Red Dragon

Ventnor's page

5,753 posts (6,588 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 9 aliases.


1 to 50 of 5,753 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

An idea for a sport that I had is Mageball, where the whole idea is that the only way to move the ball around and score points is via the use of magic spells or supernatural abilities.

Including, of course, mind-reading to figure out what strategies the other team is going to use.

For a Blaster Druid, I’d recommend looking at the Lightning apocryphal subdomain. It’s very much about piling on damage, even endangering your character to do so.

I’d recommend looking at the leshykineticist archetype from Ultimate Wilderness. It sounds very much like it would support the character concept you’re going for.

My idea for an off-the-wall character. A fighter who dumps intelligence, who has mediocre strength and dexterity, and a boatload of charisma. They’ll pick up Desna’s Shooting Star at level 1 and several free skill ranks by using advanced armor training and advanced weapon training.

So you’ve got this super-nice kinda scrawny-looking person who at the drop of the hat can become super-terrifying and whose skill with a starknife is inexplicable.

Ranger is one of the elfiest classes there is, and one that's pretty good if you are intent of dual-wielding.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could try talking to your player out of the game and tell him about the issues that you're having with his character (albeit in a non-accusatory way). Then ask that player if there's a way you can work with him to tone that character down a little while still keeping them true to the player's vision.

Most people are reasonable folks who want the everyone to have fun, I find.

The King In Yellow wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

To be fair, I'm also generally opposed to things that allow you to hit really hard with mundane weapons despite being a noodly armed weakling with a 7 strength.

So Desna's Shooting Star doesn't sit well with me the same way that Slashing Grace doesn't. I strongly prefer effects that add scaling static boosts to damage if you use non-STR to hit and STR to deal damage (e.g. Trained Grace, Lethal Grace, Shifter's Edge, etc.) All of your iconic wiry athletic swordspeople from fiction are in that STR 12-14 range anyway.

Dex to damage at least makes actual realistic sense, though. In our complete abstraction of HPs, dex to damage represents being able to more finely target weaker spots, thinner armor areas, etc.

CHA to damage, this case of this feat, makes sense if you conceptualize it as weaponizing Desna's portfolio over luck. Basically, since you worship the Goddess of Luck and are venerating her extra hard by focusing on using her kinda-subpar holy weapon, she's rewarding you by allowing those "1-in-a-million" chances to hurt an enemy who should by all rights be more skilled than you tilt more and more in your favor.

Use a different spell to fight that enemy mage. If one spell isn't working, try another. That's basically the most powerful thing about spellcasters.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
gran rey de los mono wrote:
Can you give them a scroll that says "Hastur" over and over again, just to see if they read it out loud? Or maybe "Candlejack"?

Why? Why would you want them to say Candle Jack? What would that accom

SheepishEidolon wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
On the bright side, if we take that feat we were going to spend on Weapon Finesse and spend it on Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword, we're now doing 1d10+3 (average damage ~9) in weapon damage versus 1d6+0 (average damage ~4), with no reduction in magic damage from Spell Combat/Spellstrike.
Exotic Weapon Proficiency needs BAB 1 - meaning a magus can't pick it up on level 1. But you could use a two-handed martial weapon at the beginning, either reach or not. Especially after you used up the few level 1 spells you have per day...

Humans can get proficiency with 2 weapons of their choice with the Military Tradition alternate racial trait. So, it is possible for human magi to use bastard swords from the start of their career.

KahnyaGnorc’s elaborate revenge scheme against me involves cooking me zebra steaks and quesadillas.

Goofus broke into each of his player’s homes and wrote “chaotic evil” in the alignment section of their character sheets. When asked why, he explained that good characters would have complimented his GMPC more.

Gallant knows that one of his player’s has arachnophobia and checks if it’s okay with them before including giant spiders as enemies in his encounters.

They taste like dirt and day old Frappuccinos.

The next poster has been using my elbows to enact their master plan.

What is acting?

GoatToucher eats fire and craps fire, because his digestive system isn’t equipped to digest flames.

It looks like this is a “ask your GM” thing, since Arcane bonds have to be from a very specific group of objects.

I’d definitely allow it if I were your GM, for what it’s worth. That sounds like a cool idea.

Lot likes a wet fart
Jonah punched the whale’s liver
Untold Bible tales

Gray Warden wrote:
Deadeye Bowman applies ONLY to Longbows, not to BOTH Long- and Shortbows. Am I missing something?

Any effect that applies to longbows or short bows applies to hornbows.

Since the effect Deadeye Bowman applies to longbows, it also applies to hornbows.

GeraintElberion wrote:
Magus? What’s Link’s spell-list?

