Suzaku's page

I like how the OP specified items and spells only and got a bunch of race recommendations. :)

To be fair you can use a polymorph school spell. If you have UMD you can use permanency and dark vision to use the spells.

Except the invisible rope is not being hidden.

Scott Betts wrote:

By 7th or 8th level, a smart party can no longer be threatened with the prospect of random encounters in the middle of the night while they sleep, thanks to reliable access to Rope Trick. Heck, if you memorize it twice you can be immune by level 3 or 4.

Of course, if the random encounter is with something intelligent, they might just decide to ambush the adventurers coming out of the rope trick. After all, a rope hanging out of a small portal in the air is a pretty good sign that there's someone hanging out in there...and probably with some fancy equipment / treasure.

Not if you pay for an invisible rope, by having permeantancy and invisible.

I don't see the appeal with using a higher point buy system. A character should have some flaws in their attributes.

The appeal for higher point buy is to allow characters that are larger than life. Usually this means a character with very little or no flaws. It's like making Batman with higher point buy oppose to making darkwing duck who had to lower his int (or wis depending how you view mental stats) because of the lower point buy.

Sorry, what I meant is that starting at 8pm mst would be too late for me as it'll be 10est.

I'm as well but I can't play at 8pm mst ; ;

Let say if you haven't finished an adventure path because your previous group has broken up, but you would like to play it to completion. Is it ok if you inform the group of your previous play through and join up (while keeping meta knowledge away), or should you wait to join when they get to the parts you haven't played before?

Be real men, roll 3d6 six times and make your stats in order as rolled.

But I have gotten 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18! ;)

WOW...someone needs to go back to basic 4e rules.

All I hear is "Lets take everything that makes the game a game and lets gather together once a week to listen to me share a sweet story I wrote about the characters I made up."

Actually that would be still be 3.x (including PF), 4e is stereotyped as having a lack of roleplaying (aka story).

Hello I was looking for online game such as Openrpg.

I don't really like playing levels 1-2 as very little of your class abilities come online. And sometimes you just have to suck until your second feats for stuff like devrish dancer and precise shot.

Azten wrote:

Like in real life, better weapons came along?

That an martial classes got a buff in PF. It is a lot easier for martial classes to get bonuses to damage that multiply on a critical hit. This makes the crossover point happen at a much lower level.

For example, for a straight two-hand fighter in PF, the crossover point is around level 4. At that point, you will generally do more damage with a falchion than a great sword. In 3.5, a straight fighter didn't do better with a falchion until around level 8.

With the help of excel, I managed to do some calculations. What you need is a +19 damage for Falchion and Great Sword is about equal, now with 20+ the Falchion edges out. With keen or improve crit the threshold changes from +19 to just +9.

Suzaku wrote:

I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.

That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.

Well I also think that's also stupid. If a town borders of an area where guns is prevalent than I expect to find guns in that area.

Numeria is certainly a polarizing element—not everyone likes having lasers and robots in their game. That's a big part of why we designed the Inner Sea region to be modular, such that beyond a region's border, they don't have a LOT of impact on the rest of the region. That does result in a certain level of non-realism, I realize, but it's worth it to us in order to make Golarion as widely usable as possible to as many people as possible. So... if you happen to not like Numeria, (or Irrisen with its eternal winter, or Andoran with its democracy, or Belkzen with all those orcs, or whatever) you can turn that region into a blank-slate (either an empty wilderness or a nation of your own design) without significantly impacting the rest of the setting.

Now... that said... Numeria is one of the top requests from folks for more information about it, and is often requested as the site for an Adventure Path. Reaction to Numeria elements we've put into other books has been mostly positive as well. Chances of us doing something big with Numeria at some point in the near future are pretty high as a result... at which point folks who hate Numeria will, I guess, get a chance to let their wallets catch their breath!

I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.

W E Ray wrote:

Unfortunately, some gamers feel that the "solution" is to rule that whatever the DM wants to use is legitimate.

The problem with that is? The superior solutions are?

W E Ray wrote:

You could do what everyone else did and cut Numeria out of the game.

