If the DC is 28 and they have a +2 modifier, they can't open the door using strength.
It's that simple and no different form skill checks in that respect.
Note however that other party members can use aid an other (I think it applies to ability checks, if not, it should...) to grant an additional +2 and that there are often other ways to get around an ability check.
forinstance, picking the lock of that door (either to open it or reduce the strength required), breaking it down using damage etc.
Saint Caleth wrote:
I don't know if there needs to be a whole archetype for that, since a duelist can already have an offhand weapon and only use it to parry, since duelist abilities only turn off when you attack with an off-hand weapon. So a duelist could, for example, attack with their main hand and rserve all their offhand attacks for parry attempts while still precise striking and getting INT to AC. If you are talking about something besides just parrying with the off-hand tell me though since I am not that familiar with actual dueling styles.
I'm quite sure that's not how the rules are to be interpreted (although the debat has been made often and we are just waiting for a faq).anyway, I think there is more to be done with a two weapon fighting duelist.
What benefith could a character gain from using the offhand weapon for attacks of opportunity?
P.S. If you are not into two weapon duelling? How about an archetype for a gun based duelist?
An archetype for the duellist prestige class based around the ancient duelling style of using a dagger in the offhand.
While you are at it, perhaps you can add some more offhand daggers (only the swordbreaker dagger is now part of the game) such as the Trident daggers or similar.
Just a thought but I think the point is made that it's a bad idea.
However, it's not because it's a bad idea, you can't work with it. Lets not forget that (assuming he's playing the game fair) the monster should be doing this aswell. Meaning that the BBEG might have rolled a one aswell.
I say, see this as a challenge and create a character designed around these rules.
If the rule is to roll for your first hit die, play the game with that in mind. Step out of your comfort zone and play a different style.
And if it's not interesting, you always run your own adventure....
1. How many players make up an "ideal" party? The box comes with 4 pre-gen characters but the standard for D&D is/was (I believe) 5?
There such a thing as an ideal party (or may the ideal party is that party you have the most fun with). So don't let the numbers or advice stop your.
That said, most adventures (including the one the beginner box) are written for 4 character combine of a number of classes that offer access to the 5 core mechanics (this a balanced party).
Note that some classes can be combine multiple mechanics or fill in some aspects partially. (mainly, all character should contribute to the skill mechanic - possibly through spells or other abilities - so you don't need a skill monkey that may lack in combat ability)
2. I noticed in a video preview that the "Hero's Handbook" has a walk-through solo adventure, used to teach the rules. Will I need to get all my players to run through that? If so, should I do that individually or take them all through at once (since I believe it's a linear adventure, as opposed to D&D's choose-your-own)?
The solo adventure is designed to run if you don't have a DM. Let them run through it if they desire though when are involved, aim for full fleshed adventures with all people present.Social interaction is half the fun of an rpg and you lose that when you deliberately play solo campaigns when you have a full party to play with.
3. How long does character creation take? Is it recommended to play with the pre-gen characters first, due to them having the character sheets with explanations?
Character creation with the advice and the rule from the beginner box shouldn't take longer than 1 hour assuming the players want to make fast choice. If they insist on investigating each and every detail of each and every feat and spell, thing can take a very long time.
If you start with character creation, encourage them to take the hints in the runthough and restart a different adventure when you feel they wish to customise more.
While it's by the rules, it's also entirely based on movement speed. Faster group wins, every time. And if both groups move the same speed, it goes on for infinity. Not super fun.
If both groups have the same speed, you can opposed dexterity checks to see who catches who and who gets away.If the chaser loses this dexterity check though wishes to continue the pursuit, they make opposed constitution checks to see who wins.
I see little reason to make it long and boring when 2 simple opposed ability checks can solve it all.
My point is that I always saw flurry of blows as offering a number of attacks you can fill in as you see fit.
Assuming you have two weapons and an unarmed strike. At first level (2 attacks), this would give you 9 ways to fill your attacks (3^2 or (number of weapons)^(number of attacks) different ways to fill your attacks.)
