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

Umbranus's page

3,188 posts (3,376 including aliases). 3 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 4 aliases.


1 to 50 of 3,188 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Lakesidefantasy wrote:
I just found it ironic to call it "happy gaming" right after we made it harder to game by not participating.

Is it really a problem finding enough players where you are from? Here it is more often to find enough GMs for the number of players. Or to keep your games from becoming too big. In one game we're now 6 players and that's after one quit, for example.

But I'm derailing the thread...

Blackstorm wrote:

Just to point it out:


6thlvl-----------combat trick, deadly aim

8thlvl-----------combat trick, Quick draw
He cannot select a rogue talent more than once, unless otherwise specified. This and the splash sneak attack makes his build illegal. Oh, and if he cast darkness, he cannot see throught.

Swashbuckler may take combat trick twice.

If you want more healing potential you could look at the life necromancy wizard school. If you have that you can heal anyone targeted by one of your spells or included in the AOE.
If you buff yourself or your party you heal yourself. If you blast someone hurt by positive energy you deal additional damage. If you accidentally hit an ally, you at least heal them a bit.
But it would mean another dip.

Option 1 or 3

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
It's not really rude, just sort of childish. I get that some people prefer one or the other, but ditching a whole game because of it?

I often roll bad when rolling for stats. Having bad stats and not being able to contribute in a meaningful way is not fun for me. Would it be less childish to play along but constantly whine about my stats, ruining other player's and the GM's fun?

Or trying to get killed so I can try again?

I think not playing at all is the most grown up way to handle this.
Friends ask me to join a game because we are friends, if I don't like something about this game a politely decline, we remain friends and they ask someone else in my stead.
It's not like there are too few roleplayers to get a game going if one doesn't want to play.

Lakesidefantasy wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

Sure there can be rude ways to do this. But imagine the following and tell me if it is rude and what about it is.

GM: I'm going to make a game of pathfinder, care to join in?
Me: Pathfinder sounds nice, how are you going to generate stats?
GM: We will be rolling them standard.
Me: Hmm.. you're sat on this? I really don't like rolling. Couldn't you just give us stat arrays? Like you roll some stats and we use them, allocating them as we see fit? Or perhaps point buy?
GM: No, I'm really set on having them rolled individually.
Me: Sorry, but then I'll have to pass. Happy gaming to you. *sadface*

Happy gaming?

It's easy to vilify the Dungeon Master, but what if the other players want to use the Standard method for rolling stats too? And, they really need you to play or else nobody can play. Should they all just acquiesce and play your way?

I guess so, if they want to play at all.

If you have a problem with the wording: I'm not a native speaker in English, nor are the people I game with. I just guessed that happy gaming comes close to what I'd tell them. What I meant was to sincerely wish them fun with their game even if I do not take part in it.

Not sarcastic or snidely in any way.

I have not done that yet (pass a game because of rolling stats. We always use point buy now) but I did for other reasons. And I tried to do it in a way that left me the option to join again for another game.

I'd still like to know if uncontrolled rage triggers on downing someone with non-lethal damage.

MechE_ wrote:

What my group has done for 4 full APs is utilize a standard array created by each player rolling one stat - usually 4d6, drop the lowest. For two of those 4 APs(the two I ran), we ended up with 15, 14, 14, 13, 12, 10.

Going forward, I think I'll be asking my players to use 15, 14, 14, 13, 12, 10 as a standard array. I have found that it encourages players to experiment a bit more (often with MAD characters) rather than falling into cookie cutter (forum) builds. It's 22 points that feels more like 15 in terms of combat power, but plays more like 25 points in terms of role-play versatility.

I'd have no problem with that.

I think it depends on whether you want to take the Defender of the Society (Fighter, Society) trait. It gives +1 while wearing medium or heavy armor.

Slaunyeh wrote:

As much as I hate rolling stats and think it should die in a fire, having played Dark Heresy for a while, it's kinda growing on me. :p

While point buy is both more fair and allow you to build the character you actually want to play, I'm finding myself coming around to the point where I actually enjoy the random nature of rolled stats and having to come up with a character concept that fit those, rather than the other way around.

I played Dark Heresy both ways. And I think I'd rather roll randomly so see which class I get to play and then use point buy to make it happen than the other way round.

