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

3,479 posts. Alias of Mark Seifter (Designer).


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,479 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Dustin Ashe wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Another possibility is to just treat those Part 1 NPCs as Part 3 NPCs for the purpose of CP needed (thus lowering the number of CP needed to rank up) and just carry on as normal. That could be your easiest bet. Cheers!
That is effortless. Thank you. It's probably a testament to how robust this system is that that answer comes so quickly.

I needed a system for my home game that worked with the fact that there are currently roughly 30 relationship links available at each milestone, and 6 PCs, and I wrote it all out more carefully to release to you guys with this book (and URel). If it's flexible enough to work for that without causing my head to explode, it makes it easier for me to bend it to handle queries like yours!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given that you only have two NPCs to worry about, one possibility is that you could have your PCs do a retrospective / flashback episode for those two NPCs, wherein you take the campaign so far milestone by milestone and retcon a bunch of conversations. Another possibility is to just treat those Part 1 NPCs as Part 3 NPCs for the purpose of CP needed (thus lowering the number of CP needed to rank up) and just carry on as normal. That could be your easiest bet. Cheers!

*****

Like John says—I've seen a witch use this boon to get, I believe, something like 450+600+750+900+1050+1200+1350=6300 gp, which was then enough to finish financing his upgrade to a +6 intelligence on his headband (it was 1/3 of the upgrade from +4 to +6 all on its own).

*****

Oh, cool, so sounds like only good news then!

*****

Bad news and good news.

Reskinning is not allowed in PFS. Also, if you don't have a playtest boon, you'll have to wait for the book to come out to play a kineticist.

Now the good news: there are rumors of some actual blood kineticist type stuff in the final book, so when it comes out, if those rumors are true, you might not need to reskin!


doc the grey wrote:
Okay so for the vast majority of instances the only time one can gain CP or rank up is during a milestone. All other times it's just game as usual unless otherwise GM stated.

Yep, although the CP/rank up attempt can happen any time between the two milestones. It doesn't have to be like on the exact day that you announce "We hit a new milestone guys!"

And also, leveling up gives you some free CP to spend on your relationships too. By controlling milestones and levels, you can pace the relationships exactly right for your campaign!


doc the grey wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
So that means that if the PC sorcerer had potential rank ups with all 5 NPCs in that potential period he can take a shot at ranking up with all of them correct?

Indeed. Because I am a crazy person, my PCs had the opportunity with 28 different NPCs during the last milestone (they're getting to the end and have met nearly all that they will ever meet, and they've fastidiously managed to convince every possible NPC to join their caravan because they love collecting NPCs and ranking them up).

If you collect all the minis, you too can have an intricate web of relationships that connects the PCs to a complicated supporting cast!

Lord! That's way more than I thought you could pull per milestone! I actually use the caravan system in my homebrew and custom build hirable NPCs for them alongside the heavyweight ones and they've started to befriend them as well! I thought it was just one and considering the number of milestones you got (around 5-10) by the end of it you would have all of them amongst the party. This does not make incorporating this now that the game has been going for almost a year much easier.

k next question:

So with CP that can be earned at any time that I as GM deign that they have done something to help further their relationship with an NPC rather than just at milestones correct?

With gifts are those meant to be something that can only be used to rank up or is that mechanic also applicable to earning CP?

Each milestone, they get 1 attempt per NPC to give a gift or perform an interaction using a skill (maybe go on a little hunting trip, etc). This might give CP. However, if the PCs do something significant for the NPC, it might give free CP above and beyond this. For instance, saving an NPC from being kidnapped would definitely count.


doc the grey wrote:
So that means that if the PC sorcerer had potential rank ups with all 5 NPCs in that potential period he can take a shot at ranking up with all of them correct?

Indeed. Because I am a crazy person, my PCs had the opportunity with 28 different NPCs during the last milestone (they're getting to the end and have met nearly all that they will ever meet, and they've fastidiously managed to convince every possible NPC to join their caravan because they love collecting NPCs and ranking them up).

If you collect all the minis, you too can have an intricate web of relationships that connects the PCs to a complicated supporting cast!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As I mentioned in the Ultimate Relationships thread, thank you to everyone who made Imperial Relationships a part of your game! I'm working on a series of minis that can be generally be retooled to fit in your campaign but particularly cover characters you might meet in a Far Eastern campaign. It's your interest, as expressed by talking about the product, buying it, and leaving reviews that help inspire me to get more of these out there!

