalding wrote:I realize, however that's the way people are suggesting capping this, so I used similar terms for them. Personally I think the Hex is fine as is (and almost useless overall anyways).
Situational to be sure. Useless, I think not. Definitely doesn't NEED a nerf.Quelian2010-06-08T23:33:41ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#942010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T21:47:32Z<p>Yarp. Been a while since I had to deal with a shadowdancer. Oh well.</p>Yarp. Been a while since I had to deal with a shadowdancer. Oh well.Quelian2010-06-08T21:47:32ZRe: Forums: Advice: Am I being fair?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvzf&page=2?Am-I-being-fair#552010-06-08T21:22:35Z2010-06-08T21:21:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Abraham spalding wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Perhaps simply a reduced effect against higher hit dice:</p>
<p>Hit dice <= level — Save fails, sleep: Save successful fatigued.
<br />
Hit dice > level — Save fails, fatigued: Save successful nothing. </blockquote><p>Hit dice caps are inherently bad ways to do spell mechanics. CR and Hit dice are nearly completely unrelated, so at the higher levels you end up with spells that have completely inconsistent results that you have no solid way of predicting.
<p>Basically, HD limits and HD stage spells are unpredictable. The caster doesn't know enemy HD and has no way to FIND enemy HD, so they can't be sure WHEN an enemy is worth using a spell with HD caps is useful. This is not the case for a GM. The GM knows EXACTLY how many HD his players have.</p>Abraham spalding wrote:Perhaps simply a reduced effect against higher hit dice:
Hit dice level -- Save fails, fatigued: Save successful nothing.
Hit dice caps are inherently bad ways to do spell mechanics. CR and Hit dice are nearly completely unrelated, so at the higher levels you end up with spells that have completely inconsistent results that you have no solid way of predicting. Basically, HD limits and HD stage spells are unpredictable. The caster doesn't know enemy HD and has no way...Quelian2010-06-08T21:21:45ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#922010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T21:18:41Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Charender wrote:</div><blockquote>Light, Daylight, etc. Anything that gets rid of shadows will negate HiPS. </blockquote><p>Depends on the situation and level of darkness. But yes, I see where you're coming from there.Charender wrote:Light, Daylight, etc. Anything that gets rid of shadows will negate HiPS.
Depends on the situation and level of darkness. But yes, I see where you're coming from there.Quelian2010-06-08T21:18:41ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#892010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T20:55:17Z<p>Looking through that... I can see where you're getting that, and I think you're right. Guess I better put that down on the houserule list. Wizard needs a way to prepare against HiPS.</p>Looking through that... I can see where you're getting that, and I think you're right. Guess I better put that down on the houserule list. Wizard needs a way to prepare against HiPS.Quelian2010-06-08T20:55:17ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#872010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T20:40:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Cartigan wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Aimed at you or not, you are wrong.
</p>
You are not supernaturally concealed, you are supernaturally activating the basic stealth skill when you otherwise couldn't. </blockquote><p>No, it specifically calls out HiPS as supernatural. True sight sees through HiPS. It does not see through stealth. True sight effectively negates the class feature.Cartigan wrote:Aimed at you or not, you are wrong.
You are not supernaturally concealed, you are supernaturally activating the basic stealth skill when you otherwise couldn't.
No, it specifically calls out HiPS as supernatural. True sight sees through HiPS. It does not see through stealth. True sight effectively negates the class feature.Quelian2010-06-08T20:40:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#862010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T20:21:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">james maissen wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Shuriken Nekogami wrote:</div><blockquote> shadowdancer makes a worthwhile 2 level dip as well. assuming you are human. but i wouldn't invest more than 2 levels in it. </blockquote><p>That's funny as I see the shadow companion as one of the strongest of the class abilities the shadowdancer is given.
<p>-James </blockquote><p>The shadow thing is a personal abhorrence of mine. I hate pets. But yes, it's a really good ability.james maissen wrote:Shuriken Nekogami wrote: shadowdancer makes a worthwhile 2 level dip as well. assuming you are human. but i wouldn't invest more than 2 levels in it.
That's funny as I see the shadow companion as one of the strongest of the class abilities the shadowdancer is given. -James The shadow thing is a personal abhorrence of mine. I hate pets. But yes, it's a really good ability.Quelian2010-06-08T20:21:58ZRe: Forums: Advice: Am I being fair?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvzf&page=2?Am-I-being-fair#522010-06-08T20:09:50Z2010-06-08T20:09:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Abraham spalding wrote:</div><blockquote></p>
<p>This part isn't true: A coup de gras <b> is </b> a full attack action, but it <b> does not </b> wait until the next round to resolve. Otherwise full attacking would not resolve until the next round.</p>
<p>Casting a spell with a full round action also resolves in the round it is cast — a spell with a casting time of <b> 1 round </b> isn't the same and takes until the next round to cast. </blockquote><p>A coup-de-grace is a full ROUND action, not a full attack. Full attacks are a weird subset of Full-Round actions.