Sadly, this is not adapted though I think I'll just do as I want anyway.
Anyway, atleast it's now more interesting than two weapon fighting, something the monk could really use (as they can't use flurry of blows to qualify for the other two weapon fighting feats), so I guess it's a good thing.
So, this does not allow a monk to use 2 kama's with different enchantments and start using the one kama and revert to the other for the remaining attacks (i.e. one with more damage but lower to hit for high attacks with high attack bonus and one with lower damage but higher attack enchantment.)
6) DO NOT close to melee, ready a charge this is a variant on step up + ready action. basically I close to 15 feet and ready an action to charge if the caster tries to cast. its a means of countering both 5 foot step AND defensive casting as defensive casting only stops AoO not readied actions.
Can you ready a charge?A charge is a full round action so I don't think you can.
You travel through the woods. Out of nowhere, a goblin ambush attacks.
Did you check out the beginner box bash demos?
Why not based them around a starknive?
The hilt (or maybe you call it differently) is very similar to a starknive. Unlike the starknive, you can't thrown it though you gain a shield bonus when wielding two of them (when you cross your arms in front of you, you get a nice and strong surface to catch blades). The shield bonus increases when fighting defensively or taking the full defence action.
Other option might be to base them around short swords and allow the weapons to do 1d3 damage to either the weapon or the attacker on a sunder or disarm attempt.
All the writeup proves is that the cane Ezren uses can be used as a club (so unless you kill Ezren and steal his club, you still can't use a cane as a club) and that who ever created Ezren was more concerned with flavour than with the consequences of his design would have on the way some people like to play the game.
As you pointed out yourself, if you can use every cane as a club, there is no point for the sword cane.
Just like there is that NPC that uses spring attack and vital strike (or what was the combination that was used?)
Both are either things you use or don't. They are not the core rules, so you are free to ignore if so desired.
btw, does it anywhere in Ezren's description says what the perception check is to see that the cane is a weapon?
P.S.I just hope I haven't missed a faq or something.
I'm running Kingmaker and am currently trying to build a human NPC designed (hopefully) for one on one combat with a PC. What suggestions would you make regarding classes/feats/etc?
What level do you plan to make this NPC?
It's an NPC, if your build is under optimised, artificially lower the cr rating.
The character gets a +2 circumstance bonus to intimidate checks. That's the bonus you get from something like that.
Because the rules are written from a balance perspective and not from a realistic perspective.
Just talk to your dm, I'm quite sure he won't mind letting you keep the stats for a heavy horse until lvl 6 (which is where I think the animal companion version takes over).
Mark Hoover wrote:
Skills to use to bypass would be Survival (see tracks of monsters that bypass), Knowledge: Nature or Geography to see EXACTLY what's out of place, and finish up with an Acrobatics or Climb to go over/around the afflicted path.
Does your trap has these characteristics or not? Would you allow the same things if there was a rogue in the party?
Don't play into their cards. Let them be creative within their powers.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
Any chance you can make some of those archetypes focussed on prestige classes.
A gun based duellist? Or a gun based arcane archer?
I'd like some more combat styles for rangers! What about an Unarmed Combat Style for those rangers who want to use martial arts? What about a ranger archetype using monk combat style feats?
you are not alone, Combat Styles can use some love.
The original combat styles haven't changes since the core rule book, and I'm sure there are feats that fit in the combat style that can be added. Maybe adding a single feat at 1st, 6nd and 10th level (or create a feat that allows this)?
I would like to see a combat style for throwing weapon. My halfling switch hitter ranger deserves a combat style specifically designed for it.
I spoke to my GM and he's in support for the most part, with the only restriction being I should be able to sensically justify how I am counseling/lending aid... this is not a problem for most skills, but I am running a block on PERCEPTION... how can you aid somebody else in hearing something? Smelling something? Seeing something?
If you are having so much problem describing what you do, you should maybe just accept the fact that aiding an other for perception isn't possibly in most cases.
