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

Revan's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber. 836 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 836 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Has anyone put all the exploration maps from the various books together as one large map? I'm just going to be starting my players into Varnhold Vanishing soon, so I need to figure out where that map goes in relation to the Greenbelt.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Precisely so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Jamie started the show as a fallen paladin, but not an Antipaladin. Neutral Evil, I think. Chaotic Evil might also be appropriate, as his formative experiences (i.e. slaying the Mad King and getting nothing but grief for it) have soured him on the concept of Law and Good considerably, but he's not a particularly active or malicious evil. In the main, he reacts, usually very violently, to perceived threats to the few things he cares about. Disregarding the scene in the sept that never happened, he's been clawing his way back up the alignment ladder slowly but surely since traveling with Brienne. He hasn't yet gotten north of Neutral, but he's closing in on it.

Arya was Chaotic Good at the outset, but has rapidly descended to Chaotic Neutral, and could well verge into Evil territory soon--the addition of Beric Dondarion and Thoros of Myr to her list shows that murder is becoming her idea of a default response to any given wrong. If she hooks up with the Faceless Assassins, she'll probably settle into a Lawful Evil alignment as they would presumably provide rules and structure to her (admittedly understandable) homicidal urges; otherwise, driven purely by vengeance, she could well become Chaotic Evil.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Simon Legrande wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:
I know a good deal of libertarians myself, so let me ask you this question: Do you find it acceptable to force others to accept your beliefs?

Of course not. But if they're wrong, I certainly attempt to point that out, and convince them of that with logic and discussion. As is occurring here...

Simon Legrande wrote:
Every post like this simply boils down to "I'm more oppressed than you!"
Actually, my point was that I'm not more oppressed than you, I'm about equally oppressed...and it's not a lot, and shouldn't be compared to people who really are pretty oppressed.
If they're wrong... That's awesome right there. Please tell me that you aren't insinuating that someone's personal opinion can be wrong.

Of course it can be. There are people whose 'personal opinion' is that the Earth is flat and 6000 years old, and that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, or that the moon landing was faked, or that virtually every authority figure in the world is secretly a shape-shifting reptilian alien.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
S'mon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Sure, why not? You don't need any more strict discipline to keep from raping your crewmates than to keep from murdering them or stealing from them.

Whether that's true or not (and I don't envy the cabin boy on pre-modern sailing vessels) replace "raping" with "attempting to have sex with" and maybe you can see the problem. Or not, *sigh*.

I think it can be worked around. Charismatic leadership, harsh discipline, religious taboo are just three possibilities I've thought of, trying to work out how to run S&S. It's the attitude that there is nothing to work around, nothing that needs thinking about or justifying, that is problematic.

If by 'attempting to have sex with' you mean 'consensually', then, no, I don't see the problem. If you don't mean consensually, than you haven't actually changed the meaning of what you said. So I'm not sure what your point is there.

Nor do I see why any explanation is needed beyond "they're on the same side", or "The female pirates are every bit as badass as the men", or "Why piss off someone who carries weapons and knows where I sleep, when I can target our raiding victims who I won't be around after the fact?"


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Story Archer wrote:

Let's define 'too common'.

LGBT represents approximately 3.8% of the population. I think its safe to say that among gamers that number is probably a little higher.

In the last two AP's, the last seven books thus far, we've had three LGBT couples front and center, meaning that they and their relationships were important enough to warrant detailed descriptions among the few NPC full page spreads in the back. 3 in 7 books, compared to how many hetero couples getting the same treatment in the same time frame? Any?

See, here's the problem with interpreting the statistics that way--the nature of the narrative is such that a character is only gay when specifically indicated--i.e., when their relationship and sexuality is front and center. Any character whose relationships and sexuality is *not* front and center is presumed straight by default.

