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

Tels's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter. Pathfinder Society Member. 8,354 posts (8,404 including aliases). 1 review. 6 lists. No wishlists. 11 aliases.


1 to 50 of 1,956 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like sci-fi just fine, I just dont know if Paizo can do it justice. They seem to be in a very 'mediocre' mindset right now, in that everything must be average and nothing can excel, as far as designing goes.

I cant help but wonder if this is Marks influence. Hes a smart guy, so I'm wondering if he has been catching alot of the 'strong' options before they see print and reigning them in. At least, for the hardback books anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
This is among the reasons why every table should use the automatic progression system or something similar. The mathematical need for the big six items is a massive deterrent for interesting ideas. If you used the magic item progression system you don't need to keep the belt slot for stat boosts. Unfortunately the one paizo set up still sort of doesn't help because weapon attunement is to a specific weapon, but that can easily be fixed to just be towards a weapon IE javalins, or throwing stars or what have you.

ppsssst

just remove limitations on slots and everything still works. just have stats belts/headbands conflict and it's still 100% balanced...

why is this one thing so much harder for people to get

Slot limitations don't exist in Pathfinder. If you want a Headband of Striding and Springing, it's absolutely possible. Slot limitations are only enforced in PFS.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I had a thought, the Veela from the Harry Potter universe would make a good addition to role playing games. Women of unearthly beauty who can captivate men with their presence, and when enraged, transform into humanoid bird frlorm, growing beaks, wings, claws and the ability to throw blasts of fire.

So some sort of Aura of Captivation that forces men to make a will save or be Fascinated with the Veela. Transforming gives them a flight speed, and two claw attacks and probably an at will Scorching Ray.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huh... with your construct race, one could make a reasonable facsimile of Genji, a cyborg ninja, from the video game Overwatch. Notably, because he stores his shuriken within his cyborg body and reloads by drawing them out of his arm. So, integrated weapon (shuriken), and probably faster movement. Build him as a "ninja" (however you choose to go about doing that) and you've got a reasonable Genji.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, I was curious for opinions of the creature as is, not in context of the AP. I've heard this guy can be murder in the AP to any party without ranged. But I'm more curious as to opinions without specific scenarios or terrain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What are your thoughts on this creature?

As for Log Horizon, it's definitely a much more mature show and will focus a lot more on socioeconomic problems. It also features a much more diverse cast and d9esnt focus, almost solely, on the story of a s8ngle character.

On SAO, I enjoy the show for what it is, a power fantasy written for young adults. I will say I admire Kirito because he is utterly faithful to Asuna. He doesn't even blink at other girls, because his devotion to Asuna is absolute.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As mentioned on the previous age, Cao Phen made a rock throwing build using an Oracle with the Stone mystery for a certain ability, and Barbarian for the hurling powers, followed by a Fighter archetype. With a Belt of Mighty Hurling, you get to use Strength for attack rolls with thrown weapons.

Basically, you just throw rocks at people. But rocket that deal, like, 2d4+20 points of damage and you can automatically crit and you crit on a range of 17-20. Or you can shatter through rock on impact to make them take tons of bleed damage.

Cao Phen's thread.
Daezzn "Hurler" Keifr is a 10th level NPC version of the build with NPC stats and WBL that I wrote up.

Bumi Mei Fong is a 12th level example of the build, with a 25-pt buy and PC wealth by Ravingdork. Bumi inspired by own Daezzn build, which is inspired by Cao Phen's post.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hate to be a damper, but you can't use Great Cleave with Vital Strike even with Weapon Trick as Great Cleave and Cleave are separate, yet similar, actions in combat.

Also, you might go Monk of the Four Winds so you can make multiple Cleave/Vital Strikes in 1 round. But only at 12th level or higher. If 8 recall, 15 levels of Monk and 5 levels of a full BAB class will qualify for Greater Vital Strike.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
I proudly declare that I bypass this issue by having no standards. :3

There's a sex joke in there, but I'm too sleepy to find it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Note: unarmed strikes are not lost via polymorphism because unarmed strikes are explicitly called out in the rules as not being natural weapons or a natural attack. If I recall correctly from when I looked through the rules a few years ago, there was only one instance in the rules (across 3-4 rule books at the time) where unarmed strikes are mistaken for natural attacks and it is due to copy/paste from 3.5 era.

So, because unarmed strikes are explicitly not natural attacks or natural weapons, and polymorph calls out losing access to natural attacks/weapons, you do not, per RAW, lose your unarmed strike.