~Mark

Designer

doc the grey wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
doc the grey wrote:

Are milestones meant to be tied to the rank up scenarios presented in Imperial relationships or are they meant to be something more free floating that happens independent of the rank ups?

Are gifts something that can happen separate from milestones or are they meant to only happen in tandem with milestones?

So what happens if a player reaches the camaraderie cap with a character but there are no more milestones planned for that current part of the adventure path, can they still rank up without a milestone or are they supposed to wait until another milestone occurs and try then?

If a player fails his chance to rank up at a milestone and again they are out of milestones does that mean that they have to wait till another one occurs or can they initiate the rank up without being in a milestone?

The guide suggests that there should be about 5 milestones per ap book. Are each of these meant to be tied to individual characters or is the opportunity an open opportunity to advance your plot with any character you can?

What is the average rank progression supposed to be per level or book? I.e. is there supposed an average rank a player is supposed to be at with each character at each level?

Think of milestones like markers that together delimit a period of time. So let's say Milestone #10 was saving the frog princess and Milestone #11 was allying with the flamingo knights. Then between those two events, each PC can try one gift or activity to gain CP, and if they are ready for rank up, they can attempt that rank up once (if they gain enough CP to rank up due to a gift or activity, they can do both).

Does that mean you can only attempt 1 rank up or CP increase per period?

For example during that period between frog princesses and flamingo knight the PC Sorcerer can only gain CP with one NPC or rank up and not say further his relationship with like 3 NPCs?

During that period between frog princesses and flamingo knight milestones, PC Sorcerer can attempt to gain CP once with every NPC that spent significant time with the PCs in that period. The PC can also attempt to rank up once with every such NPC who is ready to rank up.


El Ronza wrote:
Anything else in this line is most likely going to be an insta-buy for me. I loved this product! When would one be able to expect more minis? :-)

We'd like to get started as soon as I take the ones I already have and put them in a presentable form for the crew at Legendary to lay them out!

With the holiday season coming up, I don't want to make any promises on estimated dates though.


OK guys, having seen the first month returns on this one, thanks to everyone for taking a look at Ultimate Relationships! I'm working on some follow-up minis that will give you more relationship links to play with and stockpile for your campaign!


magnuskn wrote:
That's why I put a permanent dimensional lock on the entire room. :p

I did something similar (my version of the Seal was more badass so that the oni could be less foolish/do-nothing without breaking the plot, but it prevented the party from using dimensional magic while they benefited from it) and also gave her several more levels, switched her to a playtest shaman (who still had cleric spells at the time), added an escaped Tunuak to the encounter, and had her use a scroll to bring in a frosty glabrezu of Sithhud (PCs usually have 8 people, and they were 1 level overleveled, so I don't recommend all that for 4 players).

*****

It's always a judgment call when it would affect the encounter as much as this one. In this case, if you look at the two subtiers, all the scenario adds in the high subtier is the third hag that uses coven powers. Normally adding one creature to an encounter with two of that creature raises the CR by only 1, and since the higher subtier is usually shooting for raising the CR by 3 (since 8-9 is 3 higher than 5-6), it probably means that the author expected those tactics to be allowed. After all, in theory, an encounter with 5 hags is 3 CR higher than an encounter with 2 hags, and the 5 hags could have 3 of them do a coven power and the other two attack in melee, and this illegal 3 coven is strictly weaker than that. When I ran it, I stuck with the tactics and just had this be a special coven.


DrSwordopolis wrote:


Rogue Eidolon wrote:
50% miss chance from using tremorsense

Common misconception, largely I suspect due to the difference between Blindsense and Blindsight. As long as you're touching the ground it works like Blindsight.

Tremorsense wrote:
Tremorsense (Ex) A creature with tremorsense is sensitive to vibrations in the ground and can automatically pinpoint the location of anything that is in contact with the ground.

Let's look at Blindsense side-by-side.