Off the top of my head: sword beams, fireballs, teleportation, shielding magic, thunderbolts, and that one spell that lets him turn into a fairy.

Haunt Collector whose occultist implements are all masks containing the souls of the dead? Yeah, that’s actually pretty darn cool.

The vibe I got from the Zelda games is that the Hylians were a distinct human ethnicity, like Azlanti or Chelaxians in Pathfinder, rather than being a separate race.

Also, Ranger/Slayer are better at Sword and Shield combat than Fighters are because they qualify for the Shield Mastery feat at level 6 with their fighting style class feature. Fighters can't use that feat until level 11.

Maybe, but those gadgets are intrinsic to the class. You don't need to ask your GM to make a fire rod drop, or whatever.

Of course, another good pick would be a Ranger with a Horse companion. The chain of feats that get you an animal companion might be a good pick in general.

A Slayer might be good too (Studied Target is a good way to represent "Z-targeting" from the 3D Zelda games).

Actually, thinking on it, a Chosen One Paladin might also be a really good fit. You've got the swordsmanship, the familiar which is knowledgable about the ways of the world, as well as the flavor of being marked by your deity with a special destiny. Add a Sacred Birthmark trait on the left hand too.

I guess what I'm saying is that there are as many ways of building Link as there are Links. And there are a lot of Links.

Space Peacock Spirit is one of the more popular ones, I would think.

I’d actually build Link as a psycometrist Avenger Vigilante. While the dual identities bit is kind of off-flavor, that archetype is all about using items to create magical effects which sounds very much like Link. You also have full BAB and a lot of skill points, which I think helps the concept.

Peet wrote:
CactusUnicorn wrote:
Jokey the Unfunny Comedian wrote:
One hex is approximately 12 gloothurbs across. That's roughly 15.4 xsalnks, if you're familiar with Shirren units of measurement.
For all the Ythrikilil out there. This converts to 763.956 Xenkilats
Which is exactly 4 Florbs. This makes for an easy conversion. Which is why you should use Florbs as your base measurement, even though the race that invented Florbs died out more than two centuries ago. Sadly, finding a mechanic who can calibrate your sensors to measure in Florbs is... difficult to say the least.

Unfortunately, the only mechanic in the Pact Worlds who can perform a Florb calibration is an elf who learned how during the Gap. He knows how to do the conversion, but has no idea how he learned it and doesn't know how to teach anyone else.

Maybe the dwarven prince asks the PCs to help him transport the bodies of the dwarven strike force members who died in the confrontation with the dragon to their ancestral tombs, saying that it would be an honor for those who fought alongside them to see them interred with the other deceased members of their clans.

Said tombs, of course, require an adventure to get to. And of course, if anything were wrong with said ancestral tombs, that might point to something being wrong with the kingdom itself.

A few different Bloodrager bloodlines involve shapeshifting. I’d recommend giving those a look.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Cleric: I believe in something

Oracle: Something believes in you

"Don't believe in yourself! Believe in me! Believe in the Cayden who believes in you!"

Charm Person and Dominate Person are essentially magically forcing people to take roofies.

I think my favorite scene of the movie was one involving Rey and Kylo Ren.

Because of the way that the movie built up Rey and Ben’s relationship over the movie, Ben’s offer to have Rey join him felt like it had actual emotional weight. Luke’s rejection of joining Darth Vader and Sheevy P in the original trilogy felt like a no-brained. Of course he's not going to join the obviously evil villains.

But I found myself believing that Rey had genuinely come to empathize with Ben, and even see him as a friend. That lent that scene an emotional weight to it that Luke saying no to the Emperor lacked (IMO, of course).

König Drosselbart wrote:
Ventnor wrote:

Or you could just be a scumbag and pay the pope or go off and murder a few folks who believed in a different religion and you were considered honorable again.

Well, I am sorry that I have to say it this directly, but I am afraid that you won't get it any other way: That sentence sufficiently proves that you are absolutely ignorant about history, have no desire to learn about history and refuse to acknowledge how warped your view of history is. In other words: A strong opinion, but no clue whatsoever.

Let me give you a friendly hint: History is a lot more complex, nuanced and grey than you can apparently even begin to fathom.

Since trying to illuminate the topic at hand with a historical anecdote went this poorly, we should probably stay in the fictional world of Golarion in this thread.

At the end of the day, honor is a bunch of pretty words used to justify a few ruling over many.

All you have to do is look at the many wars, betrayals, massacres, and outright corruption of Europe’s medieval period to see how high regard those who supposedly lived by a company debit honor had for it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

I'd be interested in finding out how to make a Wolf Shifter be good. I don't pick a class and then find the best race or items to max it out, I take a character concept and then make a character.

