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

Rogue Eidolon's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 2013 Marathon Voter, 2014 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStarFullStarFullStarFullStar Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston. 3,238 posts (3,356 including aliases). 6 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


1 to 50 of 258 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I always apply drunkenness rules to PCs who drink liquor for power. It still gives them plenty of ki to spend on their abilities before they run into trouble, and it seems to be an intended limiting factor of those archetypes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kieviel wrote:
Why does Nyralothotep have a double entry?

He's tricksy and appears in many guises.

Cheliax

5 people marked this as a favorite.
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:
I personally am heading straight to the chapter on selling my soul!

Rightly so! That's my chapter and includes the second best advice I can give practical-minded future immortals and devil-may-care despots! Win eternal power and influence semi-gods with such irrefutable tips as:

* How to untethered a ratty soul from your gross meat-body!

* Determining (and increasing!) the value of your mortal essence!

* Finding agents you can absolutely, always, 100% trust to give you fair value for your afterlife!

* Tips to assure you'll never, ever, ever, need (or want!) a hereafter!

* Phenomenal rewards vastly outweighing pedestrian mortal taboos.

* Practical ways to make your most depraved—er, LORDLY—dreams come true!

* And Much, MUCH more!

Act fast! Before the soul market's flooded with the tarnished essences of everyone who bought the Kobold Guide to Magic first!

At the home office, we deal in...futures. I'd like to make a deal with you. In exchange for all you desire, I promise I won't ask for anything you'll need for as long as you live. Now what could be more fair than that?

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Confusingly, I think officially all the empyreal lords grant all the subdomains.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Tim, you are doing everyone a favor by emphasizing these things directly in a bit of a confrontational way to bring it good visibility. Anyone who has freelanced before should know these things already, and newcomers hoping to use Wayfinder as an entry point are much better served in their future efforts by having this drilled into their head, rather than simply a polite and quiet rejection without knowing why.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:

I stopped reading after "ranger's adamantium greataxe".

Because it's clear that your comparing system mastery disparity at that point and not the classes.

Big two-handed weapons like that are good for switch hitters as far as I've seen, and adamantine is a good material to pick.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Erick Wilson wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:


The honest truth is that any party that makes good use of their martial characters, optimized or not, can always keep going for many on-CR encounters before resting if they have enough sources of healing (like a wand of CLW). It's generally parties "carried" by the casters that wind up needing to rest sooner because even if your level 7 sorceress can wipe out the encounter with one 3rd level spell, she'll eventually run out. The exception being witches with their at-will hexes.
I know this. You know this. But the encounter design of many mods and APs does not reflect this fact.

I dunno--it's all in how you sell the amount that the PCs should keep pushing each day. In fact, I daresay that in a campaign where the PCs try to press onward, martials and especially fighters shine more. I always see these threads about how you could just have a party with only casters and I think to myself that those groups must never deal with mega-dungeons where it's in the party's best interest to clear out as much as possible in one day, while they have the element of surprise.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Erick Wilson wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:


Actually, there's a pair of characters in our local PFS group with 11 Cha sorcerers where its terribly important for them not to get more Cha (Karmic, and they are built to fail as many Concentration checks as possible, with Paired Opportunists).
Okay, that's hilarious.

They're pretty deadly, especially after they both dipped Cavalier so they could give everyone Paired Opportunists. Their best module ever was the one where they were given a drug that dealt Cha damage.

Them: "What!? It lowers our Cha-based checks and doesn't prevent us from casting spells. Must have MORE!"

Concentration->Fail->Everyone gets a swing at +4

They also always say "This is our most powerful magic, our 1st-level spell. It's more powerful than the cantrip because it has a 10% higher chance to fail to be cast defensively."

Or "Damn it! I actually cast shield! Oh well, I guess I do get +4 AC..."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Marthkus wrote:
Erick Wilson wrote:
And no, it's not Stormwind, and again, Stormwind is in some cases not actually a fallacy. It's just oversimplified. It's a fallacy only if you view it as necessarily applying to every instance.

No stormwind is always a fallacy.

There is picking sub-optimal options because you will have fun with them. But that is doing mechanical things for mechanical reasons, which has nothing to do with RPing.

A ninja not taking vanishing trick is just being irresponsible. That's like playing a barbar with 14 strength or a sorcerer with 9 cha. You're just being silly.

Actually, there's a pair of characters in our local PFS group with 11 Cha sorcerers where its terribly important for them not to get more Cha (Karmic, and they are built to fail as many Concentration checks as possible, with Paired Opportunists).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:
OHGODWHATHAVEIDONE!?

Hahahaha, sweet!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Liz Courts wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

OK, but how about a parting gift of telling us what does the "K" in "Sean K Reynolds" mean?

Kombustible?
Konvertible?
Krusty the Klown?
Kissable?
Korny?
Kitkat?
Katyusha?
Kooky?

