|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 Recent Posts
We played a 20th level PFRPG one shot this past weekend and our DM used the horrifically overpowered feats to make our adversaries worthy. I believe he succeeded and we all had a lot of fun. The feat worked real well in that regard, IMO. The 20th level master of many forms monk with gestalt fighter and gestalt gunslinger (using an advanced revolver) as well as having the denied feat gave us absolute fits.
paper. on the history of bacon. Thanks. This thread has been pretty dead today. Uggh, five days til the long weekend. 'nite
paper. on the history of bacon. Since I made a post in "the thread" (in no way inflammatory) that was deleted along with other posts that were inflammatory and someone posted (in response to Ross' post) that "Don't see how calling stupidity for what it is can be inflammatory." I'm curious as to what was posted in response to what I stated. Could anyone relate? (PM if necessary) Spoiler:
I have no intent for joining that "conversation". But, if my post was being referred to as stupid and that was what was being referred to by Xabulba after the responses had been removed then I would still consider the insulting to be going on and flag it. http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5rkn&page=2?Arizona-Secretary-of-State-seek ing-to-remove#76 If I (or my post) was not being referred to as stupid, then nothing to worry about. By the way, I think I favorited more posts today than ever before. Thanks. :D
^ Typically, a spell from a domain list is not gained as a class list spell. For instance, fireball is a magus 3 spell, a sorcerer/wizard 3 spell, and a fire domain level 3 spell. If a cleric has the fire domain, it does not have the option of memorizing fireball as one of its class spells. Fireball can only be memorized and cast as a domain spell. I believe that is the intent for the domain spells with the godling spellcasters. What of spells that are also on a class list? More specifically, what if an eldritch godling chooses its spells known from the sorcerer/wizard list and chooses the fire domain? Rather than have some spells from a domain be added as spells known (those also on the list the character chooses spells from such as fireball for an eldritch godling choosing from sorcerer/wizard spells and having the fire domain) and others not being added (such as sanctuary for the same eldritch godling but with the protection domain in addition to or instead of fire), I think it would be the intent to be uniform and either add all or add none. In this case, looking at how a cleric's spells work, I would say none. There is my two cents. But, I am not on the SGG staff and they may feel differently.
Not being the one who wrote those rules, I can't say if there was a reason or not. If there WAS a reason, my guess would be that samurai aren't supposed to care that much about money. Ha, but what if they (and perhaps I should say their players...) care about buying weapons and armor?
The point is that umbral reaver did not (merely) say "people doing that" caused me to leave but rather specifically called out Darkwing Duck. That is an insult. Personal attacks, truthful or not, are against the ules and can result in locks.
The cause for further investigation was a negative factor and stating it in that manner (people like you) is a swipe at that person. You really need to pay more attention to what is being stated. I said that if that is what you are stating then fine just don't pretend otherwise. On the previous page I stated:
But, to go farther about this: "My saying that people like that are why I left the church would be accurate, even if the person may feel insulted. Sometimes the truth hurts." ...is that is not what was stated. Rather than "people like that" it was "people like Darkwing Duck" Posters are arguing that is not a swipe at Darkwing Duck. Nonsense.
Of course, if someone said, people like you are why I left Wicca, it would be a swipe at you regardless of whether or not they added afterward that it caused them to further investigate then leave. The cause for further investigation was a negative factor and stating it in that manner (people like you) is a swipe at that person.
Stuff More nonsense. Calling it a fact that the rain comparison is a good one for this case is nonsense.People are not rain. Behavior by someone leading to another not being Christian is a criticism of that behavior. Directing a statement at a particular poster and stating "people like you" are the reason is an insult to that person. There is no way around that.
Stuff Complete Nonsense. People are not objects and have choices in their actions. It was specifically referencing DD in a negative manner regarding the positions he holds and the way he acts. That is an insult. Trying to argue otherwise is complete nonsense. In fact, the very end of the above post continues to make the point. It is saying that umbral reaver was driven away from Christianity by people who claimed Christianity but acted otherwise. Saying those were people like DD is insulting DD. Not an insult is more nonsense.