I read endless threads in advice mentioning items I never see and races I'd never use. I'd be looking to play an Elf or Human Shifter (Wolf Aspect). At 1st level it seems...lacklustre. In fact it looks lacklustre for a bunch of levels and then looks worse. It seems there's a feat (Shifter's Edge) I need - (why isn't that a class feature?) or am I missing something.

Any advice on other feats to make this class at least...hold it's own?... be somewhat enjoyable??? Dunno really. I don't mind being outshined, or not the DPR champ - I just want something I can wrap a wild/feral savage concept around. I want to like the Shifter, but I can't. Maybe a Guide will help.

(And no, I don't want to play Kobold Press' Shapeshifter or Legendary Games Legendary Shifter - which adds another bite attack, but is still prescriptive for "shapes"/animals without claws or a bite.

I feel like a Mooncursed Barbarian would fit your character concept pretty well, actually.

König Drosselbart wrote:
Ventnor wrote:

Honor was a set of rules used to oppress anyone who wasn't noble, especially peasants and women. And actions that need to be taken to "restore honor" tended to be extreme, to say the least; suicide or a deathmatch on the "field of honor" or just straight up killing a person...

No, it wasn't.

The romanticized image of the knight in shining armour certainly is a product of poetry and often doesn't correspond with historical reality, but thinking that every noble was an oppressive scumbag and the chivalric code was geared towards oppressing women and peasants is even more wrong. As wrong as you can be, in fact.

The chivalric code was not actually set in stone, it was not a codex like a law, it was a somewhat "floating" concept, comparable to how the meaning of "gentlemanly conduct" is not set in stone.

But it did consist of virtues that a knight was encouraged to obtain. Those virtues usually included:
Humility / Modesty
Courtly / Polite Conduct
Self-Restraint / Discipline
Clemency / Generosity
Courtly Love

Thus, it was actually meant as a guideline for a knight to become a better person and in extension a better ruler, if he happened to possess some territorial power.

And your part about "restoring honour" is complete nonsense. There was no ritual suicide or ritual killing amongst knights to "restore honour" - medieval Europe wasn't Japan.
There were no set rules how to "lose honour" and how to "regain honour". If a knight violated laws, or betrayed his liege lord, he was punished by him and if he sinned, it was up to the knight to go to confession or not and up to the priest to set a penance.

Or you could just be a scumbag and pay the pope or go off and murder a few folks who believed in a different religion and you were considered honorable again.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I’d recommend looking at Iomedae’s divine fighting style if you want to make a buffing Fighter.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Moonclanger wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Why do people argue that wizards need to have “perfect” spells to succeed, and ignore the existence of “good enough” spells?

Perhaps because we are talking about the wizard and not the sorcerer. It's what separates the two. The sorcerer will always have "good enough" spells, but with forewarning the wizard can have the "perfect" spells.

But if a wizard doesn’t have enough forewarning, instead of preparing perfect spells for a situation he’s not sure will arise a wizard can prepare spells that are good enough for a lot of different situations.

No one ever seems to realize that in these debates.

I have the beginnings of a campaign setting in my mind where there is no Arcane Magic, just divine and psychic magic.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why do people argue that wizards need to have “perfect” spells to succeed, and ignore the existence of “good enough” spells?

21 people marked this as a favorite.

There’s this proverb I’ve heard used on these boards before. It goes like this:

“A failed Reflex save hurts you.
A failed Fortitude save kills you.
A failed Will save kills your party.”

Matthew Downie wrote:
König Drosselbart wrote:

Using poison takes the same line: Attacking someone with something that he has no chance at defending himself, instead of besting him due to superior skill. On top of that, said someone will likely die an agonizing death, eliminating the possibility of letting him live. (And don't claim that Fortitude-saves count as 'defending'.)

Thus, using poison willingly and knowingly is without doubt a dishonourable act.

That may describe some real-world poisons, but how many poisons in Pathfinder cause agonizing death?

You can defend yourself against poisoned weapons by not getting hit, or by killing the enemy first, just as you can when someone's trying to stab you. (And there are many other ways; antitoxins, magic, etc.)

That is, if we assume the poison is on your weapon. By one technical definition, poison is something you eat/drink, and venom is something that gets in your blood. I think most people would agree it was dishonourable to offer someone poisoned food.

What's really dishonourable is going against an agreed set of rules. If we decide that fighting with arrows is unfair, then is becomes dishonourable for us to use archery on one another. If we use the rule for long enough, we'll start to think anyone with a bow is a barbarian.

