Rasief's page

Attacks of Opportunity, usually.

If the bad guy can't perceive you, he can't take an aoo.

Regarding Monk 1, he has 13 hp (1d8+5), maybe there is something I'm missing but you sould have just 1d8+4, +1 Con and +3 Toughness.

Me and my group aren't quite focused on optimization, flavor is much more important for us. For example, one of the players has a ninja with STR 12 that uses shurikens in time to time just because he's a ninja and ninjas use shurikens (of course he has a shortbow too).

I believe your monk is a good playable and versatile option. He has decent melee attack and damage, a viable ranged attack, not too bad AC.

In the Carrion Crown Adventure Path there is a research quest in the first book, as it seems to be you can retry some knowledge checks via expending a day in a library, there is no mention about there has to be a new player every time the party try.

According to the rules for Lay On Hands a paladin that's healed by negative energy and hurt by positive energy can still heal themselves. They straight up heal wounds, and can alternatively deal damage to undead creatures.

There is a FAQ that clarifies that Lay on Hands uses positive energy so I don't think the dhampir can use it to cure himself.

Keep his spells and abilities the way they are. The problems he has with them are his Special Snowflake Tax.

That would be really hard for a 1st level character IMHO, so this is why I'm thinking about help the player a little.

I'm not worried about using the spells as evil acts, it's just for flavor since the spells are "evil", then it's restricted for a Paladin to use it against others.

Anyway I really don't want to mess all with another evil/paladin thread.

One of my friends is going to play a Dhampir Paladin in our new campaign (Carrion Crown) starting next saturday. Since a Dhampir functions like an undead regarding positive/negative energy, I was thinking to allow him to switch Lay on Hands/Touch of Corruption (Antipaladin's) in case he needs to cure himself, he would lose his paladin abilities if use it to harm anybody.

I also will include the cause wounds line on his spell list in order to allow him to prepare/use wand these spells, again it would be an evil act to use those to hurt anybody else.

I won't include the chanel negative energy.

What do you think, it's overpowered or not?

Regarding the Paladin's code I think it can not be problem if he limits the use of these evel spells/abilities on himsef or over a friendly undead (maybe it won't happen at all).

You can use drain or curse effects, those can't be removed via cure wounds.

As Golux said, it means there is no limit in the number of times you can do the action dayly.

It is not related with the kind of action (standard, move, full round, etc.).

and do not mention the type of weapon (ranged, single, martial, etc. or even melee)

In fact in power attack they mentioned the two-handed weapons as an entry for extra damage, but that does not open the way for ranged attacks with power attack or something similar.

Sinde both feats (Power Attack and Deadly Aim) are described based on the type of attack (melee or ranged) and do not mention the type of weapon (ranged, single, martial, etc. or even melee) it seems to me that in RAI or RAW its clear that ranged attack can be combined with deadly aim always and never with power attack.

As Adamantine Dragon says, power attack is for melee attacks and combat manauvers, deadly aim is for ranged attacks. If you use a thrown weapon to make a ranged attack (depiste if this is a Dex based or a Str based), it's still a ranged attack so deadly aim affects this, not power attack.

Thanks for the advice, actually I'm familiar with that line of feats, not too much time ago I played a ranger archer. I asked just because in some forums there are people that mention bards as excellent archers so I suposed there had to be some special builds around that.

Hello Pathfinder experienced players, as the title says I want to play a bard archer and I'm looking for some advice in how to create a good one.

I'm not a minmaxer, I'm just looking for a reliable build, we will start at level 1, 20 pts buy system. Thanks for the advice.

Shame on you GM if you plan a TPK.

However, it is not common for us to create TPK because of some problem. In Japan, it is said that character should not be died and GM should avoid character's death.

I totally agree with this statement, as a GM I try to tell a story, I usually plan the final comfrontation since the begining and usually try to lead the players to additional personal motivations on the PC's (revenge, sense of honor, a debt) to try to stop the main villian.

The death of a PC is not a desirable situation for me but if it occours it can be explained on the continuity of the story if someone else takes his place, if the entire party is killed its a bit more defficult to explain why a totally new party is trying to take their place, and the personal motivation are just lost, it would see as a different story.

Same as Cheapy said, the only difference between class skills and non-class skills is the 3 bonus ranks you receive at the begining.

Well, iron armor definitely provides protection against iron weapons, not in the form of DR but provides protection.

As for the DR entry the "-" means that there is no way for a weapon to overpass the DR, no matters his material or his magical bonus, so the adamantium armor still keeps the DR 3 against an adamantium weapon.

Humans now get TWO bonus feats!

Is that true? I mean the bonus feat and the +2 bonus on the abilility you want are the things that make humans one of the best classes to play (at least from my point of view).