Blindsense wrote:
The creature usually does not need to make Perception checks to pinpoint the location of a creature within range of its blindsense ability


My two cents in my own game:

An earth gliding druid who attacked with slams, a touch, or a ray or something with the 50% miss chance from using tremorsense instead of sight would probably work like the incorporeal example (untargetable except while attacking, and then cover). If the druid wants line of effect, line of sight, or the ability to target anything other than with a touch, then they would need to be out of the wall (to requote the incorporeal rules from the OP but add an additional line that comes just before for context):

incorporeal wrote:
It can sense the presence of creatures or objects within a square adjacent to its current location, but enemies have total concealment (50% miss chance) from an incorporeal creature that is inside an object. In order to see beyond the object it is in and attack normally, the incorporeal creature must emerge.

Also, in the "in the wall reaching out" mode, I would imagine that the druid's ability to communicate with the party in either direction, including to command any animal companion, is virtually non-existent. Perhaps in a home game the other characters can come up with a foot-tapping morse code to reveal information to the druid via tremorsense, though that seems like it would take actions beyond free.


Nefreet wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

In order to avoid table variation, we can only go off of what's listed in the description of the item.

Scrolls are not on that list.

Ah, only what's listed, I see. I don't think that's a universal PFS rule, though, is it? Mike seems in your link to be specifically referring to the summon minor monster spell.

He actually confirmed Carlos' comment earlier in that thread, which stated "in PFS, in order to avoid table variation, we go with what's listed".

And so, since it's an Adventurers Armory item, you said you can't FAQ it, right?

So, in PFS, no scrolls.

Carlos's earlier post in the linked thread actually mentioned there being table variation when you go off of such a list. I think we are in an area of table variation, so for now, while I intend to continue allowing them, I also completely respect Chris standing his ground and not allowing them. I have played at Chris's table before and would happily play at his table again and just not use my scrolls in wrist-sheaths if it's one of my characters who has scrolls instead of wands.


Nefreet wrote:

In order to avoid table variation, we can only go off of what's listed in the description of the item.

Scrolls are not on that list.

Ah, only what's listed, I see. I don't think that's a universal PFS rule, though, is it? Mike seems in your link to be specifically referring to the summon minor monster spell. I can see a lot of danger, with situations like "If the PCs have any visible weapons with them, such as swords, which Enpeesee dislikes the most, Enpeesee refuses to allow them entrance to the museum" allowing PCs with axes to enter the museum because only swords are listed.

In this case, that would mean that a kukri or starknife, for instance, despite basically being the same size and shape as a dagger, wouldn't pass muster.


Nefreet wrote:
It does, in PFS.

Based on the "physical description" section of scrolls, it still seems as ambiguous as ever on whether it would fit. I may be missing something though. At the risk of becoming like a character in a Phoenix Wright game, can you tell me which new phrase in the description generates the contradiction?


Nefreet wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Well, SLWS can't hold scrolls anyways, so that's a moot point.
Interesting. Hadn't seen that one. I'm curious to read it; got a link?
Of course ;-)

Does that definitively block scrolls?


Nefreet wrote:
Well, SLWS can't hold scrolls anyways, so that's a moot point.

Interesting. Hadn't seen that one. I'm curious to read it; got a link?


Nefreet wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

So, using yours and James' logic, and the comment you edited into Jason's post, would it be reasonable to rule that SLWS don't provoke?

Because until your comments just now, I figured it all made sense.

I can't see much justification for it in the strict rules, given it says it acts as a normal wrist sheath, but I'm happy to houserule it into home games anyway. It's Adventurer's Armory, so I can't really help you with a FAQ.

Like Chris, I don't do homegames.

I think we're both interested in something we can rule for our PFS games.

While the RAW seems to lean the other way, it isn't 100% spelled out, and no NPC I've seen in PFS ever uses the things, so if you let players avoid provoking, I doubt they will make an issue at the table. Just when you're a player, if you accept the other ruling graciously, things should probably be OK.


Undone wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

As the person who edited that comment into Jason's post, I will say that some swift and free actions provoke (such as reloading a gun).
Out of curiosity could you settle the question of using pummeling bully without the feat associated being a provoking action?

I can't "settle" anything, but it seems to me that given it's a trip attempt that is not using the monster Trip ability, it would normally provoke from your trip target. That said, barring shenanigans (which, of course, are a common way to get style feats, for better or worse), you'll have Improved Trip anyway to take this feat.