Then again, most historical codes of honour were very much in the interests of the ruling class. "It's not honourable for peasants to use crossbows, which can penetrate my armour. Swords, which my armour is highly effective against, are honourable. It's not honourable to use ambushes against knights like me, but it's fine to use them against any other enemies."

That's one of my main problems with Paladins, to be honest.

Honor was a set of rules used to oppress anyone who wasn't noble, especially peasants and women. And actions that need to be taken to "restore honor" tended to be extreme, to say the least; suicide or a deathmatch on the "field of honor" or just straight up killing a person because they didn't want to marry someone.

Why is honor presented as an inherently good thing, when so much evil came of it?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

14.) A golem made out of gold coins. (In Dragon's lair, horde takes YOU!)

15.) A couple of bound devils to whom the Dragon has sold its soul for more power. (Twist: the contract is written in such a way that a dragon doesn't have to give up its soul at all, and the devils are there to try and find a loophole in the deal that is more prominent than the loophole that the dragon is using.)

Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Well, which of the two deities do you like more?

I'm conflicted both have their good points. Irori fits more as he is the patron deity of all monkness.

But saranrae's Just so much better combat-wise.

Not to mention my character and saranrae would probably see eye to eye better, due to both of them just wanting to help others.

While she would consider Irori's Single minded obsession with perfection to be rather selfish and honestly unrealistic. Does she agree with his dogma to always strive to be your best? Of course everyone one should aim to be as good as is within their ability.
But one has to wonder IS perfection a thing? I mean even deities for all their power aren't perfect.

My recommendation then, is to have your character worship Sarenrae, since it sounds like she would be more drawn to worshipping the Dawnflower than Irori.

Farael the Fallen wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Farael the Fallen wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Drow Society + The Star Wars prequels
I do not consider the Star Wars Prequels to be canon, so I cannot use it. However, I will replace it with the Star Wars Christmas Special, which is absolutely canon!
You did say lame ideas, didn’t you?
Yes I said lame ideas, not completely unwatchable, mind killing, soul crushing evil ideas. There is a difference.

Potato potahto

Farael the Fallen wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Drow Society + The Star Wars prequels
I do not consider the Star Wars Prequels to be canon, so I cannot use it. However, I will replace it with the Star Wars Christmas Special, which is absolutely canon!

You did say lame ideas, didn’t you?

Well, which of the two deities do you like more?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Drow Society + The Star Wars prequels

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Little known fact about Nietzsche: he was also a dope rapper.

Not exactly a bard, but in a pbp game a while back I played a Shoanti Skald. I played up his skills as him combining his martial training and barbaric rage with bardic magic that he'd learned from a Varisian troupe that he'd journeyed with. Also, for extra cool factor, his primary weapon was a Totem Spear.

Perfect Tommy wrote:

Got another FAQ?

Because nothing here:

ou may change one feat to another through retraining. Retraining a feat takes 5 days with a character who has the feat you want. The old feat can’t be one you used as a prerequisite for a feat, class feature, archetype, prestige class, or other ability. If the old feat is a bonus feat granted by a class feature, you must replace it with a feat that you could choose using that class feature.

says anything about retraining feats gained by racial traits.

Actually, the FAQ he quoted above explicitly said you can’t retrain feats gained by racial traits.

Volkard Abendroth wrote:
James Gibbons wrote:
Volkard Abendroth wrote:

Dimensional Dervish is theoretically more powerful, but the limited uses per day make it far worse in my opinion. It's cool you can dimension door, it's a great utility power. But it's combat usage is very limited.

At the level presented (10) it is 5/day, and it continues to scale up to 9/day. At four per day it gets the fighter into melee range as a swift action a number of times equal to the recommended number of encounters/day. The smart fighter will only use against challenging encounters/spellcasters. At higher levels, it can be used more than once/encounter without exhausting and allows. Dimensional Dervish allows for movement before, during, and after a full attack.

How the hoot are you getting 5 uses per day? Item mastery gets you max 3. Once at 8th, once at 14th, once at 20th. You can't even increase the daily uses with abundant tactics because it's not a combat feat.

Abundant Tactics adds a number of uses = Weapon Training bonus. Gloves of Dueling increase weapon training bonus.

It also opens the door for Barroom Brawler, which leads to Schrodinger's fighter.

Item Mastery feats don’t count as combat feats. Abundant Tactics won’t work with it.

I think the most important part of playing a reluctant PC is to give them a reason to act. Have your character make strong emotional attachments to the other PCs, let them hate one of the villains so much that their anger overrules their caution, or come up with some other motivation that overrides their usual nature.

I’ve heard a lot of horror stories over the internet about people who play characters that refuse to join the rest of the party by saying “That’s not what my character would do.” Don’t be the buzzkill.

1 to 50 of 5,753 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>