Not true. His original post was in response to this: "Darkwing Duck, people like you are one of the reasons I'm no longer a Christian. " That is an insult directed at Darkwing Duck. And it would also apply to any who may hold to the same beliefs as DD. I've ignored the general bull in this thread but the above by umbral reaver was an explicit insult and saying otherwise (or that it is not those who may hold similar views) is nonsense. So, yes it was a insult at another poster, Darkwing Duck, and it naturally applies to any who may be in agreement with said poster within this thread or without. But, to go further, the post generalized about "bad Christians" in a manner that says "disagreeing with me" means that you should be looked down upon. That's what "people like you" means in that context. So, yes, there is every reason for such individuals to be insulted. If one wishes to say, "I am insulting those jack asses because they deserve it for their actions, then fine. But, don't pretend that one isn't being insulted or that they are just reading into things that aren't there and don't complain if others respond in a manner that eventually leads to the thread being closed.
That is why devastating strike, part of the vital strike combo, is so useful. It gives a static bonus that multiplies on crits.
I think something being left out is that this feat chain may also be used with other feats to make it more appealing. Power Attack and Furious Focus used with a two handed weapon makes a character front end loaded with respect to hitting with iterative attacks. An enormous increase in damage and without trading off to hit probability on the first hit. When facing a more challenging and often difficult to hit creature, especially one with significant DR the party is not prepared to counter, the extra damage on one hit from the chain is very nice. This is especially true since the chance of hitting with the iterative attacks could very well disappear.
Perhaps this was addressed and I missed it. The engineer archetype can take mastercraft training and advanced engineering training to be able to add special abilities to items using the magic items creation guidelines. Those rules have caster levels and spells required for items. The Modern rules do not give guidelines (craft skill ranks or character level or something else) for caster level or guidelines for how an engineer would get "access" to a necessary spell (i.e he doesn't have the technological equivalent of a "level spellcasting" chart or one of known technological "spells") How is that done?
Kind of out of the blue, but I like the idea of differing greatworks for the nonadventuring machinesmiths in the campaign world as a way to add some flavor. Something like the core being a power box that a machinesmith could tie various gadget tricks or upgrades to in the form of "drill press" or "lathe" and with a final upgrade (20th level) that would change it into something like a cnc machine. :P Cool for background, IMO, but not playable as the main part of a PC's ability.
If you're willing to use 3.5 material, Eberron had rules for creating an airship. Though, the process involved enslaving an elemental so it's more difficult and morally questionable than normal item creation. Plus, it requires a totally different item creation feat. I am (somewhat) familiar with eberron. I have skimmed the section in the setting book on materials (like soarwood) and a section on various creations of certain houses but don't remember specific rules for doing such. Would you happen to know specifically which book it is in? Page would help but I can find it, sooner or later, if given the book. With respect to the PFRPG version in UC, I don't expect there to necessarily be an enslaved elemental. I think the best way for PF to explain this would be as a discovery (for both alchemists and wizards) available from 13th or perhaps 15th level on. That would severely limit the number of individuals capable of learning it. Golarion only has a handful of characters of levels from 11 to 15 in any given region. Even fewer individuals of those handfuls would be alchemists and wizards. Still fewer would be levels 13 to 15. Then reduce the number to those out of that set who would not have their development hinge upon other discoveries and I think the numbers would be about right. To go a little farther...
Note: I have dreamed about going on military conquest with an alchemist...
The spell level x caster level x 2000 is modified by spell duration as explained in the note to the table for Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values. For levitate, duration in minutes per level, there is a multiplier of x2. That would give a cost of 480000 gp. Needless to say, I am hoping for a cost of 50000 (30000 or so to create) instead of 240000 or 480000. But, that does appear to be a reasonable method to create such a vessel. Thinking appears sound to me.
