Watcher's page

Other than 3.p p145 "Trip: You can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks"

You're trying to use a positive ("you can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks") to prove a negative ("weapons cannot be used to make trip attacks unless they have the trip property"). It doesn't work that way. Especially since, as I've already pointed out, the text for Trip and Disarm are functionally identical, and no one's claiming you can't make a disarm attempt with any weapon.

I'm with Zurai on this, in the respect that you do not need a trip weapon to perform a trip attack. It doesn't say that.

If you do use a trip weapon, you have the option of dropping the weapon rather than have the trip reversed on you. That is the advantage of using such a weapon.

Done. Fini.

(But like Hogarth, I'm stepping away from the unarmed attack discussion as irrelevant)

<shrug>

I guess I'm happy that the community is blessed with enough abundance right now to call for a revision of a book that is now roughly 15 months old.

I'd still like to see the book make to at least two years, before it's updated with new content.

Nice stuff Set!

That would be a nice bit to see featured in product somewhere.

Before there is a whole mess of posts from folks who cry, "I would gladly buy a whole new book with 20% new content!".. let me stress one thing.

Let us not confuse basic fiscal responsibility with loyalty to Paizo.

No one should be forced into a catagory of "being disloyal", because they're hesitant to replace a book that isn't very old... especially when they didn't hesitate to put their money down to start with.

No one has overtly said that.. yet. But I wouldn't want this discussion to go in that direction. I know how passionate my fellow Paizoan's can get when it comes to demonstrating their loyalty. It would be really sucky to be labeled disloyal with the economy such as it is.

********************

Taking a moment to reframe my opinion:

I'm just suggesting to Paizo: "give me some sort of concession for having bought the first book as a loyal subscriber. I'll let you decide what you can do, and how it should be done."

And again, I'm focusing on subscribers because their support can be documented, and because they by in large don't pick and choose what books they do and do not buy. They buy them all.

Also it might be that this book doesn't get updated very soon, like in the next year, which would certainly mitigate any concern I would have in replacing it as a subscriber.

Hmmm..

15 levels you say? Sounds like my player could have used this back at 5th level... but then I'm not sure our existing campaign will make it to level 20 anyway.

Are there any rules regarding the defeat of this devil? Other than it be singlehanded?

Is there enough background for me to logically point to which order she should join, being based out of Magnimar? Or is that decision more attitudinal in nature?

(We're doing Runelords)

Aasimars need to get some good love. If that had happened early on, how much happier the people of Sandpoint would have been...

I know of course you were making a play on words; but I like to point out the subtle shades of gray to be found in Burnt Offerings.

Hey all..

Sometimes I'm one of the first to get a book, and sometimes I'm one of the last to get a book.

Rather than whine about not getting CoT #27 yet (because it will be probably mailed Monday anyway), I thought I'd just ask those that have gotten it already to talk about the Hellknight Prc.

You know, to tie me over for another day or two.

I have a player who has been waiting a long time for it, and has actually taken a few more levels in fighter than they originally intended, just to wait for it.

Is it cool?

Is the initiation requirement in interesting?

Any cool mechanical stuff about the class?

(This post assumes that some people have received it already by now)

Honestly, what I'd suggest is significantly expanding the book/pdf - but using existing lore and crunch from various sources that have seen print already (such as the Adventure Paths).

I think this is a great opportunity (rather than a problem) for Paizo to consolidate the Golarion setting into one large compendium. There are a sizable number of feats, prestige classes and other crunch that are great and fun roleplaying options. For example, the Hellknight, Chevalier, Inheritor's Crusader. This also allows double-duty in that several pre-Pathfinder prestige classes can get the updated treatment such as the the Lion Blade, Spherewalkers etc.

Now some of these are in Chronicles or Companions (such as the Lion Blade) - and perhaps shouldn't be reprinted in the compiled version; but others like the Spherewalker are in Adventure Paths and I think should be good game for a compilation.