Anyway, I'm found one. When looking for traps, providing a light source that's not coming from the character who's looking for traps might help. The shadows are pointing to him rather than away from him which makes the easier to see.
You should be careful not to trigger traps though.
I like the idea of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary Box. It's a quite resource efficient way to get a visualization of the monsters you are/will be fighting.
However, if I start with this, I kinda wanna go all out on it. Not just doing something half. I want to have a pawn for each and every monster to face. For the adventure paths, this is not a problem with the release of pawn sets specifically for the campaigns (I assume this will continue).
However, there isn't an analogue for modules. 'GameMastery Module D0: Hollow's Last Hope (OGL)' is already hard to get a pawn for all opponents and this is probably one of the simplest first level modules. I can probably fetish a dwarf from the beginner box and be fine.
So my question, is there a list somewhere with 'Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary Box' compatible modules?
'Crypt of the Everflame' seems interesting though it's sequel 'Masks of the Living God' requires a bunch of cultist which I don't think are included anywhere.
Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:
Because Ezren is the worst wizard you could build...honestly, if you use Ezren expect to die...horribly. Well the worst wizard that can actually cast spells...I mean if you want to create a Wizard with 10Int, you would then be THE WORST possibly. He's just a Bad Wizard...
With a 10 int, you can still cast cantrips.1d3 damage is too good, better drop that int to 9.
ihmo House and his team are doing profession (doctor) checks (or even just heal checks) and not knowledge (medicine checks). The untrained assistants gain a sliver pieces each day which seems enough as it's always House who saves the patient.Furtheremore, even if you place the check on knowledge, it's closer to find the answer in a library (due to the long time it takes them to find the answer and the many wrong paths they follow) rather than a strait remembering knowledge check. Something for which I never argue you couldn't.
ihmo, House is a bad example to prove your point.
If the skill check is concerning finding information about in library, I agree aid an other helps.
If it's just knowing something or not knowing it, I don't think one should be able to use aid an other.
Anyway, don't let your players abuse aid another. It's a low dc, doesn't have a risk involved and can be made untrained. There are hardly any reason why someone wouldn't constantly use it.
You can never use aid an other on knowledge checks, there is just noting beneficial you can do.
Furthermore, as you said, it's literally in the rules; he can only use aid an other untrained (for trained checks) if the DC is less than 10 for the check.
this seem very clear cut. not sure what else I can say.
Really, you all think this a good idea?
Maybe it's because I'm in Europe (and I assume you aren't) though if one of my 'leaders' would bring something like that to a campout, I'm not sure it would it out alive and I'm not sure it would catch on. There is just a to large difference between what we did on normal activities and sit down and play an rpg.
Something I could see that could work is organising a games evening (forinstance when people have exams and don't have time to spend a whole day) and brining the beginner box as one of the games you propose. This way, you know people expect this. Those who really don't want to do this, will probably not show up (atleast, that's my experience).
Astrikkar Arkylon wrote:
although not a fighter, I think a ranger could be interesting. They don't need dex to qualify for the feats;
Probably a dwarf using a dwarven Urgrosh.
Every time I've either run it myself or seen it run by the book, there's never been a problem. If they forget to search, they blunder into the trap - as it should be. If they take the time to search, they find the traps - as it should be.
The problem - although problem may not be the correct answer - is that the player has to remember each time to search for traps. I think there are more interesting things to focus on when playing.
When strictly playing by the rules, one has to remember and explicitly say they are taking of their armour when going to sleep and explicitly put it back on in the mourning.
These are things a character would is actually living in the world wouldn't forget as they have a mourning ritual, they feel hungry or they feel the vibe of the dungeon they are exploring.
Things like these are easily forgotten while they don't make sense to have been forgotten. Depending on the character, the party, the player and the situation, offering a free/passive check is just a representation of what would have happened if they player would not have been a player though would be a living in the world.
Yes, but the skill bonuses you get are decided at the item creation. Not when you wear the item for 24 hours. Else, you can just take it off and get a new set of skills after 24 hours.
