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

Secane's page

FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,972 posts (1,994 including aliases). No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 14 Pathfinder Society characters. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,972 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

I would rule it is either or.

"damage dealt or damage healed"

Just like you have to choose to target living OR undead when you channel energy, you would have to pick 1 or the other to add the bonus to when you level.

Lantern Lodge

I think that as a GM you have the right to decide on fringe cases like this one.

As for "Does one need to target the center of an area of effect in order to dispel it?"

I will say no, you don't have to target the center.
Otherwise, based on that logic, dispel shouldn't work on spell that emanate from a target either, unless you can literally have a line of effect to the "center" of the target.

As for the 2nd question... base on the Unhallow Spell discription, the "stored spell" would only "effect applies to all creatures, creatures that share your faith or alignment, or creatures that adhere to another faith or alignment"

Since the dispell magic spell is not a creature, it cannot be the target of an Unhallow Spell's stored spell.

Lantern Lodge

SOME weapons are kinda like armor... they would also be a no go for druids... like the Dwarven Boulder helmet!

Helmet, dwarven boulder
Source Advanced Race Guide
Damage 1d3 (small), 1d4 (medium); Critical x2; Range —; Type B; Special
Description
This heavy, reinforced helmet can be used to make melee attacks. The wearer may also use the helmet when attempting bull rush maneuvers, granting a +2 circumstance bonus on the check, but after completing the maneuver (whether successful or not), the wearer is staggered until the end of his next turn. In addition, the helmet grants a +2 circumstance bonus to the wearer's AC against critical hit confirmation rolls. A dwarven boulder helmet adds 20% to the wearer's arcane spell failure chance. It occupies the head slot and is made of metal, not stone, meaning that it can be crafted from unusual materials as a metal weapon. A dwarven boulder helmet can be enchanted as a weapon (not as armor, despite providing some protection).

Lantern Lodge

Some more info on the NPC alchemist?

What level are they? And how many?

Bombs don't deal too much damage. So unless there is an overwhelming number of alchemist npcs... it should not be too hard.

Lantern Lodge

GM: Hi everyone! Thanks for coming together for this small "horror" campaign of ours.

Now I know you have many questions, so let's get started!

First things first, YES! The Book of Erotic Fantasy is legal and we will be using everything from it.

Now, on to roleplay questions...

Lantern Lodge

Mix in alchemist for some explosions?

There are some alchemical discoveries for bombs that appear like your throwing missiles around?

Lantern Lodge

Alchemical Weapon (Su): At 2nd level, a grenadier can infuse a weapon or piece of ammunition with a single harmful alchemical liquid or powder, such as alchemist’s fire or sneezing powder, as a move action. This action consumes the alchemical item, but transfers its effect to the weapon in question. The alchemical item takes full effect on the next creature struck by the weapon, but does not splash, spread, or otherwise affect additional targets. Any extra damage added is treated like bonus dice of damage, and is not doubled on a critical hit. The alchemical treatment causes no harm to the weapon treated, and wears off 1 minute after application if no blow is struck. At 6th level, a grenadier can use her alchemical weapon ability as a swift action. At 15th level, this ability becomes a free action. This ability replaces poison resistance.

When you hit level 6, you could move to draw and swift to infuse.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

ALL archers (fighters, rangers, slayers, zen archers, etc) are POWERFUL damage dealers.

It really is more about what you want out of your archer.

Fighters - More consistent damage output, just pure damage
1) More consistent to hits (due to weapon training)
2) Higher static damage (due to weapon training)
3) Tons of feats
4) Overall more armor (thanks to armor training)
5) Not afraid to wear heavier armor
6) You are always at max possible strength, aka no need to spend time on buffing etc. You are always ready to start shooting
7) less overall skills
8) Able to handle most foes with the right feats

Ranger - More than just damage
1) Earlier access to some feats via combat styles (Improved Precise Shot,etc)
2) Good against specific enemy types
3) Spells! + buffing
4) Tons of skills
5) Tons of out of combat and in combat class features (tracking, etc)
6) More self-dependent (able to spell heal of of combat, etc)
7) May need to spend time buffing for more damage (gravity bow, etc)
8) Spells are unfortunately limited in supply.