Nefreet wrote:

So, using yours and James' logic, and the comment you edited into Jason's post, would it be reasonable to rule that SLWS don't provoke?

Because until your comments just now, I figured it all made sense.

I can't see much justification for it in the strict rules, given it says it acts as a normal wrist sheath, but I'm happy to houserule it into home games anyway. It's Adventurer's Armory, so I can't really help you with a FAQ.


Nefreet wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?
Since it says it otherwise works like a standard wrist sheath, it seems so. Not an official pronouncement or anything though.
What are your thoughts on James' explanation?

They make sense to me from a story perspective, and honestly in home games, I generally rule the same way as James did for the same reason.


Nefreet wrote:
Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?

Since it says it otherwise works like a standard wrist sheath, it seems so. Not an official pronouncement or anything though.


doc the grey wrote:

K, well I can say I think the system is tally intriguing and wasn't too see more. With both books in hand the system seems to be really cool and the examples presented in imperial relationships helps make it a lot easier to start building your own versions of those progressions or insert them into your own campaign for another character.

All that being said I really wish that this book and Ultimate Relationships could have been combined into one book. I feel like the later could have really benefited from having working examples right next to the rules rather than having to buy a whole separate book.

We were this close to that, and it was my initial project idea, but the thing is, the way we did it, people who aren't running a Far Eastern AP are more likely to be able to notice and enjoy the new rule subsystem than if the whole thing was Imperial, and with 4 Far Eastern examples, it couldn't have all been Ultimate Relationships. The only option turned out to be the split.


doc the grey wrote:
Are you guys doing another in this line to discuss some of the other NPCs that appear in the later books in the Jade Regent line?

Actually, I'm working on some of those right now! I'm really excited about the possibilities for using them both in a Far Eastern AP or even in a separate home game. I hope people will like them enough to allow me to continue until you guys have them all!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You get the 4 key Far Eastern Adventure Path NPCs, with boons, affinity notes, gifts and interactions, and then 10 rank ups each, which allow you to explore the NPC's feelings and backstory and feel like you're really becoming closer to that NPC, not just gaining a bunch of points. They follow the rules for Ultimate Relationships and are thus also a really good example of those rules even if you're not running a Far Eastern Adventure Path and just want to see examples to help you in your own campaign.


doc the grey wrote:

Are milestones meant to be tied to the rank up scenarios presented in Imperial relationships or are they meant to be something more free floating that happens independent of the rank ups?

Are gifts something that can happen separate from milestones or are they meant to only happen in tandem with milestones?

So what happens if a player reaches the camaraderie cap with a character but there are no more milestones planned for that current part of the adventure path, can they still rank up without a milestone or are they supposed to wait until another milestone occurs and try then?

If a player fails his chance to rank up at a milestone and again they are out of milestones does that mean that they have to wait till another one occurs or can they initiate the rank up without being in a milestone?

The guide suggests that there should be about 5 milestones per ap book. Are each of these meant to be tied to individual characters or is the opportunity an open opportunity to advance your plot with any character you can?

What is the average rank progression supposed to be per level or book? I.e. is there supposed an average rank a player is supposed to be at with each character at each level?

Think of milestones like markers that together delimit a period of time. So let's say Milestone #10 was saving the frog princess and Milestone #11 was allying with the flamingo knights. Then between those two events, each PC can try one gift or activity to gain CP, and if they are ready for rank up, they can attempt that rank up once (if they gain enough CP to rank up due to a gift or activity, they can do both). While 5 milestones per book is a good bare minimum, I tended to have far more milestones in some books, and most books had at least 10. However, you can pace things in a way that works for your campaign. It's up to you how quickly you want relationships to progress. If you progress them in such a way that people are reaching rank 10 before, say, book 5, you'll definitely need to adjust the XP from the provided example, and there's not more to explore with that NPC from then on, but then there's more NPCs, so it's probably OK. Someone like a bard with tons of skills and great performs is probably going to reach a high rank with NPCs who like performances no matter what you do, but ideally there are still relationship links to explore throughout the game, even if they're ones that only start at later sections. The best-case situation is probably for PCs to hit 10 with their prioritized trait-NPC that they've been putting level up CP into in Book 5 and then some more 10s with a moderate group of favored NPCs in Book 6 if they're working on it. If they're the kind of person who has the ability and the desire to play Persona 4 and max out all relationships on the first playthrough, they might get a lot more 10s, but that's cool too. It probably means they're having huge amounts of fun. In my own personal campaign, for which I designed these rules, we are in Part 5, and one character has one Rank 10 with her trait NPC and two 9s (with a love interest and another NPC that she was amazing at coming up with great gifts and interactions), one character has rank 9 with his trait NPC, who he focuses on nearly exclusively, and that's it for 9+. Surprisingly, the character with the highest ranks is the druid, but she's probably diverted skill points to more various different unusual skills than most druids, and it turns out that Celestial Obedience: Arshea is super-good for these when you're using flat Charisma checks for the lower DC.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
'Your' refers to the character using the feat, not every character using the feat.