The K stands for Awesome.

Kawesome! It is similar to a Gninja in the way that the sheer Kawesomeness defies the spelling of the word awesome.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Claxon wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
"Oh, no! A 20th level Barbarian has a good will save! How will I, a 20th level full caster, deal with this threat? It's not like I have any option other than directly targeting enemies with a SoL effect!"
Why is a barbar capable of resisting the highest possible DC from creatures that are not un-stated Gods?
Why should spellcasters always succeed? So one class, one, has a chance to not get railed hard by the 20th level Mythic 10 caster. You'll be glad you have the barbarian in your party when they're the only one that can survive the magic to bring the caster down. And you'll also be happy when he can sunder the domination magic off of you.

After one fight, the barbarian retreated with pretty much everybody else polymorphed into a fish or turned to stone. He was also in death mode, so he had to keep raging, down some potions for half healing, and finally fall unconscious. Fortunately the enemy has a psychosis that causes him to generally ignore opponents that leave him be, so the barbarian was able to rest, heal up, and then spell sunder all the fish with his bare hands (but he couldn't recognize which were which, so he wound up freeing some other things too...oops!)

All in all, it was a hilarious tale for us to tell and a lot of fun to be had, and the barbarian got to be the big damn hero.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Cure spells with a successful save still heal for half hit points.

Heal doesn't. Nor condition removal spells if those are relevant. And the very best actual Cure spell only heals a maximum of 52 HP, 26 on a Save. Any high level Barbarian worth his salt has at least double that from Rage.

I never said it wasn't doable, just an annoying difficulty to overcome.

You do it post combat and spam the spells.
Which is still an annoying difficulty to overcome, as you are unable to be efficiently healed during combat. It's not as if you're gonna be raging afterwards, anyways.

This--we had a superstitious barbarian in Rise of the Runelords for Parts 5 and 6. The player of the Mystic Theurge first thought the barbarian was OP, but he said after playing all the way through that the penalty of losing in-combat spells was massive. Flat-out negating the heal spell is big when those are flying around to every other character (with Reach Spell and the like). That superstitious barbarian died in something like every major battle. Did he do amazing things? Absolutely. Spell Sunder was huge several times, his saves were unassailable, and his full attack damage was better than the fighter when he used Raging Brutality (though the fighter's staggering criticals and dazing assault were a sight to see).

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mahtobedis wrote:

I don't suppose anyone has had a chance to think more about this question in the last few weeks?

My poor imp familiar got epically exploded

** spoiler omitted **

and I want to replace it with a pooka, but I don't really know what a pooka can and cannot do at the moment.

One of the few imps that will be remembered by paladins as a martyr, albeit inadvertently. A paladin can only dream of making such a sacrifice for the cause of good.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Sin of Asmodeus wrote:

Not to be a jerk but. You guys are doing a disservice to your players every time you pull a punch or pull multiple punches.

This causes GMs like me who sit down and don't pull punches and let the dice fall as they will to be perceived in a bad light because we run a fair and even game and characters die.
Stupidity leads to character creation.
So does softball leveled pathfinders that have never once been in fear of death.
YMMV.

MMDV.

Each situation is different. I don't find it a disservice when I pull punches. If you are perceived as the bad guy for running your table the way you do, it is no one's fault but the player.

If you're going to softball, though, at least do it secretly through pulling punches in the tactics or the like. The problem I think Sin was having is that Akerlof is openly breaking the rules to try to prevent the death (by clearly allowing multiple rerolls per person, which might make the players think that this is an acceptable GM ruling and then try to pressure GMs into using that ruling). There are more graceful ways to do it if you must.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A lot of the above is good advice.

One thing I've noticed is that after you've built the stable, most good GMs are easily able to escape it. If you want to keep them, I recommend the following:

1) Use Exceptional Locks for the stable, augmented with an arcane lock spell with as high of a caster level as you can. I know it's expensive, but it's worth it. Check regularly in case the arcane lock is dispelled, as it is more likely that good GMs have a +20 to Disable Device than +30.

2) Keep up a dimensional lock type effect up on the stable at all times. Good GMs usually know about inexpensive ways of escaping dimensionally (like getting something to grapple them while wearing Boots of Escape, which is cheaper than a Cape of the Mountebank, or even just a humble blink spell). The easiest way to do this is with a forbiddance tied to a hallow, but remember to make a pass phrase so you can send in new GMs to the stable without them taking damage.

3) Make the walls of the stable adamantine, possibly magically augmented for extra hardness. Good GMs are likely to have some kind of adamantine weapon, and you really don't want to come back to the stable and find that they've broken a hole through the wall (Also make sure the ceiling and floor are equally secure.