Two bonus feats is just too much to me.

I'm our last campaign I builded a table of attacks for each of the characters in the back of their character sheets, the barbarian table was something like this (not the real stats, just and example):

Type Attack/Damage

Normal +15/+10 (2d6+8)
Power Attack +13/+8 (2d6+14)
Rage +17/+12 (2d6+14)
Reckless Abandon +17/+12 (2d6+8)
P. Attack + Rage +15/+10 (2d6+20)
P. Attack + Rage + Rec +17/+12 (2d6+20)
.
.
.

And added as many entries as possible combinations, it's a bit large but it worked perfectly for them, helping them to track their modifiers and remember their attack options.

For the fighter I added one column for one handed attacks and another for two handed, you also can include a column tracking the AC (specially for the barbarian).

I think GMing is most about story telling, so if you enjoy to create and narrate stories then you will find DMing quite enjoyable depiste the easy or hard task that could be.

Thanks for the advice, I suppose that I will need to drop some extra restoration stuff in time to time in order to keep them alive without a cleric.

As a DM I'm about to start a Carron Crown campaign, my players will be Paladin, Bard, Rogue, and Alchemist.

Is that group well balanced for the adventure? I mean, they don't have a full arcane caster nor a main healer.

Thanks for the advice.

I think that is really depending on the setting, if slavery is a common practice then it can't be seen as an evil act (certainly not a good one either).

Regarding law and chaos I think slavery is much more a lawful act, that's because it needs some degree of structure in order to work.

5E is a love letter to Old School crowd with some 3E/4E innovations thrown in. WotC is going after all those folks who play OSRIC/C&C/S&W/T&T/X&Y and have no strong brand holding them. Smart move, but is it enough to satisfy the Corporate Overbeast?

That's why they need to go after Pathfinder folk as well, here is were most of the people are.

I readed the last articles on wizard's website and depiste I found most of their content quite interesting, (it seemed to be similar with 3.x/Pathfinder, i.e. class hit dice were the same, fighter d10, cleric and rogue d8, and wizard d6), right now I really don't see the need of try another system when I feel really comfortable with the on I'm playing right now for high fantasy, of course Pathfinder.

Wizards need to make a really really great game if they want the people playing Pathfinder back.

For what you two say, it seems that RotRL is quite better than most of the APs, thanks for the advice.

Though, if you wait 2 months, the updated PF rise of the Runelords will be out.

We want to play, two months is too much ;)

Right now I want to avoid non PFRPG APs (like Rise of the Runelords) because I don't want to spend time making conversions from 3.5.

Regarding our regular game speed, we usually take 3 or 4 sessions per level and since APs seems to have 3 levels per booklet I assume we will take something like 80 sessions (2 years for us).

I'll give them the options of City (Council of Thieves), Horror (Carrion Crown) or Oriental (Jade Regent).

Thanks to everyone for the advice.

As DM I'm about to finish my actual Pathfinder campaign and since I usually don't have enough time to prepare sessions I'm seriously thinking to run an Adventure Path.

Can you people give me some advice regarding which AP is good to start?

I also want to know which is the usual rate of advance, I mean how many sessions per booklet can we take? we usually take 4 hours sessions.

Thanks.

Besides metamagic rods I see feats as something that a creature can achieve through continual practice, not a magic effect, so I would not allow those in my games, of course I can be totally wrong.

The mistake in your math is that you asume that both book covers have the same weight.

You also can say that death has no order or plan to act, she takes poor and rich, child and old, etc. So from that perspective she sould be chaotic.

I prefer to see her as neutral since she comes to all creatures, even gods eventually.

I agree with LN for Death. He plays no favorites and he gets very cranky when people break the only law he cares about.

If there are in the setting a lot of sentient undead out there not being chased by death, I see no reason to believe the god of death is feeling cranky. In this case I go for the true neutral

On the contrary if in the setting the sentient undead are chased by the god of death or his worshipers then he would be lawful neutral.

In my opinion the God of Death has to be true neutral, I see no reason to attach death to law, I mean a lawful lich can try avoid the death same as a chaotic one.

What do you exactly mean with a search tool bar? do you have any example with another Firefox pluggin?

There is already a Google search in the top-right corner of the page.

There is one divine spell that can help, Mighty Strength, it's a 4 level spell (Cleric or Paladin) that provides +8 enhacement bonus to Strength. You can find it in Dwarves of Golarion.

Since it's an enhacement bonus, can stack with Divine Power.

Nice!! thanks for the news

Are out there some news about which will be the next iconic? I supose it will be Seoni but it woud be great to know exactly which one will be.

If you have no problem painting minis you can get some good fighter kind miniatures from DDM.

