The Black Bard's page

This is just a point where the game kept things simple for the sake of the game.

My family raised Welsh Ponies. I rode them all the time. They were definitely not horses (we had a few horses as well). The last time I rode one I was probably 250 pounds. I would be very surprised if the pony was in its medium load, seeing as how it was perfectly capable of galloping.

Now, if we are talking Shetland Ponies, then that's a different story, and I believe it. The problem is the game world has two classifications: Horse and Pony. But there are dozens of different breeds of pony, several of which are basically just "slightly smaller horses" like the Welsh or PoA.

Basically, you ride what is going to be comfortable for your hips to straddle for 8 hours. If your a 6' tall ranger, you ride a thoroughbred. If your a 5' tall elf, you ride a welsh pony (still a horse by game definition). If your a 3' tall gnome, you ride a Shetland pony.

Back in 2nd edition there was an article in Dragon that had traits for horses, including stat mods for the various breeds. I still use that, updated to 3.5/PF. Maybe that's why this isn't an issue to me.

In Pathfinder, if your party can't take on 6-10 encounters a day, they're the ones making the mistakes.

CR relative to party level was diminished, the old rules of 3.5 do not apply anymore. A PL=CR encounter is easier now. Combine that with good teamwork and a group can go for quite a while.

The only thing that stops a party from continuing in a dungeon is two resources: HP and offense. Offense is almost always spell slots, as a rogue/ranger/barbarian/fighter don't care unless they are consuming ammunition. Still, a sundered weapon might give some pause. HP goes down if you are hit, and comes back at the cost of spell slots/channel energy.

Minimalize how often your are hit, supplement HP restoration with outside sources, and reduce how often you consume limited offense, and you go longer.

Then again, lets look at what is common in my gaming groups:

Spellcasters NEVER cast every round, unless they need to. Spells are reserved for opportune moments or needful circumstances. Always carry a backup ranged weapon. +1 crossbows are cheap and can always contribute in a fight.

Everyone chips in for healing, with the old CLW Wand. Between UMD and spellcasting, usually every member can at least try to use a wand, and often two of them have reliable/guaranteed success. A few potions are always carried as well.

Flanking, aid another, tactical positioning, helping each other out when needed. My groups figure something went wrong in a fight if no one had to calculate flanking bonuses.

Granted, it seems like what you want is beyond even this.

I recommend just extending the recharge mechanic to the limited martial character abilities. Barbarian Rage is basically the rage spell, so check how fast the spell recharges, and allow the barbarian to recharge perhaps his con mod in rounds after said time. Whether he can repeatedly recharge himself to full or can ONLY recharge that amount after using rage is up to you: the first version means he can go nuts and fully recover with a decent break, the other means he can only fully recover if he rages less than his con mod each time, prompting some degree of resource management.

Bards are also easy, just compare bardic music effects to similar spells accquired at the same or close level. Inspire Courage = bless, inspire heroism = heroism, etc etc.

I'd say multiplying by a factor of 3 is fair for limited use abilities. 5/day becomes 15, 3 becomes 9, 1 become 3. Perhaps give them a recharge downtime to prevent them from getting rapid-fired in climactic battles. 5 minutes would often be enough, and could still allow for something dramatic like: Failed attack, fight for another two minutes, villain starts to win, monologues for 3 minutes, attack recharges, hooray".

Dagger, small improvised, or unarmed. Less is always more.

Nobody's posted the teacup scene from Riddick? For shame.

Personally, I think it is a little strong, on par with Magic Missile. Comparative spells (and their associated pros/cons to the Lesser Sound Burst) would be:

Magic Missle: Pros: Medium range, force damage, no save or attack roll, tiers with CL. Cons: single target, requires line of sight, 1d4+1 damage.

Burning Hands: Pros: Area, tiers with CL. Cons: Fire, area starts from personal range, save for half, 1d4.

Shocking Grasp: Pros: Tiers, 1d8. Cons: Electricity, melee touch spell.

And then we look at Lesser Sound Burst:

Pro: sonic damage, which is just flat out better than standard elemental damage, close range, an area (no need for line of sight), and a d8. It's only real flaw is it doesn't tier with caster level.

At level 1, I would never pick burning hands or shocking grasp over this. Magic missile would win if I knew distance might be a factor, but in most dungeons close range spells are plenty far reaching.

At level 2, burning hands starts to exceed the damage, but fire resistant creatures are possible, and why be within 10 feet of the target when you could be at 30? And there's still always a save made? Shocking grasp now does more damage, but thats in melee, which is just not a good idea, and you could miss the touch attack. Magic missile hasn't tiered yet, so its still a range issue, really.

At level 3, Magic missle starts to rule, 130' range, two missiles which can be used on separate or same target. Shocking grasp is now enough of a damage king its worthwhile as a "crap, in melee, this needs to die!" backup spell. Burning hands is kind of meh, but 3d4 against 3-5 targets in a bottlenecked hallway is fabulous, if somewhat situational, damage. At this point Lesser Sound Burst starts to quickly slide to the bottom of the pile, in between the guaranteed results of Magic Missle and the potential AoE mayhem of Burning Hands, but not better at either really.

Levels 4 and above it continues to slide as the other spells improve damage capability and it remains a single d8. Its almost overpowered at level 1, then fades into obscurity.

Personally, I would make it "Fort save for half damage" OR "Target: 1 creature". That said, that only removes its overly powerful state at level 1-2. I would make it tier at levels 4 and 8, capping at 3d8 damage. To me that would keep it a valid level 1 damage dealing spell without overshadowing or being overshadowed by the rest.

My goblin alchemist learned his craft by peering through a window for many a night watching a human alchemist do his work in his lab. He started copying the notes and trying his own experiments with bits stolen while the man slept.

By the time he realized he was learning to *gasp* read, he had also inhaled so many fumes and nibbled on so many thrown out failed recipies that he's pretty much a junkie. Between those two factors, he now quite literally believes that the writing HAS stolen the thoughts from his head. I play him as perpetually stoned, relatively uneducated, yet oddly brilliant or insightful at times, in a fabulously high pitched voice (think Towlie from South Park).

"Maaan, what if, like, solving big door lock was to do this, and this, and this, and then this... whoa... it opened... I am so freaking high right now."

Also, I always prep at least one Polypurpose Panacea specifically for the "hallucination of cute and freindly woodland animals" effect.

My party has finally begun to not blink twice when he starts talking to Mr. Rabbit and Mr. Bluebird.

Proper names of "standard" outsiders is a bit creepy/unrealistic, but names of unique outsiders that are relevant to the local faith, or of standard outsiders that have made actual impacts upon the local area.

Savage Tide, right? So for local flavor, you might have:

Olman kids might play a game of hide and seek + tag where the person who is "it" is called Olangru. In my game, Olangru was the Olman word for "Boogeyman", he was around that long and was that well known.

While the Olman respect/fear him enough to potentially not do so, it wouldn't be a stretch for kids in Farshore to use the name Zotzilaha. Its on the map of the island thats hanging in the town hall.

A local legend of one of the couatls could also provide a name. Most are gone or in hiding, but they still can be occasionally seen.