Why don't you just speak for yourself, rather than pretending to speak for everyone else? This is not a rhetorical question, it is a genuine inquiry.

I think W E Ray was refering to how the inclusion of Numeria killed the setting for me. But to me that is like ignoring the Elephant in the room.

Getting magical weapons no one int the partey is proficient with sucks and isn't fun as a player so I try to aviod that as a gm.

I also think finding a magical weapon or even masterwork from an enemy and a challenging fight winning it is more fun than just finding it sitting in a chest.

Once the alarm is raised or even just recently, than I think all the stored magical weapons should be issued out to help defend the place.

For me The setting died when I learned of Numeria.

Any adventure path where you get to play in the epic level range.

Some monsters that are for Epic Challenge. What it's a wish list...

If they announce Numeria I'll cancel my subcription even if it's just a part of single portion of the book in the path. I'm still waiting for them to recont it out...

I guess than it's just plain awful archetype.

Suzaku wrote:

I fail to see how battle dance and rain of blows doesn't stack. The bonus from rain of blow are untyped (although it does mention it doesn't stack with haste). It's like saying battle dance and haste doesn't stack.

Quote:

Rain of Blows (Su)

At 6th level, a dervish dancer can use his battle dance to speed up his attacks. When making a full attack action, he may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding, as though under the effects of a haste spell. He also gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and on Reflex saves. At 9th level, and every three bard levels thereafter, these bonuses increase by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 18th level. These bonuses do not stack with the haste spell.
This ability replaces suggestion and mass suggestion.

Well, I'm not the expert on bards, again, but this is why I read it that way:

d20PFSRD wrote:

A dervish dancer is trained in the use of the Perform skill, especially dance, to create magical effects on himself. This works like bardic performance, except the dervish dancer only affects himself, ... Like bardic performance, it cannot be maintained at the same time as other performance abilities.

Starting a battle dance is a move action, but it can be maintained each round as a free action. Changing a battle dance from one effect to another requires the dervish dancer to stop the previous performance and start the new one as a move action. Like a bard, a dervish dancer’s performance ends immediately if he is killed, paralyzed, stunned, knocked unconscious, or otherwise prevented from taking a free action each round. A dervish dancer cannot perform more than one battle dance at a time.

Except rain of blows is not a battle performance. If that is the case than Razor's kiss, Versatile Dance, etc are battle dances as well.

You'll probably be happiest with Dawnflower Dervish. It does the non-buffing, dex-based combat Bard thing very well. Arcane Duelist's "Bladethirst" doesn't compare to dancing, and the feats and abilities are weighted towards heavier armors and anti-spellcaster stuff. Dervish Dancer is different, but not quite as good a combatant as Dawnflower Dervish. Dance of Fury can make for a strong skirmisher, though, making the class a serious contender if you are starting at higher levels.

You are right that battle dances don't stack, so I'm not sure what the person talking about inspire courage/rain of blows was talking about.

I fail to see how battle dance and rain of blows doesn't stack. The bonus from rain of blow are untyped (although it does mention it doesn't stack with haste). It's like saying battle dance and haste doesn't stack.

Rain of Blows (Su)

At 6th level, a dervish dancer can use his battle dance to speed up his attacks. When making a full attack action, he may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding, as though under the effects of a haste spell. He also gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and on Reflex saves. At 9th level, and every three bard levels thereafter, these bonuses increase by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 18th level. These bonuses do not stack with the haste spell.
This ability replaces suggestion and mass suggestion.

Not everyone uses the FotM builds and min/max advice on the forums. I'd say that the majority of actual players know nothing of these extreme cases and you'll see longswords at most normal tables.

Powergaming is the exception, not the rule. GMs need to step up and squash anything that doesn't feel right in his/her campaign.

What is FotM?

Benefit: You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.

Ok so he cast on his non shield arm, and hold whatever item on his shield arm. I also believe that rule is rarely going to come into play, like food or water. Heck, I've seen cleric/paladins casting when they have weapon and shield, bring up you need a free hand usually make you seem like a rules lawyer.

Love Obsidian Portal & run may campaign off of it, too.