The things I think are worth adding into such a compilation are:

• Original campaign setting, pathfinderized
  
• Regional/racial expansion (with regional traits and feats)
  
• Consolidate prestige classes from various sources (at least those from adventure paths)
  
• Possibly consolidate the religious articles (usually in adventure paths) that detail the deities
  
• Consolidate setting specific equipment/items
  
• Generally more crunch
  

Personally, I think the vast majority of people would be very happy to pay good money for an "old" product that is essentially a compilation of existing material. Provided enough things are compiled into it to make it a worthwhile reference work. I'm talking at least another 100 pages after the original campaign book has been pathfinderized.

Also - all-new artwork is a must. Some people may be happy with old work - I on the other hand feel all happy when I see the world unfold in fresh new gore, beauty, awe and glamer.

You know.. If there is room available in the game and David still has a Wave invite..

I'd like to play. Or at least ask to play.

Can I have an invite?

Send it to: caines in my head at gmail dot com

And caines in my head is one word with no spaces in it.

Please? And thank you!

I recently bought Hero Lab. Love the program. As a designer and contributor, I would love for monster creation -- using everything that's in the bestiary and including adding PC classes and PrCs -- to be as easy as making a character. I only want to go to something like the Editor when I'm inventing an entirely new magic item, ability, spell, race, class or PrC.

That ability, combined with what's already in Hero Lab, is my holy grail. I would utterly pay extra for a Bestiary data set and monster design screens.

It's not like they haven't charged for expanded content before. Case in point, they charged a little more to incorporate the M&M Ultimate Powers and Masterminds Manual to the main M&M Core rules. I don't see why they couldn't ask for a little more money for a proper Bestiary data set.

I expected to dislike this show but I find it unexpectedly interesting. My wife was a huge SG-1 fan and made me sit through Atlantis.

But I like this!

I do think they're on the point of using the Stones too much though.

Watcher wrote:

If you're wearing a Gauntlet, you should be wearing armor and suffering whatever penalties may or may no apply according to traditional rules. With one exception.

Except that it is a simple weapon and like any other weapon can be purchased and used by anyone with proficiency. Yes it is an inherent part of some armor but that doesn't mean that it can only be used by those wearing those types of armor. If the weapon itself has no Acrane Spell Failure then it wouldn't affect a caster. It makes sense that it would, but there are no rules to say that.

Also, just because the description says it is a big metal glove with spikes on it, doesn't mean that HAS to be the only style available. It could just as easily be a thin leather glove with a thick leather pad on the backhand and the spikes affixed to the backhand and back of the knuckles of the glove rather than the front of the knuckles. (Like some anime Ninja type gloves)

EDIT: Or perhaps you could use the Spike Gauntlet mechanic to custom create a thick leather, spiked, strap that would fasten along your forearm or perhaps affix to a pair of bracers.

I stick to my earlier point about wielding a weapon while wearing a spiked gauntlet however.

I might buy a new book.. But probably only in PDF. Depends on the price.

This does constitute a challenge for Paizo and it's long term susbscribers (like myself). I have a subscription but I'll be getting a book that is 80% the same.

I would offer some alternatives.

For example, I like the idea of just being able to a revised PDF at a lower cost... or reducing the price of the hardcopy... but specifically limiting that to those individuals who purchased a PDF or hardcopy directly from Paizo.

(Not because I'm snubbing the rest of the world who didn't buy from Paizo directly, but just because the previous purchase can be verified).

JoelF847 wrote:

When using a spiked gauntlet, does it leave your hand free for other tasks?

1) Can you use that hand to weild another weapon?
2) Can you use a shield?
3) What about other activities like climbing?

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Ask your DM. For some things like spell casting, your DM is highly likely to reject allowing those things with Gauntlets.

Gauntlets don't provide any AC bonus in of themselves. They're a component of a larger set of armor; i.e. Scale Mail, Half-Plate, Full-Plate. So only divine spell casters would 'normally' being wearing gauntlets, unless it's a specialized wondrous item.

However, Arcane Spell Failure would still apply, just as always does when wearing armor. Particularly heavy armor.

If you're wearing a Gauntlet, you should be wearing armor and suffering whatever penalties may or may no apply according to traditional rules. With one exception..

Right now, there is only one magic Gauntlet in the Core Book (the Gauntlet of Rust), and that is built as a Wondrous Item. Because it is a Wondrous Item and not armor, I would not apply Arcane Spell Failure to it. (Yeah, that does bend common sense a little, but that happens sometimes in order to have a clear cut ruling)

A little common sense is required here. Check your Core Book under the definitions of Scale Mail, Half-Plate, and Full Plate Armor. They all include standard gauntlets. It is stated right in the equipment descriptions.

