Rigg Gargadilly

Shane LeRose's page

Goblin Squad Member. Organized Play Member. 395 posts (857 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:

I agree with the interpretation that per the RAW of this encounter, the party automatically bypasses the encounter if they all choose to stealth. They automatically get spotted and have the encounter if even one person chooses a different tactic. In either case, rolls aren't relevant so any roll a PC makes would simply serve as their initiative roll in the ensuing combat if they don't all sneak, or would provide fluff for why they avoid notice if they do all sneak.

It's... unsatisfying, but that's how it is presented.

Am I missing something? How is it possible to bypass this encounter just by "declaring" stealth? Doesn't their stealth check need to exceed the Manticore's perception DC? Do they get a perception check to notice the manticore flying around?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:

And we've been told repeatedly that +1 makes a *huge* difference. You can't have it both ways. If Expert proficiency in weapons matters, then so does an 18 as compared to a 16.

EDIT: Sorry if I seem upset about this, but yeah, we've been repeatedly told by developers that +1 is a big difference in that system, yet they/others also seem to downplay it in some situations. It doesn't make sense, and it's essentially double-speak on their part. Either it matters, or it doesn't, and we need to choose one.

It's fine to be upset. It's all in how you express it. Also, I am not one to talk.

+1 matters, kind of. +2 matters more and +3 is freaking king. An unoptimized character in this edition is only 1 point behind the optimized one. I'm learning to like this. It means you're still effective even if you somehow make a "bad" character. What I'm disliking is the fact that future supplements can NEVER give another +1 anywhere on a character without potentially breaking the system. This heavily restricts design. With no room to breath, you're stuck with a stagnant system.

Just play the test, take exceptional notes, and move the future towards better character options. It's all any of us can hope to do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why do you even take this feat? Seriously, it doesn't give you an extra attack or anything useful.

Is it so you'd always be "armed"? Is that really that important in this edition?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
I really like most things about the switch to Ancestry, but I feel like the inclusion of ancestral heritage should include heritage feats tied to the different ethnicities and that it should reach out beyond just humans. Humans have always had the privilege of being something more than just a race (which is why I like Ancestry), but no one else ever felt as well supported. Even just including 2 heritages for each ancestry and having those tied to something that feels like a heritage (Ethnicity) would go a long way to making the Ancestry system feel more well supported.

To expand on this real quick. The background section needs to be better defined. Backgrounds fit with ethnicities, especially since this can bridge between races. Backgrounds based on regions instead of job type would also be more interesting and may even offer broader options.

For example, your background could also allow you to take feats from a unique list in place of racial heritage feats as you level since you identify with your region more than with your race.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
extinct_fizz wrote:
Crumbs to this whole thread. I love the idea of using the cool racial feats or alternate race traits from PF1e as the Ancestral feats. I love the idea of starting out as "any elf" and becoming a Paragon of Elvishness during your adventuring career.

Please don't misunderstand. We all love the idea of Heritage feats and being the "elfiest" elf you can be. The issue is execution.

Your entire race is locked behind feats. Many of which you wouldn't take because they're either useless or don't do the one thing you want them to do.

Long-term the races need to have minor, nebulas abilities that open the door to one or more feats that make your character, their style, and so forth more unique.

So far, that's my take. Races need more qualities that define them as a separate race and then heritage feats that really pop. I mean, you get one at 1st and not another until 5th. If these feats are the baseline we can expect for future designs, then we already have a big problem.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Hastur! Hastur! Hastur! wrote:

I really like the new multiclassing. Well to be honest, I really think I like the new multiclassing rules. I havent actually used them yet.

I absolutely hated the 3.x and PF version of My character is a 1 fighter/1 rogue/2 paladin/1 monk/1 gladiator/1 super ninja/1 ....... etc etc.

Get away from me with that.

I however dont have any problem with a player who honestly wants to be a 10 fighter/10 monk or what ever. To me, unlike the mess I just listed above a 10/10 character is a valid character concept. The min/max Frankenstein monstrosity is just someone with too many splat books.

As someone who liked making characters like this (done mostly when making leveled monsters to use against the PC"s) I think you need to step off.

You never played characters like this, but you judge them and the people who play them. My fun has nothing to do with yours'. If my style of character "offends" you then maybe you're the problem, not me or the system.

In the current system, you can't stop learning magic, or developing combat abilities, or stop being a thief. It isn't unfair to call that ridiculous. It isn't unreasonable to suggest fixes that improve the system.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

This is a non-issue. You can still make a Str based cleric. You'll have a 16 in Str which is more than enough. You don't "need" it to be 18. There's no more times and a half on damage for going two handed.