4) Put up a private sanctum on the stable, line the walls with lead, and surround the stable with a small moat of running water by diverting a nearby river. If you want to keep those good GMs, you don't want other good GMs, particularly Andoren ones, to find the GMs using divination magic, and these precautions should prevent most of the simplest techniques (locate object, locate creature, scrying, etc).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Right now our caravan has:

6 PCs
1 reincarnated former PC
Ameiko
Sandru
Koya
Shalelu
Bevelek and Vankor Dalmuvian
2 new Sandpoint NPCs
Kelda
Spivey
Zaiobe
1 new Land of the Linnorm Kings NPC
Helgarval
Ulf
Arya (modified female Skygni)
1 new Crown of the World NPC
Miriya (from Legendary Games's Under Frozen Stars)
1 new Tian Xia NPC
1 new Uqtaal Necropolis NPC (Nork-Yutt, the yeti who watches the spirit tree and wanted to see more trees and spirits)
14x featureless NPC rabble mostly picked up in Kalsgard


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's funny, I was just thinking about this article when I saw yet another myopic post that claimed DPR was everything and totally ignored on-hit debuffs like Dirty Trick, Trip, and more. I was thinking of linking that person here but just decided to give up.

On a totally different note, however, I have a thought about the answer to this:

Lamontius wrote:
Tark are you going to cover using some of these maneuvers on your allies

The problem with that is that many of these maneuvers assume enemies and are simply nonfunctional when used on allies, requiring GMs to make table decisions about things like (among other things)

*Can you drop your CMD voluntarily so that a size Tiny familiar can pick you up and Reposition you?

*Does it really avoid all AoOs for being "forced" movement, particularly when you are actually doing the thing above if the GM allows you to do so.

I usually allow PCs to drop some aspects of their CMD but not all, and I still give AoOs if the movement is desired by the person being moved rather than forced. However, I could see GMs deciding both ways on both of those.

Given that it's hard to say where a ruling will go on these issues with maneuvers on willing targets, it makes sense not to focus on them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That presumes that the GM is doing the math like we are here in the playtest thread and figures out that Dualistic is intentionally a huge power creep. What if the GM figures "Dreamscarred has always come through for me before with presenting options balanced with my core, so I'll assume that they priced this Dualistic thingy to be a neat option for someone who likes the concept of spawning a second weapon that costs roughly the same amount as it would to buy two of the same weapons. It's pretty unlike them to release creep on purpose." Then after playing for a while with Nick outshining everyone in the GM's game, particularly Eddy, the GM has to try to figure out how that happened.

On the boards, you will hear some of the most invested players respond who can do the math easily, but there's plenty of people out there buying and enjoying their DSP products who are like the example above.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Prince of Knives wrote:

TWF looks a lot better on first blush than it ends up being, mostly due to its total reliance on full attacks. Dualistic won't fix that, for anyone. What it does do is free up some wealth for the TWFer to try and solve that for themselves. Does that make sense to ya? No, honestly - it's late at night here and I'm worried that I'm not expressing myself properly because I'm tired.

No, you're making good sense, and it's as I suspected. Then it is clear that the goal is, even beyond the new classes, to also offer options that are so fundamentally superior to the core options that anyone who uses the core options to do the same thing will be comparatively terrible. In that case, much as Cheapy is my buddy, I suggest that you ignore him. He is trying to suggest a way to create something that is balanced with the way PFRPG works right now, but you are looking to improve (I'll use the word improve, even if not everyone agrees that it's an improvement, as that is the goal) upon some pretty fundamental aspects of the game by intentionally building massive creep. His advice isn't helpful to you in that regard, and neither would be mine. Anyway, I wish you best of luck in that venture--I love different kinds of modifications and rules and tinkerings with the way things work. The only suggestion I give is that you put a disclaimer foreword or little box in the product in general, something like:

"GMs--unlike in other Dreamscarred Press products, this special product is intended to enhance your game by providing powerful new options for areas of the games that are simply more potent than anything your players currently have. This is because we considered to be too weak as they stand. Please note that your players who use these options will blow the players who don't use them and build characters in the same niche out of the water, so if you're going to include these options, you should recommend to all your players to use them, and be sure to familiarize yourself with them enough to recommend them to your players.

Players--Because of the particular goals of this product, the items and abilities found within may be considered substantially too powerful by a GM who is happy with the power level of these aspects as it is. Please make sure to show this to the GM and that you and the GM are on the same page as we are about these areas of the game needing a boost before pressuring your GM to include this material."

Because Prince, I've seen your posts and I know you know the game well. And I've seen my own posts, and I know I know the game well. We both know the game quite well enough that if this product came out and we weren't familiar with it but a player wanted to include pieces of it into our games, we would be swiftly and easily able to assess whether it was something we wanted in our games (you would assess yes, and I would assess no for my current campaign at least and maybe yes for a future one, but both would do so using data and experience).