Bear with me.

So the bare bones concept of wearing gauntlets and wielding a weapon are already there in place. People have always been weilding weapons while wearing gauntlets.

Taking the next step, spiked gauntlets allow you to make an armed attack while being technically unarmed. (A concept noted on Page 182; i.e. the unarmed "armed" attack) That is, they do lethal damage normally, can be used to make AOO's, and are great in a grapple. They're an ever-present weapon option that can not be disarmed.

But a spiked gauntlet is still a gauntlet at the end of the day.

Spiked gauntlets add extra functionality to normal gauntlets, but at an additional cost.

They don't take away any existing functionality. You can certainly wield another weapon, and if you are disarmed or grappled.. you have a back-up weapon that can not be disarmed.

As an ancedotal point..

I have a fighter player in my group who actually paid for +1 Shocking Gauntlets to be crafted. All the other players called her insane, citing that she should have added those enchantments to her main weapon. That is until I started using the new and improved grapple rules, a lot. That fighter normally weilds a two-handed weapon. If it weren't for those spiked gauntlets, she would be screwed a couple times already. But now, she can take care of herself even if she does get grappled or disarmed.

Cliff,

Besides the awesome Kobold Quarterly article Gorbacz just mentioned, there is something else in mind to remember about the APG.

They're going to have some support for tailoring existing classes, in order to create hybrids exactly like the old scout class.

You don't hear too much about that when the APG is discussed, because that material isn't going to be used in the public Beta Test. So it isn't brought up a lot.

After all, six new classes wouldn't eat up the word count of an entire book.

It gives you something to look forward to..

EDIT: Ninja'd by JoelF

Actually, a poltergeist would be an awesome (primarily NPC only) template, going with a lot of the current paranormal 'theories' on the whole thing. Where the person triggering the event isn't even aware that they are the source. (And a cool mechanic allowing someone to rid the template victim of their condition.) That'd be a lot of fun! Good idea, Watcher.

That would be a kind of wild spin on it.. because it might seem like an undead manifestation, but actually be something more akin to a psychic phenomena.

So there Paizo! Two different ideas for you to consider!

I think the above snippets summarize the fundamental points you're trying to make in your post. If not, please correct me.

And if it cheers you up, over the years I've not only purchased Pathfinder, but d20, M&M and M&M Ultimate Powers Pack, and at least two of my friends have done the same based upon my experiences with the program. I'm not saying that to make you feel indebted, but rather to assure you that you're not wasting your time.

I hate to see anybody have a bad day.

I agree that the examples in the documentation *are* simpler than they could be. The docs are intended to get users started, and they focus on the stuff that everyone is going to want to understand. We don't want to scare users off by launching into all sorts of complexity when many of those same users won't ever need to delve into that complexity. Ignorance is bliss for users who want to add custom magic items, feats, and the like to support their house rules and the GM's particular world.

Here's another quick observation, just to file away for future thought. Adding PC levels and special templates to monsters are Paizo Design 101. They love to do it. They get a more versatile and creative encounter out of doing it, and they do it often.

One thing that I'm encountering is that if you go back to their older material, published under 3.5, those creatures can be a lot different now with all the significant changes in the PC classes. For example, a Pathfinder RPG Ogre with 4 Barbarian levels is pretty different than an Ogre with 4 Barbarian Levels in 3.5. They have more options and tricks; in fact they can even be differentiated from each other with different tricks. Now I have a stat block that shows me the 3.5 Ogre, but one thing I'd like to see is how that same creature looks and feels when fleshed out with the Pathfinder rules. And again, in just the chapter I'm running I have:

And you're going to find that variation in all of the 3.5 Adventure Paths and individual modules, being converted over. And even when users finally run an Adventure Path written for the Pathfinder Core Rules (like Council of Thieves), then you have still have the TacCon issue.

Anyway, I'm beating a dead horse here.