I assume the same goes for languages and maybe other things. Wonder if someone complied a list. languages are not in the description of the "Headband of Vast Intelligence"
Anyone ever tried to boil their dice for 20 minutes?
btw, the hyper hygienic society we are living in is probably one of the reasons there is an increase in auto immune disease (like allergies). When the immune system doesn't get alien things to attack, it will eventually find else to attack.
There already is a way to this (if you take the dragon bloodline anyway). The dragon disciple is designed for sorcerers of the dragon bloodline to further explore their heritage.
The advantage of a prestige class is that you can custom make something for each of the bloodlines rather than be limited to what evolutions can offer your. Furtheremore, evolutions are devout form any fluff are flavour. All you are doing is turning your sorcerer in a eidolons freak.
You don't even have to create a new prestige class, you can use the dragon disciple as a template and create archetypes for it.
The Rot Grub wrote:
So you've started by letting you students do the main reason parties break and campaigns are ruined?Let us know how it turns out.
btw, have you looked at the Box Bash Demos?
Btw, since this is likely to be the only source book with pictures of most of these races, I hope there are lots of pictures of each one and not just one picture of one gender on the one page for each race.
I hope they turn the art into pawns.
It's nice when you can represent your monsters with pawn, though when you have to represent you players by dice because you don't have pawns for Pc's, it takes a lot away from the game.
in the book Roland goes into the town of tull and end ups killing every one in the town, as they all attack him. Now it is never clearly stated but it seems to me that the evil pregnant priestess is controlling them or has tapped into some primal religious fever. in pathfinder the closest thing would be mind control or domination if you will. I don't think the towns folk were particularly "good" aligned in the first place and the domination command to kill Roland was not against theier value system.
Wait! What pregnant priestess are you talking about?Is there a pregnant priestess in the dark tower series?
Now I'll have to read the books again.
Anyway, why are you playing Roland as a paladin. Isn't Roland *the archetype* of a gunslinger.
imho, you should play him as a lawfull neutral gunslinger or come up with a different backstory or convince you gm to let it slip.
The Rot Grub wrote:
Hmm, perhaps you're not getting a grasp of how I'd manage the club. First, I will need to find a way to get approval from the principal, and little elements that can spark interest in traditional subjects, using the RPG as a source of enthusiasm, I think will be a part of this.
To convince the principal, I would just quote the article.You can offer all that by simply playing the game and actively encourage the players to play our their character.
Whenever possible, you should always make people aware of the benefits of roleplaying, as these are many. Firstly, as a game of active communication between a group of individuals, it involves a great deal of social skill development, including speaking and listening skills. It aids the development of patience, respect, and teamwork, as those involved learn the necessity of waiting their turn, and working together to accomplish a common goal. Given the unusual and tricky situations characters in a game can find themselves in, roleplaying actively encourages creative thinking and problem-solving, not to mention visualisation and the ability to understand different outlooks, points of view, and consequences. Beyond these points, roleplaying has elements of basic mathematics, largely addition, subtraction, and basic probability, as well as providing an avenue by which boys especially can improve their literacy, especially descriptive writing. Depending on the setting of the roleplaying game itself, it may also teach aspects of history such as the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Roleplaying is also a great way to relax with friends, one that does not involve being transfixed by a television or games console, and is performed in a safe, social, indoor environment. As it is not a physically active pursuit, it is also ideally suited for children with physical challenges. Not bad for something that is also immense fun.
Are you really going to ruin the game by forcing them to study statistics or write novels?
They will learn more from the soft skills they develop while role playing then from the sneaked in lessons you plan. Things like respect, teamwork, listening skills,...
P.S. Apparently, someone wrote an article about this. The original from blackindustries.com has vanished. I found a version of the article on rpg.net though.
Would it be a bad idea to create a line of feats similar to arcane heritage though for domains?
You could take the first feat at 3th level and gain all 1st level abilities, the second one should be limited to the level where the cleric gets it +2.