It's the same reason it's disingenuous to ask why 'whitewashing' casting practices are problematic, but it's OK for black actors to play 'white' roles. It's because there's almost no such thing as a 'white' or 'heterosexual' or 'male' or 'cisgendered' role. Those traits are so encoded into our minds as the 'default' that those are almost never defining traits of the character in question--their stories would not have to change if one or more of those traits were changed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
nighttree wrote:
Well that just took the whole thing to being so situational as to be almost useless :(

Again: Golems are not the only constructs, only the most iconic. In my last post, I linked to the d20PFSRD's list of all construct type monsters--any one of those not named 'Golem' would be susceptible to the Impossible Sorcerer's enchantments.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
CLASSIC AUX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Because as we all know, relationships, romance and even message have nothing to do with story. Are in fact all best avoided if you want good stories.
Not if they are a distraction. Who the hell cares about these NPCs and why do these Mary Sue’s need to be front and center in every AP holding the players hands?

They're...not. Not really at all. As far as making them 'romance options' go, Paizo has never done significantly more than noting that they might be open to such an advance. Past their introductions, their specific actions in an AP are generally left very vague. That was some people's major complaint about Jade Regent, actually (besides caravan rules being FUBAR)--it billed itself in part on the regular NPCs, but devoted little space within the pages of the AP to developing those characters.

I care about the NPCs because they are *part of the story* and *part of the world*, and the more I know about their backstory, personality, and desires, the better a GM can present a living, breathing world populated by actual people.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Well, I'm no Dev, but it seems to me that Golems would still be immune, but there remain a wide variety of Constructs of varying power levels, from Homunculi and Animated Objects to Akaruzug's who are all now susceptible to your enchantments.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Irori is really the only one I can think of where celibacy would be highly common, and even then, I don't think it would be universal to his priesthood--Irori recognizes all rigorously followed paths to enlightenment, so while many priests of Irori take vows of chastity to avoid distraction, I'm sure that he has tantric sects as well.

Abadar, Erastil, and *maybe* Iomedae, meanwhile, are the only others who would even really care about your sex life, but they just want to make sure you get married, first. (Well, Lamashtu cares about your sex life--she wants you having lots and lots of it so you can birth more mutant babies.) Everyone else ranges from indifferent on the subject to encouraging you to have a good time.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Iomedae (when written properly as opposed to the mockery in Herald of the Ivory Labyrinth) may not be as powerfully interested in redemption as Sarenrae, but neither is she anywhere near as quick to rush to violent judgement as Ragathiel. Iomedae doesn't care who you are, she cares what you do. A tiefling's nature is no fault of their own, and if they rise above those origins to be righteous, all the better. If the character has been faihful and true, Iomedae should have exactly zero qualms about giving them the mantle.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Skills aren't useless, per se, albeit some do not scale very well to the resources of higher level parties. The problem is that, for the most part, they are not defining capabilities that you build a character around, but rather as a means of interacting with the world--the price to pay the game, really. There's a certain amount of fun in being the guy with the most tools, but the best ones are tools that everyone has, and when those tools simply don't apply in a meaningful way, you want other tricks at your disposal.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Versatile Performance is not great at all, unless you're starting your bard out at higher levels. If you want to do the skills in question before you get access to the appropriate Versatile Performance, then you find yourself with a plethora of wasted skill points spent over the course of your career.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Gore is also the attack for spearing someone with a horn, and there are loads of monsters who combine the two.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

All worms that walk were once humans (or elves or halflings or...), until they died and their personality and power were subsumed into a mass of vermin. To their own minds, at least, they are still the person they were, despite their now squamous physiology, and so they still think of themselves as male or female based on what they were in life.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

My way of playing it is that

A) A grapple check triggered by the 'grab' special ability doesn't stop a full attack in progress (but you can't drop one target in between attacks in a full attack sequence to pile on constrict damage, either), and

B) Creatures logistically capable of maintaining multiple characters can maintain all grapples they have established with the same standard action--one check which is then compared to each CMD to see if it keeps its hold.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

The Horizon Walker still does its Nightcrawler thing. Better, in fact, with the Dimensional Assault line of feats Pathfinder created.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

There is no benefit whatsoever to experience points, save perhaps a visceral thrill from watching the number increment closer to the next arbitrary tipping point. Inevitably, experience points promote gaming the system and/or leave the players behind where they should be. There is never any good reason not to simply tell the PCs to level up when they achieve appropriate milestones.