I think your suggestion is a fine idea. You can learn a lot from studying an existing "thing" in the Editor.. and a directed guide to Authoring Kit that explains the 15%-20% that is immediately relevant (and is "required reading") certainly would not go amiss. Likewise, a handful of example creatures is also a great idea. Mathias was just saying the other day that Breath Weapons are difficult to codify because they vary so much from creature to creature. Having an example creature and a guide to explaining how a breath weapon is set up could be a great idea. But I'll leave it up to you guys to pick and choose what creatures and mechanics would be best illustrated. Just don't make them too easy. :)

Thanks for replying!

A poltergiest.

Something noisy, illusionary, with lots of telekinesis.

Something I always envisioned that you could add to a location invested with haunts, only the poltergiest could add a dynamic and adaptable element to the mayhem.

Lonewolf-Rob,

Earlier you asked me what I disliked about the Editor. I'll give it a shot. Please note, I differ from Lazar-X in that I think the existing documentation is fine as HTML.

In a sense, I do think the documentation is lacking in some respects. Not because it isn't thorough in going through the examples, but because the examples provided are really simplistic. The tutorial on Race editing with the 'Storm Elves', for example, is great until you actually want to create a creature from the Bestiary. The Storm Elf tutorial only modifies an existing race. It's great to know you can modify an existing file, but that doesn't teach you a whole lot about the more sophisticated aspects of race editing. If you create a new race file based upon a Bestiary Creature, you're going to run into things like special abilities.. and it's a lot more complex than just modifying base attribute scores, racial weapons, and starting languages..

This is what I did today: I've been trying to create a Stone Giant race in Hero Lab. I did all the tutorials over to refresh my memory, then I sat down to do it. Admittedly, most of it was pretty easy. The problem is the parts that aren't easy are actually really hard, and when you get help.. you have no idea why it works other than it does.

Mathias was helping me (for which I am very grateful), but it serves as a good illustration.

Rather than creating new specials for each situational stealth bonus, I decided to make a single special that's designed to show those bonuses. So, add the racial ability raStealth to your race, and then in the bootstraps menu, go to the fields button for that, and add a new field entry. Put "livename" into the Field Id and "+8 Stealth in rocky terrain" in the Value. "Assign" is the correct selection in the other menu.

(I'll eventually get all those old situational bonuses converted over so they don't clutter up the list of specials).

For rock catching (raRockCat), just select it as a racial special. You may also want to modify the name like you did on the stealth bonus, giving it a livename like "Improved Rock Catching (+4)".

Start by adding Rock throwing (raRockThro) as before, and this time, edit its tags, and add a new tag. Enter "Value" as the Group Id and "180" in the Tag Id. That sets the range of the rock throwing ability to 180'.

Honestly, the first time I tried to create a Stone Giant.. it was a mess. The main panel says to add an Ability Score Modifier for the basic stats. A stone giant's strength ability modifier is (+8), so I put in. Then I got flabbergasted when my giant only had a Strength of 18. It took me 10 to 15 minutes to finally realize that that if I put 17 in that box, then I would get a giant with strength 27 and a (+8) strength modifier. Yeah, I realize that should have been friggan obvious, but it wasn't just because of the sheer ambiguity of using the term "ability modifier" in two entirely different contexts. Then I look the in the Bestiary and Stone Giants have 6 pre-set feats, so I add 6 bonus feats. Except all that does is allow my giant to select 6 feats instead of having the 6 that are listed in the Bestiary. Mathias again comes to the rescue, telling me to create them in the Bootstrap menu.. which works perfectly. Except I'd never have known that if he hadn't told me, and therein lies my critique. Not that he helped me, but that I wouldn't have known if he hadn't.

(And even still I'd like this Martial Weapon Proficiency to be specifically for a Greatclub, rather than offering me a drop down menu choice.. but having come this far, I'm not prepared to be pedantic about it)

Three or four hours of trial and error this afternoon to almost, but not quite, create one creature. I'm still fighting with this hide in rocky terrain part.

And if you jump to the Data Authoring Wiki for more detailed information, that's way over the average user's head. So we go from too basic of a tutorial to a very complex wiki.