Prerequisites would be something like:
Having a spell on the class spell list means that a 1rst level wizard can cast a 4lvl spell (such as enervation for example), from a wand without making the check or "class spell list" refers to have the spell on the spellbook?
You don't need the spell in your spellbook. The only thing that matters is the list in the core rules book (or the extended lists from other books if those are allowed in your game).
In the end, the only thing that's stopping you from doing so at first level is the fact that you probably don't have the gold to buy a 4th level wand.
Similary, a paladin and ranger can use wands of cure light wounds from level 1 enough though they can't even cast spells.
Ive decided not to get the cloak of elvenkind...turns out a party member already has a similar cloak and has ranks in stealth, but just never bothered scouting before.
Stealing solo is dangerous. I would be glad to have someone with me that can heal, crowd control, talk himself out of sticky situations or run back to get help.
large group, lets see. Anything that can buff everyone (or most everyone) at once would be great with this many players. If the person who is undecided chooses bard go with maybe paladin or cavalier. If they choose the fighter go bard. Those buffs are good when you only have 3 allies, with 7 its going to be awesome.
They can or maybe should both be bards.
One takes one of the martial buffs bard types the other one that buffs magic through their performance (magician seems like the archetype for this).
my questions are, is this viable in a long term campaign that will also have combat situations.
The questions you are asking can only be answered in the specific light of the campaign you plan to play.
I'm sure there is at least one long term campaign with combat situations where such a character is viable. However, I don't think there are many campaign where it is viable.
Look at the last campaign you played and try to estimate the percentage of die rolls not related to combat. I think you will be disappointed.
Furthermore, if you surprise me and you come up with a high percentage, consider what the other character will do when you being the social skill monkey?
ihmo, it's be for each and very class to have a use in all aspect of the game. A fighter has enough feats to invest in Intimidating Prowess, a druid or cleric should find a way to invest in perception and/or sense motive.
That said, creating a character based around social skills and only socials skill isn't going to be interesting character. Not for you and not for the people you play with. Try and find an equilibrium between a combat role and a social role.
A bard forinstance is suited for this quite nice. He has enough skill points, Versatile Performance and a good charisma to make a good face without high int. And a bard can probably still max out use magic device.
There is noting wrong with a character focused on social interaction. I just think it's not a good idea to have that as only focus. I think the bard is capable of having the social aspect as one focus without diminishing the combat aspect to much.
Wolf Munroe wrote:
Was just looking for traits and happened to found those as skill traits.
There are many examples to use as a base for skill traits.
Just stay away from to skills that are popular. ihmo, there is no reason why you would want to give out perception as a class skill. Already enough people max it out because it's so good. No reason to make it even better/easier to max.
Shouldn't we faq this?
It's compatible with RAW though I don't think it's RAI, I think flurry of blows should have been a full round action rather than full attack action.
Also with a Bastard-Sword you will not fight one OR two handed but both, this is why it's called a one-and-a-half hander. While fighting you will permanently change your grip, even from one-handed left, to right etc.
How could one model that in an RPG such as pathfinder?
Having a weapon that lends itself to both two handed use, one handed use (and a hand free for something else, like holding a torch) and sword and board could be interesting. The versatility (assuming it offers more interesting characteristics than the long sword) can be worth the feat.
That's a niche that something like a bastard sword could fill extending it's use significantly. As it stands now, it only offers a small increase in damage as compared to the long sword.
One step up from martial weapons is an okay goal, but is that worth a feat? In some cases (falcata) it arguably is, but is a die step worth spending a feat on? Math-wise, I'd say no, unless you have tons of feats available, but Pathfinder does a pretty good job of not leaving characters feeling like they have too many feats available.
You could always end up finding a very good magic bastard sword, much better than what you are currently using, better than what you have found in the stores and something that can probably carry you to the end of the campaign.
Is that weapon forth a feat?
Furtheremore, a fighter can take the feat as one of his bonus feats to take advantage of the bastard sword as a better weapon for the lower levels and retrain it later.
Is the bastard feat worth a feat?