Also, every 5 levels you add +2 to FOUR different stats. That's an 18 Str and 16 Con by 5th level.

You can even do this with a halfling. You'll have an 18 Str by 10th level instead.

Seriously. Optimization is almost pointless. An unoptimized character is only 1 point behind an optimized one on average.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kodyboy wrote:

With everyone getting their level to attack rolls trained vs legendary is only a five point difference. This means an untrained wizard can attack almost as well as a trained fighter, especially at higher levels.

After playing a few encounters this makes me think that martial characters either need more bonuses or the level attack/bonus to ac should be half the level not the full level.

The math you're concerned about is ultimately fine. A fighter is much better than a wizard wielding that same mace, plus the fighter may have an ability that tacks on a rider. The wizard has no such option.

The closeness in numbers means that an optimized character is only slightly better than an unoptimized character. So even if you make a dwarven bard, or a gnome barbarian, you're only going to be 1 point behind the dwarven barbarian, or gnomish bard respectively.

As an optimizer, I dislike this. I don't hate it, and I'll probably learn to live with it, but today I'm scowling.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Alchemists should replace Empower Bombs with Empower Alchemy. Does the same thing for bombs, if you want, but could be applied to poison instead to make that more viable, or to mutagen to make that more viable. Just a resonable boost that also gives "alchemy points" that can be spent on your focus, at a level much earlier than 9th.

Being pigeon-holed into bombs, and then getting minimal support for them, isn't helping my interest in this class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, it just seems like it should adjust for size.

I'll have to talk to my DM about. Thanks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bart Humphries wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
By that interpretation, it can be put on any weapon as any weapon can do non-lethal with a -4 penalty to hit.
Yes, as long as you took the -4 penalty to hit, or had a feat that turned all damage into nonlethal damage, it could be put on any weapon. Of course, if someone else used the weapon who didn't have the feat, or if you didn't have a feat like that and didn't take the -4 penalty to hit, then the ability wouldn't trigger.

I like this interpretation. It's clean and elegantly makes sense. I fear this is not how it would be ruled upon by Paizo.

I do believe that adding the merciful enchantment makes the weapon viable for sapping, but I don't believe you're able to apply sapping without the weapon having a specific quality (beyond taking a -4 to hit) that makes the weapon non-lethal.

Thank you all so much for your responses. I believe, at least to my satisfaction that this has been settled.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

After reading through these threads I am baffled.

Aid Another is not an attack of opportunity. Never has been. There are traits and feats that grant a bonus to Aid Another or Attacks of Opportunity. These bonus' are not interchangeable. How is it even possible that people believe they are one and the same? The deeper people go to justify their thin lines of logic the more desperate they sound. Why would anyone even want it to work this way?

Aid Another is an action that spends an Attack of Opportunity in the case of the Bodyguard feat. That's all it does. There is no triggering event for an Attack of Opportunity.

Again, simply baffled.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MeanDM wrote:
I went through several stages with this game. First I heard about it and got excited. Then I saw a video of it on YouTube and lost interest. Third I read the opinion on it from you guys, so picked it up on a whim, without high hopes. Then I played it nearly nonstop for the last few days.

This is how I celebrated President's Day weekend. In the dark surrounded by madmen.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dotted.

"cracks knuckles" time to get off the pot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Stuff like this doesn't help convince people to join Society games. It obviously should work off your level. You shouldn't even need a ruling on this, but people can be sticklers for wording.

I'm sorry you have to go through this just to play a game. Hopefully Paizo actually weighs in on this. It wouldn't take them any time at all to clear this up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pbbttt!

You're no fun.

So one feat grants 4 skill "ranks" over 4 levels and can only be taken once.

It seems the designer of the feat over values skills.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bosses lasting more than 4 encounters should seek immediate divine intervention.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why do I want to play a catfolk?

Because then my interest in catgirls wouldn't seem so creepy.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

There are two kinds of people.

People who see this video and stare in awe.

Those who feel the need to poo poo Lars' accomplishment.

Seriously. There are paragraphs above me that exist solely to debunk what we saw.

I truly pity those people. That video is an amazing depiction of human skill and ingenuity. To spend so much effort pointing how "wrong" it was according to "experts" just makes me shake my head in shame.

I truly expected more of this communtiy.