Yes, it would seem that you each add your own modifier after sharing the highest d20 roll.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mythic Evil Lincoln wrote:
Components: M (A Kitten)

That reminds me of a spell I wrote for BoHR: Reapers, steal life. I told my friend reading it "This is an [evil] spell that's really evil." He said "What, it lets an undead come back to life and then immediately return to undead form when you kill the human form. What's evil about that?" And I asked "Did you read the components carefully?"

Compnents: M (one sentient infant)

*****

Game Master wrote:
Hima Flametinker III wrote:
Would consuming the tears of your enemies be an evil act?

Nope. As long as you're not even thinking about drinking blood, you're fine.

Don't drink blood, though. Wonton slaughter, grave robbing, making pacts with devils for power, and burning people alive are all perfectly acceptable, even healthy, behaviors for a pathfinder.

But GODS FORBID you even think for even a moment that you might consume one drop of blood. Especially if you are a Dhampir. If you do... may the banhammer have mercy on your archetype/feat/race.

PFS has kind of an unhealthy obsession with banning anything that might allow you to get any kind of mechanical benefit for drinking blood.

Nooooo, save the wontons! The wontons are a proud and noble creature that deserve the right to live!!


If you happened to be using this for a Far Eastern Adventure Path, you would most certainly replace the relationship rules with these. Also, in that case, I highly recommend Imperial Relationships, which has four main relationships detailed out.


Harrow Cards. Pick a card for each NPC as a way to keep track of them and add interesting thematic connections. Then pick a card for each PC based on their alignments. Or you can not do that and just ignore that part, whichever works best. For example, the Imperial Relationships examples have cards listed for each NPC, such as The Big Sky for the Destined Empress.


Hark wrote:

The whole system seems to be intimately tied to the concept of the Adventure Path. This makes it not all that useful for people like myself that lay in sand box games. And I can't say that I'm not disappointed as this sounded like a great tool for sandbox games.

There is really a great need to discuss different kinds of relationships in the rules as well. As it stands there is just a 1-10 scale with no actual context as to what that might mean.

I'll keep an eye out for updated/expansions to this rules set in case it develops into something I can use.

Some minor adjustments should make it work perfectly even in a game that doesn't neatly divide into 6 parts (see my most recent post in this thread before this one).


Just pick one that matches your alignment and personality, based on the Harrow meaning of the cards.


Milestones are basically after significant events. You can pace them however you like for your campaign depending on how fast you want relationships to progress. If you aren't running an AP at all and the game is freeform, you can divide the NPCs by plotline (since you said there are 5) instead of part for the freebie camaraderie and then just decide which "part" they are from for the purpose of required camaraderie based on how late they appeared (so, for instance if the party is just meeting them and they're level 15, with the game expected to climax and end at 20, you would use the lowest required camaraderie).

As to whether Imperial is worth it as an example, well, examples are so important that I was pretty close to having them released together, but in the end, we realized they made sense to be separate. Normally I wouldn't suggest getting a $5 pdf over a gaming computer, but since you are literally tingling with anticipation of the potential (that's awesome, btw, and makes me feel really happy as a designer!), you may well consider getting the worked out examples at your fingertips and scavenging them for inspiration for your own relationships!


Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

buys, reads

...waaaait a minute. Scripted events at relationship advancement points, fortune-telling card themes...