If we are using Pathfinder dieties, I could see the following in children's games where a particular diety is prevalent:

Abadar, Erastil: Chaotic demons are "bad guys". Abadar might extend this to a particular devil who is good at making "bad contracts".

Pharasma: Daemons are the bad guys.

Sheyln: Her brother is the bad guy.

And so on. I could see any of the "important servants" being on the list too, like First Blade, Eternal Gravestone, the White Stag, etc.

An Erastil community could play "Poachers and Stags", where everyone pulls a strip of cloth from a bag, then goes and hides. There are red strips for the poachers, brown ones for the stags, and one white one. Poachers can "kill" stags, and the white stag "kills" poachers, but can't start hunting until at least one stag is "killed". Local preference and the nature of the children may alter the rules/numbers/etc.

tl;dr Your idea has merit, and could be a great way of giving PCs hints as to the local situation. Not much more than hints, but still.

So in my home game, my players have found a hidden, sealed dungeon in the upper city-ledge of Tumen in Osirion, specifically the one once owned by the Pharaoh of Numbers. They have already played through Entombed with the Pharaohs, and are working on discovering the location of The Pact Stone Pyramid, so I have plenty of material to work with.

I want this small dungeon in Tumen (which is almost a megadungeon in its own right) to be a hidden stronghold of the Pharaoh of Numbers, a place where he recorded lore on the Dominion of the Black and what their inevitable return to Golarion might mean. I also want them to find one of the doomsday clocks, since that was their entire goal in this expedition and they've done a darn good job with info gathering, smart exploration, and so on.

But for the life of me, I can't figure out what to put in this mini-dungeon/stronghold. The relation to the Pharaoh of Numbers makes stuff relating to Aucturn the 11th planet and the numbers 11 and 56 a no brainer, but beyond that, I feel like there should be something truly unusual, like a chunk of the dungeon being a permanent demiplane with objective gravity for some sort of MC Escher madness.

I'm just drawing a blank, so I figured I'd ask for a few ideas here to get the engine warmed up.

Any thoughts?

Not one of the designers of that, so feel free to ignore me.

That said, the game is built to favor the player. Despite the fact that the elemental descriptors are opposites, class abilities are meant to strengthen something, so I would say the fact it has [Fire] means a person would get the benefits of it being within their specialty. And as such it would not receive the penalties for [Water] being opposed to it, and vice versa.

Simplest, easiest, play friendly. If there is a "proper" way to run this that deviates from those three states, it better have a good reason to do so.

My 2 cp.

So.... an Alchemist's competence bonus to alchemy checks goes away in an anti-magic field, because its part of the Alchemy (SU) ability. The creation of entirely non-magic tindertwigs and alchemist fire is tangibly more difficult for him in such an area. He also can't identify potions within an anti-magic field for the same reason.

Conversely, that same Alchemist can brew those potions in an anti-magic field with ease (although they won't work until he comes out) because it is listed as Brew Potion (EX).

I'm not griping about these on some deeply personally offended level. I just thought this was amusing. Anyone else have some odd quirks they have noticed in the rules?

The OP's example fight was an admittedly single fight with a single target. Prime alchemist "Spotlight fight". Same CR encounter with 4 creatures of a lower CR, and things would be very different. Also, energy resistance prior to Sonic or Force bomb can absolutely ruin an alchemist's day.

Most of all, discourage the 15 minute adventuring day. Alchemists become fun but not crazygood.

Kingmaker = Alchemist rules the playground without modification.

I'm playing a goblin alchemist in Osirion, between random encounters in long desert trekking, or being stuck in tombs with angry guardian creatures, I have to ration my bombs very carefully, or end up going home in a bag.

Every single person posting on this board, unless they are an Ex-Black Ops, is level 1-2, 3 at best, and I highly doubt they have levels of a class with full base attack. Which is to say, level in "professional killer", because rogues, clerics, and other "fighting" classes have average. High base attack is for people who kill for a living.

Level 6 is pushing the limits of what real world people can do, and they are likely few and far between. I've seen an Ex-Navy Seal at a SCA war who was six foot three, but he could disappear in foot tall grass and sneak up on you in bright red full-plate. It was unbelievable, but it happened there on the field, and even thought I saw it, I still have a hard time believing it.

Level 10 is superhuman. Not Superman, but beyond human ability nonetheless. 15 is insane, and anything above it is people who have skill that is inconceivable to see in action.

This is part of the reason I loathed the concept of the Epic Level Handbook. Sure, I loved some of the specific ideas, but the concept itself of "epic" play was just so ridiculous to me. Anything above level 9 is epic, when you think about it from a real world perspective. And like it or not, most of the commoners in Golarion or any other setting are just as normal and limited as us real world commoners.

Someone should link the old article commenting on the "reality" of levels in a D&D world. Between it and the youtube videos, the issue is, as far as I'm concerned, dealt with to the point where its simply personal taste from this point out.

Tolkien's estate lawyers didn't let up twenty odd years ago, they sure aren't going to now with award-winning movies, multiple video games, action figures, board games, wedding rings, and the like. Oh, and that series of books.

Balrog is copyrighted, insofar as a a flaming demonic entity of smoke and shadow, armed with a whip and a sword. Unfortunately, Gygax was in the wrong in this case, innocent of malicious intent perhaps, but still in the wrong. Copyright law existed back when Gygax named the demons, and while he may have thought of it as an amusing nod, a wispy tangential reference to LotR, it could also easily be seen, and held up in court, as him trying to profit in some way off of a creation of Tolkien.

To have a Balrog in Pathfinder would require it to be unlike the one in Tolkien (like the boxing character in the American release of the Street Fighter video games). Which defeats the point of the referential nod, which is really the only reason it's wanted in the first place.

tl;dr = No, no Balrogs in Pathfinder.

I just do -2 penalty (attack, save, ability check, skill)at half HP, Fort DC (10+HD) to ignore. And again at 1/4 hp, Fort DC (15+hd), so fail both and -4 penalty, but hey, you failed two fortitude saves. The penalty is a pain penalty, any pain related effects apply. Endurance applies, die-hard makes you immune. Healing above the threshold eliminates the effect.

Works well enough, makes for a good "benchmark" of enemy health (its attacks falter a bit and become less accurate), and generally affects both PCs and monster equally, because while the PC may be feeling that save more often than not, the monster tend to flat out fail more due to a higher save DC relative to Fort mod. Which makes sense, big monsters likely are rarely hurt badly, so when it happens, they actually feel it, as opposed to brawny fighters for whom the negative HPs are a second home.

Others mileage may vary, of course.

I stand corrected and delighted!

Unfortunately, alchemists can't craft items without the Master Craftsman feat, as while their extracts have "caster levels" for the purposes of determining their power, the alchemist himself does not have a "spellcaster level", which is the prerequisite for the item creation feats.

Unless your DM wants to houserule otherwise, an alchemist is no better off making magic items than a fighter or rogue.

Are there any discoveries besides Feral Mutagen (and the Greater/Grand mutagens) that only apply while in mutagen form?

I figure I can simply self restrict using discoveries like Vestigial Limb and Tentacle to when the alchemist is in Mutagen Form, but such acts tend to lead quickly towards "shoot self in foot" land. Then again, any sort of compensation for self-limiting often goes the way of munchkin (Unearthed Arcana Flaws).