<p>From the rulebook, pg 197: </p>
<p>Coup de Grace: As a full-round action, you can use a
<br />
melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace (pronounced “coo
<br />
day grahs”) to a helpless opponent.</p>
<p>I do believe I was misreading the intent of the standard action to initiate complete full round actions, though. Thus, your point still stands.</p>
<p>Cutting duration to 1/2 level, minimum 1, still prevents move and CDG until level 4. Personally, I think that's fine.</p>
<p>And yeah, if my DM capped the HD on slumber hex via houserules in a home game I would ask to reroll or walk. It's just not that broken.</p>Abraham spalding wrote:This part isn't true: A coup de gras is a full attack action, but it does not wait until the next round to resolve. Otherwise full attacking would not resolve until the next round.
Casting a spell with a full round action also resolves in the round it is cast -- a spell with a casting time of 1 round isn't the same and takes until the next round to cast.
A coup-de-grace is a full ROUND action, not a full attack. Full attacks are a weird subset of Full-Round...Quelian2010-06-08T20:09:10ZRe: Forums: Advice: Talkers and Fighters II: How to become more of a talker?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwb5?Talkers-and-Fighters-II-How-to-become-more-of#82010-06-08T08:47:12Z2010-06-08T08:47:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kyrt-ryder wrote:</div><blockquote> Ten years from now, what are you going to remember? How much damage you dealt? How many monsters failed their saves against you? Or the story and adventure and rapport that grew between you and your party-mates. (Yeah,its a daunting task with what you've described of the Paladin, but odds are decent he may follow your lead if you took the step and went all out) </blockquote><p>Definitely truth. Also, if the paladin wants to have limelight, share it. Play off his actions and team up to do a little good cop, bad cop and the like. You'll find it ends with your GM happier. Happier GMs give better circumstance modifiers.
<p>Hell, I've let people do incredibly epic things in both roleplaying and combat because they made it sound so incredibly COOL. Normally they'd have never had a chance. A +5 to a check from the GM for making him laugh or even just a doubletake is sometimes all it takes.</p>kyrt-ryder wrote:Ten years from now, what are you going to remember? How much damage you dealt? How many monsters failed their saves against you? Or the story and adventure and rapport that grew between you and your party-mates. (Yeah,its a daunting task with what you've described of the Paladin, but odds are decent he may follow your lead if you took the step and went all out)
Definitely truth. Also, if the paladin wants to have limelight, share it. Play off his actions and team up to do a...Quelian2010-06-08T08:47:11ZRe: Forums: Advice: Am I being fair?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvzf?Am-I-being-fair#492010-06-08T08:42:48Z2010-06-08T08:42:48Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Are wrote:</div><blockquote><p>This reminds me of the 3.5 PHB2 Beguiler.. If the enemies didn't have sky-high Will saves or mind-affecting immunity, the Beguiler could handle the entire encounter by herself (leading to the other PCs not really doing anything except coup-de-grace'ing), while if they DID have sky-high Will saves or immunity, the Beguiler did absolutely nothing (which led to the encounters being pretty tough on the remaining PCs).
</p>
</blockquote><p>I played a beguiler in 3.5 as well. (I love enchanter type casters. Can you tell?)
<p>Anyway, the witch is like a severely toned down and not asininely broken beguiler. The beguiler's main issue was they had access to way, way, way too many spells that they could randomly spontaneously cast, and then they added in the 11 or so skills per level if you got decent rolls.</p>
<p>The witch only has one truly moderately broken hex in the slumber hex. Cutting the duration to 1/2 level progression completely fixes it too. Also, I need to edit the move-and-CDG comment. 1/2 level progression allows that at level 6, but really a witch is going to glitterdust you into the ground at that point.</p>Are wrote:This reminds me of the 3.5 PHB2 Beguiler.. If the enemies didn't have sky-high Will saves or mind-affecting immunity, the Beguiler could handle the entire encounter by herself (leading to the other PCs not really doing anything except coup-de-grace'ing), while if they DID have sky-high Will saves or immunity, the Beguiler did absolutely nothing (which led to the encounters being pretty tough on the remaining PCs).