Two of them come to my mind right now and none of these is rare so they won't be expensive:

Regdar, Adventurer (Giants of Legend - Uncommon): Just need some dark color in his armor.
Dread Guard (Archfiends - Common): He already has a black armor but has a sword & Shield.

Happler wrote:

Also, under Magic:

Not it does not say that it reduces the damage by half, but that the victim only takes 1/2 the damage (rounded down).

Right, but in the case of ray of enfeeblement, we are not dealing with damage, we are dealing with a penalty. If the spell only had the Saving Throw line as "Fortitude Half", I don't think there would be any confusion, however it specifically has text in the spell description that says "A successful Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half.", which is mathematically something different. However, as Bobson suggested, it may be that the right answer will come out if rounding isn't applied to the intermediate step.

Thanks to all for the responses.

That is an ability damage effect so it's also a damage effect.

TOZ wrote:

Some of us have never read Tolkien.

*raises hand*

That'd be me. Though not for lack of trying. I can get almost 3 pages into the Lord of the Rings before I just can't do it anymore.

Quite different here, I've readed LOTR three times and I will certainly read those at least one more time in the future.

Just received my Beginner Box Heroes today and I have to say they're really awesome. Do you people know if is there a plan to relase the remaining heroes soon? I want to see them, specially Amiri (Barbarian), Seelah (Paladin), and Sajan (Monk).

I just sent you an e-mail, let me know what I can do to help.

Master_Crafter wrote:

I think it is important that just getting Crane Style and Crane Wing takes 5 lvls if you don't have the Master of Many Styles archetype (though this archetype does ,with a human's bonus feat, have the potential to get these feats by lvl 2 and the entire chain by lvl 3)

Most fighters will only have to wait one lvl before they get another attack, but in the meantime they can still use two weapon fighting to bypass the Crane Wing feat's block of a single attack. Any Monk with Flurry of Blows could also bypass this defense.

As for the rules lawyering, there was an article somewhere that covered the fact that the rules were intended to both simulate reality and allow some fantastical abilites on top of that, however imperfectly they meet these requirements. Which also means that the developers intended for players to use what is commonly referred to as "common sense," as uncommon as that trait might be.

To Hyla: I believe that the article in question specifically named the method you are using to adjudicate the rules as something along the lines of Rules As I Interpret Them And You Can't Prove Me Wrong, Neyah! (RAIITAYCPMWN)

And just note that if you are going to apply "your Strength modifier, as normal" to your natural attacks you are also making a judgement call as to what is normal.

Normal for what? A melee attack? A rule that only affects attacks with weapons?

It seems that by your own logic you have just defined natural attacks as attacks with natural weapons.

And if that is not enough, what about the sub-section about "'Armed' Unarmed Attacks" in the "Unarmed Attacks" section (CRB p182).

If they are considered armed attacks, what are they "armed" with? Natural weapons? Wouldn't that make it a weapon attack?

Just saying that you should be wary of trying to rules layer too much, especially when it flies in the face of common sense and logic. There will always be someone who can poke holes in it. It might just take a bit to encounter that person.

And it makes

...

I'm happy to not be playing with this guy in my RPG games, he read the rules and he assumes no one else has the right about those.

I really do not see the problem with the gunslinger, he doesn't seem overpowered at all. In fact he brings again one of the things I most love from 3.x/PF, the different mechanics between classes.

Talking about flavor, I really love to play a Roland Deschain's character.

It just bugs me that so many people think pally means "Sturm."

Strictly talking about classes Sturm wasn't even a Paladin, he's listed as a Knight of the Crown, the lowest order of the Knights of Solamnia. Depiste they are LG and they have a code of honor they aren't paladins.

I'm not a vet player, I have just 10 years in RPG world. I even started to play a bit late, that happened in college.

I started with D&D 3.0 and when 3.5 arrived all my group moved to this as well, we explored Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms and in time to time some other systems (Call of Cthulhu, Mutants & Masterminds, World of Darkness) but none of them catched us like D&D 3.5. At some point in 2006 my original group was dissolved and I looked for new players and started DMing.

When 4E arrived we gave a try to it but after about a year I dropped it and stopped to play mainly because that wasn't funny anymore (at least for me).

I was heard about Pathfinder a couple of times but never gave a try until january this year, at first glance I felt that was as good as D&D 3.5 was for me at some point. I looked for my old crew again and started to play. This is definitely the game I want to play right.

The reason: after trying a bunch of systems 3.x/Pathfinder is the kind of game that has the right balance in roleplaying, combat mechanics, and rules wich I feel comfortable with.

By the way I like in general the changes that Paizo crew made over 3.5 on skills, combat manauvers, and classes.