What you need to realize Rob, is that if the tactical console feature is going to be of any great use during actual game play.. we need to be able to create monsters and creatures easily. Then we could use the tactical console to track the conditions, stats, and abilities of the enemies. You show a screenshot of that being done, and it laughingly has a couple of 13-14 level characters shown in the tactical console along with some hobgoblins. That is because the hobgoblins are one of the few NPC races that created and provided with the program.

Again, I can see why you wouldn't want to invest the man hours in creating a datafile just for the Bestiary... but without building creatures for the program, the tactical console will never live up to it's potential. So we need more help so that we can do it ourselves.

As much as I like the program, the Editor is not as crystal clear as it is sometimes made out to be. On a positive note, it appears to be more than comprehensive enough to handle anything the Core Rules can shell out... if you know how to use it.

I usually GM..

But the pain in the backside spells that my wizard seems to love is:

Glitterdust
Enlarge Person (on the fighter, using a two-handed weapon)
..and Grease.

Roughly in that order.

At a glance, your version of Longtooth (in Chapter 5) looks just like my own.

Since I'm in Chapter 5, I might see if I have time to add to it.. unless those are your personal conversions? (And again, if I have time)

Thanks for the input. Mine should be easy though, all I'm subscribed to is the Adventure Path. I'm sure I'll get it sooner than later though!

But.. based upon what you wrote above, I'm not sure you entirely follow what I was saying (in respect to shipping).

"Easy" doesn't necessarily enter into the picture. It's all about the number of people who are going to have identical items shipped, regardless of the quantity of those items.

Let me use your own words to illustrate my point. You say your order should be easy, because you're only subscribed to the Adventure Path. On the face of it, I see where you're coming from because intuitive logic suggests that a single item is easier to ship.

But that's not necessarily how it works.

Hypothetically speaking, if more people have subscribed to the Chronicle Books and the Adventure Path, than just the Adventure Path only (and assuming both books are in and ready to ship), then those are going to go before the people who are only getting the AP alone. That is, it's not the simplest order that gets filled first; the orders that go first that are identical to the largest group of subscribers.

Of course, as Vic pointed out.. confirmations don't work that way, so I'm referring to shipments only.

People like me and Yoda have been doing this for a couple years now. :) Ultimately, if you dwell on it too much you'll drive yourself crazy. Though, since I was running a game at the time it was hard to wait for the Bestiary.

Lone-Wolf Rob,

Here is some feedback I gave the guy who does The One Sheet, and I referenced your product as a base of comparision. I also think it's good feedback for you guys to hear as well.

I can only imagine Mathias groaning at the idea of the extra work.. but despite what the Bestiary depicts as possible PC races, and NPC races with character levels.. it doesn't always match the reality of what has been done in some of the APs.

And maybe you can't do anything about that, but I think it's a reality to be aware of...

*********************************

On another subject, I have started adding stuff from the Bestiary.

Presently, the I added the 12 playable race from the Bestiary: Aasimar, Drow, Drow Noble, Duergar, Goblin, Hobgoblin, Kobold, Merfolk, Orc, Svirfneblin, Tengu, Tiefling

Once I add a few other items (like animal companions and monstrous feats), I will release another update to the Sheet...

Cheers!
RiTz21

But I'm always on the look out for new products. Here is some feedback..

Despite what the Bestiary lists as playable races, some of the adventure paths add character levels to the most damnable races.

Runelords Example (Warning Spoilers):

In HeroLabs, by next weekend, I might be able to build those races and add character levels to them. Thus far, as much as I love HeroLab, I don't find it all that easy to use the Editor. But to be fair to HL, not all of the necesssary functionality has been added to it yet, but will be shortly.

Getting back to your specific product.. a selling point to me is monster races that often have character levels added to them, regardless of whatever the Bestiary says. Tengu and Lizardfolk are great monsters, but neither has ever appeared in the big AP I'm running, but plenty of other monsters have been. In fact, it's been 20+ real world years since I used a lizardman in anything.

I don't know what you or your competitors can actually do about that, because I can appreciate the reluctance to add the whole damn Bestiary.. but if some character builder would actually look at the AP's and see what races are really getting character levels, that would be awesome.

LinusMundane wrote:

I love TOS+, recommend it to everyone as it is the most comprehensive, well supported piece of software out there for Pathfinder RPG. Nothing but positive things to say about it.