But many of the GMs who buy from Dreamscarred Press or tell players things like "you can use anything written by Paizo or Dreamscarred Press" do so from Dreamscarred's sterling reputation from their work on Psionics of putting out material balanced with the core that GMs can feel comfortable to use in their games without really looking at it with as careful an eye toward balance. And some of those GMs aren't as fast as you or I are, or as capable of making all those analyses. Of those GMs who allowed carte blanche DSP products, if any of them at all do not want the power level pushed, then they might feel burned when they later find out that it was, as it hadn't been by previous DSP products. The foreword disclaimer serves as another chance to help these GMs out (and that way, if such a GM complains about a Path of War ability that their player sneaked into their game without talking to them about the power jump, you guys can point to the foreword that asked the player to have a frank talk with them first).

In essence, some of this suggestion is only really even relevant due to the fact that this product was published by Dreamscarred Press, which has earned a previous reputation for tight balance not pushing the power level (and so I know several GMs of the sort I described who allow DSP stuff without vetting it). If this had been published by a new imprint made by you and ErrantX, my advice would be different because consumers would have a different assumption (as I said before, I love tinkering with the rules and changing the power assumptions--I wrote a new base class on the power level of a gestalt for every gestalt combination with 3.5's core classes).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The easiest way to do it so that it would be balanced with current options (rather than scaling from extremely weak to hideously overpowered depending on the remaining enhancement bonus of the weapon) is to make the ability cost a flat cost equal to the cost of a +X weapon and then generate a +X weapon.

So for example, +50000 to generate a +5 weapon. If you later upgrade the main weapon to a +6 equivalent, you could also increase the amount you paid for Dualistic accordingly to upgrade the split weapon as well.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

2 people marked this as a favorite.
gh0+1 wrote:

I understand where you're coming from, but when a spell is given as a bonus to a bloodline (Fey, in this case), I had thought it counted as a Sorcerer spell for all intents and purposes.

Is there an official ruling anywhere?

John's a pretty official guy.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I recommend creating a silent image of something like a hamburger, rather than bacon. Also, don't make it a cheeseburger, since that has both milk and meat in it.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wiki Monster wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

Found it!

That's a really helpful resource, Mark. Any chance members of the PathfinderWiki editing team could use your work on the site? I've been wanting to increase the wiki's usefulness regarding the Pathfinder Society metaplot and faction evolutions for a long time, and this sort of overview is immensely helpful. Your original post would be included as a reference on the wiki so you receive proper credit.

Mark, you not only are welcome to put up that summary, but feel free to host the scenario connections flowchart as well (it's here on Google Drive). Linda and I created both resources after talking to Mike and John at the Paizocon PFS panel about resources they thought would be useful to have perhaps in a blog post or something. They are for the moment not up to date with all of Season 5 yet, but that would be simple to add if people wanted it.


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Powerful monks are pretty common and pretty hard to defeat. I suggest a variant on darkwarriorkarg's terrible remorse strategy--the best way to beat him is to direct him to the forums. There, people will erroneously tell him that he is worthless and weak in every way for being a monk, until eventually he is overwhelmed with despair and takes his own life. Then you come in and grab the loot. No other method is as safe and foolproof as this one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

That's great Steven, but it doesn't really tell me much about what each of those are. I'm sure that's all part of the beauty of marketing and anticipation. ;P

Can you tell me what Convergent Path is in #3?

Anything about the Secrets of the Masked Reveler?

Anything about Haunted Quarter?

What classes will be receiving archetypes in Renegade Archetypes #2?

(Also, small typo in #18 for Pathfinder "Rtier".)

Good to see you guys are developing stuff for a number of game systems. Brokeworld had an awesome cover, and I loved the idea of Ursanauts and Dropbears….

Secrets of the Masquerade Reveler is going to be amazingly awesome for you if you like that archetype from Convergent Paths Fey Archetypes! Further than that, wait and find out... ^_^

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I mentioned this a few times before, but there was a collateral-damage type wizard who killed a bunch of people in a scenario where the BBEG was already framing the Society for crimes, thus making that job easier. After the bard gave away his secrets in Celestial, which the enemy understood, he managed to die while in a magic jar, but he magic jar-ed a devil enemy and greater teleported to Absalom, escaping the trial in the scenario and spending the prestige for a raise dead. With one negative level still (since you can't remove both the same week), he didn't have enough caster level to cast his own teleport to get back the adventure location, so the other PCs threw him under the bus in the trial and managed to exonerate the Society but demonize him. The other PCs were told that they were released on the condition that they were deputized to extradite him, and the Venture Captains told him that his many successful missions and prestige managed to earn him enough favor that they are willing to pull strings to keep him safe, as long as he never returns to the country in question and toes the line with less collateral damage.

So he got a boon at the end that I handwrote about being wanted for murder in that country and the other PCs got "deputized to extradite PC X". All the players thought it was hilarious, and the PC in question started summoning Good outsiders and cleaning up his act (one time he bound an outsider of Torag and promised to follow the Paladin's Code of Torag in exchange if it would help). He sometimes jokes as a tagline about the PC being "so much fun, he's even illegal in Country X".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Torbyne wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Torbyne wrote:

Is this a wishlist for Paizo thread?