With a handful of exceptions like Spell Focus and Eldritch Heritage, virtually any feat chain with the X/Improved X/Greater X nomenclature should be condensed down to a single scaling feat.

I reject size-based immunity to combat maneuvers. If you have enough skill, strength, and levels to overcome a skyscraper-sized creature's enormous CMD--then you're a superhero, and deserve to succeed, rather than being constrained by arbitrary realism.

I allow Chaotic Good Paladins and Lawful Evil Antipaladins, and monks of any alignment.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Since Supernatural abilities aren't subject to being dispelled, I'd say there's a very solid case for Detect Magic only detecting spells and spell-like ability.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

The write-up my friend sent me which inspired this idea in the first place had some preconstructed armies for the PCs--some who they would start with, such as the ronin-and-peasant forces of Jiro, or the soldiers of Enganoka from securing Itsuru's place as daimyo, along with other armies which could be recruited in special events--such as travelling to a monastery to recruit a force of Sohei.

I suppose one idea might be to alter and expand on the 'Rebellion Points' mechanic presented in the module--rather than a measure of the PCs success at the end of the adventure, it could potentially be implemented as a measure of the morale of the rebel armies, the goodwill they have earned with the people, and thus their ability to hold themselves together and keep supplied and fit.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

That's all well and good, but rather fails to answer the question I asked. Mass combat rules *do* serve the story here, as the final act is a war of revolution, and the prospect of leading armies is something the players have expressed a great deal of excitement over. I want to use these rules. I need advice about the best way to do so, not advice to not do so.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:
To butcher a phrase coined by Nixon, 'It isn't Evil when a Goddess does it.'

A sentiment that is neither Lawful, Good, Just, nor Honorable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
LordOfThreshold wrote:
And if you think 20D6 Sonic is bad, maybe you don't have what it takes to face the raw forces of the Abyss.

20d6 sonic damage isn't bad for these PCs to be encountering. 20d6 sonic damage inflicted by a supposed ally and patron because you didn't answer a question she really has no good reason according to the exact,self-contradictory criteria she has in mind, on the other hand, is petty, vindictive, absurd, and unworthy of anyone with a Good alignment, let alone the Goddess of Honor and Justice.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
On the topic of shields, characters who are using weapon finesse (like a dagger/rapier) take the AC penalty from a shield (like a buckler) to their attack rolls, if they choose to "carry" one.

Where is this stated? I know that happens if you're not proficient in the shield, but where does weapon finesse come into it?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

The feat does exactly what it says it does (grammatically). If you have this feat you can either choose +1 hit point and +1 skill rank, or you can choose the alternate class reward.

You do not get your choice of two of the three, but it does not preclude you from taking an alternate class reward if you choose to do that instead.

Then alternate FCBs should never have been mentioned in the feat, as it has no interaction with them whatsoever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Frankly, even more than the over-the-top, out-of-proportion, unpaladinlike punishments being thrown out based on vague criteria, the fundamental problem of the scene is that it makes zero sense for Iomedae to be asking these questions at all. In the first place, she really has no other options for this mission, so disqualifying the PCs doesn't make a *great* deal of sense. Secondly--actions speak louder than words. Any drunken braggart might claim they know how to defeat a demon lord. What does asking the question tell Iomedae that the countless heroic and legendary deeds the PCs have already performed do not tell her? And what possible relevance does being able to identify a mohrg she once killed have to, well...anything? The only question that seems at all relevant to the circumstances is the one regarding redemption--and that's the worst of the lot. Can't just say Yes, or no, or debate it with your party members...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

The largest appearance of Kuthites in the Adventure Paths so far has been in the Curse of the Crimson Throne path, though their interactions with the PCs are...complex, to say the least. There was also a heretical Kuthite in the Shattered Star path. Can't speak to any modules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

I think making this a Mythic Trial is the problem, James. By making that choice, you had to make it an 'encounter'. Building the scene that way naturally casts Iomedae as an antagonist.