Slayer - Ranger with no spells, but more damage output
1) Earlier access to some feats via combat styles (Improved Precise Shot, etc)
2) Able to study aka add damage to any enemy
3) Sneak attack = more damage
4) Tons of skills
5) Slayer Talents!
6) Plenty of out of combat and combat class features
7) No spells when compared to the ranger
8) Able to handle most foes. Just like a fighter

Zen Archer (Monk) - A LOT of arrows in the air!
1) More arrows when full-round (flurry) attacking
2) Lots of archery feats given for free!
3) Nice monk class features
4) Nice amount of skills
5) Less static damage per shot, but lots of arrows
6) Abundant Step(!)
7) Able to pull off shots other classes can't
8) Good saves
9) Ki is a powerful, but also limited resource

As you can see archery comes in every flavor. There are very few cons, it REALLY is just what YOU want!

Lantern Lodge

Thanks, I will look into that. The new weapon master handbook added a ton of new things.... So I really got to have a good look now

Lantern Lodge

Nargemn wrote:
This is just preference... But I really enjoy pairing Ulfen Guard with the Viking archetype for fighters. At 8th level (5 viking/3 Ulfen Guard) by choosing the Formal Training dedication you count as an 8th level fighter for feat qualifications, and your rage stacks with Viking's. Not only all of that but the flavor fits really well too.

I did seriously consider going with a pure viking. But I realised that viking takes away weapon training, which is required for the Ricochet Toss feat. Which us the linchpin of an axe thrower build.

Without Ricochet Toss, I would have to invest in half a dozen axes atleast

Lantern Lodge

My focus is on making the ulfen guard pc work.

I know there are many other ways to build this character without ulfen guard, but my character is member of the sovereign court. Hence ulfen guard.

Btw, won't full plate with high Str work as well as a dex build?

Lantern Lodge

Secret Wizard wrote:
Are you set on having the PrC? 'Cause you could make this work well with pure Fighter or Barb.

Well... I'm looking at Ulfen Guard for both flavor and character reasons. Also gives making this character an effective one a certain kinda of challenge.

Lantern Lodge

I'm thinking of making an Axe-thrower Ulfen Guard character for PFS.

The Ulfen Guard PC seems like a mix of Fighter and Barbarian...
So how could I make this character ideal work? How much of each class or even other classes like bloodrager, slayer, etc should I have?

Should I also focus on STR and get a Belt of Mighty Hurling (Lesser) for throwing axes?

The basic ideal is kinda like a Thor like character that uses axes. Start early level as melee axe build and move on to focusing on throwing one weapon via Ricochet Toss feat.

Lantern Lodge

Is your game a homebrew?

Cos if it is you can always ask your gm for options like a permanent gravity bow effect on a bow, etc.

Lantern Lodge

James Jacobs wrote:
Secane wrote:

2) CAN Hellknights that are Lawful-Good go to hell in their afterlife, if they really want to? (Assuming they really believe the in the clause.)

2) If they "WANT" to, then they're not lawful good.

1) What if someone who is truly LG or at the very least truly, totally Good, wants to go to hell for the sake of another? An example reason being the person they love most and who does love them in return is going to/in hell and they want to join them.

2) How does hell or the good planes for that matter handle such cases?

-----------------------

3) I read in one of the Pathfinder Tales of angels called the Redeemed(?), who are former devils turn angels. Aka they are the opposite of fallen angels.
Are such beings individually unique? Each having their own looks, stats, abilities?
And therefore don't conform to any of the known celestial angel/races types?

4) Which core deities are the most likely to have or gain an addiction to korean love dramas?

5) Which iconic characters are the most likely to have or gain an addiction to korean love dramas?

6) What inner sea nation has the most "soft power"? As defined as the ability to shape the preferences of others through appeal and attraction.

7) What would you do if you found out that a product that you made was culturally insensitive?

8) Are the humans of Golarion originally from another planet/world/plane? Or or are the humans of Golarion and other planets in the solar system the result of parallel evolution on their own planets?