... Just going to leave this here than...

A native outsider PC race based on nuetral outsiders.

I think I've seen some quotes stating that they don't plan on a planetouched race for the neutral outsiders. Either way, you could check out this book of reapers, the psychopomp-blooded planetouched.

(Disclaimer: I am the author)

Ooh, Tempting... but i am wary due to GMs being wishy-washy on TPPs in home games (i know thats where Pathfinder has its roots and all). Thanks though!

Tell them Rogue Eidolon says it's balanced. Then watch as they think you're a crazy person?

Alternately, just show them the race itself and the flavor text and story elements and don't try to use any of the other racial options other than the race? If your GM allows planetouched written by Paizo into her games, such as aasimar, I can't imagine they won't allow the reaper race (since it gets +2 to two stats and -2 to one stat unlike the aasimar with their +2 to two stats). If they love it, then try to play with the extra racial options?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brandon Hodge wrote:

Loving this dialogue, folks! One of the great payoffs as a freelancer is seeing how things turn out--for good or ill--at the game table.

Love the second-life finale, and was something I toyed with before saving that idea for ** spoiler omitted ** where it worked to good effect. I think with the reliquary destroyed, Xin's ghost popped out one last time, but he was still somewhat tethered to its broken frame, and only this time he could be destroyed, unlike before.

Our GM gave us the bizarro-world twin of this idea--a second-gasp social encounter. Our group had been trying to help Xin remember his past and save himself from his madness throughout the dungeon, so after destroying the reliquary, we wound up having a conversation with him and convincing him to move on. In exchange, he told us some of the secrets of arcane lore he had discovered and asked us to ensure that the spirit behind the empire of Thassilon would live on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Timitius wrote:

You know, thinking out loud here....

I'd really be amused if someone could come up with lyrics for an opera....or even MUSIC...SINGING of said opera pieces.

OH! We'd print the words, and a link to YouTube, where people could LISTEN to the songs sung by a fan versed in opera singing!

:D

That'd be cool. Unrealistic? Probably. BUT COOL.

;-)

Tim

I sent word to local PFSer and professional opera singer, Mahtobedis!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Coriat wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.
Well, given that as a Gargantuan creature it can just as easily move straight through your square (eating an AoO) as back off (eating the same AoO) a Crane Winger likely doesn't have enough personal control over where the T rex goes to be able to reliably implement this tactic. The Crane Winger can't even block lanes, and thus is not at all unlikely to have his hand forced if for example the dinosaur decides that a less punchy meal is better.

As long as it keeps readying an action, it never moves more than 40 feet. Unless you've got a medium armor halfling (which isn't impossible--I've seen one once in God's Market Gamble), nobody is going to actually be caught that way.

For every tactic the t-rex can use involving readying actions, there's an equivalent tactic that renders it useless if you break its expectations of what the readied trigger will be. And if the t-rex is mixing up its readied triggers and using all this highly advanced tactics, it's going to seem pretty fishy to most players (even me, and I'm on an extreme end towards likely that sort of stuff in general). Do you want your players to say:

"Well we had the t-rex well in hand, we thought. As far as brute strength, we had it outmatched. But the problem was, the t-rex's tactical genius was just more than all of ours combined. Every plan we came up with, the t-rex had already anticipated and prepared a countermeasure. In the end, we had no chance!"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Coriat wrote:
On another note, is it fair to conclude at this point that a great many of the complainers about Crane Wing were misapplying the fighting defensively rules? I've been trying to ask whether there is something I've missed here for days now and getting basically deafening silence when I ask for any other rules that might be at play other than the Combat section ones.

I think that was only Aelryinth. I know he complained a lot of times, but he's not really representative of the other people who had a problem with Crane.

I personally agree with you on readied actions working (which of course eliminates all attacks but one), but you should also keep in mind that the text on the conditional trigger and when you needed the hand free also] changed in the errata.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Beard wrote:
Quote:
Being able to deflect one of 5 natural attacks may not seem that great until you're selectively avoiding the one with Grab. Or a Paralyzing rider. Or a Touch attack with Energy Drain. Or the crit. Or the only one that can hit your sky-high AC.
What you've just describe is exactly what made crane wing useful to begin with. Being able to selectively defend yourself against the single greatest threat your enemy is coming at you with was the whole point in the feat. What's wrong with being able to negate a crit? The system makes it very easy to build characters that are literally immune to critical hits in the first place, and that's without a feat tax or building defensively to the point of cannibalizing your own offense. For that matter, what makes you think people can get their AC so high that a correctly used <insert level appropriate CR creature here> won't get through it? There are any number of ways to completely crap all over someone's high AC without having to raise the thing's hit chance at all. Besides, that person sacrificed most of their offense for the sake of having that high AC. Shouldn't they be allowed to enjoy their impressive defensive prowess? It's really nowhere near as bad as Mr. Two-Handed Fighter one shotting things with four times his own health pool due to automatic scythe crits.