And I'm sorry to say, I think your development of the text ended up portraying exactly the opposite of what you intended. The wording of what she's looking for in the answers is vague and even self-contradictory--humble but confident; conflicted, but providing a definite answer, yet not arguing amongst the party. Reading all that, it feels like the PCs are bound to walk away from the encounter imprisioned, or banished, or banished and then thrown into a prison in the place they were banished to. (#MyLittlePonyMemeHumor)

I think Adelai Niska might disagree with your assessment of a torturer's concern with keeping his subjects alive. In all seriousness, though, I wouldn't call the trumpets 'torture' as such. But I might at the least call it bullying. Corporal punishment simply seems massively out of proportion for the situation. Put it another way--if the damage weren't a trumpet blast, but took the form of Iomedae physically striking the PC who answered incorrectly, would we still have an argument over whether the punishment was inappropriate?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

And 'changing the game entirely' and 'using the full array of creatures, classes, abilities, and tactics in the game to account for the varied abilities of the PCs' are also two very different things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Current gun mechanics in Pathfinder target touch AC (well, at ranges which are usually absurdly close for a ranged-focused character, anyway, but I digress), but that doesn't mean gun mechanics *have to* target touch AC.

Guns do not 'guarantee an instant kill', at least no more so than someone getting an axe buried in them does. There are countless people alive today who have survived gunshot wounds, and we don't have the amazing curative powers available to high-fantasy settings like Golarion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

It's not punishment for 'screwing with the goddess' that's the problem. It's the punishment for getting her questions 'wrong'. Huge amounts of sonic damage and deafness is not a proportional response for a LG goddess to give PCs for disagreeing with each other over whether attempting to redeem the wicked is prudent.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

The finale of Jade Regent is effectively a war to reclaim the throne of Minkai; it would seem the perfect opportunity to employ Ultimate Campaign's Mass Combat rules; my players seem very jazzed about the possibility of leading armies, and a friend has sent me some suggestions for opposing armies for them to face. My questions for the forum are threefold:

1st) Do those who have run a lot of mass combats have any advice for a GM new to them on pitfalls to avoid, alterations to make, and other ways to make the experience as excellent as possible?

2nd) Mass Combat rules, particularly logistics and the growth of the army, are closely tied to Kingdom Building rules. Does anyone have advice on decoupling the two?

3rd) I've incorporated the Ruby Phoenix Tournament into my games, and as it approaches its conclusion, I need to decide on a prize for the players. My current thought is an artifact which will provide bonuses to Mass Combat--a powerful boon to characters intending a revolution, but which would not meaningfully affect individual power level. Any advice on what would be appropriate powers for such an item?

Thanks all for your assistance!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Suffice it to say: there's a difference between attacking a square you believe an invisible enemy is in, and attacking a square you have every reason to believe is empty to activate an ability triggered by attacks.

There's a difference between taking a hand off a longsword to use Lay on Hands on yourself, and taking a hand off a longsword to be able to use an ability which gives a benefit in exchange for having a hand free, without actually taking the penalties that entails.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Turgan wrote:

Morphling's example clearly is not taken from gaming experience, because dragons don't work that way.

They usually have six good attacks (all within three points of each other), not one. And they are intelligent.

Not to mention breath weapons and frequently spellcasting.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

If you take the attack action, you're attacking. If there's nothing to attack, you can't attack, therefore you can't take the attack action.