You forgot to link it. Then again I could be a little too nosy.

Suzaku wrote:

I was wondering if according the FAQ does this mean it mean in a party of 4 where 1 player crafts his entire 62,000 wealth. Does that mean he still have 62,000 in terms of WBL? How about the other players who request the crafter to craft for him, would that player 62,000 have WBL or 124,000?

The crafter would have a WBL of 62,000 gp.

The non-crafter would have a WBL of 124,000 gp.
Likely meaning that the loot would be less for a while.

So wouldn't that mean if the crafter doesn't charge, the player would be behind the WBL?

I was wondering if according the FAQ does this mean it mean in a party of 4 where 1 player crafts his entire 62,000 wealth. Does that mean he still have 62,000 in terms of WBL? How about the other players who request the crafter to craft for him, would that player 62,000 have WBL or 124,000?

Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

I don't see why Eberron shouldn't have guns.

But then, I don't see why Eberron shouldn't have steam engines. (I cannot believe that the lightning rail is less expensive than a railroad.

It's not about expense, it's about theme. Eberron is not a place where technology is replacing magic. It's a world where magic has developed to the point where it IS a technology of it's own. The lightning rail has a major advantage over a coal fueled engine... it doesn't need to carry fuel which is a major point since there aren't supply depots for refueling between the very few major stations.

No it's not it just bind an elemental and that's it. So basically it's just slavery of an outsider to do work for you. If it was train that was powered by decanter of endless water and some sort of fire/heat spell then it's magical technology.

shallowsoul wrote:

Not sure why this argument is still going on but I think people need to just agree to disagree and file this as a per group decision.

Weren't you the guy who started the "Why all the fighter hate?" thread? You of all people should know why this argument must go on and on and on.

Incidentally, congratulations everyone! Today we've surpassed the "Why all the fighter hate?" thread in terms of number of posts. Keep up the good work, we'll be at 2K posts soon and are still on schedule for 80K posts by Christmas!

Hey the fighter can spend two feats and become the crafter. So it's not limited to casters.

Suzaku wrote:

Can you point to me where you done your math? Because my math shows it to be a bit different for 20%.

To tell you the truth, your math and approach confused me a bit. Why are you limiting the crafting time to 32 days?

Who is the crafter in the example?

Are you factoring in the Crafting FAQ by SKR?

The last time I posted the math was in post 1573.
post 1573

Gauss's math is likely much more precise, I haven't had the time or inclination to work my way through it.

Because in reality most likely you're going to have a limited amount of down time. In some cases you have very little down time to craft an example is the Red Hand of Doom quest line. Other times your crafting maybe delayed. At first I picked 30 days (or a month) but that gave me non round numbers, so I went with 32 days as it provides each person with exactly 8 days of crafting. Granted for the 11 day I changed it to 33 days to make numbers easier.

Trayce wrote:

Umm... yeah, the metagaming going on in these arguments is crazy. Nevermind the math.

Well, the conversation has ranged from in-character rationales, out-of-character rationales, metagamed information, philosophy (types of covernment/group apprach) and to math.

The math actually is important, as both sides were/are feeling that they are being taken advantage of by the other side. The math is to show that if a reasonable fee (20% for a party of 4 - haven't done the math on other party sizes) is applied, no one is being taken advantage of, so no one feels abused by the crafting.

Can you point to me where you done your math? Because my math shows it to be a bit different for 20%.

Wealth of each party member with no crafter, 50k, and only have 32 days of down time.

Party 1 50k
Party 2 50k
Party 3 50k
Party 4 50k

Now if there is a crafter, there are going to be 8 days of crafting each person.

Player 1 54K
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 54K

A little bit wealth disparity but not much, which easily be made up on next treasure hall.

Now lets say someone in the group wants an item that normally is 16k or 16 days, person 2-4 are still going to want their items.

End results

Player 1 58k
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 50k

A little bit wealth disparity takes much longer to fix unless loot goes to slightly lopsided. You're going to expect this to happen when you get if there is no commission fee. Player 1 is going to be either the wizard or someone who views the caster's time is worthless.