I played a beguiler in 3.5 as well. (I love enchanter type casters....Quelian2010-06-08T08:42:48ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: The 'big six', are they really needed?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwbj?The-big-six-are-they-really-needed#82010-06-08T08:30:58Z2010-06-08T08:30:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kolokotroni wrote:</div><blockquote>Certainly there are tons of feats and abilities that change things, spells focus, and greater spell focus changes things. But certainly those 2 feats should not be required for success should they? Nor do they apply to all the wizards spells. I am trying... </blockquote><p>Actually, given that melee characters are balanced around them having weapon focus in their specific weapon... yes. Spell focus at least should matter. Pure casters don't have an incredible amount of feat taxes outside of the Spell Focus feats.Kolokotroni wrote:Certainly there are tons of feats and abilities that change things, spells focus, and greater spell focus changes things. But certainly those 2 feats should not be required for success should they? Nor do they apply to all the wizards spells. I am trying...
Actually, given that melee characters are balanced around them having weapon focus in their specific weapon... yes. Spell focus at least should matter. Pure casters don't have an incredible amount of feat taxes outside...Quelian2010-06-08T08:30:58ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#762010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T08:20:44Z<p>Actually, the fact that the subject sees through normal and magical darkness when true seeing is up pretty much trumps the magic/nonmagic argument. You can magically cut through all darkness both mundane and magical. This hits either of our interperetations.</p>Actually, the fact that the subject sees through normal and magical darkness when true seeing is up pretty much trumps the magic/nonmagic argument. You can magically cut through all darkness both mundane and magical. This hits either of our interperetations.Quelian2010-06-08T08:20:44ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#752010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T08:15:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote><p>That doesn't mean they are hiding in "magical shadows."</p>
<p>Sure it's supernatural in nature, but no where does it say it is illusory. I looked up True Seeing and I don't see anything on its "defeat list" that would apply to HiPS. </blockquote><p>Shadows aren't actually where the player is if they're outside the dim light. Their supernatural effect is allowing them to act as if they were within the dim light. They are not. Without their supernatural ability they are now subject to a DC 0 perception check to be seen.
<p>HiPS is a supernatural effect that alters what would be happening were no supernatural effect going on. True seeing clearly states it shows things as they would be if everything was mundane. Effectively, it's antimagic sight.</p>
<p>Edit: I clearly stated earlier this is a RAI patch to a RAW grey area. If you are making an RAI call that you can't true seeing a shadow, then that's no more or less valid, really. RAW is incredibly vague here.</p>Ravingdork wrote:That doesn't mean they are hiding in "magical shadows."
Sure it's supernatural in nature, but no where does it say it is illusory. I looked up True Seeing and I don't see anything on its "defeat list" that would apply to HiPS.
Shadows aren't actually where the player is if they're outside the dim light. Their supernatural effect is allowing them to act as if they were within the dim light. They are not. Without their supernatural ability they are now subject to a DC 0...Quelian2010-06-08T08:15:49ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Disappointed with the very limited errata for the Core RulebookQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kvlj&page=2?Disappointed-with-the-very-limited-errata-for#732010-06-08T08:13:24Z2010-06-08T08:13:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Flyby attack doesn't do much for dragons using ranged attacks. If a dragon is above and to the right of me, I am going to shoot him with my ranged attacks. If he flies overhead and breathes fire, then continues flying to the left of me, not much has changed tactically. Assuming I am not dead, I am simply going to continue firing ranged attacks at it.</p>
<p>It's not like it can pop in and out of cover easily with its crappy maneuverability. </blockquote><p>This is why all the smart dragons fill their lairs with tubes of acid/lava/liquid nitrogen/<insert energy damage liquid here> that they can pop in and out of while their breath weapon recharges!Ravingdork wrote:Flyby attack doesn't do much for dragons using ranged attacks. If a dragon is above and to the right of me, I am going to shoot him with my ranged attacks. If he flies overhead and breathes fire, then continues flying to the left of me, not much has changed tactically. Assuming I am not dead, I am simply going to continue firing ranged attacks at it.
It's not like it can pop in and out of cover easily with its crappy maneuverability.