Forevermore I will call acrobatic archers Lars. It just seems appropriate.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I took a bodak, blinded it, and gave it full plate armor (non-magical). It rode a shadow unicorn. Had no class levels, but fought sword and board.

My players were terrified of this thing.

One of the players specialized in sundering and after a couple rounds remembered he could do that. Breaking the armor and shield made the bodak easier to fight, but breaking the shield meant he was better off dropping the sword and going for two claw attacks each round. It was not a quick fight, but it was fun for everyone involved.

Amongst my friends I'm considered a specialist in crafting encounters that are difficult, but not overwhelming. It's not easy, and I have enough failures to keep me on my toes. The point is if you want to make an encounter last then you need the players to attack something other than the bad guy. My players had to focus on an evil unicorn and beefy armor before the bodak could be destroyed.

TLDR; give the players something else to attack. Multiple targets, armor that needs to be sundered, a robot's forcefield or something that grants temp hp every turn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Mighty Khan wrote:

Vampire template. +2 CR to any living creature with 5HD. Pick a base creature with more than one natural attack, preferably with naturally low Con and high Cha.

Example: Wyrmling Sea Dragon

You end up with a CR 6 with great saves, 27 AC, and 3 Energy Drain attacks at +10. Energy Drain only triggers once a round, but at least one of those 3 attacks is bound to hit each round for 2 negative levels and decent damage.

I once built little girl Changeling Vampire triplets all named Suzy. They were a Ninja, a Freebooter Ranger, and a Sensei Monk, each with two claw attacks. They were wonderfully creepy and almost TPK'd. The Freebooter would pick a PC for her bane and they'd say

"Kill that one, Suzy!"
"Sounds good, Suzy!"
"Let's get him, Suzy!"

The Ninja would use Vanishing Trick and they'd say

"Where's Suzy?"
"You'll see, Suzy!"

Dotted. For, , , reasons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

-20 to grapple with a single limb. The lillend grabs with the tail, but uses her "whole body" in the grapple.

When I would summon one (towards the end of Carrion Crown) I'd have her just use her tail as a primary attack after she started a bard song. Worked out pretty well.

Move action to sing (giving everyone a +2, including herself). Standard to make a tail attack at +13 for 2d6+7 damage and a grapple check at +19 for another 2d6+5.

My apologies for bragging, but I'm just super proud of that strategy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is either the ultimate GMNPC or the ultimate villain. Being able to interact with the players without being at risk is perfectly fulfilled by this build. Thank you for this!

Dot


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can take a 5' step before casting the spell, but not after. Strict RAW


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Babies

The snack that smiles back!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Triphoppenskip wrote:
Ratfolk rule catfolk drool. RATFOLK FOR LIFE!

Be wary cheese-butte, for you are crunchy and delicious with ketchup.

You rule my belly! I drool over your flank sizzling in my frying pans!

Catgirl's gotta eat something. (Folk, catfolk. Still struggling here.)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

We should all start bumping this until this thread hits 100 pages and Paizo is crushed under the weight of our demands!

Give us catgirls!

Folk. I meant folk! Pretty sure I meant folk.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Psychic = spiritual. It relates to the essence of things. So outsiders should play a strong part of it as should some fey and some undead.

Psionic = mental. This relate to the mind, or the intelligence guiding a something. This focuses on living, thinking beings. Humanoids and abberations are prevelant here.

There can be overlap, just as you can combine the arcane with the divine. YMMV, but this works for me and will be a part of my campaigns.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I kinda wish the occultist had some sort of abilities that were tied to intelligent items. Maybe they add an intelligence to an implement to increase its power, but now you have to convince the item to cooperate.

Maybe a bonus in opposed ego checks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're using spells like chill touch or frostbite then the three primary attacks each round become more lethal. Sadly the warpriest wins out here because clerics have better personal buff spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corneleus Idaho wrote:

I think the psychic has the potential to be a leader role character if he wasn’t just a rehashed sorcerer.

What does the psychic really need?
1. Telepathy! Regardless if she can read minds (poorly), if she can’t speak to someone without words, she is not a psychic. First level, that should be a given. Even if it is limited to a range of 30 ft, and it increases as she levels. She should be able to communicate with a creature that she shares a language with or perhaps if he forms a psychic bond with them? Maybe he has a psychic aura or something that gives him some kind of bonus to mind-affecting spells and abilities.
2. Teamwork abilities. If the psychic did possess the aforementioned “psychic aura” she should be able to grant buffs to her teammates within that field or share her teamwork feats she possesses like a Cavalier. It would fill a hole that is missing in spell casters. Maybe I’m wrong, are there any primary spell casting classes that receive and share teamwork feats?
There has to be something with the class that makes him feel like a psychic.