Are there any recommendable 3PP Alchemist materials? Or any Alchemist stuff beyond what Paizo has in their core line?

Am I the only one who thinks there should be more "Hulk" discoveries besides the few in Master Chymist, most of which seem rather underpowered for their prerequisite level? (Still miffed at Half-Dragon Mutagen)

All help is appreciated, and thanks in advance!

First bit of advice to give is: your campaign, your world, change what you want. There were never any Wizards of the Coast Intellectual Property Purity Police, nor are there any Paizo ones either.

If you want something that makes a bit of internal consistency and sense, here's an option. The biggest difference of all in Pathfinder is that dragons are no longer "tied" to their alignments. There are fallen golds (not many), and redeemed reds (well, one....maybe). Silvers in particular are highly prone to tarnishing because of their zealous nature.

So use that to your advantage. Leave history as it is, but put in a small event that happened that maybe not many people are aware of (DC 25 Knowledge Arcana or such, if it should ever matter).

The Corrosion Compact. In the year XXXX, a gathering of silver dragons assembled after reports from all over Golarion made a single fact clear: while there was no end in sight to evil, the zealous pursuit of its destructing by the silver bloodlines was beginning to cause more and more collateral damage, chaos, and further evil. More silver dragons were tarnishing with each decade, and it was decided that a greater emphasis on self-discipline and humility was needed more than aggressive crusading and thoughts of being above the common law.

As an object lesson in such humility, most silvers voluntarily exiled themselves into "mortal lives", usually with a small and reasonable escape clause (defending other creatures, feeding, or mortal peril being common, although a rare few apparently went into permanent mortal exile).

This gives you a way to bring silvers "back" to the Draconimicon standard (apologies if my recall of their personality in that is off, over the years multiple editions, settings, other dragons, and such blur the memory), without having to retrofit any of Golarion's history to account for their "new" personalities.

Personally, I'm going to use silvers as a "OH CRAP" scenario, sort of like the Infinite Flight in World of Warcraft. In my Golarion, silvers are tarnishing more and more quickly, but they don't have the humility to believe it is possible when they are told of it. Eventually (and that's a fairly soon eventuality) the entire silver flight will be a corrupted race of Tyrant dragons imposing martial law upon everything they can see.

My tangent aside, hope the idea helps you some.

I would figure the intent is that this would not work with Fast Bombs, since it gives base bomb damage against multiple foes (which could exceed anything you could do with Fast Bombs, given a big enough crowd). It specifically calls itself out as a standard action, despite that other bomb discoveries do not.

Finally, or firstly, I'd just look at Fast Bombs. It specifically says "throw additional bombs". Breath Weapon Bomb says "drawing, drinking, and expelling". Different terms, different usage, not compatible.

That's the way I would run it, and seems fairly clear-cut by the terminology and intent. Others might differ. Hope this helps.

Easy and very encouraging way: A "take them alive" button, which causes you to simply not kill the target when its HP drops below 0. Super easy and could be linked to a party vote system for interesting social dynamics, alignment ramifications, etc. Could interact weirdly with undead and constructs, but that could also open up interesting quest ideas. (Bring me a live ghoul!)

Easy and encouraging way: a toggle option that just causes you to "do non-lethal damage". Lack of major repercussions like attack penalty or limited options would make it more likely to be used. Downside, non-lethal fireballs and boxing wizards might be a bit immersion breaking. Also feels like option one until you run into undead, constructs, if the non-lethal rules are being otherwise played as is.

Easy and discouraging way: a toggle that activates the non-lethal mode of all of your attacks which can do non-lethal, as per the standard rules. Makes the selectable equivalent of a "Non-lethal Spell" feat-type mechanic attractive, but it is also still spending a player resource. Would need to be a solid in-game reason to do non-lethal to make the choice attractive. (I would say there should be heavy faction and alignment repercussions for lethal assaults on other characters, PC or otherwise, but that's food for another thread.)

Super easy and not a good idea way: Not being an option at all, being difficult to the point of frustration, or not having an in-game reason to do so. Obvious points, but sometimes the obvious should be pointed out.

Me personally? I like option three the most from a player level, but that is because I want to see as much of the basic ruleset preserved within the online game. I also enjoy playing Monster Hunter, which has a similar concept for capture, in that it requires a quick shift of strategy from the initial phase of "beating the heck of them".

Way I've been running it, having run a few of the APs and read any info I can get my hands on, to the delight of my FLGS, is as follows:

From the simple leather-bound diary of Baron Ferrick of Southshire, found in his quarters after his exile from the kingdom for undisclosed crimes of undisclosed magnitude:

"In the beginning there was something, that was also nothing. This not-thing is sometimes called Yogg-Sothoth in these times. It was the only existence, it was all existence, and it lasted for an eternity and for no time at all. It was whole, it was complete, and it was perfect.

And then it was shattered. Perhaps in its own not-existence it stretched too far, like a man dislocating his shoulder. Perhaps it was simply time for it to shatter, like a tree bearing fruit in the spring. But it was split. A portion of its essence bled away, as did a portion of its not-essence. These pools are now commonly called the Positive and Negative Energy planes. Split in two, Yogg-Sothoth, or the Dark Tapestry as it is sometimes known, now existed as a physical body and an intangible essence. The physical body is the material plane, a limitless expanse of stars, planets, cosmos, and galaxies. His essence is time itself, stretching through all things, infinite even when viewed from the infinite.

Much like a the shadow of a man left by an atomic blast upon a wall, the sundering of Yogg left shadows of the byproducts of creation and entropy upon the walls of reality. These shadows became elemental planes, reminiscent of parts of the material, concentrated, but limited. No, if I had meant to say THE elemental planes, I would have. There are multitudes, and they are tied to the regions they were spawned from.

On those planets and in the dark places, things grew. Some were tiny and benign, somewhat like the mitochondria of our own world. But some grew, and grew, and eventually they were not so tiny or so benign. These would come to be known as Outer Gods and Great Old Ones. They burrow through Yogg-Sothoths flesh, burn through his veins, and chew upon his bones. But just as a man may not pluck the virus from his tissues, so too is the Dark Tapestry unable to extract the creatures which torment it. Perhaps Azathoth is like an antibody, scouring the cosmos for the other beings which torment is father/host. Perhaps it is just one more of the tormentors.

In one region of the cosmos, a small branch of a limited galaxy, some of the lesser inhabitants, safely and distantly removed from their other, greater neighbors, began to crawl and fight and breed. The abyss formed in the space beyond space, a whirling composite echo of the frenzied proto-thoughts of primordial creatures struggling to live amidst pain and terror and death. As the eons went by, the creatures became more advanced, and their minds became capable of more, of understanding the world, of remembering and forgetting, of affection and rage. A new Maelstrom erupted in the beyond, and creatures of chaos, of change, crawled from it, curious and unfettered.

Soon the mortal creatures grew even more capable in their understanding, and they thought of hating, of loving, of obeying, of rebelling. New spaces formed in the beyond, new realms which produces their own offspring to look upon reality. These spawned realms were able to look about and see the realm that had created them.

