|cwslyclgh Marathon Voter|
I have finished voting, but have decided not to reveal my picks until the final day of voting this year, in an attempt to stave off swaying the voting process... people thinking stuff like "Joseph Kellog seems to have enough votes already that he should make it through with out my help, so I am going to vote for Adman Blanchard instead because even though I hated his archetype I loved his item and would like to see what he can do in the next round"... (note that I just used those names as examples, it is not indicative of what I thought of their archetypes).
Well it means that the creature is going to stay grappled and take the damage each round for a minimum of 4 rounds if it fails its initial will save... and like all spell combinations it is going to be situational... don't cast it on golems or giants then (although assuming that a rod is not used, the min caster level for a dazing black tentacles means that the tentacles CMB is +20, easily affecting hill giants, flesh, wood, and ice golems, and having a better than 50% chance of working on stone, fire and frost giants and clay golems.
If cast on a group of 6 Hill giants (a CR 13 encounter), each tentacle would need to roll above a 3 on d20 to successfully grapple a giant, inflicting 1d6+4 damage and requiring the giant to make a will save (with its whopping +3 to will saves) or be dazed for 4 rounds, each of those rounds it cannot attempt to escape from the grapple, so it automatically takes the 1d6+4 damage and must will save again or reset the daze to 4 rounds from that save...basically any hill giant from the group that is grappled (80% chance) and that fails its initial will save (chance will vary by caster, but likely at at least gonna happen 80% of the time) is very unlikely to ever get free taking the full 15d6+60 (112.5 average over the course of 15 rounds, enough to kill a hill giant)...
I'd say that the snake could move through such an area at normal speed, but would still take the combat penalties for being squeezed (because it can't coil to defend itself or strike as effectively)... there is something to be said about GM common sense playing a part in interacting with the letter of the rules sometimes.
The Red Ninja wrote:
Remember that the Judges still pick the top 32, all our votes do is decide what order the judges look at the items in.... I would be shocked if all the items that make the top 32 are simply the 32 items that get the most votes from the public voting period. Even if John Doe rigged the system somehow to get 1 million up votes against each other item for his misformated Astounding Codpiece of Stupendousness (a Camping Spell in a Can that also makes one immune to a personal range spell when cast by others and has a market price of $4.95), putting it firmly in first place in the voting.. the judges are simply going to reject it and move on.
They don't waste time on unimportant stuff like who made the first one (or only one... I have seen a few items that seemed to be unique) or how this item is made in x city from y material.
They know what rule system that they were designed for, and don't include elements that have been changed (listen, spot, tumble checks) or dropped altogether (I have seen items that reference spells that either do not exist in Pathfinder or have had the names changed).
They have a cool effect (or small, logical suite there of), that is (are) unique, with out trying to do too much and bogging it down with extraneous BS and tacked on powers that make no sense.
This morning between about 5 and 8 am pacific time, I voted 100 times (so saw 200 items), and this time I created an excel spread sheet to keep track of which items appeared (and in which column) and which items I voted for… here are some numbers that I pulled out of the data, I thought I would post them for those who might be interested in such things.
Total number of unique items: 175
21 items appeared twice, 2 items appeared 3 times
One of the items that appeared twice did so in back-to-back votes (on opposite sides), it did not get my vote either time.
2 items were items I had not seen previously, 4 were items that I had seen previously but not recently (since the cut down).
I did not see my own item.
I voted for the item on the left 53 times and the item on the right 47 times.
Later this today, probably starting around 1 pm pacific time, I plan on doing it again and comparing the results (to see if time of day really matters). Over the course of this week I plan on doing this at least 9 more times (at various times of day) giving me record of 1000 votes.
I invite others to attempt similar experiments and post them to this thread. comparing the data derived could prove to be interesting.
Eric Morton wrote:
Yeah, I've encountered several items where I found myself yelling, "Perfect. Now stop writing. Stop writing. Stop writing!" (Okay, I didn't actually yell it, but I did think it really hard.)
I did actually yell it at one point, prompting my wife to rush into the room and ask me what was wrong....
That is correct, unless the creator asks for a critique once voting is over, keep your thoughts about any given item to yourself.
I would be surprised if a 'critique my item thread' does not pop up this year after the top 32 are announced, just like it has in all previous years... giving people who want feedback the chance to get it from fellow posters (and occasionally from judges as well).
when I can make a judgement quickly enough for the timer maters (ei they are both items I have seen before and already know the relative merits of)... I simply open a nnew window and come here to read the message boards, or check my email, or check facebook, or go to cracked.com, or... you get the picture, reopening the voting window every so often to cast my vote.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I'd agree with this Sean, if 4/5ths to 5/6th of the items that we see were not items that we have seen and read multiple times before... after a while you get to know the items pretty well, and judging between two such items is a very swift process (note that this speaks for those of use that have done a a lot of voting since the poles opened... somebody who sits down to vote for the first time probably won't have this problem for the first couple of hours).
I find those three methods to be the best (but in reversed order of that listed by Jacob)
First compare to other items with similar abilities or usefulness, second look at caster level of the item and what level of character the item might be fore, finally look at the crafting 'formulas' in the CRB.
It is a little different to determine if an item you are looking at is priced well rather than pricing your own though, for determining if pricing on an item you are voting on is correct, look at the price given and compare it to other items with the same price point, if it is about as powerful as those items it is probably pried well, if it is slightly lees or more powerful or useful than those items it is probably still okay, if it is way more/less powerful or useful than those items you know it was priced poorly.
Of course the ability to price an item correctly is, while important, not a make or break quality of a RPG Superstar candidate, and item price is quite frankly one of the last things I consider when voting.
TGM is saying that if you have the Kirin Style feat and the Kirin Strike Feat, you can use a swift action to gain double your intelligence bonus to damage against an identified foe.... his example wizard has a 20 intelligence (a +5 bonus) using Kirin Strike as a free action after casting acid splash he could add double that bonus (so +10) to the damage...
When you are all out of other offensive spells
When it is the only source of fire or acid you have access to and your party fighter has just dropped a troll unconscious
When you want to annoy somebody with out danger of killing them (although first level commoners better watch out)
When you have rogue levels and the opponent is flat footed with in 30' (sneak attack damage baby)
unless the person that the character is attacking has improved unarmed strike (or is a monk or what not) the character throwing the first punch does not provoke an attack of opportunity because the unarmed foe does not threaten an area. If the defender does have IUAS (or is a monk) he gets an AoO, but the attacker does not get an AoO in response to the defenders AoO because the defender is considered armed while the attacker is not (and thus does not threaten an area).
Or in other words you must be armed (or have natural weapons, Improved Unarmed Strike, be a monk or so forth) to threaten an area and be eligible to take Attacks of Opportunity, so in a typical fist fight no attacks of opportunity will occur.
perhaps Sean could make a big list of which spells and effects use positive or negative energy (and keep updating it as new books come out) I mean it is not like he has other questions to worry or think about instead of this rare ability that only affects a handful of creatures that many (if not most) GMs probably won't use unless they happen to appear in a module they are running anyway.