This. 1st level telepathic communication that evolves as you level. It even allows you to create psychic spells that are tailored to having an improved effect if you possess a mindlink of some sort with the target.

Teamwork feat sharing and more teamwork feats for caster types. Yes please and thank you!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sacred Fist. I realize you just played a warpriest, but this is a warpriest plus monk on crack. Take pummeling style at 1st level. Maybe dip one level into Monk (Master of Many Styles archetype) so you can get Pummeling Charge at 2nd level. Take the trait that adds +1 to all your luck bonus' and suddenly Divine Power (1st level buff spell that adds +1 luck bonus to hit and damage) becomes a class feature.

Battle Shaman archer. Seriously. Your 8th level ability is a better version of the inquisitors bane ability. Take Life as your wandering hex and you'll be able to channel energy by 4th level. Super utility, a fair amount of control and surprising damage support in the form of deadly archery.

Ecclesitheurge with a one level dip into sacred fist. Be the ultimate bad touch cleric and take the maddness domain. Make it your secondary domain so you can keep the sweet domain ability, but dump the crappy spells.

If you decide to go Hunter I suggest verminous hunter so your scorpion/mantis companion can take worm as the animal focus and gain fast healing/fortification.

We're about to start an AP and I'm torn between the first two options. I hope you enjoy these suggestions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bloodrager

Blood Conduit (replaces fast movement, bloodline feats, uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge and indomitable will)
Combos With (Crossblooded, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Blood Rider (replaces fast movement, the bloodline feat gained at 9th, uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge)
Combos With (Crossblooded, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Crossblooded Rager (replaces bloodline feats, bonus spells, bloodline powers)
Combos With (Blood Conduit, Blood Rider, Metamagic Rager, Rageshaper, Spelleater or Steelblooded)

Greenrager (replaces blood sanctuary, bloodline feats gained at 6th and 9th)
Combos With (Metamagic Rager, Primalist, Spelleater, Steelblooded or Untouchable Rager)

Metamagic Rager (replaces improved uncanny dodge)
Combos With (Crossblooded, Greenrager, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Primalist (alters bloodline class feature)
Combos With (Blood Conduit, Blood Rider, Greenrager, Metamagic Rager, Rageshaper, Spelleater, Steelblooded, or Untouchable Rager)

Rageshaper (replaces blood sanctuary and improved uncanny dodge)
Combos With (Crossblooded, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Spelleater (replaces uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge and damage reduction)
Combos With (Crossblooded, Greenrager, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Steelblooded (replaces armor proficiency, fast movement, uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge and damage reduction)
Combos With ( Crossblooded, Greenrager, Primalist or Untouchable Rager)

Untouchable Rager (replaces the spells, blood casting, eschew materials, and bloodline spells class features)
Combos With (Blood Conduit, Bloodrider, Greenrager, Metamagic Rager, Primalist, Ragershaper, Spelleater and Steelblooded)

Didn't find something like this so I thought I'd craft one and share. I'll peck at the other classes as time permits. If anyone wants to jump the gun and start posting archetype combos for the other classes I believe everyone here would appreciate it.

You can tack on Primalist and Untouchable Rager to Blood Rider or Steelblooded. However, Steelblooded's 7th level ability would become useless. Also, Metmagic Rager can be combined with Greenrager and Primalist. Even though Untouchable Rager can be combined with so many archetypes most are a wash as many of the abilities require you to spend spell slots or cast spells in general for effects.

From an NPC perspective I'd say the Greenrager and Spelleater combine well together to create a final villain that can hold their own against a party of adventurers. An Untouchable Blood Rider works the same way. A good final boss type NPC.

From a player perspective I really like the Blood Conduit and desperately want to play one. It fixes the action economy problem and lets you cast spells through combat maneuvers. It's like a full attack Magus.

Metamagic Rager has some interesting options, especially when combined with Greenrager. You can use Echoing Spell
to recast your spells, especially your summon natures ally's. It cost 6 rounds of rage though, but nothing would stop you from just flooding a battlefield with raging celestial tigers. Eight rounds of rage would let you Quicken any of your spells, even your summons. Empower and Maximize could be used when you're able to summon multiple creatures and of course the standard Extend, Still and Silent options exist. Still is especially interesting since it means you could cast spells while restrained.