This is why all the smart dragons fill...Quelian2010-06-08T08:13:24ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What ever happened to ROLLING your stats and letting the dice gods decide?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwbg&page=3?What-ever-happened-to-ROLLING-your-stats-and#1252010-06-08T08:08:15Z2010-06-08T08:08:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kyrt-ryder wrote:</div><blockquote> Heh, I cheat. I reward my characters with levels when I feel they're characters have grown enough in the story. It's got absolutely nothing to do with the b&&#-kicking that they happen to do along the way. </blockquote><p>Guilty of that as well. My college group was notorious for that. Unfortunately the DMs would still ping you a level for dying so if you died you were stuck behind everyone with no way to earn it back.kyrt-ryder wrote:Heh, I cheat. I reward my characters with levels when I feel they're characters have grown enough in the story. It's got absolutely nothing to do with the b&&#-kicking that they happen to do along the way.
Guilty of that as well. My college group was notorious for that. Unfortunately the DMs would still ping you a level for dying so if you died you were stuck behind everyone with no way to earn it back.Quelian2010-06-08T08:08:15ZRe: Forums: Advice: Advanced troll with gear, what CR?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw9k?Advanced-troll-with-gear-what-CR#242010-06-08T08:03:16Z2010-06-08T08:02:53Z<p>Where's his cold/fire resistance coming from? Or is it just an added thing on the monster?</p>Where's his cold/fire resistance coming from? Or is it just an added thing on the monster?Quelian2010-06-08T08:02:53ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#732010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T07:58:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote>The moment you show me where the rules say supernatural shadows are are involved I will happily agree with you. Until then... </blockquote><p>From the core rulebook:
<p>Hide in Plain Sight <b>(Su)</b>: A shadowdancer can use the Stealth
<br />
skill even while being observed. As long as she is within 10
<br />
feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself
<br />
from view in the open without anything to actually hide
<br />
behind. She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow.</p>
<p>Hide in plain sight is a supernatural ability. The dim light itself? not supernatural. The concealment the players draw from being near the dim light is very much supernatural. You can't HiPS in an antimagic field.</p>Ravingdork wrote:The moment you show me where the rules say supernatural shadows are are involved I will happily agree with you. Until then...
From the core rulebook: Hide in Plain Sight (Su): A shadowdancer can use the Stealth
skill even while being observed. As long as she is within 10
feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself
from view in the open without anything to actually hide
behind. She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow.
Hide in plain sight is a...Quelian2010-06-08T07:58:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What ever happened to ROLLING your stats and letting the dice gods decide?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwbg&page=3?What-ever-happened-to-ROLLING-your-stats-and#1232010-06-08T07:56:04Z2010-06-08T07:56:04Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kyrt-ryder wrote:</div><blockquote>Interestingly enough though, I just finished a session with my optimized 'combat monster' Pathfinder Paladin player, and all we did the entire session was just roleplay back and forth between him and the Highwaymen that had intended to gut and rob him at his campfire, and instead he ended up persuading them to give up crime and go find work in his home town where he'd just come from. Through the whole game we made maybe 6 rolls, a couple perceptions, a couple stealths, and he made two diplomacy checks. And <i>some</i> people have this idea that optimizers are all about killing and/or fighting and don't want to RP>> </blockquote><p>I hear that. My characters may be beasts in combat but that doesn't mean I'm not down for a 8 hour session with 30 minutes of combat. So long as we get EXP for it!kyrt-ryder wrote:Interestingly enough though, I just finished a session with my optimized 'combat monster' Pathfinder Paladin player, and all we did the entire session was just roleplay back and forth between him and the Highwaymen that had intended to gut and rob him at his campfire, and instead he ended up persuading them to give up crime and go find work in his home town where he'd just come from. Through the whole game we made maybe 6 rolls, a couple perceptions, a couple stealths, and he...Quelian2010-06-08T07:56:04ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#712010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T07:49:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote> I don't think either spell would do anything VS HiPS. Using the stealth skill is mundane and not affected by magic. </blockquote><p>Doesn't remove the effect of the stealth skill. Does remove the effect of the supernatural shadow allowing you use of the stealth skill where you otherwise would be unable to, IE outside of cover/concealment in normal or bright light.
<p>If the shadowdancer is in a place any normal person could make a stealth check, true seeing does nothing. Effectively true seeing simply removes HiPS, not stealth.</p>
<p>This would be different were HiPS not <i>supernatural</i> as true seeing makes a very specific exception for non-magical deceptions. Extraordinary abilities remain unaffected by true sight regardless of what they do.</p>Ravingdork wrote:I don't think either spell would do anything VS HiPS. Using the stealth skill is mundane and not affected by magic.