When I have just killed some villain with heavy damage, particularly a critical hit, I often give their corpse a conciliatory statement of "Don't worry, people tell me I sacrificed most of my offense to learn these Crane techniques. Imagine if I didn't know them--you would probably have died just from my walking into the room! At least now, you had a chance to be blocked by my positioning at a chokepoint and wholly unable to do anything for about 10 seconds--hopefully that gave you time to get your affairs in order."

I hope this disclaimer is sufficient to assist their transition to the Boneyard and accept Pharasma's harsh judgment for their vile deeds. It's better for everyone if they don't come back as some kind of vengeful undead...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Terrible remorse as printed in Ultimate Magic was an auto-win spell. I quickly made a thread as soon as I had my subscriber copy and saw the spell, and then they errataed it to a weird intermediate state where repeatedly casting the spell was an auto-win if the enemy succeeded on their save but not if they failed. Eventually, they weakened it yet again, and now it isn't an auto-win period.

I'm all for pointing out overpowered rules items for every class, particularly spells, and I try to do so as soon as I identify them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MagusJanus wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Dude, you don't know how to run a playtest to compare different builds. If you want to see the mechanical power, you have to have ONLY the changes that involve the mechanical power between the two builds.

in short, you made a lousy CW fighter, deliberately. You also made horrible choices for the goblins (the goblin wizard killing the fire elemental, when he could have shot the cleric, and got rid of a PC AND the elemental at the same time stands out), and you metagamed the range stuff for the missile attacks. You also deliberately ran the CW into a ranged fight with a build (stats) that wasn't designed for ranged combat, and wondered why he sucked.

I didn't make the CW build. Shisumo did. My entire point this entire time has been that an overspecialized build like what he came up with is not a good example. After all, even you admit it's a lousy CW fighter.

And, no, I didn't wonder why he sucked. I knew why he sucked before I even ran the tests. He's overspecialized to melee; in any instance where he must focus outside of that, he's pretty much useless to the party as anything except a meatshield.

My entire point is that using an overspecialized build to prove a point is utterly the wrong way to do it. I didn't need the builds to be similar because that was not part of my point; I simply needed to demonstrate just how bad of an idea thinking that overspecialized build is good actually is. So, yeah, I intentionally compared it to a more generalized build that is more likely to see actual play. I then had to metagame the missile roles and use horrible goblin tactics just to keep that build alive long enough for a true test to be run. That alone is enough to show just how bad Shisumo's example is.

That you call it a bad build is just icing on the cake.

So, yeah, it was a bad series of tests for determining actual balance... but, then, those tests were never about balance....

Just to let you know, my playtest Crane dude has both Deflect Arrows (to deflect the first ranged attack) and Evasion, so from the sound of this, he would have "invincibled" (his terminology, not mine, since obviously he is capable of failing his Ref) through this playtest just like the 20 entire adventures I used to playtest him.

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Great job Seth! Since Kristen is ahead of Linda, you guys are totally gonna be 2nd couple to 10 Stars!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
What can I say? I like to digress. And it's Friday. Have a good weekend, all. And please stay positive. Laugh, go play some games.

Have a good weekend Stephen! I'll be sure to throw a magic missile for you in Jade Regent tomorrow morning.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Another kodiak moment on the Paizo forums!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cerberus Seven wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Well, there was the one time my Aldori Swordlord cohort soloed two dragons that were each of her CR in this weird festival game arena combat from an outtake of the AP. Or the time she got into a fight with a Mythic Nightskitter. And another with a Mythic will-o-wisp that was hilarious because one attack provoked a chain of 20 attacks of opportunity. And more stories that are spoilers for the AP (these were all for encounters the GM added). I'd be happy to post a highlights reel in a spoiler block if you like! But there's literally dozens of stories, so before I take the time to write 'em up, let me know if you (and...
Ok, I simply HAVE to know how this bolded part happened.

I will tell you because it was amazingly awesome.

Story Others Might Not Care About:
The GM was running an unrecognizable adaptation of Realm of the Fellnight Queen that basically only kept that there was a queen named Rhoswen and nothing else was similar. She created a really excellent Mythic Will-o-wisp for this event. It did divine damage like flame strike so you couldn't use resist energy and it had two or three touch attacks per round for more damage.

Anyway, after it dropped the PC Fighter in one round, we sent my cohort to face it. It activated some ability where tons of eyes grew out of it, which was actually a mythic power to get an AoO every time it was attacked for one round. It had Mythic Combat Reflexes, so no limits to AoOs. Keep in mind we are not mythic, we're just four non-mythic PCs with a pair of cohorts. My cohort is an Aldori Duelist/MoMS (at this level, pure Aldori would be better in almost all cases, but in this case Snake paid off) Snake and Crane like 80%+.

