|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
3.5 had some rules on this and variant potions and such. Thing complete Arcane or PH 2
I can agree with that. I have just seen so many times of people tripping out over anything martial not being purely and completely realistic. Kinda like when weapon cords got a nerf in part because a developer couldn't really do it that well with his mouse.
Well speaking of Caster/Martial disparity, my gears get ground when people freak out at a Martial doing anything thats beyond real world capability.
What you mean your monk can punch through a stone wall in 5 mins......anime is influencing the system too much.
Your fighter can fall off a 300 ft cliff and walk away......systems broken.
Your barbarian can swim in lava and not die........too unrealistic.
Your adamantine sword cuts rock better than a mining pick.......it's not a lightsaber bro.
Your wizard can stop time teleport in a demonic horde mind control half the enemy forces and nuke the rest........that's the way they made the game don't be upset just house-rule it.
And we also see in some threads that not doing enough damage can make you a jerk.
captain yesterday wrote:
While nothing seriously professional I worked the kitchen at our local country club for about 4 years before I moved, and I know the feeling. i would much rather make a burger at home any day of the week.
I thought it was a rule in PFS that Evil spells are not in and of themselves evil acts?
Casting an evil spell is not an alignment infraction in and of itself, as long as it doesn't violate any codes, tenents of faith, or other such issues. Committing an evil act outside of casting the spell, such as using an evil spell to torture an innocent NPC for information or the like is an alignment infraction. For example: using infernal healing to heal party members is not an evil act.
Edited edit: Ninja'd
Another option might be to look at the kirthfinder docs in this sub-forum the equipment book has a section on limiting found character wealth similar to what was described above. A character would have a set amount of worth they can attune to anything above that will eventually be lost in some manner or another.
What whip are you looking at? The whip pathfinder has up on the PRD is a trip weapon
Whip 1 gp 1d2 1d3 ×2 — 2 lbs. S disarm, nonlethal, reach, trip
Green Smashomancer wrote:
Yeah Saiyans aren't know for brains. And Abridged Saiyans even less so.
Forgive the misunderstanding then. I had wrongly interpreted your response as one saying that an action would be better than inaction.
So realizing that talking isn't your forte and staying out of trying to convince someone of something isn't one of those options?
Dave Setty wrote:
As Chris asked above where would that "sending" come from? I don't think any scenario would actually account for that premise without it coming up for more than just a slave. So since the judge can't just decide that it happens it's not going to happen. Now as far as between scenarios there is plenty of time for the character to wander off and preform other task for the master until the next time recruited for a mission.
So my choice is in validated by his choice? Understand if there is a real issue then that's fine but if he just doesn't like necromancers and its that or play a pregen who can't give my Necro credit. (note I'm not in PFS yet its not really availble in the Seark region But I want to be able to play not just DM and it seems like a good way to enjoy that side of the table.) If there is an in character reason or out of character reason we can talk, but if its like the hate we sometimes see for any number of other things then why am I the jerk if I don't change.
captain yesterday wrote:
While we are at it lets ban any necromancers, torturers, heck anyone who might commit actions against the law. Better get rid of any religious characters that might cause people to feel bad about. Paladin's also probably need to go their code might get in the way of cooperating too much. This is where banning things that people don't like can end up with everything slowly going away.
Then to ask whats the point? If I've chosen an option, especially gender/race, that's legal and I'm not pushing it why am I the one to have to suck it up. If it had been your race or class he was adamantly against would you have then picked up a pregen/other legal character?
The issue is that only top FAQed numbers get FAQs so if everyone flags and moves on the threads passes front page in about 3 days. And with only one or two replies it might not even garner additional hits due to lack of activity.
The problem comes when others (as we are currently seeing in the slavery thread) have a refusal on the basis of a character that I'm not pushing. I have seen people blanket refuse to work with a slave owner, or a necromancer, hell even a gunslinger. At what point is the issue no longer with the character I built and with the other person?
Feral Combat Training and Unarmed Strike Damage: Does this allow me to use my monk unarmed damage with the selected natural attack post errata?
So between this and the threads on slavery, how does one even play anything other than a true neutral fighter with no ties. I seriously want to know. I see threads where even the thought of raising the dead should have you kicked out of the game. But having strong religious beliefs could also be being a jerk. Owning slaves is being a jerk and needs to be abolished, but if you press your anti-slavery Andoran feelings to hard its also a problem. Is this more of a board thing or is playing anything with a belief system possibly asking for trouble.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Two leadership questions as I am brain storming.1. A single character can only have 1 cohort correct?
2. When you build your villain set-up is it appropriate for the cohorts to have leadership if applicable. For instance a high level necromancer has a cohort that is a vampire lord. Would it be appropriate if he is a major plot villain in his own right for him to have leadership and have a cohort and followers of his own?
Jiggy your talk of curve balls reminds me of the first campaign i ran after I got married. Things went great and fairly predictable for the first several months, mostly due to having 5 fresh no ttrpg experience players. I ran them trough Expedition to Castle Ravenloft when they hit the right level. The group was so intent on stopping this evil vampire they rushed the castle the second day there without weakening Strahd at all. My plan was to play it straight and give them a reason to back out and plan, so when they met the first real tough opponent (the demon on the parapets) I expected a death and run, and was more than willing to let them escape. The party fighter ( a very holy and devout warrior of Kord) and the groups barbarian decided to save the others by bullrushing the demon off the edge. Both of them rolled 20's and sent it and themselves plummeting. The party druid saved them from death by healing them after flying down in wildshape. So they rolled with it finally encoutering Strahd the next week. This time I was sure I could scare them out. Instead they trapped him in a wall of stone with the druid. The druid dropped a sphere made from dust of dryness and then shifted into a large Crocodile. 6 rounds later she had managed to hold the vampire lord under water for 3 rounds to kill him. This was one of the only times I have ever truly wanted to change things up and let the bbeg pull a John Cena. But I rolled with it they freed the towns people. Never did send a vamp against them again though.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Sure uh huh......just like they government told me officially that they had no interest in monitoring my activities. They just expect me believe the building being built next really needs the phone company van there every day.