Sadly, most discussions about the Bloodrager focus on either the crossblooded or the primalist options. I'm hoping to discuss the other things the archetypes alter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Emblazoned wrote:

First off - thank you for the advice.

The players don't feel like combat is taking too long, in fact they keep arguing that the combats are shorter since the enemies die faster.

I think having each subsequent monster aid the first, and requiring a move action to direct each creature after the first might make things faster as long as the players were pre-rolling their attacks.

Thanks again -

Blaze

Lol, it seems you don't really have a problem. The players just want enemies that don't die that fast. Also, all those summons make lovely fireball targets.

Just use more powerful enemies. Preferably ones that have protection from good/law/chaos up so the summons can't approach them.

Seriously, how did no one already suggest that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've always been frustrated by the number of folks who dismiss 3PP goods, then I buy something 3PP and get burned by it.

Keep in mind, it's usually that I'm looking for something specific to add to my campaign and what gets produced doesn't fit, at all, not even a little. Maybe it's my fault for wanting/expecting one thing that is almost impossible to deliver followed by a blind purchase that then sits there unused. The desire to bypass having to commit more work for a game is strong so when a certain class is advertised that isn't on the PFsrd I usually pick it up, and end up disappointed.

I won't name the products I've been disappointed in because the publishers, whom I respect, have all participated in this thread. I will say this though, everyone has a vision of the type of game they want to play/run. You will never please us all, and many of us will just be content with supporting you, even if we don't get precisely what we want.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Majuba wrote:

Wow.

I have no intention of allowing this at any table I run, at home, or in PFS. Simply Ludicrous.

Yeah, totally. I heard an aasimar/MT totally one-shotted the Whispering Tyrant. With enchantment spells, even.

Seriously Sean, not cool. This was never a power issue. It's an accessibility issue. It adds an unnecessary layer of complexity to the game and serves no purpose other than to count as something designers of the game must keep in mind when creating additional content.

I'm not a fan of this ruling and I'm not a fan of your snark. This is simply ludicrous and no one should feel the need to apologize for stating an opinion just because people disagree with them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I, for one, maintain that though I enjoy things like this, it doesn't help the game. Yes the game is only as complex as YOU want it to be, at least until you add ME to the mix. No one plays this game alone. As such we need to be considerate of those who blanch and recoil at exploits. It really comes down to a matter of respecting your fellow player/GM.

I don't believe it over powers the game, but it does add an unnecessary complexity that is both awkward and exploitative. It WILL be a problem down the road and it is an easy fix. Some simple re-interpretation on the wording for PrC's and your done.

As much as I like finding a way to early entry any of the PrC's, I'd rather have Paizo offer outright support for existing PrC's instead of this "rules interpretation" hoopla. Just my 2 cents.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I approve and enjoy it, I have a friend who would hate this.

Capital HATE.

Anytime there's an exploit based on system mastery, loopholes and niche rules applications it ruins the fun for him. It makes me a little sad, since there's this whole aspect of the game I enjoy that I can't share with him.

Paizo did right by my friend when they marginalized PrC's. I was fine with it and have sinced not incorporated 3.5 materials in our games for about two years now.

This ruling is fun, cool and interesting, but for the wrong reasons. It will infuriate those who want to enjoy the game they love without being bogged down by system mastery. It also doesn't add anything genuine to the game.

I believe the requirements for PrC should be more clearly defined as casting class levels vs spell-like abilities. It may be interesting for many of us, but it's irresponsible of us to push this into law when it alienates so many more people.


59 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can I?

Does an aasimar's daylight ability allow them to qualify for eldritch knight? Why, why not?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Endoralis wrote:

Oh I've been carefully watching this thread since its make-up. I am the player of the Oracle and gladly would like to clear up any real issues/knee-jerks you may have.. I will say one thing, This is not even anywhere near close to optimized for me AND the fighter is still new to Pathfinder.. the result of their choices is simple deduction and fighting style One weapon+Power attack + Mounted = damage. That really is it, and they player was not even around when we first created characters nor did they know I had a mount.

So, List some question.. I'll answer.. so that the conversation isnt one-sided and also not visibly incorrect.

If the shared mount was your idea then Kudos! good sir. My PC's will soon be facing an anti-paladin riding a synthesis summoner. With tentacles. It'll be awesome!

Back on track. Is everyone having fun? Do you believe your party is overpowered? Do you agree that the system mastery on both sides has been lacking? What would you like to do to fix that (if there is even a problem)?