Here's a thread I made in unarmed/natural attacks. Granted it's 4 years old now and pointless to bring up, but it exists.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the things I like about those rings is they could easily be magical rings in a campaign. Like each ring is a portal to a world contained within or a window to a snapshot of the past or something. Or maybe the Rings store the wearers happiest memory, or acts as a gateway to a new planet.

You could have some fun with a party needing to track down bearers of the rings so they can visit the world/memory/time within to learn some secret or discover some lost knowledge or recover some plot item etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
What is the weirdest thing your players have played as?

3.0/3.5 had a guy play a half-minotaur kensai that could, apparently, make 22 attacks a round at like, level 7. Dude only used bastard swords and dual wielded them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Awesome rings.

Which one do you guys like best? I like the Enchanted Forest and the Delicate Dark Arctic Forest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheAlicornSage wrote:
Out of curiosity, did anyone read my feedback on the spell description layout, or does everyone think everything I write is not worth reading? (I know a lot of my posts are more just me finding it hard to resist responding to things, but I do actually try to post worthwhile stuff occasionally)

I read it, I just don't really have anything to say on it. Until Ashfield said something, I didn't even know people thought the spell layout needed updating. It's not something I've ever given any thought to.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Firefly Animated Adventures Teaser Trailer!

I blame Cosmo for no one telling me this was a thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Firefly Animated Adventures Teaser Trailer!

I didn't know this was a thing! Did you know this was a thing!? Why did no one tell me this was a thing!?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I never got to finish Scarwall, the group I was running it for broke up during it. But we have a 6ft by 3ft plexiglass sheet with 1 inch squares carved into it. So we just drew out as much as we could and then just erased and redraw as needed. Another player was mapping it all on grid paper so the players could keep track of the castle.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Could you use spell like True Strike to add +20 to your attack vs magic defense, thereby, essentially, guaranteeing you succeed and likely adding a truckload of burning stacks?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:
As for the psionic/magic thing, let me clarify. You mentioned wariness about merging spells like Charm Person > Monster because it might step on the toes of psionics. But why? Why would you create whole new psionic versions of magic spells instead of just using the same version.

That's more or less the same conclusion I came to as well. One of my initial concerns was that one of the most defining features of the 3.5/PF psionics system was the ability to scale stuff, so I pondered on the ramifications of that. Having given it some thought, I realized it would be a problem. Especially since psionics still has the appeal of being point-based and often have multiple augmentation options.

Truly the biggest concern is balancing the number of spells you'll want/need with the number of spells you have available. If casting up improves the power of lower level spells significantly, unless certain careful steps were taken to ensure that there were big differences between the low and high level versions of things, a mage could very easily have the appropriate option for every situation with very few spells known / prepared invested (which is why by comparison to even sorcerers, psionic classes get few powers known over the course of their careers, since if you're wise about their usage, every power known gained over the course of your career could be a legitimate option to use).

I imagine that spells known/prepared will probably get tweaked more as the project enters alpha and then moves to beta to find the best balance. I'm already a little concerned that spontaneous casters as I have them set up might be a bit too strong (they get significantly larger numbers of known spells per spell level, before taking into account any class features granting bonus spells. The funny thing about spontaneous casting is it goes from near useless with few spells to amazing with several more spells because your round to round options explode in size) but that tuning's expected to be adjusted as it comes....

Well, I'm not sure a wizard (as in, prepared caster) would get as much benefit out of it. Because they would still need to prepare it in the appropriate slot. So if the prepare it in a 3rd level slot, they wouldn't be able to upcast it into Dominate Monster or Mass Charm Person. However, they only have to have the one spell in their book. Sorcerer would be able to adjust it on the fly.

It helps the Wizard because he now has more varied spells in his book, but it also helps the Sorcerer by not having to take a bunch of redundant spells that do the same thing.

If you include a few upcastable spells, it might help people get used to psionics who aren't familiar with it. It would also stand to reason that, despite being differed t magic, there would be some crossover between the two. As in, someone might develop a psionic power that has free scaling, but the majority still require more power points. However some wizards also developed some upcasting spells, to mimic some features of psionic manifesting. I dunno, it just seems to make sense that casters and manifested would try and learning from one another even if it only works for some abilities. Kind of like different martial artists studying each other to improve their skills.

[Edit] I swear, autocorrect can't make up its mind. "Psionics" was corrected into "avionics" "picnics" and "passions".