What happened then? Who knows. Some say those of the spawned realms looked upon ours and were jealous of it, for they were created of us, and without even our intent. They were a byproduct of our existence, a sort of shed hair or spoor. The thought would have been quite humiliating, would it not? Perhaps they wished to erase the world that was and create one of their own, to reverse their cosmic roles. Perhaps they tried once in a realm created by their own thoughts, a first draft of sorts. Perhaps this realm was not of their own thoughts, but of the other half of Yogg-Sothoth, his essence rather than his body, time rather than form. Perhaps they simply instated themselves as lords, using the powers granted to them by our own thoughts to cow and impress us, subtly and not so subtly driving us to reinforce them with more thought.

It matters not what those who proclaim themselves gods choose to do. My work will return Yogg-Sothoth's severed essence to his material form, at least if only in a small part. And in that small part, he will be protected from the burrowing torments of the others. Perhaps I may even immunize enough of him to be recognized by him. Perhaps not. Many will seek to oppose me. To them, my work is blasphemous. But what can be expected of those who crawl and fight and breed in a single life upon a single planet in a single solar system. They simply lack... perspective."

Just use a madlibs to give you inspiration.

__monsters__ are threatening __place/people__ with __bad thing__. __person__ are very interested in seeing it dealt with. The situation is complicated by __relationship/condition__ __monsters__.

So, just picking words at random, flipping to pages, and so on, you could get:

Basilisks are threatening merchants with capture. A dirty beggar is very interested in seeing it dealt with. The situation is complicated by a territorial crag linnorm.

Then expand. Why are basilisks a problem for merchants? Perhaps they are overbreeding. Why are they capturing merchants. Maybe they are dragging the statues back to some giant basilisk egg laying broodmother. Okay, were poaching from How to Train Your Dragon, but thats fine. An advanced, giantx3 basilisk with a Petrify DC in the mid 20s is pretty scary even for 14th level PCs. Just having to make potentially 8 petrify saves a round is scary, for the mage with +9 fort. Don't discount lower CRs just because its "too easy".

Why did a dirty beggar pass this along to the PCs. Maybe he's an agent for the king, or a merchant who wants to see his failed experiment with controlling the trade routs with domesticated basilisks stopped without anyone aware it was his fault. Maybe hes the crag linnorm in polymorph, hoping the PCs will remove a genuine threat in his territory.

This is what I use when I "seat of the pants" DM, which is pretty much anytime I'm not using an Adventure Path or Module. Maybe it will work for you.

Also, these aren't Desert Eagles or AK47s. These are flintlock muskets and pistols, shooting a ball of lead, not a jacketed round with a hollow-point tip. There is a big difference from a pre-War of Independance musket shot and a 44 calibur round from a modern assault rifle. Honestly, a greatsword is a far more effective means of inflicting tissue trauma, setting aside ranged capability.

Guns are expensive in Pathfinder because they are new, different, decently effective, and have some niche advantages that people can exploit (touch AC, works in dead-magic, etc).

For those old-timers here (sarcasm on) think about when CD burners first became available to the public. $1000. Yep. True story. It was amazing, it was revolutionary, it was cutting edge, and it was expensive! Now they are quite literally 2% of their origional price, and 500% faster if not more, to say nothing of DVD burners.

Gun tech in Pathfinder is emergent, its at that same point as CD burners were back in the day. As time in the game world goes on, the price will come down as manufacturing improves and demand spurs production.

If that is the point you want to be at in your game, that is fine, but please be aware of why guns would be inexpensive at that point.

Also, a good rule of thumb I like to use is what I call the Rule of 5 and 15.

5 is how many HP an average Joe can be expected to have (some might argue 3 or 4, but I figure most commoners put a 12 in con. When your a peasant, survivability is paramount.)

So consider that anything doing 5+ damage consistently is something that can conceivably render the average man dying with a single solid (non-critical) hit. Greatswords and greataxes? Sounds about right. Shortswords and daggers? Eh, they can be fatal, but that sounds like heart/neck/headshots, aka crits. In general this works pretty well to benchmark damage. Throwing a rock at a person can be fatal, if you get a headshot, but anywhere else and you just hurt the person. I would see 1d3 or 1d4, probably the d4 since the -4 for improvised is also a factor in its lethality. Keep in mind, anything more than perhaps 3 pounds is a bit much for the average person to lob the 50' that a thrown weapon can reach. Dropping a 30 pound rock off of a cliff on someone will be far more devastating, but that isn't a one-handed thrown weapon, to be sure.

Next in the Rule of 5 and 15 is, shock, 15! This is the average Joe's hp pf 5, plus 10 more for his death threshold. In other words, anything doing more than 15 points of damage is instantly fatal. No tender last words, no CPR, no emergency medical action, no last minute heal spells. Dead. Flat out. Head torn off, heart torn out, torso crushed, legs severed at the thigh for instant bleed out, etc etc. Anything doing 15+ damage is basically an ambulatory 60 mph car-crash in terms of how fatal it is.

So a 30 pound rock from 20 feet up? I can see 3d6 from that, highly likely to be lethal, but would take a crit to be instantly fatal. A thrown rock though, not happening unless something with horrific strength is throwing it. Consider, a STR 20 raging barbarian could throw a 1d4 rock for 1d5+5, which is 2d4+10 on a crit, average of 15. Headshots from this barbarian are instantly and irrecoverably fatal to the average human.

Just some thoughts I use to keep things in perspective. D&D sometimes seems to not be very simulationist at all, but once you reel it in to the baseline of "average human", sometimes it starts looking more sensible. Just have to remember PCs are just not average.

For me, individual dragons might part with a portion of their hoard for a useful piece of gear, if it was extremely critical to their current plans. Then again, I often run dragons as adventurer patrons, giving the location of an un-plundered ruin in exchange for a specific item from it, the rest is fair game. So it is far more likely the dragon exchanges an intangible like knowledge for the item, or simply goes and procures the item on its own, with a potential level of violence appropriate to the dragon's nature and the nature of the item's current owner.

The way I see it, dragons don't view their money as money, they view it as a possession. Humans view money as a means to acquire a possession, or as a means to acquire more money, and thus more possessions. But a dragon just sees the money itself as the possession.

Would you trade a significant portion of your mini collection for a specific mini that would be useful in your next session? Or would you rather acquire it with an alternate method (human: purchase. dragon: steal or persuade)? Or simply make do without the mini?

That and draconic arrogance. If I were a biological Abrahms tank with unlimited ammo that could fly, I would be mortified at the thought a human might challenge me so much I need to put human defenses upon myself. Add in the rest of a host of neat tricks like stealth, illusion, mind control, terrain reshaping, burrow or swim speeds, and lets not forget better spellcasting the bigger you are, and there really is no reason to even consider using paltry magic items, unless one happens to fall into your lap thanks to a foolish adventurer.

But to consider actually parting with a portion of your hoard, the physical sum of your life's deeds, your comfort blanket, your master bedroom, your hobby, your life's work? To buy a trinket that might give you an edge, that carries with it the implication that you NEED an edge?

That would be the most loathsome of blasphemies.

The Black Bard wrote:

High charisma, not so high looks: Mickey Rourke.

Really? That's your go-to "unattractive, but with a high CHA" pull?