And I would not mind using a system in which every one got the same amount of stat points but where you get to roll how many you put into each stat.

I think my aversion to randomely deciding the amount of anything a pc gets is so big because:

a little anecdote:

I once was in a game where we played ravenloft using the 3.0 rules. I knew the gm for some time but had never played under him so far. And I guessed it would be a game heavy on role-playing. So my flat-mate and I decided to build flavorful characters. We ended up playing two guys from a barbarian tribe both starting out as barbarians even if she wanted to play a sorceress and I a bard. I rolled not good but not too bad either.
During the game we noticed that the game was most about roll-playing not roleplaying and every level we gained I rolled bad for hp. About half the rolls were 1s with all being below the average (no d12 higher than 5 no d6 higher than 3).
As my pc got worse and worse at being in the front line and taking the hits I focussed on being a bard. When at around level 6 or so a singer competition came up I was happy and roleplayed how I prepared for it. I practised, I bought special drinks to soothe my throat and so on.
Then the "big day" came up, I had my first match. Taking 10 was disallowed, I rolled a 2 and the contest was over. Non of the NPCs rolled, it was assumed that they were better.

After that I didn't want to play that pc any more. I asked to be allowed to reroll which was declined. I tried to get him killed by returning to the front line reasoning "If I suck at being a bard I have to be a fighting man" ingame. The GM didn't let me die, giving me autostabilize and more or less infinite negative hp. So I had the choice of:
1) quitting the game and having them still ply at my place because of my flat-mate
2) offending my flat-mate by asking them to play somewhere else
3) continue playing a PC I had learned to hate.
That taught me that no game is better than a bad game and I made some decisions. One being not to play in a D20 game with rolled stats or hp any more.

Lakesidefantasy wrote:
It is a matter of personal preference, and of course no one way is the right way. The goal is to just have fun, but some gamers apparently find certain methods so abhorrent and un-fun that they will walk away from a table using them. Depending on the circumstances, this can be a bit rude and insulting. It's hard getting enough people together to play this game, and people walking away just makes it harder.

Sure there can be rude ways to do this. But imagine the following and tell me if it is rude and what about it is.

GM: I'm going to make a game of pathfinder, care to join in?
Me: Pathfinder sounds nice, how are you going to generate stats?
GM: We will be rolling them standard.
Me: Hmm.. you're sat on this? I really don't like rolling. Couldn't you just give us stat arrays? Like you roll some stats and we use them, allocating them as we see fit? Or perhaps point buy?
GM: No, I'm really set on having them rolled individually.
Me: Sorry, but then I'll have to pass. Happy gaming to you. *sadface*


I think most Pathfinder gamers use the Standard method simply because it is called the Standard method in the Core Rulebook. However, the Purchase or Point-Buy method seems to have increased in use. I think this may partially come from the influence of 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons, because , if I recall correctly, it adopted the Purchase method as the standard. (I may be wrong about this, it has been years since I last played 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons).

I never played 4th edition. And I think it is the other way round. Because an increasing number of players prefers to use point buy some rpgs now use it.

I often times get bored with only taking levels in one class and start looking for MC options to get in some fresh wind.
And for some builds I already start with MCing in mind.

Fan fighter:
A fighting fan user I built (but never played for lack of gaming group) where I was looking for possibilities to get more static bonuses to damage to offset having a low damage die and low strength. I ended up combining the archaeologist bard with the brawler fighter into a fan fighting high diplomacy guy. His flavour was that of a L5R/Rokugan style crane diplomat who could more than hold his own in a fight.

As I understood the spell it only replaces the spent ammo all at the same time. That would mean that you need to have enough adamantine arrows to last at least one round of shooting. If you only have one you can only shoot one per round.

Dwarf favoured class bonus wrote:
Reduce the non-proficient penalty for one weapon by 1. When the non-proficient penalty for a weapon becomes 0 because of this ability, the oracle is treated as having the appropriate Martial or Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat with that weapon.

If you want to have it faster combine with the trait that reduces non-prof penalty by 2. Heirloom weapon has the drawback that it only works with this, non-masterwork, weapon.