Also--if you can take a two-handed attack, then remove the hand and have Crane Wing available, can the Magus two-hand a long-sword, and then remove the hand, so he has a hand free while wielding a one-handed weapon and use Spell Combat? Can I two-hand a longsword, then remove my hand and make an Unarmed Strike?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

(sighs) Any Crane user can use a one handed weapon with two hands on his turn and take his hand off it at the end of the turn, completely satisfying the feat. It would even look like he's flipping it around and ending his stroke with it held off to one side or something, poised to strike in the next round. Thematically, this is a katana or bastard sword, but both Aldori blades and longswords qualify, as do scimitars.

I didn't ask if you'd be altering encounters, wide open. I asked if you would modify your melee beasties the exact same way for a non-Crane Winger as you would for a Crane Winger. You're building a straw man and asking it the wrong questions.

And so, several dozen combats passing by in which the PC doesn't take damage without you radically changing the encounter to compensate for the one feat gets the GM feeling frustrated with their build, which means you should keep right on doing it and play through a meaningless combat. Good to know. (in other words, hyperbole doesn't make a point, either).

==Aelryinth

You have to be 'fighting defensively with one hand free' to get Crane Wing's benefit. Fighting defensively is done as part of your attack. If you don't have a hand free when you attack, you don't have a hand free for the purposes of Crane Wing.

Someone else said it for me already, but no, I wouldn't change an encounter in exactly the same way for a party without Crane Wing as a party with Crane Wing. Because different parties with different strengths require different strategies to counter. But I do have highly defensive characters to counter, and similar strategies do apply.

Adding the Advanced Template--a so-called 'Simple' template designed explicitly for the GM to add on the fly--does not constitute a 'radical' change. Neither is adding another monster or two to the encounter. Adding class levels is a bit more involved, but if they were a classed enemy already, adding an extra level is not terribly taxing.

(Frankly, my most radical changes have nothing to do with countering party abilities--I give virtually every sapient enemy my players face (or at least the humanoids) class levels. Even if it's just a level of Commoner, there's no reason you should encounter a classless Ogre if you'd never encounter a classless Human. And I love to find thematic points to play with mechanics I haven't tried before, like turning the Queen's Physicians and the Gray Maidens in Curse of the Crimson Throne into Plaguebringer Alchemists and Order of the Lion Cavaliers. Or maybe Samurai with tweaked weapon proficiencies to really make them implacable...)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

And why can't a spring attacker use his weapon 2handed? Nothing in there requiring a one handed weapon...which he also has, by the way.

As for adding templates, you're now catering to it: I can't deal with Crane Wing, let me change EVERYTHING. If you have to change your entire game just to adjust for the one feat, it's too strong.

Or, in other words, if you took out Crane WIng, would you have to do all that stuff just to have effective melee beasties?

As for letting them be defensive: why not instead wave the whole combat, just say you kill the thing while taking one lucky hit, and just not play it? You'd accomplish more faster for about the same result.

Spring Attackers can use two-handed weapons. Crane Wingers can't. Well, maybe if they dip into Alchemist and get a vestigial arm, I suppose.

And if Crane Wing wasn't present, would I still be altering encounters? Yes. Yes I would. I'm doing it right now, in both games I'm running. That's not saying 'I can't deal with Crane Wing'--or the Heavens Oracle or the Summoner riding his Grappling specialist Eidolon. That's saying that Paizo doesn't know my group as well as I do, so I can use the framework of the story and characters they provided, while I take care of 'dealing with' whatever powers my players brought to the table.

So, a single combat passing by in which one PC doesn't take damage, and gets to feel good about their build, means to you that you should just throw out playing combat altogether. Good to know.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Before: While fighting defensively, you can ignore one melee attack per round that would otherwise hit you.

Now: Once per round, while fighting defensively, you can add +4 to your AC against a single attack, before it's rolled. If you, for some bizarre reason are in Total Defense, you can do the deflection.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

As if a CW has to be low damage.

But, you know, at least he can HIT the barb and paladin, do some damage, make the party spend resources. Which is the whole idea.

When you can't do any damage at all...that sucks. Why even fight?