2 people marked this as a favorite.

For a spell like Detect Magic, you might opt to have multiple methods of casting. For example, when it is in a spell slot, it might let you have a skill check to notice magic, but you can also spend 1 minute casting it to create a magical pulse, which let's you do what the current spell does after 3 rounds of study, but for all items in the AoE.

You could make it so the "passive" detect magic gives a penalty on checks vs magic of higher spell slots. Perhaps certain schools or subschools 9f magic have inherent resistance to detection magic. Like, most illusions might be harder to detect due to the nature of the magic, but so too might polymorph spells and the like.

As for the psionic/magic thing, let me clarify. You mentioned wariness about merging spells like Charm Person > Monster because it might step on the toes of psionics. But why? Why would you create whole new psionic versions of magic spells instead of just using the same version.

For example make a "Charm Spell" that, at first level, allows you to charm humanoids, like Charm Person does. Then, if you slot it in a higher level slot, it can be used to Charm creatures of any tupe, or be used to Dominate humanoids.

Then, for psionic, just put in a paragraph or two that says when a spell allows casting from a higher level slot, psionic can achieve the same effect by manifesting it at a higher level.

This helps lower the overall redundant page count by having multiple versions of, essentially, the same spell.

I mean, you could do something very similar for many elemental spells too. Like a generic 1st level firespell (Burning Hands) can be morphed into Flaming Sphere as a 2nd level spell, or Fireball as a 3rd level spell etc. Might be too massive a buff for spontaneous casters though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Cosmo wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Crossposted in AMA threads: it's a Paizopaloozaganza!

Cosmo.

Cooooooossssssmmmmmmmooooooo.

Clearly you are to blame for this*.

Super-serious series of questions*:

* Nnnnnnope.

If you could have 1d4 different super-powers, what would they be and why?
(Assume corollary powers required to make a given power work are part of it; i.e. Since you'd need super tensile strength/durability to, you know, not-die when you made use of your super-strength power, you get them both when you say "super strength" as a singular option.)
Why?

If, instead, you could be a gestalt of 1d2+1 super heroes, who would you gestalt to be yourself? Why? Which comic universe would you run around in? Would you prefer to be in that one, or this one?

On the other hand: BAM! You just gained 3d6+2 levels in a Pathfinder class (or classes)! Which class(es) do you pick, and why? Incidentally, if you could spontaneously switch races, would you? And if so, to which?

Similarly, you won the super-lottery, and gained mythic tiers! 3d3+1 of 'em! (And you gain class levels to match; please feel free to change your previous answer if this does so for some reason.) What path do you take? (Alternate option: substitute a single tier for a simple mythic template.)

Yet another query: you monster. Specifically, you [dice=CR]d30 (or less) monster! Which are you?! ... and would this have been your first choice? If not, which would be?

But the wheels of fate-time have spun again, and your everything has been transposed into that of someone else! You've just become a prepublished NPC from an official source! Which prepublished NPC is it?

What campaign setting do you run around in? Why?

As a final thing: blend any and/or all of the above questions into a single ginormous question: an optional blend of a prepublished NPC, monster, and some superheroes all walk into a bar... and out comes you, as a gestalt of those guys, the race you choose, some...

Yes.

Damn... that was some deep stuff...

I blame Cosmo for making me all existential and stuff after his profound response.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Scientists can turn female skin cells into sperm cells. They can't fertilize, but it's a breakthrough in the field. Considering how much more advanced science is in the "modern" comics/animated material, let alone the "future" ones, it's entirely possible that Poison Ivy could have perfected it. She may focus mostly on plants, but she's a brilliant scientist and this is something she may* be passionate enough about to pursue.

*by may, I mean, "highly likely."


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for people who make multiple posts when they could just lump it all together in one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

On a separate note, I blame Cosmo for Rhubarb Barbara. (See description for translation)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Isn't that AMA aimed at the Paizo staff? Unless it showed up in the "Ask the Iconic" threads as well...

Didn't realize that Ashiel was a Paizo staff member. Maybe some of the crazy decisions Paizo has made recently can be overturned now!

I doubt it, and for that, I blame Cosmo.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Lately?

Ten thousand word stream of consciousness posts is kind of his thing. :-)

Also, favorites. Favorites for daaays....


2 people marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Pg 53.

Wait, what? I'm confused, what book are ya talking about, and what's on page 53?