I never said unattractive. I said high charisma, not so high looks. I find Mickey Rourke to be currently one of the most commanding male presences in cinema, but he is hardly a "pretty boy". Most would agree that Liam Neeson, Robert Downy Jr., and Christian Bale are all more appealing visually than him. Perhaps his rougher looks enhance his presence, perhaps they are just parallel to it, but he is my go to for exactly what I said: "high charisma, not so high looks".

Steve Buscemi might be my call for "unattractive, but with a high CHA".

High charisma, not so high looks: Mickey Rourke.

Decent looks, poor charisma: Cast of Jersey Shore.

I found the answer right after posting, felt stupid, and deleted my post, but apparently the thread still lingers.

If a moderator will delete this thread, that would be fine, I have no need of it.

I read through the archives and while it seems the RAW is pretty clear that undead just make crappy barbarians due to the fact the primary benefits of rage are morale bonuses, and the undead type is immune to morale effects, I wanted to see if there was any official ruling on this one way or another.

I don't like calling for developer intervention, but there have been enough undead barbarians in the modules (including ones described as gaining said levels after becoming undead) that I think it might be nice to put this to rest once and for all.

So, does anyone know of a stated confirmation? Or is this just a slightly grey area made blurry grey by the time when the Beta listed rage as typeless bonuses?

And for bonus points: if you cast Create Undead on a peasant, you can get a ghoul. If you cast it on a 4th level fighter, can you get a Ghoul with 4 levels of fighter? I'm not advocating Create Undead as poor man's ressurection (well, maybe, but not for those reasons). Just curious if that is withing the rules, not allowed, or just not covered.

Mechamorphosis is decent, but it really hits a wall when put with other material. It can stand on its own just fine, or in D20 Modern, but it gets wonky in a fantasy world or with the complexity of spellcasting. It is a good idea fountain though.

I need to find some Sorcery & Steam. Haven't browsed it.

Dragonmech has decent stuff too, and its more fantasy-incorporated. The clockwork aspect is a big deal though, and it has a lot of critical hit tables and such. Also, pretty much nothing besides DM fiat when you try to make a sentient DragonMech.

If others want to use them for their ideas and conversions, that's cool, I just prefer to take something already within the system and expand/modify it, rather than try to shoehorn in something from outside, already shoehorned for its original purpose by 3PP.

I won't lie, this thread has my interest. (Big transformers fan, that is, fan of everything from G1 to Prime).

If you are going for something less BeastWars/Dinobots/Predacons and more G1/Bayverse/Prime/etc, I would reccomend looking at the options for animated objects. A medium animated object has 2 construction points.

Granted, with such a baseline, we are going to have some silly Transformers, but hey, "Its magic I don't gotta explain s--t." Not to mention 30' tall metal robots with energy weapons isn't exactly Level 1 material, if you know what I mean.

Heres a pair of basic statblocks, followed by my ideas/explanations of them.

Rollout, NG Medium Formshifter Fighter 1.
Construct (Restricted Shapechanger)
Alternate form: Wheelbarrow.
Construction Points (2): Faster, Trample.

Interrorgater, LE Medium Formshifter Rogue 1.
Construct (Restricted Shapechanger)
Alternate Form: Iron Maiden
Construction Points(2+2) Metal, Grab, Constrict
Construction Flaws: Slower x2

I think a subtype of Restricted Shapechanger is needed. The full shapechanger subtype gives a large and, frankly, bizzare advantage to an animated object. Specifically, the ability to restore one's own shape if it is manipulated by magic, such as polymorph, etc. I can see a wooden Formshifter perhaps being able to undo the effects of being shifted into some other wooden form, but not from being turned into a rabbit. Also, special attention and decision must be made regarding spells like Warp Wood, Wood Shape, Stone Shape, etc.

Construction flaws are from Ultimate Magic, as are several other Construction Point options.

If I were to fully implement this (especially as a race that might have larger versions) I would design a feat tree for size increase and extra Construction Points. With the expanded options in Ultimate Magic, just about any design can be executed with sufficient points. Want to be a tank? Metal, Ranged Attack, Trample, maybe allow Fire Damage added to the ranged attack. (Personally, some of the restrictions on which options can and can't be added to others annoy me, so I lift them).

I would say for a Formshifter to be large, there should be a Character level (aka HD) requirement, along with at least one feat leading up to it. Here's a basic idea.

Bulk. Your body is much larger than normal. You gain +2 size bonus to Str, -2 size penalty to Dex, +1 bonus to Natural Armor, and take a -1 size penalty as if you were one size category larger. Additionally, you weigh 4x as much as normal. If you take Massive, these benefits and penalties are ignored (they do not stack).

Massive. Prerequisite: Bulk. You become 1 size category larger, permanently. You receive all the normal benefits of being the new size. This does not stack with the benefits from Bulk.

Improved Bulk, Improved Massive, Greater Bulk, Greater Massive, etc.

Thats how I'd start on this.

Hmm...I think I do need to start on this....

Close to 30, and they act like this? Good lord, my group (and I) are all in our late 20's to early 30's, and this would never happen unless the characters being played were evil.

I'm getting the feel from your posts that the players were the ones joking about the dead, and the characters were just very unsuccessful in the saving of the town. If that is so, an alignment change might not be in order.

If that's not the case, then you have two possible outcomes:

A: Your players are great role-players trying to portray some sort of "descent into madness" or something. However, your later comments about them canceling and not returning communications or just being squirrely about it indicates this just isn't possible.

B: Your players are bad role-players. Some might say terrible. I, personally, would refer to it as "Sorry guys, our playstyles just don't match, hope you find a DM better suited to your needs, and if you wrote down my address and phone number on anything, please burn it" level bad.

Is this sort of behavior normal for them? Do they often laugh at say, war documentaries? I expect laughter at things like, say, Zombieland. But I would be quite worried if I heard a trio of men laughing heartily throughout Schindler's List.

Especially the one with a son. If this behavior is normal for him, you may need to keep an eye on it for the sake of the kid. If not for that, I'd say drop these guys as a gaming group. Find an online game or such, there is no reason to game with bad gamers, and no reason to associate with bad associates.

My wife works for Child Welfare, so maybe its just the ruboff, but even without the kid in the mix, I wouldn't let those players back to my table after that, if it played out like I'm imagining. Hopefully I'm imagining wrong, and they are nice normal folks playing a game (badly) to have a good time. Hopefully.

Hopefully.

So my next question is what happens with cultists/worshippers of Old Gods/Great Ones/Etc? Do they get put in the Graveyard with the rest of the heretics and atheists? Do they just end up being drawn to Abbadon's portal like every other unrepentant NE person?

I'm thinking that their embracing of the Old Gods/Great Ones probably falls pretty heavy on the Heresy scale, and some might turn to them out of a rejection of the gods themselves, so I think the Graveyard is a solid choice for said peoples. Any thoughts out there?

Are there any encounter tables or even just lists of inhabitants for the Boneyard? I have a detour coming up in my Kingmaker game that makes me really in need of such info.

Should I just assume there may be just about any type of outsider capabable of honeyed words and concerned with mortal souls? Are there any inhabitants specific to the Boneyard?

Anyhow, help would be appreciated. Many thanks in advance.

Your hands are your best weapon,==Aelryinth

I'll restrain my full snark for the sake of the thread, but still: WRONG.