==Aelryinth

Why aren't you doing any damage at all again?

unless, again, you are picking monsters who only have one attack.

if you have a monster with one attack, it's hosed. Even if that attack is a Vital Strike.

You're playing a high AC character. Generally, monsters are only going to hit such on a 14+ or better.

That means secondary attacks are 16+ or 19+ to hit. And you take no damage, or so little it doesn't mean anything.

Functional invulnerability is what you have. trying to hit something with 28 AC with your +12/+7 to hit monster is an exercise in frustration. When you do hit, and the WIng takes it out, that's worse.

The problem doesn't get that much better with scaling, if you take care to keep AC high...tertiary attacks are meaningless, and the PC's have more tools for keeping monsters to fewer attacks.

From the GM's standpoint, it's incredibly frustrating to not be able to use melee tools. You'd get the same frustration from a character immune to spells - 'Oh, I'll just melee them' doesn't erase the sense of uselessness, especially if the character then takes steps with the rest of the party to defend against other tactics.

It's still an Ugh moment.

==Aelryinth

Out of the Bestiary, secondary attacks are, as often as not, more primary natural attacks which will be at the same bonus. Or maybe it has Haste or Two-/Multi-Weapon Fighting, or both, and can make several iteratives at the same bonus.

If a party member has 28 AC, and major enemies +12/+7 to hit, then the problem seems to be on enemy selection. I make liberal use of the Advanced template and adding class levels when I'm running APs. If an enemy can't hit the PCs, it's probably the wrong enemy. On the other hand, if it's a cannon fodder enemy, and has a more reasonable chance to hit other party members--sometimes it's all right for the players to kick ass and feel awesome.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

And I just outlined several ways to hit and deal damage to Crane Wingers. Anything that can hit them twice, anything that catches them flat-footed, plus the many, many non-melee options in the game.

Definitionally, if you're Spring Attacking with Crane Wing, you're not two-handing, full-attacking, or even Vital Striking, which means you're doing considerably less damage than the Rapid Shot/Many Shot Archer, the Pouncing Barbarian, or basically anybody making a full-attack. Not to mention that the class who can get that combo online fastest is notorious for having trouble hitting in the first place, even when it's using the attack booster it can't use with the combo.

There's a pretty huge difference between the party having to deal with something every encounter, when they're more or less locked into their chosen suite of abilities; and the GM having to deal with it every encounter, when he can completely change the abilities and tactics of his 'side' every encounter. If a party encountered nothing but swarms, they're in trouble if they all rely on targeted damage. If a PC can throw swarms at encounters, not everything he fights will lack area effects.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

His solution will be to gang up on that PC with two or more monsters, or one monster with a lot of natural attacks, or have archers and alchemists and spellcasters and pouncing and or Come and Get Me barbarians, or use effects and terrain that make mobility difficult, or something that the spring-attacking Crane Winger has trouble tagging much damage onto with their single one-handed attack a round, so it can focus on the greater damage output of the Barbarian and Paladin, or the insta-win potential of the Wizard or Oracle.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

For mocking, sure. But blasting them if they answer her questions 'wrong' could very easily start the adventure off on the wrong foot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
richard develyn wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
First, this has been bugging me, and others have touched on it, but I've not seen it noted outright...
My little take on demographics (post #209) suggested 1 in 30 population had PC class levels.

So this thorp we've been discussing probably *wouldn't* have witches. A hamlet could have up to two PC-classed characters. How likely is it that one of them was chosen by a mysterious otherworldly force to be granted strange eldritch magics? Maybe one of them, almost certainly not both. Did that one witch, if she exists, take the Slumber Hex instead of Cauldron, Healing, Charm, Feral Speech, or Tongues? (And that's if a witch, in-universe, even chooses their Hexes; they may only learn what their patron elects to teach them through the familiar.)