Now if the caster wants to make 2 items for 8 days each. But his party members also want 8 days worth of work. Someone is going to get hosed, so instead the crafter charges 25% of his work and everyone get 8 days including the caster himself. The crafter buy his second item at full price because the downtime is limited.

Player 1 60k
Player 2 52k
Player 3 52k
Player 4 52k

Granted player 2-3 are equal, but player 1 has a bit more wealth. But on the upside it's easier to adjust the wealth's group loot could be generated in way that it doesn't benefit player 1 as much as player 2-4.

Now lets assume Player 1 charges 20% and each player wants 11k worth of item. So player 1 makes the items and decides to purchase said items in the market place.

Player 1 56.6k
Player 2 53.3k
Player 3 53.3k
Player 4 53.3k

It's a smaller gap. Now lets see if it's at 10% like OP charged.

Player 1 53.3K
Player 2 54.4K
Player 3 54.4K
Player 4 54.4K

It becomes reverse, the players are actually profiting off the crafter in the above scenario.

So in short it depends on how much free time the crafter has and it's all depended on how much known free time the player can spend. Your free time can be interrupted by some sort outside events: like a giant tribe raid, sibling gets kidnapped etc all canceling whatever free time you have.

My math is based on 50k - (cost of materials + any commissioning fee) + cost of said final item.

Not much of a melee PFS player, but isnt there a feat that allows you to drop BAB for AC?

Also maybe a defending weapon?

If he's a regular player and he's a GM, the GM can always chose to pick scenarios where he's not always at an advantage.

Wealth of each party member with no crafter, 50k, and only have 32 days of down time.

Party 1 50k
Party 2 50k
Party 3 50k
Party 4 50k

Now if there is a crafter, there are going to be 8 days of crafting each person.

Player 1 54K
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 54K

A little bit wealth disparity but not much, which easily be made up on next treasure hall.

Now lets say someone in the group wants an item that normally is 16k or 16 days, person 2-4 are still going to want their items.

End results

Player 1 58k
Player 2 54k
Player 3 54k
Player 4 50k

A little bit wealth disparity takes much longer to fix unless loot goes to slightly lopsided. You're going to expect this to happen when you get if there is no commission fee. Player 1 is going to be either the wizard or someone who views the caster's time is worthless.

Now if the caster wants to make 2 items for 8 days each. But his party members also want 8 days worth of work. Someone is going to get hosed, so instead the crafter charges 25% of his work and everyone get 8 days including the caster himself. The crafter buy his second item at full price because the downtime is limited.

Player 1 60k
Player 2 52k
Player 3 52k
Player 4 52k

Granted player 2-3 are equal, but player 1 has a bit more wealth. But on the upside it's easier to adjust the wealth's group loot could be generated in way that it doesn't benefit player 1 as much as player 2-4.

Now lets assume Player 1 charges 20% and each player wants 11k worth of item. So player 1 makes the items and decides to purchase said items in the market place.

Player 1 56.6k
Player 2 53.3k
Player 3 53.3k
Player 4 53.3k

It's a smaller gap. Now lets see if it's at 10% like OP charged.

Player 1 53.3K
Player 2 54.4K
Player 3 54.4K
Player 4 54.4K

It becomes reverse, the players are actually profiting off the crafter in the above scenario.

So in short it depends on how much free time the crafter has and it's all depended on how much known free time the player can spend. Your free time can be interrupted by some sort outside events: like a giant tribe raid, sibling gets kidnapped etc all canceling whatever free time you have.

My math is based on 50k - (cost of materials + any commissioning fee) + cost of said final item.

James Jacobs wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

OK, I can roll with that. But now, at risk of following an annoying trend: JAMES JACOBS! Can I haz an Irori Paladin code cheezburger? 'Cause that leaves them as the only Paladins without their code spelled out as per Faiths of ... books.

Irori's paladins don't have an organized "knighthood," which is the main reason they're rare. They're individuals. That said... I thought that we put an Irori paladin code into the Dragon Empires Primer... I know I requested one to be in there...