Please, do not talk about martial artists, effectiveness, and then claim that hands are the best weapons. Because the last firmly cements that you do not actually know as much as you think you do about the first two.

You know which of two martial artists is likely more dangerous, assuming some phantasmal balance in skill/bodymass/style? The one with a weapon in his hands, because he can use all of its advantages PLUS the rest of his body.

Not even going to participate in this thread any further. No source has been found for the supposed "CONTENTIOUS DEV STATEMENTS", the RAW is pretty clear that its fine, its relatively sub-optimal, and its a visually dynamic and interesting concept. No points against, three in favor, judge bangs gavel, court is adjourned.

I feel that action and intent both compile to result in a character's alignment. Action has more of an effect, but intent still matters.

Example 1: Jimmy Joe Bob. He's evil, via intent. But how evil? Well, hes a coward, by definition he avoids confrontation and challenges. So he hasn't gained much personal XP, and that means he is unlikely to be the required level to actually have an evil aura. Pally smite is still rather undefined, but since it works even if the Pally isn't sure the target is evil, and it auto-doesn't work if the target is actually not evil, then I would say it is something more than just the Paladin getting his righteous wrath on. There is a discretionary power built into the ability, and that would note that Jimmy is evil and thus he would suffer the effects.

Example 2: Robin Hood vrs Not-Evil Sherrif. Not explicitly evil, if he behaves as normal Robin Hood does (doesn't kill his robbery targets, etc). Theft is a disruption of social order, which is chaotic, but it has no bearing on good or evil. Paladin is justified in apprehending him for his crimes, especially if he is not putting the spoils to good ends (such as with Normal Robin Hood). Ending him though? Not unless he resists arrest and leaves no other choice.

Example 3: Barq. Obviously evil, with the orderly mentality that suggests Lawful. But not a criminal, if he was sanctioned for his duties. Might get an official reprimand here and there, but until he hits 5-6th level and gets an aura, the paladin doesn't have much to go on besides knowing he'll get to say "I told you so" to Barq's superior one day.

For the life of me, I've never understood why alignment threads cause so much consternation. But then I've long noted the C-L axis along with the G-E one. That and I always try to refer to Lawful as "Orderly", to avoid the "Obey the LAW" stupidity that inevitably creeps along.

Let me add a +1 for the idea of a book like "Ultimate Threats" covering some of the elder gods, spawn of Rovagug, and so on. Reprint the established spawn's stats, throw in a few more, and even a few other "near-spawn" abominations from various dark rituals, magical catastrophes, diefic plots, and so on.

You could even put in a partial template, or even just a "how to" section that describes guidelines and recommendations when making "massive monsters". Might be a good place to throw in the "monsters as terrain" idea. (BTW, I do that all the time, with climb vrs jump checks at the start of each round. Success gives the PC concealment, or total concealment if positioned in a blind spot. Failure means he operates normally, fail by 5 and he falls off. Also, ride vrs jump works great for covering riding hostile monsters, and anything cowboy related).

What I'm trying to say is: Do Kaiju right, but please don't totally scrap the basic idea of the template. It would be great to have a "helping hand" for designing those awesome Really Freaking Big Monsters (tm) that are sometimes Kaiju and sometimes just really freaking big monsters.

Not trying to derail or criticize, but I tend to divide WoW character level by 5 rather than 3, tends to work much better and fits within Pathfinder's challenge rating spectrum much more nicely.

Consider this: at level 60, it took 40 people to down Onyxia.

Downing Magtheridon took 25 level 70s.

The Lich King required 10 well geared 80s.

And now Deathwing will take 10 85s.

I personally assume any raid boss would have the "Advanced" template just for good measure, but even disregarding that, lets look at what these bosses actually are.

Onyxia is an old (and not the oldest) dragon. Wyrm or Ancient (recolored) red dragon is still a CR 19 at the least. In game she is capable of killing the fighter type with three or four hits if the healer is not paying attention. And almost every character type will simply die if struck by her breath weapon. This plays out rather effectively against 40 level 12 characters.

Magtheridon was a powerful outsider, possibly equivalent to a pit fiend lord or balor lord, although granted you fight him in a slightly weakened state with a terrain advantage. It seems appropriate to assume it would take 25 level 14 characters to beat him.

The Lich King is a pain to stat, but at the least he is a high level character with an artifact weapon, and at least one template. 10 level 16 characters versus something in the CR 24-5 range, I think.

Deathwing is a dragon aspect, so great wyrm + advanced. Metal clad is perfect as well. But really, thats about all. Putting him somewhere in the 26-27 CR range. About right for 10 level 17 characters.

That aside, I wanted to chime in on class representations:

I'd do warlock as a summoner who can choose from 4-5 different eidolons, with most of his conjuration spells shifted to evocation and necromancy.

I would also do deathknight as a magus with some spell trade-outs and other tweaks for the undead companion.

I don't want to pay $20 for an AP volume and have 60% of the scripted encounters be "Specters(4"). I can do that myself.

Then save yourself $20, and do so. If its that easy, it should be no problem?

Oh, right.... the rest of the AP material, the plot, the personas, the setting....

Fact is, if the shoe fits, be happy you have the shoe, don't complain it isn't a boot. The vast majority of the encounters you are describing are there because they are the correct encounter to place relative to the setting, plot, adventure level, and available material.

Setting: "Another goblin? Bleh, this is stupid." No, this is Sandpoint, and its full of them.

Plot: "The endboss is a tiefling too? Lame!" The plot is about the devil tainted son of the theive's guildmaster, in case you forgot.

Adventure level: "A specter? Booring?" Yeah, well, a banshee would flat out kill your character at this level, and that would be more booring, don't you think?

Available Material: "Why just another dragon, why not something interesting like a Jabberwock or something?" Because this adventure was written prior to Bestiary 2, and Paizo doesn't have time machines hooked up to their printers to do MAGICAL CHRONOSPACE REVISIONS.

You are a PFS member and have a relatively long post history, so I will refrain from making any assumptions about what you have played and how much material you own. But your complaint has very little substance or proof to it, being entirely opinion, and the manner in which you phrase it does nothing to help your chances of being taken seriously.

But BP and gold aren't directly interchangeable. That 50BP doesn't mean you ahve 200,000gp lying around, it means you have connections, labor, political maneuvering space, the goodwill of the people, supplies and raw materials, and the funds to get something accomplished. That's one reason I thought withdrawing BP gets you 2,000gp BP per while depositing costs 4,000gp per BP. It's not as easy to turn the goodwill, favors owed, raw materials, and labor into coin, and it's also risky.

So I'd say the 50BP is more like 100,000gp in value, but even that's iffy, and your PCs don't need the world when it comes to their castle. That said, I would probably go a little more elaborate than the Cheap Keep from the Stronghold Builder's Guide and let them have some funds to elaborate it whatever way they wish.

By that logic, 50 BP is 100,000gp of value in raw material and funds, AND connections, labor, political maneuvering space, and the goodwill of the people.

You could build something amazing with all that.