By the time we get to a Village, there's a decent chance of their being a witch, and maybe even multiple witches. But I wouldn't expect lone raiders (at least of size and power any less than a Dragon) to attack settlements of this size, at least not in any way more sustained than grabbing cows from outlying farms--at that point, action economy is turning against the raiders to an increasingly massive degree. If enough creatures are attacking you, even if they can only hit on a natural 20, 5% can happen often enough to be lethal.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Fergie wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Good question. Same question, two wizards.

Offhand, I can't think of anything but charm person, or perhaps the real long-shot of a lucky blindness spell, that would take out the giant.

My money is on the witches.

Revan wrote:
Then drop the odds again because of the need for specific positioning, and the certainty of death for one or both if the witch doesn't go first...

Given the giants stealth of +2 (+6 in snow) and its -1 initiative mod, I think the odds aren't affected much. Again, we are talking about two second level characters vs a CR 9. They should have basically 0% chance of defeating the giant.

We're assuming elite array for this witch? So if she put her next highest score into Dexterity, that gives her Initiative +2. That's only a 3 point difference with the giant's initiative. She can improve that with Improved Initiative, of course, but that's one more necessity towards making this work, and she has two feats at most--and in all likelihood, one of them spent on Extra Hex. If she does have a +6 Initiative, she still needs to roll a 14 to *ensure* she acts before the giant.

Perception also isn't a class skill for her, and at this point, she's running out of points to invest in Wisdom. Put her sole +1 into Wisdom, and she's looking at a +3 perception modifier--not the best odds of spotting the giant, especially if its snowy. The giant, meanwhile, rocks a +10 Perception; if the party isn't trying to be stealthy, he can spot them 100 feet out without rolling, and one thrown rock certainly annihilates the witch. It probably can't take the fighter out in one hit with the rock, but there's a good chance in two--and both need to close in fairly close before Slumber+CDG can possibly work.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Fergie wrote:
Rerednaw wrote:

With a 15 int the Slumber DC becomes 10+1+2 = 13.

The generic frost giant has a will save of +6. So he needs a 7+ or it's a 70% of success.

Don't forget the racial adjustment, and let's just assume a second level witch. So we now have a 40% chance that the witch will take out the giant.

So 40% or even dropping it down to a 35% because of the chance the giant could roll a 20 on his coup de grace save. While I would normally scoff at such a limited chance of success in a a monsters vs PCs battle, we are talking about two guys taking on a CR way, way, way beyond anything they should have a chance at. While hold person comes close, there is nothing in the game that allows such nasty save-or-almost-certain-death, and nothing that does it without: SR, an AoO, a spell slot, feats or other investments, etc. Even the heavens oracle isn't even close to being able to color spray the giant for more then the minimum effect.

Then drop the odds again because of the need for specific positioning, and the certainty of death for one or both if the witch doesn't go first...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

How many thorps have a Witch instead of an Adept, given that NPC classes are more prevalent than PC classes?

How many of those thorps will have a 2nd level witch? If Slumber doesn't put the enemy out for at least two rounds, the odds of CDG drop precipitously.

How many of those witches will have the Slumber Hex, when they could be making a nice living off Cauldron, Healing the townsfolk, using Charm to settle brawls and arguments far more safely and amicably than by knocking someone out, using Feral Speech to find out what's agitating the animals the thorp relies on...

How often will that witch not get killed by a thrown rock? All it takes is the giant making the first attack, before everyone has had a chance to get inside. Let alone if the cottages have thatched roofs, made of vegetation, so probably hardness 0. Or the GM observing that a giant is the same size as catapult, presumably throwing projectiles of the same size, and so 'similar' to a siege engine, as the rules on ranged attacks and hardness allow for.

That's a lot of 'what ifs' to get to an uncertain strategy.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Diego Rossi wrote:
The rules for settlements say that we can find spellcasting services in a settlement as small as a thorp with fewer than 20 people in it. The witch is one of the best characters for that as one can cover a large selection of arcane and divine spells. The best hexes for a village witch would be charm, slumber and healing.