TS often gets pulled away from the forums for a period of time and has to play catch up in his threads. If I had to hazard a guess, he quoted my post, and posted the page number, so he could come back later and know where to pick up from again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hell, this rule makes it nearly impossible to be a neutral caster. You have to go out of your way to cast evil spells or commit evil deeds to counteract the castings of Protection from Evil you put on the party because some ghouls showed up. I mean, this rule can make lawful neutral or chaotic neutral druids fall because they lost their alignment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:

So... Horror Adventures is out in people's hands...

Lets just say I murdered an orphanage full of children and then raised them all for my undead army. Once done, as a wizard, I then cast Protection from Evil... say 5 times, using up 2nd level slots, just to be sure.

What alignment am I?

B!!$+~! Crazy.

I ask, because it seems they hard coded in rules for how spells with an alignment descriptor affect the caster. 2 evil spells makes you non-good, and 3 evil spells in a short enough time period makes you evil. Apparently, the opposite is true. So cast 3 good spells and become good.

I have to wonder, what's the whole point of the redemption theme in Wrath of the Righteous again? I mean, these rules are better than a Catholic confession because you don't have to list every sin.

Because maybe the people needing the redemption rules don't have access to spells that forcefully change your alignment?
Buy a wand and go to town activating it. It's not like it will explode if you fail.

*shrugs*

You can do that, but not everyone probably would. Just like his in RL most people are hesitant to use medication that affects their mindset even if they're in a better state if they do so.

Question then: are good/evil clerics good/evil because they are? Or is it because they cast good/evil spells?

I mean, theoretically, divine casters may not have their natural alignment. What if peek only worship Sarenrae because they cast a number of good spells and now they're good? What if the only thing keeping them good are the repeated casting of good spells?

This rule plays so much Mary havoc with alignment, morality, intentions and actions it's ridiculous. The idea that casting 3 first level spells can instantly swap my alignment after spending decades serving the forces of good are utterly preposterous.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:

So... Horror Adventures is out in people's hands...

Lets just say I murdered an orphanage full of children and then raised them all for my undead army. Once done, as a wizard, I then cast Protection from Evil... say 5 times, using up 2nd level slots, just to be sure.

What alignment am I?

B!!$+~! Crazy.

I ask, because it seems they hard coded in rules for how spells with an alignment descriptor affect the caster. 2 evil spells makes you non-good, and 3 evil spells in a short enough time period makes you evil. Apparently, the opposite is true. So cast 3 good spells and become good.

I have to wonder, what's the whole point of the redemption theme in Wrath of the Righteous again? I mean, these rules are better than a Catholic confession because you don't have to list every sin.

Because maybe the people needing the redemption rules don't have access to spells that forcefully change your alignment?

Buy a wand and go to town activating it. It's not like it will explode if you fail.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Tels wrote:

So... Horror Adventures is out in people's hands...

Lets just say I murdered an orphanage full of children and then raised them all for my undead army. Once done, as a wizard, I then cast Protection from Evil... say 5 times, using up 2nd level slots, just to be sure.

What alignment am I?

B!!$+~! Crazy.

I ask, because it seems they hard coded in rules for how spells with an alignment descriptor affect the caster. 2 evil spells makes you non-good, and 3 evil spells in a short enough time period makes you evil. Apparently, the opposite is true. So cast 3 good spells and become good.

I have to wonder, what's the whole point of the redemption theme in Wrath of the Righteous again? I mean, these rules are better than a Catholic confession because you don't have to list every sin.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So... Horror Adventures is out in people's hands...
Lets just say I murdered an orphanage full of children and then raised them all for my undead army. Once done, as a wizard, I then cast Protection from Evil... say 5 times, using up 2nd level slots, just to be sure.

What alignment am I?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Icehawk wrote:

Well, got the horror book. A lot of it is meh. Couple awesome archetypes. Especially like wielding book as weapon inquisitor. Some pretty good spells. The worst magic item I've ever seen. Lose 1 hp permanently for +4 vs pain and the ability to do inflict light wounds at 1d8+5 and a 1d4 round sickened at dc 11. And if the item comes off you, take 1d8 damage and 1 con damage. It admittedly is pretty hard to get off you but still.

Saw the evil thing. It basically says two evil spells drops you to non good, 3 to evil, depending on the time gap between them. Evidently this goes for other alignments too. Nothing like alignment ping-pong. Any spell that sacrifices an living creature is instantly become evil (There's several in this). Acts of torture immediately shift you one step to evil for each one. Also, only non good people can benefit from others dying still. But the guy who hates sentience and wants to devolve everything, he can be good cus he isn't using blood.