I totally agree!! But, I guess my opinion would be a bit biased... :P

On another subject, I have started adding stuff from the Bestiary.

Presently, the I added the 12 playable race from the Bestiary: Aasimar, Drow, Drow Noble, Duergar, Goblin, Hobgoblin, Kobold, Merfolk, Orc, Svirfneblin, Tengu, Tiefling

Once I add a few other items (like animal companions and monstrous feats), I will release another update to the Sheet...

Cheers!
RiTz21

But I'm always on the look out for new products. Here is some feedback..

Despite what the Bestiary lists as playable races, some of the adventure paths add character levels to the most damnable races.

Runelords Example (Warning Spoilers):

In HeroLabs, by next weekend, I might be able to build those races and add character levels to them. Thus far, as much as I love HeroLab, I don't find it all that easy to use the Editor. But to be fair to HL, not all of the necesssary functionality has been added to it yet, but will be shortly.

Getting back to your specific product.. a selling point to me is monster races that often have character levels added to them, regardless of whatever the Bestiary says. Tengu and Lizardfolk are great monsters, but neither has ever appeared in the big AP I'm running, but plenty of other monsters have been. In fact, it's been 20+ real world years since I used a lizardman in anything.

I don't know what you or your competitors can actually do about that, because I can appreciate the reluctance to add the whole damn Bestiary.. but if some character builder would actually look at the AP's and see what races are really getting character levels, that would be awesome.

So, I guess my question is (since I am a new subscriber), if I didn't get that email, does that mean that I won't be getting my copy from the shipment that just arrived?

I don't know if they've ever done a second printing of an AP chapter, and if they have, it's very rare. These shipments of the AP chapters are large enough to cover every subscriber with some to send to distributors, some to sell at the Paizo on-line store, and some to replace the damaged copies. You'll get yours out of the shipment that just arrived. Note the certainty and conviction of how I said that.

What happens is that these batches are organized by the largest number of subscribers who have a shipment that has all the same books. Basically they generate lists of subscribers and they organize them into similar groups. The group that has the largest number of identical orders (regardless if that group is getting two books or five books), is processed first... and then the next largest group is processed and so on.

It's just how they automate the process to make it as fast as possible. If you have 500 orders that are all getting the identical products, it is easier to package those up before stopping and doing smaller number of orders that have differing items.

So.. in conclusion.. you didn't get an e-mail yet just because they're not done processing all the orders yet. You'll probably get it Monday or Tuesday.

Why would James want to meet this? Clicky

Like "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein", which also featured Dracula and the Wolfman..

And "The Three Stooges Meet Hercules"...

Not that I was likening JJ to the Stooges or Bud and Lou.. but the rhythm and cadence were there in the thread title, at least for me.

Interesting..

Actually my assumption was that they were one in the same; only charater optimization was the term used by people who engaged in it, and defended the practice, who wanted a less negative label for it.

You know, like a gambling addict who squandered their kid's college fund referring to it as 'entertainment risk taking'. Or someone cheating on their girlfriend/boyfriend calling it 'diversification'. A term designed to mitigate an unwholesome practice.

I HATE mini/maxing, so if character optimization is something else, I'd love to know. Then I'll stop ignoring those threads.

No..

It was disrespectful. Bad attitudes all around.

Granted, if they've already started posting about you on these forums, they're going to read this and immediately want to defend themselves by telling their side of the story. None of us, here on the boards, are going to be able to tell whose story is more accurate, other than to take someone's word for it.

Still.. If I caught one of my players reading the AP after I asked them specifically not to.. and they came to the boards and read spoiler posts, I would not definitely not continue to run for them. And I would tell them why.

KQ12 is already in editing. Given the time it would take for someone to write the Baba Yaga adventure even as a 32-page adventure, we're talking more like KQ14.

But you know, I'm having lunch with James next week and maybe we'll swear a blood oath of some kind. Ideally involving some chicken bones.

Seriously, late in 2010 is better than never.

I wrote the post above before looking at Dungeon Grrl's link.

I think she was referring to this specific book

It looks pretty neat!

My only wish is that the concept was not tied to a specific class. That any character could have a legnedary weapon.

Look at the writer's list there.