Ultimately, people are just not used to the the Reverse Pay System of Kingmaker's Kingdom Building. In everything else, we are used to pay, then work commences, then it is completed. Sometimes that may be broken up into chunks along the way, but even in construction you pay the contractor first, because you pay him not only for his time but for the materials he will purchase on your behalf for the project. The counterpoint is that he is licensed and bonded so that there are legal consequences and options if he takes your money and runs. Regardless, most of us are used to a chain of events of Pay Cost - Build Starts - Build Completes - Structure Useable. From Starcraft to Monopoly, this is how it works.

Kingmaker switches things up by not putting the Pay phase at the start. In this system, it goes Building Starts - Pay Cost - Build Completes - Structure Useable.

People just seem to not like the aspect of "having to look backwards" to say things like "the castle has been worked on for months, and is just now complete." They feel like it breaks the sense of immersion to retcon in the presence of such a major building. Yet with smaller buildings like shops and houses, often they don't feel that way, because its easy to imagine the shop being built during the month that the cost is paid.

Its ultimately an issue with perspective and an the difficulties people have in shifting to said perspective. That said, I honestly can not see a method that eliminates the perspective issue without radically complicating the system. While not perfect, the rules work well for both scope and simplicity.

Your point regarding constructs and undead is totally valid, and a smidge of extra text amounting to "while they don't suffer any of the other penalties, undead and constructs can have limbs severed."

But yeah, I always run on the "15 point" rule. An attack that does 15 points of damage sends a common man to his grave instantly. Dead on impact, not on arrival. No medical treatment or magic lower than Last Breath can save him.

I agree that 50 does seem a little high, but its also an easy and convienient number to remember. 25 would be a little low past level 5, but 30,35, 40, all feel like odd numbers to use. I think Kaisoku does an excellent job describing the "behind the scenes" of that mechanical choice.

And as Revan says, a commoner loosing his hand likely will kill him, as it could most of us internet warriors. A severed hand bleeds like crazy, and it takes quite a bit of mental fortitude to bandage oneself enough to survive traveling to the hospital, assuming the shock itself doesn't knock the man unconcious to begin with.

Fluff text from the Pathfinder books on undead implies that fear "sweetens" the flesh. So a ghoul is not likely to CDG a meal that could be "sweetened" by slowly just eating it while it's paralyzed. If guaranteeing one kill suddenly became a priority, like if four ghouls were attacking and one was easily dispatched, the others might try to CDG and pick up and run off with a meal.

And +1 that any enemy with the ability to stop a PC from acting (Paralysis, Hold Monster, Sleep, Suggestion, Dominate, etc) is very powerful.

Best choice with ghouls: fight defensively, they have poor ACs for their overall CR. The extra AC will help limit the number of saves you have to make. Also, be willing to take attacks of opportunity if it means stopping the ghoul from making a full attack. 1 attack of op for movement +1 attack after ghoul chases is not as bad as 3 attacks for standing there and letting it maul you.

Here we go. I played next to one of these back in 3.5. Pathfinder, not going to happen, but heres a full-splat 3.5 magic missle monster.

Sorceror, PHB2 trade-out familiar for standard (as opposed to slow) metamagic.
Force Missle Mage, as previously noted.
Argent Savant for extra damage bonuses.
Twin, repeating, quickened, empowered, for feat selection.
Spell Matrix spells from Spell Compendium, Celerity spells as well.

End result: Unload like a beast for an average of 500 points of nearly unblockable damage on any target (or divided amongst targets) within medium range. Throwing around something like 60 missiles per round.

Willing to suffer consequences? Push it up to 700 with celerity.

Like I said, we played with the guy, point buy was high, but that just gave him a few extra spell slots, since he wasn't ever setting DCs. His math and such were legit, we all went over it together.

Barring DM modifications on the fly, he would have downed Kyuss in Age of Worms in 1 round with average damage. Granted, he was begging for inevitables to come down on him with all the time-warping via celerity and time-stop to re-fill his Spell Matrix.

Again, 90% useless for Pathfinder tho.

One more voice chiming in on the whole cannon sneak attack being legit by RAI and RAW.

If an attack, specifically an attack roll, is made in a situation qualifying for sneak attack, then it gets sneak attack. You can houserule otherwise, but be wary of opening yourself up to counter-arguments, like "No way the titan can get sneak attack, his hammer is bigger than me!"

Heck, a ballista is just a huge heavy crossbow that disregards the normal size/hand effort ratio.

Stuff.

I.....how.....wha....

Not sure if trolling.

First rule of Good Feat Design: If you have an NPC use it on your players, will they scream bloody murder? If yes, feat is bad.

The issue isn't in a feat that balances melee vrs casters or anything of the sort. The issue is a feat that gives an unlimited source of an effect that is stronger than several mind control spells.

I don't know, I took one look at it and saw "no fun if used against PCs" written all over it. At least stuff like Vampire Dominate and Hold Person and other "make me worthless for the fight" spells have Saves, SR, counterspells, and so on.

Glad to see they are getting to fine tuning it. Hopefully they can extract a good mechanic out of the horrible execution of a decent idea.

On a tangent, I'm running into a side-issue, probably best reserved for another thread, where I expect to have 6 players. I'm looking for excuses to cut down on "secondary" characters like cohorts and companions because they slow game-time significantly, but if the adventures prove to be the challenge I expect, I hate to restrict this too much.

Just say: "Hey guys, there's six of you here, and I want all of you to be able to share the spotlight and have fun, plus I want to be able to spend my time running the adventure rather than rebuilding it, so heres the deal: in the interest of keeping the combat round moving and the action flowing, I'm gonna but a nix on secondary characters, like animal companions, cohorts, pally mounts, that sort of stuff. I'm not trying to limit you guys, I'm just trying to limit the strain on my ability to keep track of everything and keep it moving without people getting bored. Just trying to make this as fun as possible while knowing my own limits."

If they have a problem with that, if their character concept "just can't be realized without an animal companion" then they obviously aren't as interested in playing the game with you as a DM as they are just interested in playing their character. That playstyle might be fine at some tables, but in my opinion, the more people at the table, the more of a team game it becomes. No "I" in team, and all that.

In 3.5 it might have been an issue, but now that every "companion" class like druid/ranger/wizard/sorceror/paladin now has a built in "non-companion" option, there is really no reason why players can't understand and agree to what is ultimately a reasonable modification considering the party size.

Heck, you could even let them still take leadership, just make it clear that cohorts and followers will not come into the hostile dungeon, but they will do a lot of other stuff, like keep house, carry out the loot from a "pacified" dungeon, repair gear, collect rumors, buy gear, etc. Having a cohort can just as easily be like Bruce Wayne having Alfred, rather than Captain America having Bucky.

The action economy (number of turns the good guys can take vrs the bad guys) is almost always more valuable than the point buy of the characters.

If you have five PCs, and especially if you have six, then your action economy is tilted 25 to 50% in the party's favor.

Look at it this way: if your two "extra" PCs are a fighter type and an arcane caster, its like getting to roll twice for attack rolls. Except when both rolls hit, you do damage twice. When both enemy saves fail, you do damage twice.

It really comes into play with things like Gelatinous Cubes and other "remove a character" critters. Barbed Devils tossing out Hold Person is a good example too. In a 4 man group, one guy is paralyzed/held/stunned/dominated/whatever. The other 3 carry on, with a 25% drop in party action economy. With a six man group, five more get to go. That allows the group to do everything the four man party does, plus let one more do whatever he wants and one guy dedicate to rescuing the first poor sap.