Tequila Sunrise wrote:

Everyone who uses point buy is by default a whiner. (...)
You can't handle the dice!

Insults are always helpful in a discussion.

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Re: Methodology, I personally allow player's choice: each player can roll stats, or use an equivalent point-buy, or use a set array, at their option.

Do you mean all players agree on one version or each player can use whatever he likes best? Because mixing sounds strange.

@Whining: I can only talk for my self but I would try to get every game to either use point buy or a set array and if that doesn't work leave without hard feelings. No whining from my side, I just don't play d20 games with rolled stats.

There is charging hurler, rhino charge, horde charge

For the extra dimensional containers: Introduce a new version that costs 5-10% more, requires air bubble in addition to what spell(s) they need to create them and have them have a permanent air bubble inside that doesn't get out and keeps everything dry.
Or just handwave it.

Nekrah wrote:
Ahm, it seems that some of you have misunderstood the point of my post - I didn't ask what characters folks are playing, the question was: would goblin gunsliner be acceptable in this campaign? And if anyone has any tips of playing int-based character who is not battlefield controller wizard.

I don't see a problem with a goblin gunslinger. And such a pc would even fit in with the martial campaign trait. The one that disallows you to play a hero but forces you to be a tainted guy no-one would want to have around with demons involved.

As to int based: There could be a lot of int based PCs working out. Thanks to one PrC (I think student of war) that gives int to AC instead of dex even int based (int + strength actually) would work. Or Magus or alchemist.

Slamy Mcbiteo wrote:
An Adventure Path where Small characters do not get screwed?


In our kingmaker game it was a running joke that one had wanted to play a small race and didn't because he thought he'd never get loot. And then we kept selling lots of small sized weapons and some pieces of armor. We sadly didn't finish this AP so I can't tell if it stays that way 'till the end.

Kingmaker spoiler:
In the beginning there are mites and kobolds, some of which you can get loot from. Later there is a quickling with a magical dagger good enough that our medium sized rogue used it (the GM allowed it despite it becoming smaller than light = unusable). Somewhere I don't remember we found some small silver weapons and a small flaming crossbow. And around level 8 we fought some creatures that started small but got large during the fight. They reverted to small when dead and their leader hat magic loot including a mithral armor. All told there was a lot of small loot and the only small pc was a summoner.

blahpers wrote:

That would be amazing if it worked.

A gunslinger can get an inferior version of this using those cartridges that entangle foes.

Same with arrows.

You could allow him to create tanglefoot shuriken that work like tanglefoot arrows and let him use those with abundant ammo.

Edit: Or, as an alchemist should have throw anything you could just allow him to throw tanglefoot arrows.

A chirurgeon alchemist with spontaneous healing would fit your description well. You can give your healing extracts to others, heal your self via spont healing and you can deal area damage via bombs.

And I hope that the bloodlines will be better balanced against each others. In the playtest there were only few I could see myself playing. And some for special circumstances.

If I was to take part in such a duel I might take chances that my opponent relies on color spray and start the duel with closed eyes, delaying my action to be first on the second turn.
For my own action I could see me using the wood wizard's school power (a spear with hurled with int to hit and damage, dealing bleed in addition to initial damage) or, as others suggested, hand of the apprentice.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:
I was wondering if anyone had any insight as to why the class is so universally reviled.

I played alongside a master summoner for some time and it was annoying to have one player get so many actions each turn vs your single one. And some fihghts got trivialized by being swarmed with summons.

There is the elaborate trapper trait. But that's only for kobolds.

Thanks for the input.
The AomF will not be possible for a starting pc and the standard monk will not start working during the first levels. And those are the ones we will be focussing on.

A friend of mine asked me how to build an unarmed fighting guy dealing elemental damage with his hands.

What I found/remembered so far is the following:

- Suli with elemental assault
- Barbarian with the elemental power chain
- monk of the four winds with a dip into unarmed fighter for early efreet style
- Oracle of flame with revelation strike

Right now I think for a level 1 pc I think human oracle of flame is the best way because he already gets everything he needs and can use this power several times per day, unlike the suli or the monk.