So.... literally, *pro. from good, pro. from good, pro. from Evil, pro. from evil* and no change in alignment as a result?

My God... It's so F%+~ing easy to abuse! Paizo was stupid to hardcore rules like that. It completely subverts their entire F@!+ing redemption system for Wrath of the Righteous and makes a mockery of moral consequences.

GM: The Hell are you doing?
*Not Evil* player: Killing children for my undead pygmy army.
GM: The f$@&? Why?
*Not Evil* player: I need bodies and there is an orphanage right there. Duh!
GM: That.. that definitely makes you evil and a villain now.
*Not Evil* player: Nah, it's cool. I got a wand of protection from evil. Gimme 3 rounds and I'll be fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ash, if you had to stat up one of these 35 Pokemon fusions as a homebrew monster, which would it be?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not necessarily. A "Fighter" class could simply be one that performs feats one would consider impossible through his extraordinary skill. Like being able to cut down a forest with his sword, or use his axe to create a fissure forming a new canyon, or flatten a mountain with a hammer. Honestly, I think "martials" could stand toe-to toe-to with magic if writers drew more inspiration from animal.

I remember writing up a pretty terrible draft of an idea for a class one night after finishing reading the relevant light novels and tuen decided to binge SAO and SAO2 across 2 days with no sleep. While the draft itself is terrible, some of the things I wrote, while way OP in their current form, weren't terrible ideas for martials.

For example, like being able to "attack" an AoE spell or effect to counteract the damage. Or being able to partially deflect an enemies attack, lessening the damage it would deal. Or slashing the enemy hard enough they temporarily reduce the DR or hardness of the enemy.

Huh, I don't remember sharing it, but turns out I did. Come, and witness my terrible class design with the Sword Saint.

Anyway, there are a lot of things from a lot less mystical anime or Manga that martials could draw from. Like Rurouni Kenshin, or Samurai Champloo. Or even take some ideas from some of the "trapped in an MMORPG" shows like Log Horizon or Grim gar or even the grand daddy .hack/.

I mean, so many protagonists in supernatural anime are often some warrior of a sort. So mandala in Japan have come up with numerous ways of making their Muggle warriors still stand out. I mean, even though the characters all have some sort of supernatural ability to assist in some way, the characters in in RWBY are all predominantly Muggle badass warriors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thought, would cards be a viable target for the abundant ammunition spell? Cast it on your deck, throw cards, any that are destroyed are recreated in your deck.

It's also worth noting that the cards can be made of different materials, including metal. Get yourself some adamantine harrow cards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My grandfather was Red. Self taught accordion player, always played by ear and never learned to read sheet music. In fact, due to his severe dyslexia, he was all but incapable of reading it. But he played because he loved music. Even as his mind deteriorated due to Alzheimer's and Dementia, he continued playing. He didn't know how he knew to play, but he played anyway.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What I love (think is utterly stupid) about this idea of Paizo's is that someone like an Evil Wizard infiltrating a Good Group who casts spells with Good descriptor (Protection from Evil, Celestial Healing etc) to maintain that cover will soon "rise" (as opposed to fall) from Evil into Neutrality, and then Good. All because he hasn't been performing Evil acts so as to maintain his cover other than infiltrating for nefarious purposes.

Best part? There is no counter argument to this. Intention or future plans plays no part, only actions matter. You cast Good/Evil spells, you become Good/Evil. Period.

Also, I recall James Jacobs stating that it doesn't happen over a few spells, but if you cast like a dozen or so? Alignment shift.

Bloody nonsense that they created this whole redemption system for Wrath of the Righteous when the simplest method of "redeeming" someone is handing them a wand of [insert good spell] and making them activate a bunch of times.

[Edit] Wow, was I wrong. I decided to look back on James' post and I was way off. See post here.

James Jacobs wrote:
Ashkar wrote:

As a rough guideline, how many evil spells should be cast to shift someone’s alignment towards evil (from good to neutral or neutral to evil)?

I understand that it may vary from situation to situation, but I don't want to be arbitrary and shift ones alignment for casting 1-2 evil spells, or counting till the caster reaches hundred or more casts.

I wouldn't nail it down, since intent maters as much as anything. If the spellcastter was obviously freaked out and apologetic and uncomfortable about casting an evil spell, it might take four or so before I'd shift the character's alignment closer to evil. If the spellcaster was blasé about it or eager and amused by it, the shift might happen with a single casting. The actions of the player casting the spell would be as much a decider as the spell itself.