With six players, at a 15 point buy, fatalaties are going to arise from stupidity, not lack of power. The primary points of "Stupid" to watch out for:

1: Splitting up. You have enough people to split into three pairs. Nobody should ever be completely alone. Lower point buy = lower hp = die faster in an ambush. Never go solo.

2: Disregarding saving throws. Stats are lower, saving throws are lower. Maybe by only a point, but thats all it takes to fail. Cloak of resistance is Priority #1, with upgrading it being #2, and getting stat boosters to low saving throw stats #3, even if you don't need it for anything else. Circlet of Wisdom +2, even if you aren't a cleric, is still +1 to will saves, +1 to perception, +1 to sense motive. All of which can save your life.

3: Disregarding knowledge. Knowledge skills can tell you if you can kill a monster or not. Fighting something you can't kill, or even can't kill fast, is just asking for the dice to turn against you. Divinations can give amazingly good advice even at low level. If the Augury spell says "Woe", then be very cautious in the dungeon. A lower point buy group should not be blazing through an ancient crypt in a single afternoon. They should take their time, researching, casting divinations, checking for traps, and generally acting like people risking their very lives for a shot at wealth rather than superheros in search of glory.

4: Disregarding consumeables. Maybe its just me, but I see a lot of players never even look twice at potions that don't have "healing" in the name, same with scrolls. But 100g for two Oils of Magic weapon means being able to wait a full extra level to get a +1 weapon, and instead you can buy a +1 suit of armor and a +1 cloak of resistance, both of which will keep you alive longer. Is it a pain to keep track of twenty odd potions and one-off wondrous items? Maybe, but why risk a horrific poison blade/crushing ceiling/spiked pit/fireball trap combo on a treasury door when you can gaseous form right through, load up, and get out with two potions of Gaseous Form.

I wold not stop them from play any class. I have run age of worms. A few thinks I wold make sure the players know first.

1: Monks are off limits! not becous there a bad class but becous of how the spawn of Kyuss function.
2: Make sure they understand that channel positive energy and clense are both required for compleation of parts of the AP.
3: Make sure they understand this AP is deadly. They will need optimized characters if your not using a high point buy.

1: Agreed. I wouldn't forbid the class outright, but I would flat out warn that the player is choosing "nightmare mode".

2: Don't know what you mean by cleanse, but Channel Energy is definitely another "helps a lot". Not having an actual channeller (Cleric or Paladin) definitely bumps the difficulty from "normal" to "hard" in a few points, both in terms of healing, damaging enemies, and opening certain pathways. Note that UMD to fake having the ability can bypass some the latter.

3: Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. If you want a story to progress without frequent character turnover (which can sometimes create the "why are we still doing this" situation when everyone realizes there are no original members of the party left) you may want to use the 20, or even the 25 point buy. If your party normally is solid on their tactics, synergy, and teamwork, 20 should be ok. If you plan on taking the effort to "pathfinderize" the monsters, even just the "boss" monsters, you might want to look at 25. Some of those come out amazingly deadly with a few extra feats.

I only say this stuff because when I run APs, I prefer to let the story carry the players a bit more than usual. When I run sandbox, I let players drive the story, and PC death helps with that more often than not. With APs, PC death usually brings things to a grinding halt or even bumps the train off the tracks entirely. Ultimately, its up to you how you want that to play out. Hope this info helps.

Before I comment on the APG classes, I do just want to point out that there is a slight risk that comes with following the APs reccomendation that players be "natives" of that wretched little mining town who become adventurers to get out of it: specifically, they may hate it so much they refuse to ever return, which can play holy hell with the story progression a few adventures down the line. From personal experience both playing and running that AP to completion, I recommend being willing to have one or two PCs not be "natives", if only to help with that issue.

As for the APG classes:

Alchemist is easy, fits in anywhere a smart guy can make a living being smart and making potions.

Inquisitor is easy too, lots of heresy going on in a wretched hive of scum and villany like that town. Sometimes the inquisitor comes to town, sometimes the town creates one on its own. Will of the gods and all that.

Cavalier can be harder, if only because having the wealth to own a horse means having the wealth to leave the town. See my first comment; a cavalier might work better as an out of towner.

Oracle is same as inquisitor; the town itself may produce one. Who knows what strange visions could be granted by inhaling too much coal dust, or illegal narcotics in a back room. And consider the forces at play in the adventure itself, a connection could be made there in the first adventure even. And then there is always the non-native, drawn to the place by visions he doesn't understand. Oracle is a goldmine for plothooking.

Witch is easy, since its basically a school-less wizard. Turning the resident NPC wizard into a witch could make for an interesting thing (and arguably should be done if there is a PC witch as that NPC serves as a prime resource for learning spells for many early levels).

Summoner is the same as oracle in my book. Who knows what powers might reach out from within their prisons, or from beyond the eons of time long past, to grasp for a mortal hand. Again, many "behind the scenes" forces in the story that could make for good choices and great "ta-dah!
reveals down the line.

I don't see any reason why the APG classes couldn't work just as easily as any of the core classes. Heck, some core classes are almost harder to justify, like monk.

Alignment thread ahoy. What fun.

Evil isn't that which is not good, evil is that which is actively evil.
Good isn't that which is not evil, good is that which is actively good.
Neutral is that which is neither actively good nor actively evil.

Alignment is both intent and event, although the ratio between the two tends to vary by the scope of event. The scope being the people affected by it.

A palladin who goes around killing goblins in their lairs isn't committing an evil or a good act. The act of killing itself is unaligned, otherwise all predators would be evil (just like in medieval Europe). Why he's killing the goblins matters. Is he killing to put an end to their predations on the local town? To rescue kidnapped children? A good act then. To do the same to receive the posted reward? Neutral, a self-serving act that happens to benefit others. Because he hates goblins with a passion, and can't stand to see one live? Approaching evil quickly, a self serving action that brings active harm, although a nearby town might see less raiding that spring.

Now, a paladin who goes into a goblin lair, defeats the warriors and cheif, spares the women and children, reclaims the goods stolen from the villagers, warns the goblins to "Amend their ways or leave this place, such mercy will not be shown again", warns the villagers to watch for signs of goblins in the area, spends a day training a few strong lads some basic fighting, and returns the stolen goods and spreads half the reward from the village cheif back around to the villagers, is doing a series of good acts, with only the defeats of the warrior goblins and cheif being a neutral act.

To me, good and evil take effort to achieve, and are quite hard to reach through inaction. Deliberate lack of action is different, the very nature of choosing not to act is an act itself. See Batman Begins: "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you."

Just like a bad guy with a hostage who threatens the paladin is the one responsible for what happens to the hostage, not the paladin. He chose to take use another life as a shield against his enemy. He chose to disrespect another being's right to live. The paladin is trying to save the hostage, in hoping that he can strike down the villain before he kills said hostage. Granted, this assumes the "bigger plan in motion, villain is buying time" scenario.

tldr: Alignment absolutes work just fine when you realize the alignment grid is just that: a grid. There is space between the lines.

Far more than I expected to receive! Thanks a bunch!