9) With so many other non-human races to be racist against, how racist are the human races of Golarion to each other?

10) How do anti-paladins of Calistria handle the fact that that their goddess's home is on a goodly plane?

11) Do Flumphs have their own deities?

12) Are there fairy godmothers in the Golarion multiverse?
12a) Do they exist/operate on Golarion?

Lantern Lodge **

Will there be a easy to find link to the Campaign Clarifications Document? Like the additional resources link or have it appear in the downloads section?

Blog posts can become hard to find or backtrace after some time.

Lantern Lodge

If a PC wants to make someone (NPCs, etc) else feel "uncomfortable" or disgusted, which social skill or skill/s should be used?

An example, a PC causes a distraction by wolf-whistling, catcalling or giving "hungry eyes" at some NPCs.

Which social skill or skill/s should be used in this situation? Assuming that the PC is NOT ACTING and actually having the hots for the NPCs.

Some thoughts on this...
● I was thinking a performance skill like acting, but then I realise that the target of the PC's catcalling might actually feel even MORE "uncomfortable" or disgusted if the PC is actually being genuine in their actions.
● Bluff kinda usually works, but the PC is not bluffing here.
● Diplomacy seems counter to what is going on...
● and Intimidate, might work?
● But what if the target ENJOYS that catcalling?
● It rotates back to Diplomacy?
● And what if the Intimidate fails and cause the target to get angry?
● Then it becomes a "success" cos you failed a skill check, but succeeded in your intention of making a target "uncomfortable"? (+ Angry)
● AND then there is dirty tricks, but those are melee only and you don't need to be in melee to give "hungry eyes" to a target from across the room?

I'm confuse....

Lantern Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:
I've not read any Dragonlance books, so I have no idea what Raistlin was capable of. I'm not entirely certain he's read them either.

Well... he pretty much just wiped out all the gods of the world single handedly. You know, the simple everyday stuff that solo, OP, physically sick spellcasters do. :P

Lantern Lodge

So older era Dragonlance? Before they learned how to use wild magic?

If that is the case... remind the GM that wizard magic would therefore be High Sorcery?

Among the wizards, it is only Raistlin Majere who has a health issue which affected his magic. Which is mainly cos he is effectively walking around with a curse on him for being too overpowered.

Most High Sorcery spellcasters have no such issues. Especially more so for the Wizards of High Sorcery. The strength of their powers are more closely tied to the moons that give them their power.

So what the GM should be doing is:
1) Checking what is the alignment of the party's casters and

2) Assign the proper color robe (white, red or black) to them based on the caster's alignment.

3) THEN the GM has to come up with a way to track the Moons' (Solinari, Lunitari and Nuitari) rise and wane.

4) And finally come up with the appropriate buffs and debuffs on the appropriate spell schools and robe colors, depending on which moons are on the rise and which ones are on the wane.

IF the GM wants to give fatigue for spellcasting, then the GM better make sure that each spellcaster is a Raistlin Majere in the making.
Remind him what ONE Raistlin Majere can do and did.

Lantern Lodge

This post should be in the rule questions section.

That said, you are correct.

Wands are Spell Trigger items that he can use as long as the spell is on his spell list.

Scrolls are Spell Completion items and he would need to use UMD to activate them.

"An alchemist can utilize spell-trigger items if the spell appears on his formuale list, but not spell-completion items (unless he uses Use Magic Device to do so)."

Lantern Lodge

CRB, pg550 wrote:
Creating magic armor has a special prerequisite: The creator’s caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the armor.

So.... the Make whole (normal version) spell, would not be able to repair a +4 armor/weapon?

Since the required, double the Caster level, is a CL 24? Which is not attainable for most lv 1 to 20 PCs?

The Make Whole, Greater from the Technology Guide would had to be used instead?

Lantern Lodge

Summon spells usually just takes up more time in a game.

That said, there are some newer feats that really make calculating the actual stats of summon monsters a real chore.

I'm looking at you Versatile Summon Monster/Summon Nature’s Ally!