Regardless, it wouldn't take many castings.

So according to James Jacobs' Guide to Aligned Spellcasting, it can take as few as 1 spell, or as many as 4 to cause an alignment shift. Let's hope he didn't get to decide the rules on this topic for Horror Adventures.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I prefer my smut to have a little, or even a lot, of plot, or relationships/emotion. Not a big fan of stories involving random people, but i don't avoid them. The only stuff I do avoid is scat, mutilation/gore, and netorare/cuckold.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What I'm getting from this is... Mouse Guard can't exist as a game because mice can't kill cats as they are prey and inferior to cats, who are predators.

Imma go read some smut now.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:

Black dragons have always been my favorite. Probably because of Sleeping Beauty.

I apologize in advance if this comment starts a 5 page dissertation on how Maleficent wasn't an actual dragon...

;)

Hmmm this reminds me, didn't Ashiel run a campaign featuring Maleficent once?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do you read fan fiction? If so, what's your favorite kind? AU, crossovers time travel etc. Also, what's your favorite fandom?

Me, personally, I'm a huge nerd for the Harry Potter fandom. Recently, I've been really keen on Harry Potter/Star Wars crossovers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does D&D Legends solve the house cat vs. Commoner problem?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
4mb4r4b4 wrote:
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
No, Silent Spell metamagic still lets you cast and escape. Disintegrate, Gaseous Form, etc.
Can I argue that you are not free of complete the somatic components of the spell if you hands are impeded from the Dimensional Shackles enchanted with a continuous Silence effect? Especially if as in my mind your hands are tied behind your back.

Doesn't account for Still Spell. A sorcerer with Silent and Still Spell pretty much requires permanent effects like flesh to stone to keep trapped.you have to prevent them for being able to cast spells, and the only way to do that, short of some antimagic effect, is preventing them from taking any actions.

Theoretically, one could create a trap that permanently stunlocks them via the daze, stunned or nauseated conditions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate the Vigilante because of how stupidly over engineered the class is to prevent powerful combos or even just useable things. Like the Celebrity Perks ability Ash quoted. If you ever sell the gift from the fan, you will have your celebrity status instantly ripped away from you by the Gods, no matter where you are, be it in the same country, planet, galaxy or planar realm.

I mean, a vigilante gets a gift at 7th level, and then 10 levels later, as he's wining and dining with a God-like being in another plane of existence, he decides to sell his collection of baubles from ages past and some supernatural force descends upon him, ripping away his extraordinary celebrity persona because, f*## you, that's why.

Or other abilities like Lethal Grace.

Lethal Grace (Ex) wrote:
The vigilante combines strength and speed into incredibly deadly attacks. He gains Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat, and if he already has the Weapon Finesse feat, he can immediately swap it for another feat for which he qualified at the level he chose Weapon Finesse. When using Weapon Finesse to make a melee attack using his Dexterity bonus on attack rolls and his Strength bonus on damage rolls, he also adds half his vigilante level on damage rolls. This bonus damage is not reduced or increased if the vigilante is wielding a weapon two-handed or in an off-hand.

The ability specifically calls out he must use dexterity for attack, and strength for damage in order to add half his level to damage rolls. This is the same kind of nonsense the resulted in the Nerfratta for the Slashing/Fencing Grace feats so you can't dual wield or use shields with them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So, is this one of your games or just eerily close to something you would do?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dumb idea sparked by Pokemon: Pathfinder Go app.

You and others walk around with as PCs. You will randomly come across encounters that will be generated based off the number of people in the encounter area. Have quests giver NPCs spawn around town that send you to different locations to solve quests. Fight monsters, save princes, slay dragons.

Thoughts?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Dumb idea sparked by Pokemon: Pathfinder Go app.

You and others walk around with as PCs. You will randomly come across encounters that will be generated based off the number of people in the encounter area. Have quests giver NPCs spawn around town that send you to different locations to solve quests. Fight monsters, save princes, slay dragons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
cuatroespada wrote:
wait... volume 3 happened and i missed it!? *becomes an hero*

Oh... well... you're in for trip. I thought about slipping in some clever reference to the events of volume 3, but us gamers are shrewd enough to immediately pick up on things like that and spoil the fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

With RWBY volume 4 coming this October, got Angel theories as to where the plot may go?

1 to 50 of 1,956 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.