You have more than a few Paizo freelancer/editor/alumni who worked on this.

Amseriah wrote:

So does anyone know if the powers that be have discussed reworking this book or clumping in the rules for Legacy items in with one of the other future releases???

As it's not OGL, it's not a work that Paizo can touch unless Wizards licenses them to do so.

Don't hold your breath waiting for that day to happen though.

Actually the Powers That Be mused over the idea at one of the chats. J.J. said they'd have to find another name for them besides Legacy Weapons. He remarked that he personally found the idea to be really cool. That doesn't mean anything about it being necessarily in any book however.. But it is an indication that Powers That Be are aware of the interest.

If I recall it was freelancer Brian Cortijo got really excited about the idea. He started kicking around the idea of a an AP where such weapons were a central theme.

Maybe we should encourage Mr. Brian Cortijo to see if he can get a section in an upcoming book since he may have the passion for it!

Seriously Wolfgang, the Dancing Hut is an instant sale. I'd love to see James Jacobs be able to do this (maybe with you on board as a freelancer!)...

...but if it's not in the cards for Paizo, then do it.

Instant sale.

Zurai wrote:

Dragons get feats the same way other monsters do: one every odd hit die.

Correct. This is more or less a completely universal rule. No matter what, you get a feat every odd-numbered hit die.

SKR!

WE WANT BABA YAGA'S HUT!

That would be some total kick-assery.

I'd still love to see it!

I looked at the dragons the other day with a mind to stat of a Juvenile; an age that doesn't have a pre-made stat block.

One thing I wondered about were monster feats, and when I should add some (if at all) in between the stated up examples.

For example, an adult red has more feats than a young red. Are those the 'break points' when they receive more feats; or might they have an extra feat between those two ages?

Folks,

Thanks for the wonderful discussion. There were a lot of great ideas, and some good pointers.

In the end, I don't think it's worth taking them back from the player, since he's had them for awhile. I think, for me, the sensible solution is Mistwell's. Let the player keep them, and let him know that he could not produce another pair for that price, or upgrade them.. and let it go.

It was right before bed last night so I was probably a little crabby. But it's not worth stressing about.

For what's worth, he also created Boots of Expeditious Retreat! Lol.. It was at the same time. I remember I was extremely busy at that time during the campaign and had a lot of issues going on both in real life and with some other players. I got distracted and hand waved them through, along with the Bracers of Shielding. He only made one pair of such Boots and gave them to another player. That other player voluntarily nerfed them closer to Boots of Speed, because he felt they were cheesy.

I'm going to tell him that these Bracers of Shielding are a fluke, a lucky accident in magic item creation that are never likely to be reporoduced ever again for that price. Therefore they are something of a personal legacy to that character.

And I'll be much more thorough in my adjudication of crafted items that aren't in the book.

Watcher this is your friend

The player built the item in Beta, and as I recall it came out pretty cheap, but I can't remember specifically. I'm looking for the price guidelines from the Beta Web Enhancement, so I can do a comparison.

That link won't help me get that comparison in this specific instance.

And I'm much smarter about crafted items now than I used to be.

For what it's worth Watcher, there is an advantage to crafting the full price item as opposed to the continuous spell item. The full price (Bracers of armor etc) use your full caster level at the time you craft them. That makes them alot more resistant to dispel magic than the other items, for which you have to pay more if you want them to have a higher caster level.

I'm not saying that necessarily makes up for the price difference, but I thought I'd point it out.

Hey Kryt or Seeker...

I still have my Pathfinder Beta Book, but I deleted the web enchancements.

Could you tell me what these Bracers would have cost back in Beta?

If nothing else, I'm curious what kind of deal he actually got.

Based on Shield spell, Level one, continuous...

Oh, one quick word of advice.

If you have Sword and Fist, look up the Ring of Force Armor or whatever it's called in the magic items section.

You'll find if you do the math, it's significantly cheaper than an equivalent value bracers of armor.

You could slap the price from that onto the bracers if you wished, since the value of the bonus is the same.

(Personally I find bracers of armor to be overpriced, they're the only permanent armor bonus solution a monk has access to and they cost an arm and a leg. Even full casters have armor options available to them for cheap.)

regretably the pricing guidelines (and I have to remind myself that they are only guidelines from time to time, it's easy to get caught up in the 'rules') don't care what the spell's duration is. If you make a continuous use item of a spell the provided suggestion is caster level times spell level times 2,000.