Lantern Lodge

So most magical items, and magical weapon and armor qualities have a caster level listed.
This is important for saves and repairing or making whole destroyed magical items.

Make whole wrote:
Make whole can fix destroyed magic items (at 0 hit points or less), and restores the magic properties of the item if your caster level is at least twice that of the item.

But what is the caster level for magical weapons and armor that are just a flat +1 to +5?

Examples, +2 longsword or +5 full plate?

Is it just a caster level 5, no matter the number of the "+X"? As per the requirement for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat?

Or is there another way to calculate the caster level these items?

Lantern Lodge

Just some questions that popped up while discussing character creation (for Golarion)

1) Do Hellknights that are Lawful-Good go to hell in their afterlife?

2) CAN Hellknights that are Lawful-Good go to hell in their afterlife, if they really want to? (Assuming they really believe the in the clause.)

3) Can souls change alignment? and...

3a) If so, do they get "resorted" to their proper alignment afterlife plane?

4) (Asking for a friend) Are there really Goblin Paladins in Golarion? Like the in Paizo artwork?

4a) If so, which deities are these goblin paladins likely to worship?

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just an update.

The party ultimately convinced the paladin to step in as ruler "for now".

I prepared for every outcome, but they decided that 6k is not something they want to drop on a familiar.

Lantern Lodge

Btw, I saw from an earlier post that today is your birthday. So Happy Birthday!

And thanks for answering all of our questions!

Lantern Lodge

James Jacobs wrote:
Secane wrote:
5) Is there anything the Dominion of the Black actually fears? Magical Ponies? Magical Caring Bears? Their Mother-in-Laws? Competing organizations that mass produce whatever the Dominion of the Black is selling, in a china factory like way? (The last is a stereotype)
5) Yes. They fear other things in the Dark Tapestry, such as the Lovecraft elements. They also fear some powerful enemies on various worlds who have risen up against them. They fear Desna.

Wait... a min...

1) Why would the Dominion of the Black fear Desna?

2) Is Desna an early "Iron God"?

Iron Gods:
Aka a Machine AI turned into a god over many years and with worship? (Like one of the possible endings of the Iron Gods AP?)

3) If so, does this explains why Desna is usually present in the material world and not the outer planes? Cos she started as a material being? Maybe as a giant spaceship's AI?

4) In Chronicle of the Righteous, Black Butterfly's entry states that "Legend tells that at the dawn of creation, Desna placed the stars in the sky."

Does this meant to mean that Desna mapped out the universe (as a spaceship), actually created the stars (more like a world maker) or in a mythical sense(aka it's just a saying)?

5) Is something like a yah-thelgaad or Chyzaedu Paladin even possible?

6) How does Flumphs protect worlds or fight against the Dominion of the Black or similar Lovecraft elements?

Lantern Lodge

Dotting

Lantern Lodge

Well there are alignment issues if you don't include a line like "and creatures of an elemental subtype that matches a domain granted by the deity (if any)"

An off my head example are the CE Demon Lords, Flauros and Kostchtchie, which have the Fire domain and Ice subdomain respectively.
If the wording is just "must have an alignment within 1 step of the deity's alignment", then Herald Callers of these 2 deities would not be able to summon Fire and Ice elementals at all. Which would defeat their purpose as Herald Callers.

Lantern Lodge

Dasrak wrote:

Why is everyone getting held up on proficiencies? A masterwork light shield has no non-proficiency penalty, and if you take the armor expert trait neither does mithral breastplate. This is a very minor tradeoff that's basically not worth talking about. How this even merits more than a brief mention compared to losing a domain is beyond me. That's huge, easily worth more than the effective three bonus feats you're getting. However, that pales in comparison to the archetype's biggest downside, which perplexingly no one has talked about: it sharply reduces your options for summoning.

With Herald Caller you can only summon monsters appropriate for your deity. This is limited to the specific list of expanded monsters on page 30 of the Summoner's Handbook, and monsters that match at least one of the alignment or elemental subtypes of your deity. Has anyone even bothered to look at how restrictive that is!? We're talking maybe 1-2 monster options per spell level, if you pick a good deity choice with a favorable alignment and elemental subtype. Pick poorly and you'll have a smattering of dead levels with literally no legal options for summoning. If your GM offers an expanded list with lots of monsters with alignment subtypes that could really flesh out this archetype, but without an expanded list there are so few options here that the archetype is utterly irredeemable.