My brother (who lives here), my sister (who lives here), and I took my Mother, who is visiting in town, to the botanical gardens today. Not so much blooming this early, but it was pleasant and we took lots of pictures. Spoiler:
My Mother turned 80 this past October and with some "problems" that my sister she lives with in Kentucky had been noticing, we got her checked out. Officially diagnosed with Alzheimer's, but not real bad...yet. :( We took lots of pictures so that later she could see them to know what happened. My sister (in Kentucky) had bought her a calendar notebook so that we can keep track of what she does on each day and write it down so that she can look later and see. :( :( Of course, she is on medication but sometimes forgets it. My sister she lives with will fix and portion out several days of her medication and put it in containers but that my MOM will look at it, get confused, and change it. :( :( :( My brothers and I were fine when Dad died but have always said we would not know what to when Mom would finally be gone. We figured we would be lucky if it didn't break us. But, it is a clock that we are seeing tick away right now. :( Anyway, I am happy to be spending these couple weeks with her and am ecstatic that we got to watch UK win a national championship together on Monday night. Especially since I don't know if she will be mentally around next year much less the next time that UK is in the finals. But, every time I think about it I just want to destroy something or someone. SMDH SMDH SMDH (If you are reading, Freehold DM, please note that you are an exception to the following...) There are a couple threads in OTD right now where many of the posters on both sides leave me wishing to put bullets in their heads. That is why I am refraining from posting. Getting a suspension is something I wouldn't care about, but I think I would make statements that would get me in trouble with the law. SMDH SMDH SMDH Its only going to get worse (my Mother's condition, not the OTD. I don't give a da-mn about dumb as-ses arguing in this subforum). For now, I will be happy that she is still mostly here and that I get to spend some time with her. Sorry for ranting.
But, airships have a magical engine...
Although it doesn't have rules on crafting mechanics, any idea on the possibility it will have the requirements for crafting items using the rules from the CRB like with magic items listed in the CRB and other books? I ask this in hopes of looking for the requirements for making an airship or an alchemical dragon. Am I correct in expecting that magic items listed (cloaks, swords, etc.) will have information such as caster level and prereq spells for creation?
Perhaps my op has led to some confusion... When looking for "rules for creating these anywhere?" I was referring to airships and alchemical dragons (the title which proceeded the question) rather than the these (being flying cities) that followed the question. :) With respect to the above, although it could theoretically work to create a city, I don't see it as within the reach of PCs. 1. My goal is to figure how the rules would apply to creating airships. So, using airships as a platform to support a city doesn't help me much. 2. Interesting idea. Basically, it would involve having a demiplane with a portal connecting it to the material plane that was mobile and moving through the air. Making enough demiplanes permanent to make a city would become costly (22500 gp per permanency) if one would have more than 10 feet of up down space. Interesting nonetheless and doable is using the immortal oracle mystery in SGG's The Godling Ascendant. 3. Wall of force: one 10 foot square/level. Twenty ten foot squares at 20th level, to minimize the required number of castings. Or, 2000 sq feet. A "city" one mile on a side isn't much of a city. Rounding, 5000 ft * 5000 ft would give 25000000 sq ft. That is 12500 castings of wall of force and 12500 castings of permanency upon each wall of force at a cost of 12500 per casting for a total of 156,250,000 gp. :O If each side were limited to 1/4 mile that would make the cost 1/16 or 9,765,625 gp. Still way out of reach of non epic PCs without even making the thing fly. Perhaps I am misunderstanding how the idea is to be put together and far fewer spells would be required. *shrug*
For a floating city I would use reverse gravity because that spell does not care about weight just area. (also if you had something real heavy in the in the reversed gravity it might hold everything else up). Based upon the parameters given, Reverse gravity affects one 10' cube per level. Or, twenty 10 foot cubes at 20th level. That would put one 10' cube 200 feet off the ground at best. The object reaches the top of the area in the first round.
So, a 10' cube of lead would weigh a lot and support a lot of weight to a maximum of 200'. That would cost 728000 gp (magic item cost, continuous spell effect: spell level 7 x caster level 13 x 2000 x 4 for being a spell whose duration is measured in rounds) which is well beyond what most adventurers can come up with and is barely within the wealth value for a 20th level character. Multiplying through to make a city would be astronomical. Plus, I don't see that it would give control to fly around such as the Shory (correct civilization?) had.
The above leaves out an important phrase later in the description of the power:
Are there any rules for creating these anywhere? Creating something like one of Golarion's flying cities (now fallen...) seems epic and out of league for the PFRPG. But, at a cost of 50000gp for the airship, it seems within the realm of higher level characters and the power doesn't seem to be out of bounds as, by upper levels, teleport is available and flight is pretty common. So, I'm looking for some guidelines, preferably (but not exclusively) from the rules themselves...
*** The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.*** Untyped bonuses stack. I don't think both being a bonus from differing aspects of a bloodline was what was meant by "the same source", but I could be wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