Many of the people above have had some extreme reactions, others only know what the OP has said. I am infinitely curious about your side of this gripping tale.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since a black blade upgrades itself as you level AND a magus can spend pool points to upgrade on the fly AND each black blade is unique to its weilder I'd say treat it like an artifact. Artifacts, by the way, cannot be further enchanted.

No fuss, no muss, no funky maths.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In order for "torture" to work. It needs to stick. The torturer needs to inflict damage, but each time they do there is a chance of permanent harm. Such as ability drain, permanent level drain, reduction in movement or penalties on saving throws (such as -4 to resist fear, sickened, etc, and it isn't easily healed).

Another option is to have the devils infiltrate their minds and start tracking down their allies and slaughtering them.

Ultimately the best way to torture PC's is to have the NPC's destroy their magic items right in front of them.

You do have a pretty decent set up, but it doesn't sound very fun to play in. Kudos for the descriptiveness, but seriously, throw them a bone and allow them an opportunity to escape.

Or at least, let them thing they are escaping :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ultimate Villains

Doubles as a PC book if it's an evil campaign.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Endzeitgeist wrote:
Looking forward to UP,

It's a little late to do this, but a telepathic dog, a psionic scout of small size and a crotchety old psychokinetic with a flying house would be an AMAZING addition to the book!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I played her in the final book. We started the game with me co-DMing (we had 8 players, I mostly set-up and ran encounters). By the Trial of the Beast though, we lost 2 players outright to babysitting issues and another player couldn't commit and only showed up half the time. So I made a cleric to travel with the party and I stopped reading ahead in the AP's. Well, the big bad monster at the end of Trial killed my cleric in a single round and after that I played a new character for each book. Their story started and ended within those pages. For Kendra though, I wrote up a back story about what happened to her after the party left and arrived with a couple of new companions (each replacing a dead or retired character). It was a lot of fun and I highly recommend high level diviners (+17 to initiative and always act in the surprise round, my Gawd!).

We won the day and in the end Kendra became a watcher over the world. Kind of like Oracle in Batman. Our last image of her is a room full of crystal balls and scrying circles showing endangered parts of the world and her, ever watchful for evil's return.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Easiest way to give any monster levels in a PrC is to change the feats/skills.

Gives them a unique flair IMHO.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Thor is a rage prophet. Wind mystery, legalistic curse.

Iron is a synthethist summoner. Just look at the way he dons his armor.

Captain America is a paladin. Can't believe no one else called that.

Black Widow, ninja. Nuff said.

Hawkeye, arcane archer or a zen archer. Either could work.

Hulk, rage chemists into master chymist.

Nick Fury, master spy or arcane trickster. He can do a lot of different things.

Agent Coulson. Corpse

JK! He would be a paladin/ninja. Pure awesomeness!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Stealth is influenced by the following: cover, distance, lighting and perception. The problem isn't that it's useless or easily negated, it's that GM's get it wrong. They don't take cover, distance and lighting into consideration and (much like illusions) always assume everyone in a square mile radius gets a perception check (Will save for illusions).

Stealth done properly is hard. It requires the GM to answer a lot of questions. If the GM wants stealth to be a viable option for his/her players then these questions will be answered. Otherwise no one should be playing a rogue at that table.

A party that supports their rogue stays close by, but takes no actions. You don't provoke a perception check if you take no actions that create noise. Even if the party is loud, the rogue can still move into position to flank the enemy and maybe even take one out with a ranged attack before the enemy notices them.

It doesn't take much for stealth to work. You just gotta play the game as intended.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

People need to grow up. This thread is ridiculous.

It's a good spell, that's all. It only hits one target, not multiple. It does not compare to an archer of equal level and as a fort save for the rider it becomes minor damage at best. Yes, as a 4th level slot you could deal about 15d6 at 10th level. A fireball at this level does the same thing with a 5th level slot.

Those who are wagging their fingers at Paizo, I wag my fingers at you. New materials will be made, some very good, most very useless. I literally own books from Paizo that I don't use a single option from, but they're still a good read. When something is good, just be glad. This is a game and if nothing new was made eventually the best possible builds would be discovered and min/maxers would only play those builds. New materials will shake things up and challenge such people. It makes the game better and us better gamers.

Stop acting like old people afraid of change. It's one lousy spell. I'd rather most new materials made always be useful and balanced, but that is a pipe dream. I'm happy with the game and how it changes with each new release.

Please folks, there's no reason to nitpick or complain about every single new piece of material that is playable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Grapple

Put that in your browser and follow the questions below the flow chart. It will answer everything for you.

1 to 50 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>