So I'd have to disagree with everyone posting above, this archetype is a trap that guts your list of legal choices for summon monsters. Bite the bullet and take the feats instead, and use either preferred spell or greater spell specialization if you really want spontaneous conversion.

Herald Caller wrote:

Divine Heralds (Su): A herald caller can use summon monster spells only to summon creatures particularly appropriate to her deity. This includes all creatures listed as summon monster options for priests of her deity (see Expanded Summoning for Priests on page 30), creatures whose alignment matches at least one aspect of her deity’s alignment, and creatures of an elemental subtype that matches a domain granted by the deity (if any). When summoning a creature that is normally summoned with the celestial or fiendish template, a herald caller of a chaotic deity can instead summon it with the entropic template, and a herald caller of a lawful deity can instead summon it with the resolute template (see pages 292–293 of Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2 for more information on these simple templates).

Because of these summoned monsters’ strong ties to the herald caller’s deity, the herald caller also gains specific benefits with creatures she summons with summon monster spells gained from her cleric spell list. The herald caller and her summoned monsters can understand each other’s spoken words as if they shared a common language (though this doesn’t give summoned monsters the ability to speak if they normally lack it). Whenever the herald caller uses channel energy to heal, she can include all of her summoned monsters, even if they are out of her normal channel energy radius or of a creature type that would not normally be affected. If she channels energy to deal damage, she can exclude any of her summoned monsters that would normally be affected.

This is not anywhere near as restrictive as you described.

The Herald Caller's Divine Heralds (Su), does not restrict you to alignment subtypes like the Sacred Summons feat. This means ALL ANIMALS that follow your alignment can be summoned.

In addition, if you pick any deity with Neutral as part of their alignment like Neutral Good, you can readily summon neutral monsters like Elementals. Cos as stated above, as long as a summoned monster's alignment t matches at least one aspect of your deity’s alignment, you can summon it.

For most clerics on the good to evil or law to chaos scale, you already can't cast alignment opposite spells anyway, so there really isn't that much to lose.

The only cleric summoner that loses out a little are pure neutral cleric, which might find themselves unable to summon monsters from the 4 corners of the alignment grid, LG, CG, LE and CE.

Overall, you lose very little summon choices. After all clerics are already alignment tied when it come to alignment type spells.

Lantern Lodge

Dekalinder wrote:
Is there any reason why the lyrakaen has to lie/disguise to rule? I mean, why would anyone have a problem with a servant of Desna being in charge?

This is what the party said they were planning to do.

As far as GMing is concern, there may be political and unfortunately racial reasons for a Lyrakien azata to take over.

1) She isn't on the current or past government. She is effectively a stranger to everyone. (Which the party may or may not want to disguise her further into someone specific; like the past ruler.)

2) Lyrakien azatas are tiny... which makes it like... Think the story Peter Pan... would the lost boys follow Tinkerbell instead of Peter Pan?

3) The charter for founding a new country is given to them by a human nation (which is also their main trading partner)

4) Their nation has a human majority and most of those are simple country folk from the river kingdoms.

Yes, it IS kinda racist, but I got to keep it real. Their kingdom is not founded in Heaven.

Lantern Lodge

Be careful with over thinking into how player actions interact with the game system.

Otherwise you may end up with crazy ruling, like having to to make a player or yourself roll saving throws for every single item that is caught in a fireball/fire. God help you if they say they drop a bag of glass marbles on the floor and into the fire.

Lantern Lodge

By the way...

Is "Making a Puppet Ruler" a bad or good action?

Cos that term has been spoken, typed out and traded around the party for quite a while.
Just want to know if you think such an action has any consequences on alignment?

Lantern Lodge

The Familiar (or any other NPC for that matter) having their own egos and are not just mindless creations is one of the matters that I will remind the players about, when they finalize their decision.
I don't like to misinform players.