Slumber is certainly one of, if not the best hex for a witch who expects to get into a fight. But a 'village witch' is as like as not to be a healer, soothsayer, or wise woman. I'd expect any adventuring witch to start with Slumber, but the village witch has every incentive to take Healing, Fortune, Ward, Cauldron, or Charm over more offensive hexes. I wouldn't put Slumber anywhere near the top choice for a village witch.

You gave your witch 17 Int. That gives her Slumber Hex a DC of 13. The Ogre has a 50/50 shot at making the save. And keep in mind the Ogre is only CR 3--not remotely a 'mid-level' threat. A village militia would probably have a solid chance of taking one down, albeit with casualties expected. In the case of a lone ogre, it's not the thought that they *can't* fight it that keeps the villagers in check, but fear of how many they'd lose, making it easier to give him what he wants. A Slumber Hex is something new in that calculus, but again--the witch has to get within 30 ft., and a fighter type has to get right next to it, because it will only fall asleep for one round. They get one shot to try it, and it's nowhere close to a sure thing. That's one heck of a risky tactic, if you ask me. Make it a real mid-level like a Hill Giant (who notably, are specifically noted as preferring to throw rocks from a distance first), and the chance of landing the hex gets smaller, the payout of failing is more likely certain death...I just can't see a village relying on it, or a monster losing sleep over it.

It's a powerful Hex, a must for PCs, but I cannot see it affecting world building, especially if you don't assume that witches with the Slumber Hex are everywhere.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
richard develyn wrote:
Elro the Onk wrote:

Actually, I think that would have been a good idea anyway.

Against any group of enemies, the way action economy works out tends to make singletons a bit easier than they look (although I'll grant that really big singletons should have felt somewhat "world-immune") - a few mooks along to get the action economy back towards parity vs a group has *always* been a (mechanically) good idea.

I find it a bit anti-thematic, to be honest with you.

I prefer the idea of lone giants wandering the wilderness (there's one in the Kingmaker AP, for example) rather than having them trail a mook-entourage around just in case there's some poxy 1st level witch and her brother hiding in the bushes.

Richard

1) Witches are not necessarily common enough that the giants would *have* to accoun for them 100% of the time

2) You've finally picked a giant for your example who does have a decent change of failing a Will save against a 1st level Slumber Hex. It's also 2 CRs lower than the first one you picked, so the goalposts have moved back a bit.
3) Once again, success assumes the witch can get within 30 ft., and the fighter directly next to the Giant--who can smash them without breaking a sweat.
4) If you're really concerned about protecting against this corner case while keeping a 'lone wanderer', it's entirely thematic for giants to have pets with them--Dire Wolves for hunting dogs, a pet Dire Bear (highly common for Stone Giants in Golarion lore), a herd of Aurochs... They may not have the intellect to wake their Master up, but they'd certainly interfere with attempts to take advantage of his slumber.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
richard develyn wrote:

The point I'm trying to make is that it shouldn't be possible for me to think of *any* scenario, regardless of tactics, where two 1st level characters with one ability can trump two 10th level characters without it.

At least, I can come up with examples using Slumber Hex, but not anything else.

I mean, there could be all sorts of reasons why the Horned Devil chooses to teleport in. Maybe he wants to see the terror in their faces when they die.

The Frost Giant could come across the characters in an icy cave somewhere. Suddenly it walks in and you're 10' away.

I recall in Savage Tide when a T-Rex emerged from the jungle on to the beach. Similar situation - suddenly a big-hitter appears within reach of the party.

Richard

Except they don't trump 10th level characters. 10th level casters without the Slumber Hex have around twice as much chance at killing the devil as a 1st level witch with the Slumber Hex, if not more.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Stephen Ede wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:


Considering that the Giant, if it fails it save is going to asleep for 1 round, unless the fighter is adjacent to it or within 5', a coup de gras isn't possible, and the now angry giant is going to stand up and kill the two of them.
Why would the Giant wake up after 1 round?

Because Slumber only works for a number of rounds equal to the witch's level.

1 to 50 of 836 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.