That sounds like a line from WOTC splat book developer. oO

You know there is an old saying. "Melees can't have nice things"

kind of makes me want to kite an ooze into a portable hole and use it for nefarious purposes later, would have to figure out how to get around the acid damage though.

When you make a portable hole, just add acid resistance/immunities to the proprieties.

blahpers wrote:

Sorry, I read that as in the character with SR was the one using the wand. You don't have to lower SR to use a wand on yourself. If a separate healer is using the wand, then you are indeed correct.

This assumes the user of the wand is the caster. Many would say the wand is the caster for purposes of such things since the caster level of the wand is what is determined when bypassing SR would come into play as an example.

I would not make someone using a wand make an SR check against themselves, but I can't find any rules to support that. Of course I did not try very hard either.

A wand is an item and thus you can use it yourself and not be effected by your own SR. But never mind healing, as healing in combat tends to be as a last resort kind of thing. What I'm talking about is spell buffs like haste, fly etc. To receive the benefits like haste, can resist the spell unless said person waste an action to lower his or her resistance.

Seems kind of silly, because after trail and error eventually at least casters should understand once someone because powerful enough certain spells doesn't effect them. Then how would the character research if people don't have any concept of level or HD?

After looking at a few spells that have a HD limit, I'm starting to wonder why several settings people haven't started the develop some sort of concept about HD.

For example if a wizard knows someone can cast 3rd level spells would he or she know that person would be immune to the spell sleep.

How would wizard know the value of gem to use for Trap the soul?

Can we add stuff that is under powered that needs to be fixed?

If so, I would like to add Solid fog and Heirloom Weapon.

So where did the original come from then?

No I'm not talking about the one I refuse acknowledge (Adventure's Armory).

Benicio Del Espada wrote:

Technically, it only says you can "speak" languages, but it's a 3rd level spell. In my games, you can use it to read, too. YMMV.

Yeah, that is good logic, but I also have a player who puts max number of ranks into Linguistics and I don't want for his investment in it to be made useless by one spell.

So have him forge or look at forge documents, have faded or encrypted test on some tablet. There are other uses for linguistic skill besides languages.

Kevin Andrew Murphy wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

The blood isn't listed as a material component or focus. Thus, you consuming the blood means you're drinking the blood.

Isn't that the definition of a focus?

No.

Magic chapter says:
Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused.

I see what you did there ;p. Anyway yeah I overlooked the material component perhaps foolishly believing perhaps they forgot to include it, after all it's not the first time something like that has happened.

What bothered me is why is Cure line spells and heal are conjuration spells? They should be necromantic as they deal with life energy.

Edit

And no... Don't give me an explanation that you're actually just conjuring the powers from positive plane. Otherwise you should be getting temp hp. Let alone why are the inflict spells not conjuration (injury), because one should also be able to tap into negative energy plane.

Oh hmmm... After reading the spell again, and reading response of the people here, I'm getting the impression you're drinking the blood. I was originally thinking take the pint of blood and use 'consume' it like a normal spell component. Seems kind of odd to include consume as eating/drinking when referring to spell casting, as other places it's used destroying the spell component.

Meh I'll still imagine taking pint of blood focusing spell energy into the blood to learn the target's hidden spells.

-wizards, pinnacles of magical knowledge, forget spells that they had memorized because they used them (seems sirry to me, also see:prepared casters)

It's my understanding that a wizard when wizard is preparing his spells, he's actually starting his casting. So think of it this way, lets say you know how to make a grenade (aka fireball), so you make 2 in the morning. You get into a fight and toss your two grenades. Sure you know how to make a grenade, but you can't simply say "I toss out a third grenade" because you know how to make one.

The question really should be "why is this evil?" One possible answer answer: It requires death to be done, and there are very few cases where one can profit off of death and not be considered evil (old age death, self-defense kill, etc).

Darn, all those times players loot a slain enemy they're doing an evil act because they profited off the dead. Even going into a crypt taking the dead stuff is evil because clearly you're stealing from the dead.

To be fair it allows Wizards (another classes) to learn spells from slain enemy Sorcerers seeing as they don't carry scrolls. And yet they make it evil.