@Arachnofiend, I also do not punish players for their decisions. Some actions however do have reactions in the story and the players will have to live with the outcomes of their actions.

As others have mentioned, NPCs are people in the story and not the mindless slaves of PCs.

If NPCs playing their roles = passive-aggressively punish the PCs, then what is the point of the story at all?
Why not have all NPCs just give up, roll over and become the slaves of the PCs?

Lantern Lodge

PossibleCabbage wrote:

My question is about "The current ruler's slot is vacant after the ruler player had to leave the game due to other commitments.". I understand that players sometimes have to leave games, but that the player leaves does not necessarily mean that the character they played pops out of existence. They will clearly shift to the background, but they still exist in the setting unless written out.

So what I would say is that unless you already wrote the former ruler out of the story, you should resist doing so. Being in charge is a good gig, and people throughout history have not readily wanted to give it up.

So the observations I would make is that the character who has been the ruler won't step down just because they're no longer piloted by a player (unless that behavior would be really out of character, maybe) and if they do step down, it's not like the PCs are the only people who have a say in who the next ruler is. Even if the players do successfully replace the monarch with a particularly charismatic outsider, that's not going to last forever. I mean, an extraplanar being is simply not going to understand everything that would be common knowledge to someone from this plane, and no matter how charismatic they are, eventually they will slip up and make people suspicious and then it's only a matter of time.

Personally, I would be inclined to let them get away with it for a while, because it's kind of funny, but ensure that this is a temporary state of affairs and there will be repercussions when the ruse is eventually unraveled.

The previous ruler has indeed been written out of the story. There may be a mission to save him one day, but that would have to be story for another time.

Lantern Lodge

If the lost of inspire courage is a concern, why not pick a deity with the Heroism subdomain?

The Aura of Heroism (Su) gives everyone near you Heroism, effectively buffing them like inspire courage.

The "being too close to the frontlines" issue can be addressed with spells like sanctuary.

Lantern Lodge

@raven1272,
That is exactly what I'm afraid of.
Also since the Lyrakien azata is also not exclusively under the Pact Wizard's control, as GM I fear I may have to have it do things that would go against the party's decisions which would bring the GM and Party into conflict. (And not the good type)

@Nox Aeterna,
But do you think such an action (lying to a nation on the nature of their ruler) can be considered good?

*The nation does have a fae, Kobold and other non-human/oid population, but as a whole the population would likely not support a Lyrakien azata as a ruler. Not to mention the nation's patrons who gave the party the charter to start a nation in the first place is a human nation.

@Duiker,
Thanks for reminding me to ask the players why their Characters would want to take such an action.
Sometimes I tie the players so strongly to their characters, I take their actions as one and the same.

I am strongly considering allowing a familiar as ruler and just let the story play out.

Lantern Lodge

The class is quite interesting to read and reminds me of a 3.5 class that also make use of runes on a barbarian base.

One issue I do have with this class is that the writing is a quite messy. It has too many things going and they are all over the place.

Also instead of a spell pool it uses rage as a spell pool. This can be either overpowered or broken and weak as there are many more ways to get more rounds of rage.

Lantern Lodge

10 point buy is quite harsh on players.

What are your concerns with 6 players?
Are you afraid they will steamroll over encounters?
Or is this more of a balancing act, where you give them access to a lot of different sources like ACG, ARG...etc and want to balance it out with a lower point buy?

Lantern Lodge

I'm as asking as the GM, if this is a good or bad ideal for GMing and story.
And what should I do in this situation?

My party wants to have the party wizard's familiar (Lyrakien azata) be the replacement ruler of their country. Via a Hat of Disguise.
The current ruler's slot is vacant after the ruler player had to leave the game due to other commitments.

The party wants to make use of the Lyrakien azata, as it has a high Cha stat of 20. (Rulers add their Cha modifiers to any one of the 3 main kingdom stats.)