First I thought about combining some of the options but barbarian takes rather long to get going, longer if multiclassed. The suli power and revelation strike are both swift actions and by that mutual exclusive (ok, from level 3 on you could start elemental assault and after that add revelation strike). But what about starting with monk of the four winds, then dip oracle of flame, go on with monk. You would not get revelation strike until third level but then you'd have both.

Any advice? Did I forgot any way to do this? This will be for a new game and we do not know how far we ever get (which level) so builds that do not come together until the mid levels are not what I'm looking for.

wraithstrike wrote:
Xavier319 wrote:
The title says it all. If i have a small earth elemental as a familiar, can it do stuff like wear armor, use wands, carry equipment? It is the only familiar with a truly solid body, and they CAN hold a rigid and normal form. they can speak and manipulate objects. Is there any ruling anywhere that says if they or cannot use equipment like this?
I am going to FAQ this just so it might get an official answer one day.

Me too. But don't get your hopes high. The question has been asked many times. Would be good to know for the stone lords, too.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

If we start this we could go back to leveling only in cities with trainers and when no trainer is to be found you can't level up. That's too much hassle for me and just burdens down the game.

I would suggest mad dog barbarian. That way after level 5 your goat can rage when you do (there is a rage power for that). Add in some teamwork feats and even a goat can become scary.

Edit: I didn't notice that the goat is not on the list of animal companions. But unless it is for PFS I could see either the Antelope or the Ram animal companions refluffed as goat.

I felt that at least the cold weather rules are way off. With those rules I would not have survived my childhood.

David Bowles wrote:
Forrestfire wrote:
Yes, druids are considered to be one of the best classes in the game, in the realm of "overpowered" along with all the other full casters.
Other full casters do run out of steam eventually, whereas the companions has endless melee attacks.

Other full casters can get an AC as a class feature, too. They need a feat to raise it to full but they get it.

Yes, druids are strong but not that much, if at all, stronger than the other full casters.

You could take the coherent rage trait and choose handle animal. Problem fixed.

Coherent Rage:

Your determination allows you to hold onto a shred of your rational mind at all times.

Benefit: Select one of the following skills: Bluff, Escape Artist, Handle Animal, or Stealth.

You may use this skill normally while raging.

As I read it the burst is not 5ft radius but 5ft meaning one square. And in that square it deals 1d3 piercing damage.

EvilPaladin wrote:
If a Paladin Casts a Touch-Range Spell and then uses Lay on Hands, does he hold the charge or discharge the spell on himself?

If the paladin touches anyone or anything the spell discharges. The paladin laying hands on himself (this is not better than saying touches himself I guess) to use LoH would discharge the spell. Except if the reason for LoH being a swift action on self would be because he need not actually touch. But I don't think that is the case.

Odraude wrote:
Angels are immune to petrification. Idk, I kinda like the idea of a mobster fallen angel...

Not only angels. Many of the other celestial guys are. What I found are: Agathion, Azata, Angels, Archons and Kami.

A Kami with its ward destroyed could well become malicious and begin to plot for the downfall of the guilty one. That is someone with great political influence this might lead to the kami becoming a mobster.

Democratus wrote:

Did an exhaustive search and was unable to find this addressed.

RAW wrote:
It’s practically impossible to catch yourself on a wall while falling. Make a Climb check (DC = wall’s DC + 20) to do so. It’s much easier to catch yourself on a slope (DC = slope’s DC + 10).

If a Create Pit spell is cast and creatures over the pit fail their save, can they then use the Climb skill (DC 45) to catch themselves?

So if I cast the spell and a creature adjacent (described as a slope in the spell) fails his Reflex save - does it then get to make a DC 35 Climb check to avoid falling into the pit?

The spell description simply says that a failed save results in a fall. But the skill seems to allow yet another attempt to avoid taking damage.

Just want to make sure we have a consistent and RAW-compliant solution.

The way I see it you could try it for the wall but not for the slope. My reason would be that the slope has no climb DC given (or has it?). By doing that the victim could prevent taking falling damage and reduce the way it has to climb to get out of the pit.

I often notice it if some GM uses rules different to how they are written.
My usual reaction is to ask them whether they changed it deliberately or by mistake. If they say it was by choice I nod and continue the game. If they say it was a mistake we (the group) decide if we ret-con the wrong use or let it slip and use the right rule next time. If the GM doesn't believe he went against the rules I again nod and continue the game but show him the rule at another time. No help disrupting the game, unless a pc's life depends on it or something.