Okay, who's been playing Persona? :D

Anyway, well done and I'm hoping for more. You mention "the Lonely Lyrakien" and "the Cassisian Detective" -- will they be part of a future supplement? My gnome in our abortive JR game had his heart set on Spivey.

And what are your priorities for future Relationship plug-ins? Any plans for Kingmaker? ...any possibility of working with other third-party publishers? Because "Zeitgeist Relationships" could be nifty.

If this sells well enough to warrant the costs (mostly the art I guess), I have stuff for pretty much every notable character (54+ relationship links), including the one you seek (she is The Joke).


The black raven's got it down cold. I would recommend buying Imperial Relationships because the examples are really useful in bringing the system to life and cribbing from how I did it for your own relationships. But if you're not running a Far Eastern adventure path, the only one you absolutely need to get started is this one!


Alright guys. It's a year later, but it took the publisher a while to get them published after I turned them over October 2013. The relationship rules are finally live here. I'll also PM people who favorited that one post, as promised.


For those of you watching here for the relationship rules, they are live here


LMPjr007 wrote:
I just picked up both Ultimate Relationships and Imperial Relationships. I really have not gotten into Imperial Relationships, BUT I really like the ideas I see in Ultimate Relationships and have thought a few hacks that would be cool add-ons. So far I am interested and Ultimate Relationships is only $1.99 so I felt is was money well spent.

Yeah, it's fairly simple and super easy to customize to fit the theme of an individual campaign. I could definitely imagine extra stuff you might insert to add flavor to, in your case, say, a NeoExodus or Obsidian Apocalypse campaign. Imperial might work best for you as an example if you aren't running a far eastern adventure path.


137ben wrote:

I'll definitely be getting Ultimate Relationships.

I'm unlikely to get Imperial Relationships since I don't have the far east adventure path (or any of the other adventure paths).

It's possible that you may want to grab the original Imperial Relationships simply to use as an example of how they flesh out. I say this as an avid consumer of RPG products and not as the author (in fact, other than for the fact that they needed to be in two different lines, the examples were, I felt, so helpful, the two products came within inches of being one product). It's one thing to have a robust system to create compelling relationship progressions with tips on how to do it, but examples that a skilled GM can pick apart and use as templates can also be worth their weight in gold, even if you don't use the examples themselves in your game. Ultimately, I'm still happy that they are separate just because that puts the power in your hands to decide whether that's worth it for you!


I suppose if we had a compilation with all the characters from an AP (presuming success warrants), it will make a mammoth volume that could easily be long enough. But that is a maybe for the future!


These are about forming personal connections with NPCs and making the roleplaying between PC and NPC rich and rewarding, rather than about the long-term effects of political alliances via marriage. That said, talking about relationships vis-a-vis kingdoms or relationships vis-a-vis infamy might be good inclusions for relationship plug-ins focused on kingdom-building or piracy.

*****

Also Seltyiel. The CRB and UC pregens have been out for a while, ACG pregens are a new thing, and the others will come.

Designer

prototype00 wrote:

Are there 10 Five Storms high muckety mucks to kill in the AP? I think it was brought up before that there aren't enough Onis to provide for Suishen's full power-up.

prototype00

I don't tie them to killing Five Storms muckity mucks but instead to a relationship with Suishen (which is enhanced by killing 5SMM)


Carter Lockhart wrote:
I can't help but think either Suishen was reworked before final printing, or authors beyond book 2 were not given the stats for what the sword would be capable of....we need to come up with a version of Suishen that is still awesome but also not a challenge/adventure ruiner. And maybe. Figure out a better progression order than the vague slaying of servants of the Five Storms.

I used a 10 step progression order with better-defined progress. It's toned down at the beginning but mostly stronger at the end (he becomes a +10 equivalent weapon, but the limitation I put right away that his spells only work on the one who carries him and end if you drop him or hand him over remain). They seemed to make him much more usable and less disruptive.


I made Suishen's protection from cold a flat pool of protection that automatically protects the wielder (and remembers how much had been spent if the wielder switches). You couldn't choose not to use it, so it was often an advantage to save it for a big fight with cold monsters, since it would spend itself on environmental cold otherwise.

1 to 50 of 3,479 << 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.