While this make some sense from a mechanical standpoint, I'm very hesitant to allow this, both from a GMing standpoint; 1) I feel it cheapens the ideal of having PCs if the party has a NPC companion in such a role. And also from a story point of view, as 2) the Lyrakien azata is from a wizard's Pact Wizard archetype's True Form ability and not just a normal improved familiar. The Pact Wizard's patron being Desna. While she is a CG goddess, she doesn't seem to be the type of goddess that would support having a servant of her's outright lying to a nation. The Lyrakien azata after all is a servant of Desna's.
(A Pact wizard is an archetype where the wizard forms a pact with an outsider for power.
"Some wizards make bargains with beings from other realms in order to gain arcane power. These pact wizards have unparalleled access to extraplanar allies, but these bonds never come without strings attached.")

I'm considering the following options.... but are there any others I should consider?
No to Familiar as Ruler -
1) Have the Lyrakien azata outright deny being used in such a role. (As a servant of Desna.)
2) Consider have the Lyrakien azata LEAVE the wizard.

Yes to Familiar as Ruler -
3) Allow the Lyrakien azata to become the ruler, but play out the possible issues with this setup. Example, the Lyrakien azata's disguise being just an illusion is unable to touch anything.
4) Allow the Familiar to be ruler, but have the party and nation take alignment hits for doing so. I'm considering a drop 1 step to chaotic and maybe 1 step down to evil. Its really possibly more a chaotic then really evil action tho.

What should I do?

--
Some extra info:
The Party's country alignment is NG
Party:
LG Paladin
NG Druid
NG Wizard
NG Cleric
NG(?) Barb (New)

If you are wondering why not just get the Paladin to be the ruler?
The Paladin player has expressed that he does not want to be a ruler.

Lantern Lodge

Why not just have armor ac added as extra DR?

Lantern Lodge

Have you consider a spear thrower build?

There are new feats in weapon master's handbook that make thrower builds viable now.

Lantern Lodge

CRB - Combat - Full-Round Actions wrote:

Full Attack

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack

After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action

You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC until the start of your next turn.

When you make a full round attack and have multiple attacks (either from having a high bab, haste spell or feats like rapid shot), you resolve each attack one at a time.

So Ricochet Toss allows you to effectively use 1 weapon to commit multiple attacks. As the weapon returns back to you after each attack.

Lantern Lodge

sunshadow21 wrote:

I strongly suspect that when we see the eventual product labeled Pathfinder 2.0 it will be more a consolidation and reorganization of what constitutes "core" rather than the types of seismic changes that WotC tends to prefer. That allows all the old material to be continue to be used while providing a clearer path of entry for new players and reduces the stress put on LPF DMs. Because the sales are primarily centered on APs, it's not going to be a deal breaker to not have everyone rush out and buy the new core book immediately if they want to keep using their existing material.

The core book will look a lot different, but the game as a whole will not. The biggest change I see happening is building archetypes and traits into the core while shifting around which classes (and to a far lesser extent, races) are considered core and how they are structured. Beyond that, the only thing I could see actually changing is the magic system and magic items, but even that isn't going to get a radical change; they've said many times that they like the Vancian system, and any new system is probably going to align in some form to the basic idea of Vancian casting. They may eventually offer a pure point system as an alternative, but it will never be the core. The biggest thing that can and needs to happen is a culling and rewriting of the core spells and spell lists to fit with newer classes and spells from newer sources, but that doesn't really require tinkering with the core magic system.

Everything else would be reorganization. They pretty much copied and pasted most of the basic structure of the core book this go around, and there's a lot of room for improvement in how the different rules are laid out and explained. However, things like a unified chart for saving throws doesn't actually change the rules for saving throws, and most of the problems people complain about seem to be rooted in poor organization; most of the rules aren't that bad to those people that actually figure out how to put all the disparate pieces...

+1

I totally agree on a reorganization.
A "Pathfinder 2.0" does not need to be a complete revamp of the game system. It really could just be a more cleaned up and clarified version of the current system.

Many of what is currently appearing in the FAQs and other rules that could use clarification or streamlined, could be made into the core of a "Pathfinder 2.0". Things like how grapple really works? Do spell features from different classes affect each other? Etc, could all be ironed out, reorganized and clarified in Pathfinder 2.0.