Anyway, we had no idea the ability was only one round once a day or even what it did. Rhiana attacked the monster, so it got an AoO. It missed, so Rhiana got a punch AoO from Snake Fang. This gave the creature an AoO. It missed, so Rhiana got a punch AoO from Snake Fang. Also once it hit and she used Crane Wing for an AoO. However, Rhiana has only +9 Dex, so that meant she got only 10 AoOs. Actually counting, that makes 21 AoOs total, huh? She did actually take some damage in there. Also, the GM described that time must be warping because 22 attacks just happened in reaction to Rhiana's first iterative (at that point she continued her attack routine)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Part of our process of updating a book involves talking to various departments to see if there is anything that is causing them problems or needs a second look. In this particular case, Crane Wing was the #1 problem child on the list from the PFS folks. Without much work you could build a character with an incredibly high AC that could still make attacks, and if a foe would happen to get lucky and score a hit, deflect it. This build, which was not really all that difficult to setup, was all made possible by Crane Wing.

Jason, I'm going to buy you a drink at Paizocon for looking at Crane and coming up with a solution because it can't be an easy thing to do, especially when you probably expected all this blowback.

But it's definitely the #2 PFS problem child from Ultimate Combat, by a longshot, based on postcount, number of threads, and amount of evidence. If you also do something about double-barreled no-misfire (because of archetypes) pistoleros and musket masters (particularly pistoleros since they can do Up Close and Deadly as a Signature Deed on every attack), which is the #1 PFS problem child from UC, I will buy you a whole bottle of whatever you want.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Scavion wrote:


People who care about balance are angry. Rogue Eidolon supported the change and he's unhappy with the change.

Oh, I'm not unhappy. I am very very happy. This change is much better than the old status quo. However, I do agree that it could use some small tweaks (in the direction of strengthening slightly). If you declare the +4 after seeing the roll and that could trigger riposte, that would be perfect for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Petrus222 wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:


No specifically, but mirror image is a known quantity for us. It is range personal, easily foiled by some relatively common spells, brought down on a miss, and generally limited to a pair of character classes that are not exactly known for rushing into combat.

Lets stay on topic.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

[Friendly teasing] Ninjas and Maguses aren't meant to go into combat?[/friendly teasing]

Anyways I'd argue that it is on topic since as a second level spell it becomes available in the same time/level frame, has far fewer pre-requisites and has very good potential to eliminate far more damage from both ranged and melee attacks without forcing you to fight defensively. As a baseline, the new crane wing (heck even the old one) seems to pale in comparison.

That said, did you consider allowing the +4 AC against all melee attacks in a round?

Also does this suggest that snake fang will be similarily adjusted down the road (given that the new crane wing would stack with mobility and snake fang even for at least one attack a round.)

The crucial thing about mirror image is that they go away when they block an attack and they often go away on misses too.

Let's consider my baseline Crane guy with 18 AC who is going up against either 4 CR 1 critters with three primary natural attacks and high to-hit for a CR 1 or 1 CR 5 critter with four primary natural attacks and high to-hit for a CR.

So we saw in that other thread, the AC 18 dude was sometimes using wand of shield charges to get AC 22, both in and out of crane (I did the numbers for both ACs). Let's pretend he uses a mirror image wand instead, and always rolls above average and gets 4 images. Seem fair?

So here's the stuff without mirror image

Old Stuff:
o at level 1 (with that starter equipment and 18 base AC), based on the chart, those 4 CR 1 dudes have +2 to hit. They flank, making 12 attacks a round at +4 to hit. Without shield wand precast that'll be 4.2 hits per round. With the wand, it's 1.8 hits per round. Killing them will drop this as time goes by.

The boss monster has four attacks at a +10, no flanks. That's 2.6 hits per round. Shield makes that 1.8. This will not drop as time goes by.

OK, so Crane time.

Those 4 mooks will hit .8 times per round (so they aren't quite expected to get in even a single hit each round) without shield and expected value of 0 hits per round with shield (it's not that the probability is 0, but the expected value is less than 1 before deflection--It's actually not negligible that you will still be hit by a freak string of 2 nat 20s in the same round, about 12%).

For the boss, you expect .8 hits per round without shield, or expected value 0 hits per round with shield (the boss still hits on a 16 or higher, so has exactly expected 1 hit before deflection. The actual probability of the boss hitting you in a given round is about 26%).

So against the 12 attacks of the mooks, Crane chain is worth better than an 80% miss chance if you had 18 AC (no shield) or about a 91% miss chance if you had 22 AC (with shield).

Against the boss it's worth a 70% miss chance with 18 AC (no shield) and an 85% miss chance with 22 AC (with shield).