Doesn't remove the effect of the stealth skill. Does remove the effect of the supernatural shadow allowing you use of the stealth skill where you otherwise would be unable to, IE outside of cover/concealment in normal or bright light. If the shadowdancer is in a place any normal person could make a stealth check, true seeing does nothing. Effectively true...Quelian2010-06-08T07:49:45ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What ever happened to ROLLING your stats and letting the dice gods decide?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwbg&page=3?What-ever-happened-to-ROLLING-your-stats-and#1212010-06-08T07:36:11Z2010-06-08T07:36:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">kyrt-ryder wrote:</div><blockquote>It's actually a lot of fun, and because of the way I handle the character generation process (as a pre-game roleplaying session through the character's life as these abilities are gained) it really builds a lot of depth and emotional attachment into the character. </blockquote><p>I could see this being a lot of fun, but I imagine this works primarily because your group is comprised of very avid roleplayers. In a roleplay heavy group stat disparity is less of a factor.kyrt-ryder wrote:It's actually a lot of fun, and because of the way I handle the character generation process (as a pre-game roleplaying session through the character's life as these abilities are gained) it really builds a lot of depth and emotional attachment into the character.
I could see this being a lot of fun, but I imagine this works primarily because your group is comprised of very avid roleplayers. In a roleplay heavy group stat disparity is less of a factor.Quelian2010-06-08T07:36:11ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#692010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T07:30:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote> ...Uh, I'm referring to his comment that HiPS shouldn't be as powerful as Invisibility. </blockquote><p>Apologies. Without a quote I assumed you were speaking to the last point spells were brought up, which was my post above. Let me edit that.ProfessorCirno wrote:...Uh, I'm referring to his comment that HiPS shouldn't be as powerful as Invisibility.
Apologies. Without a quote I assumed you were speaking to the last point spells were brought up, which was my post above. Let me edit that.Quelian2010-06-08T07:30:49ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What ever happened to ROLLING your stats and letting the dice gods decide?Quelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kwbg&page=3?What-ever-happened-to-ROLLING-your-stats-and#1192010-06-08T07:27:56Z2010-06-08T07:27:56Z<p>Oh, let's see if I can beat my commoner rolls in the advice thread I posted!</p>
<p><span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (5, 2, 3) = 10</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (4, 2, 1) = 7</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (1, 5, 5) = 11</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (3, 5, 3) = 11</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (2, 1, 4) = 7</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">3d6 ⇒ (1, 5, 6) = 12</span></p>
<p>Nope. 4d6:</p>
<p><span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 6</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 6</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 3</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 5</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 3</span>
<br />
<span class="messageboard-dice">1d6 ⇒ 3</span></p>
<p>oooh. 14, 12, 13, 13, 9, 14</p>
<p>I like those. Wish I had rolled that in kingmaker, hehe.</p>Oh, let's see if I can beat my commoner rolls in the advice thread I posted!
[dice]3d6[/dice]
[dice]3d6[/dice]
[dice]3d6[/dice]
[dice]3d6[/dice]
[dice]3d6[/dice]
[dice]3d6[/dice]
Nope. 4d6:
[dice]1d6[/dice]
[dice]1d6[/dice]
[dice]1d6[/dice]
[dice]1d6[/dice]
[dice]1d6[/dice]
[dice]1d6[/dice]
oooh. 14, 12, 13, 13, 9, 14
I like those. Wish I had rolled that in kingmaker, hehe.Quelian2010-06-08T07:27:56ZRe: Forums: Advice: Dealing with Hide in Plain SightQuelianhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kw7l&page=2?Dealing-with-Hide-in-Plain-Sight#672010-06-18T13:52:49Z2010-06-08T07:04:48Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ProfessorCirno wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Yes, level 2 spells should be able to supercede all supernatural abilities from PrCs.</p>
<p>Why the hell does anyone play anything but casters if that's your philosophy? Really? Only casters are allowed to have cool things? Christ. </blockquote><p>True seeing is a 6th level spell with a 250 gp material component. Yes, it supercedes your supernatural concealment. It specifically states in the spell that this is what true seeing does.
<p>See invisibility is the 2nd level version and we never let it do squat vs HiPS.</p>
<p>EDIT: Nevermind, mistook that to be directed at me.</p>ProfessorCirno wrote:Yes, level 2 spells should be able to supercede all supernatural abilities from PrCs.
Why the hell does anyone play anything but casters if that's your philosophy? Really? Only casters are allowed to have cool things? Christ.
True seeing is a 6th level spell with a 250 gp material component. Yes, it supercedes your supernatural concealment. It specifically states in the spell that this is what true seeing does. See invisibility is the 2nd level version and we never let...Quelian2010-06-08T07:04:48Z