The Core Rule book alone is a good example. As is in its current state, it is clearly written by and for someone who already understood the 3.5 D&D rules. For a total newbie to the game system, the core book is a mess, with a totally new reader getting completely lost. Hence the need for the current Beginner Box and Strategy Guide.

Making the game more easier to understand, while keeping all the current content valid, should be the goal of any Pathfinder 2.0.

Lantern Lodge **

Just checking... is it required that the character that gets the Ritual of Stardust 4715 AR Boon, be played in a game during this period?
Or can this boon be attached to any character, regardless?

Lantern Lodge

Blakmane wrote:
Secane wrote:


Sorry, forgot to mention, this is for a PFS character.

This is something you should definitely mention :-p

Bestiary feats are not legal in PFS so you may as well go with wind stance then.

Flyby Attack is legal for my Eagle Shaman Druid character as the Eagle Shaman archetype is a legal source that specifically allows Flyby Attack to be chosen.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary wrote:


Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source;
Blakmane wrote:
go for flyby attack, by the way.

Thanks for the advice. I do think I will be going with Flyby Attack. I may have to see if I can squeeze Wind Stance later at lv 11.

Lantern Lodge

Blakmane wrote:
Secane wrote:


Flyby Attack
- It's usually a monster only feat.

This isn't actually true, just so you know. PFS bans bestiary feats but this is a PFS specific rule and there's absolutely no wording to prevent you from taking these feats otherwise.

For a strong example, see craft construct - there are multiple player options associated with this feat in other books.

Sorry, forgot to mention, this is for a PFS character.

Lantern Lodge

My PFS eagle shaman Druid just leveled up to lv 9 and I get to pick an extra feat, thanks to the archetype.
However, I'm not sure which of the these 2 feats I should pick up; Flyby Attack or Wind Stance?
*Wind Stance requires me to pick up Dodge as well, with my lv 9 feat slot.

I'm a caster (summoning) focus druid, so I only have a 12+ in Str. (Depends on what I wildshape into.)

Flyby Attack
Pros - It allows a STANDARD action. Meaning I can fly, cast a spell and fly away.
- It's usually a monster only feat.

Cons - I likely won't be able to use it for fly + grab attacks, even in Roc form as I just don't have the str to pull it off. Not to mention the amount of rounds needed to pull that off.
-

Wind Stance
Pros - Gives 20% concealment vs range as long as I move.

Cons - It eats up my other lv 9 feat slot, as it needs dodge too.
-

So which of these 2 feats, would you advise my character to pick up?

I'm currently leaning more towards, Flyby Attack, as it is a feat not usually available. Or maybe I should consider one of the other feats, Improved Lightning Reflexes, Lightning Reflexes, Skill Focus (Perception)?

Lantern Lodge

Neo2151 wrote:
Secane wrote:
Pyrotechnics - "Everyone! Close your eyes!"
Pretty sure this doesn't work. The Smoke Cloud effect definitely not, but the Fireworks effect requires line of sight, not actual visibility. It'd be a really lenient GM, methinks, who would let that slide (and even if they did, what's to stop the enemy from doing the same as you blatantly call it out?)

Well the first thing the GM usually ask if we try the above is, "what language are you shouting that in?".

In PFS, this usually have everyone looking at their list of languages and picking the one most of them knows. (And hopefully one that the enemies don't understands.)

In a homebrew the above reason is why some GMs would advise the party to have a one or a couple of "party languages". Languages that are rare for most npcs, but one that everyone understands or picked up.

Lantern Lodge

From the Core Rule Book, under Magic --> Transmutation --> Subschools --> Polymorph

"You can only be affected by one polymorph spell at a time. If a new polymorph spell is cast on you (or you activate a polymorph effect, such as wild shape), you can decide whether or not to allow it to affect you, taking the place of the old spell. In addition, other spells that change your size have no effect on you while you are under the effects of a polymorph spell."

One polymorph spell in effect at any given time. Since it takes the place of the old spell, the old spell if effectively ended.

1 to 50 of 1,972 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.