With mirror image instead of shield, here's how it changes:

Mooks used to hit 4.2 times per round. Now you have mirror image. On the first round, you will probably lose all your images. If mirror image was an automatic deflection so long as you have an image, the expectation is that you will lose 8/13 of them to ruining successful attacks and 5/13 of them to near misses. However, in reality, the first image is 56% likely to negate a hit as opposed to just pop on a near miss, then the next is 54%, then the next is 52%, and then 44% for the last. All told, you will probably lose half of them to near misses, and block attacks with the others. OK, so that means you block two attacks. You still get hit expected 2.2 times. That's more than with Crane Style and no wand at all by almost 3x, even assuming you cast mirror image every single round.

You do better against the boss because he has fewer attacks per round and is more accurate. You wind up have about a 2/3 chance that your mirrors actually block one of the bosses attacks instead of pop on a near miss. I'll round that up since we are doing 4 images to say you block 3 attacks per casting. You will still have a 94.77% chance to lose all 4 images in one round unless the boss hits you instead of an image, so you would need to recast nearly every round. And it doesn't actually provide as much hit prevention as the full crane did even if you did, since you have a 20% chance to be hit with 4 images, then a 25% chance to be hit with 3, then a 33.3% with 2, and a 50% with 1, and that degrades every time they block a hit and then also on near misses.

So no, a single casting of mirror image has nowhere near the sustainable protection of Crane (even though in assuming I always roll a 3 on 1d4, I'm overvaluing mirror image, since it's MUCH MUCH worse if I roll a 2, the other number on the other side of average). If the images stayed out even when the blocked an attack, then they would be better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MrSin wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Have confidence in your house rules, and the GM can always announce ahead of time that if they start to crack, he won't feel shy about changing it then.
Many GMs rely on the devs for balance. If they say something is OP then most GMs will be like "well it is their whole job to balance RPG rules. I'm sure there is a good reason for it that I missed." house rules are rarely ever a buff.
Most of my GMs have been like that, even if I point out its related to fluff. RAW or bust breaks my heart. They usually don't trust 3PP or conversions from 3.5 either. </3.

There's a lot of issues with 3.5 stuff based on the differences in design paradigm. As bad as I think Crane stuff was among PFRPG core line, it doesn't even light a candle to the excesses of some of 3.5.

However, I've generally found that there are a lot of 3pp publishers out there that really have a great nose for balance and more choices without power creep. Your GMs are missing out on some cool stuff if they won't try it out. Hey, let me know one of your GMs' paizo accounts and I'll gift them Convergent Paths: Fey Archetypes if they'd be willing to give it a try (even if it's only for NPCs at first). It's small, pretty balanced, and the monk archetype particularly is stronger than it looks (most people pass it up due to potential for MAD, but you can make some pretty powerful debuff monks with it).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Addendum to my last post--what I'm trying to say is, we're all a bunch of opinionated and passionate folks who love this game, on both sides of this argument, and we're simply now on opposite sides of which group's view of balance falls in line with the official ruling compared to when UC first came out.

Hopefully we can still discuss it civilly and with an eye for constructive criticism, just as when the situations were reversed?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Nicos wrote:

The thing I dislike about the old crane wing is that it where no roll involved.

Quick fix to the new crane wing.

- Increase de dodge bonus to +10
That way opponets will have a hard time hitting you but you are not totally inmune to that first attack

- You can decide to use the feat after the attack roll is revealed.

- it have to toally works with crane riposte.

Quick fix to make it work with riposte and buff it a little (since much as the old one was hugely problematic, I agree this new one is pretty weak):

After an announced attack roll beats your AC but before damage is rolled (or if you roll damage at the same time, just don't announce it yet), you can choose to gain +4 AC. If this makes the attack miss, you can riposte.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lemmy wrote:
Taenia wrote:
Time to retrain a feat I guess. I must admit I am puzzled by this decision but I can see how difficult it made some fights. I recall going against a number of creatures that could only hit my AC on a 20 and if they did, using crane wing.
If they only hit you on a 20, Crane Wing is not to blame for it being an easy fight.

Without Crane, those crappy swarms of monsters who traditionally need a 20 to hit either have enough attacks that they can fish the 20 (while Power Attacking, since why not if you need a 20 anyway?) or if not could make worthwhile Aid Another actions and get a good chance to hit. Crane negates all of these. Also, since Crane is responsible for +4 AC, it's possible those enemies would have hit on a 16 before Crane.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Huzzah! All my playtesting finally paid off. Rock on Paizo!

***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston aka Rogue Eidolon

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

this is the second most united lynch mob I've ever seen... sorry Tarma.

TORCHES, pitchforks.. get em while they're hot!

Was the most united one that time during the ARG playtest when the world stood still, as 100% of all playtesters, without a single dissent, united against the intent of the designers to make all the core races have the same RP, even if it meant that some of the abilities were intentionally undercosted or overcosted to make it fit?

1 to 50 of 258 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 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.