(Which, in the case of a level 1 spell comes out to 2,000, even if it's a 1 round/caster level spell)

Although... now that I think about it... I'm thinking 10 minutes per level might be a good baseline assumption for such an item, and to raise the effective spell level by 1 for each time reduction (+1 effective pricing spell level for 1 minute per level spell, +2 effective pricing spell level for 1 round per level spell.)

Just subscript note (2). If the duration of the spell is normally measured in rounds, you multiply the whole thing by 4.. so a Level 1 spell that is 1 round/caster level is actually 8,000 gps. (1 x 2,000 x 4).

But he built it in PF Beta, and think the price was still better then.

Sure. What I was saying, is that in the chart, there isn't a listed value for "Shield Bonus"

There is for armor bonus (1,000*bonus squared) for natural and deflection (2000*bonus squared) and then the one for the random bonuses (2500*bonus squared)

Now, if you wanted to go by the baseline, you would have to assume to use the Armor value, which is a good assumption, but it's not raw.

And to answer Dennis, yeah, he probably did get it too cheap. But at this point I'd rather get control of munchkin aspect than wrry about getting more money from his PC.

Agognon wrote:

First, I have not played much with item creation rules so I don't really know what I'm talking about here.

But, looking at the item creation rules there is an entry for 'armor bonus (other)' that costs bonus squared x 2,500gp so you are looking at a 40,000gp item right there. Adding immunity to magic missile is a whole 'nuther issue that I can't seem to work out.

That's not shield bonus bro, that's random bonus (Like Sacred, Profane, luck, etc)

If you were going to use something you would use the normal armor bonus, which comes out to the same priceline of bracers of armor.

In my case he went the route of a Spell Effect on Continuous instead of an Armor Bonus.

Quite literally the continuous use of the 'Shield' Spell.

Where as Bracers of Armor are built with the armor bonus rules, and Mage Armor as the pre-req.

However from what I remember there actually isn't a direct formula for magical shield bonuses, so there really isn't anything official to go on.

Other opinions also welcome.

I have a wizard, who back in Beta PF, who made himself a pair of Bracers of Shielding.

Using the Shield Spell on continuous duration.

At the time I didn't pay too much attention, but the more I've started thinking about it, the more I begin to question this item.

It functions similarly to Bracers of Armor, except it's a shield bonus instead of an Armor bonus, so he can cast Mage Armor as well and have it stack. Plus he's proof against magic missles.

His final AC is comparable to the fighters, because he's got +8 to his AC (when you factor in Mage Armor, and Mage Armor has a long duration compared to Shield).

I realize that some of this should be mitigated because to apply a continuous effect on a spell with a shorter duration costs more..

.. but somehow I can't shake the feeling that he got overly clever with the rules and got one past me.

I'm tempted to nerf them to Bracers of Armor, but I wanted to solicit opinions first before taking action.

As a player using Herolab I rate this program A+ now. They have been updating the program pretty much every week. Animal Companions and familiars are in. Makes my life playing my Druid and Sorcerer easy now.

They have started adding in other pathfinder books.

James should be the final word on the subject, but I have run Runelords 1.5 times.. (Just finishing Chapter 3 for the second time tomorrow).

To add to what James was saying, let me tell you some of the common issues with treasure in Runelords. Because I've heard all the unfounded complaints as well.

1.) Treasure is treasure, and PCs often dismiss magic gear because it's the wrong size. If they want their fair share of treasure they're going to have to pick up a few Masterwork Dogslicers, and +1 Ogre Hooks, and large sized +1 Hide shirts. I will concede that (in my mind) there is a questionable market for such things.. but I don't think about it too hard. I just let them sell it in Magnimar for the appropriate value. If the do that, they'll have enough money.

2.) You have don't have to let them craft, but you do have to let them shop in between Chapters. They might not find gear that is approriate to their needs in the course of the adventure. So the AP is written with a mind that they sell what they find, and buy what they need. If they're not allowed to do that, then you need to let them craft.

It's as simple as that.