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Exactly! That rule, as you say, allows you to use a non-weapon as a weapon. That object is not a weapon, but this rule allows you to use as a weapon anyway.

Sure and because I use the improvised weapon as a weapon I can use it to threaten as with a weapon.

I know that. But it doesn't contradict my posting because they way it was published it doesn't allow it and no other paizo material does.
Whether that it because of an oversight or intentional doesn't matter to me. Fact remains that no paizo PF material allows oversized two-handed weapons.

Moospuh wrote:
no. it means you can wield a Large sized 2 handed weapon with both hands without penalty. if you want to go with something like that, wield a large sized longsword (which deals the same damage as a medium sized great sword) in one hand without penalty.

Nothing in the official paizo pathfinder stuff allows you to wield two-handed oversized weapons.

As BBT stated, having no penalties doesn't mean that you can wield stuff larger than normal.

You should have a backup plan for cases in which you come across enemies immune to evil eye/slumber. Examples are plants, vermin and undead. One reason I liked having some buff spells.
While playing my witch we happened upon an old crypt full of large zombies (most of them fast), some other undead and a demi-lich. Despite having no chance to memorize for this crypt there was not one fight in which I felt useless.
Not to say that the witch spell-list without patron spells has nothing to offer vs undead.

Akinra wrote:

Ideally, I am looking for hints on:

Patron choice: I have this down to 4.

Shadow - provides some level of stop-gap in the caster world via Shadow Conjuration and Shadow Evocation.

Time - Haste and Teleport. What more can I say?

Insanity - thematic more than useful, though Hideous Laughter is fun.

Healing - just good 'ole status removal.

Familiar Choice:

Mini-Dino of Doom - nice, but then later I will lose the Init, and feel sad.

green sting - much like mini-dino, but it is so much easier to hide.

Thrush - can talk, so they make good scouts. Not sure how I feel about a scout spell book though). Oh, +3 Diplomacy is good though!

Shadow: Sure nice, can't say much about it.

Time: Are you the only arcane caster? If that's the case haste is good. But teleport should already be on the witch list.
Insanity: As you say.
Healing: Do not burden yourself too much with stuff like that or you will always have to use your spell for this sort of things.

I played a witch with the ancestors patron and I liked it. You get some nice buffs in addition to your debuffs and blessing of fervor is better for you, as a caster, than haste. And it is still good for the melees.

I guess it is some copy paste error.

ABCoLD wrote:
The simplest answer seems to be that instead of saying 4th level they meant to say 7th

That'S what I'd go with.

As I understood Erastil and his focus on family would demand either celibacy or marriage. In other words he most likely has a "No s*x until marriage" point of view. But apart from that I don't see that.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

Which Golarion nationality would be the best fitting for Azeem from prince of thieves movie?

I thought either Keleshite or Garundi but I'm open to other suggestions, too.
Garundi And what you're looking for is ethnicity, not nationality (which could be any one of a number of nations, though Qadira is most obvious).

You are right, my fault.

Which Golarion nationality would be the best fitting for Azeem from prince of thieves movie?
I thought either Keleshite or Garundi but I'm open to other suggestions, too.

Torbyne wrote:

I don't think "acid splash" is in the same category as as a splash attack, otherwise a dip into alchemist can be obscene for a cantrip. While I recognize the difference in schools I think it is safer to lump it in with "rays and ray-like effects"

It really is neither. It is not a splash attack but it isn't a ray either. Rays are special in that they count as weapons and thus benefit from bonuses to damage like from inspire courage, something not true about acid splash which only get the bonus to hit.

Slacker2010 wrote:

The more I think about it, this can be a better way (and CHEEZEY) around Rage cycling.

Assuming you only ever enter rage for one round. You would have the normal benefits and can use your powers.

Your two off rounds would still be at +2 STR, +4 CON, +2 Will save, -1 AC

This is a trade off of +1 hit/dmg for the 1 AC.

I still feel like its completely against the spirit of the trait.

When you do this with the scarred rager you would only be fatigued for one turn but still retain your bonuses for two rounds.

1 to 50 of 3,188 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.