darth_borehd's page

Whatever happened to role playing and character development? How did we fall into this "all positive bonus stats or don't bother" mentality?

So what if you make a character with low intelligence. You ever see Forrest Gump?

I don't want to raise the point buy just to get higher stats. The idea is to make players who really want that 18 to make hard decisions about having very low stats in other areas. I expect the power gamer and min/maxer of the group to make characters with very low dump stats. That's OK. The die-hard role player will create a heroic, but tragically flawed character. I am expecting that too.

I'm designing the campaign with an even mix of battles, skill challenges, puzzles, and social conundrums. Everybody will at some point have to face something that they are weakest at.

I think FireclawDrake hit the formula dead on and I will be using that.

You can use a tablet. Get an android tablet or if you like to spend money, get an iPad2.

Personally, I still prefer the paper books when gaming.

Army of Darkness
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
Dicworld: The Colour of Magic & The Light Fantastic
Harry Potter series
Lord of the Rings series
The Princess Bride
Labyrinth
Big Trouble in Little China
Alice in Wonderland
Shrek series
Dragon Hunters
King Arthur (semi-historical version with Clive Owens)
Pirates of the Caribbean series
How to Train Your Dragon
Robin Hood

I think it highly unlikely at this stage.

The only existing RPG engine which could be readily changed to Pathfinder RPG is that which was used by Obsidian for NWN2. That engine, in turn, incorporates a fair bit of code from the Aurora Engine used for NWN1, now owned by EA (BioWare). ..

NWN1 is the better of the two.

I want to extend the Point Buy downward so people can "sell down" any attribute score down to 3 to get more points. I am fully aware some players are going to move their dump stat as low as it will go.

The problem is, there doesn't seem to be a pattern for the values going up to 18. What should be the values going down to 3?

3 ?
4 ?
5 ?
6 ?
7 –4
8 –2
9 –1
10 0
11 1
12 2
13 3
14 5
15 7
16 10
17 13
18 17

http://www.widdershins.org/vol11iss4/01.htm

I disagree with his Nietzsche-based arguments and conclusions.

Interesting reading though.

How would everybody feel about a facebook or Google+ game?

...and Improved Critical and all (or at least all the ones I can think of) work with Natural Weapons.

darth_borehd wrote:

In this case, you want to "re-educate" the goblins so they adopt the human culture, or at least the parts of it that are less willing to go raiding.

Maybe I've just been reading too much lately about US treatment of Native Americans, but this whole "good" approach reminds me a little too much of the Indian Boarding Schools. Also billed as a better alternative to extermination, but still a tragedy.

Better than "the only good goblin is a dead goblin" and "nits grow into lice", but I'd have serious trouble with it anyway.

You have a problem because in the real world, we've grown to realize that, with few exceptions, it's more a case of "culture clash" than "good vs evil".

But that's not all that exciting in a fantasy world. We want some clearly defined "evil" so we can clearly have "good guys". However, we want verisimilitude so we don't want it too simplistic (at least I don't).

you can also think of it as the "De-fascism" campaign in Germany after WWII.

Try these:

Monster Feats

"Improved Natural Attack" is a must.

Power Attack is also good and "Weapon Finesse" is good if you have more DEX than STR.

Also search these pages for the phrase "Natural Weapon" and "Natural Attack".

Ultimate Combat
Ultimate Magic
Advanced Player's Guide

Greetings all,

[b]So I'm asking everybody, what do you really like or dislike about your current character sheet? Would you try using another character sheet right now?

Let's look at the standard Pathfinder sheet.

1) It's dull. Hardly any graphics and just a bunch of lines and text. I want full-color pizazz and beautiful arrangements. If you ever saw "Ema's Character Sheets" for 3.5, you know what I mean.

2) It's not organized optimally. I want all the important and often used stuff bigger and arranged so that it you see it on the front page. Having everything the same size makes stuff harder to find.

3) Everything a level 1 character needs should fit on the front and back.

4) I want a "paper doll" graphic to show where all my magical items slot have in them right now.

5) An easy way to track what is in my backpack versus what is in my belt pouch and what I have on my mule/horse/dog/whatever.

6) Weapon section should have a place to note two-weapon versus one handed or two-handed. There should also be a place to jot things down like "+2d6 versus undead". Ammunition should be easy to track too.

7) Adding bonuses up should be really clear and easy to do. +2 from that source and +4 from that and so on = whatever.

8) As you level up and acquire more things, there should be additional pages for familiars, mounts, cohorts, more spells and the like.

9) Just be awesome.

Greetings!

I'm curious if anyone has made a form-fillable version of the Beginner Box character sheet. I know there are plenty of fillable PDF sheets out there, but it would be nice to have one that matches the beginner box style.

Thanks!

Can you elaborate on what style you are looking for?

You need to ask yourself: What kind of world do I want?

In one, you have the ol' fashioned alignments. Creatures are always evil and are born that way. Baby goblins will try to choke you if you give me a bottle of milk. The world is black and white. There are good and evil....err 9 alignments and that's that. Neutral you can let slide if they behave themselves but evil MUST be destroyed no matter how cute it is.

In the second, you have a more sophisticated and modern view. There is no good or evil, just conflicting cultural norms. Evil is a relative term. Maybe they are just misunderstand and the "heroes" are the villains to them? What you have to to do is design a "skill challenge" or role-playing type of adventure where the PCs bring the human and goblin villages together to come to a mutual understanding and respect of each other.

The third way is a mixture of the two. Evil is evil and good is good, but anything or anybody can become good or evil. In this view, ideas, not beings, are inherently good or evil. Evil alignments mean they believe in the evil ideals. A goblin child chooses to follow good or evil as he matures, just like a human child does. It has elements of both of the two approaches above. To me, this is the unofficial current viewpoint in the Pathfinder/D&D games now. In this case, you want to "re-educate" the goblins so they adopt the human culture, or at least the parts of it that are less willing to go raiding.

Has anybody made a large print character sheet? We have a visually impaired player. The standard sheet type is too small.

I would love to see a Treantmonk-like guide that discussed them.

Swamp because I think to Hel's realm as an enormous, dull swamp...

I thought it was a frozen wasteland?

And Odin's always TN for me, he can't be other.

Would a TN person go out of his way to help people? Or give presents to kids? Its things like these that leave me with a "good" vibe after reading his stories.

He actually kills Balder and, in doing so, teaches the gods a much-needed lesson in humiliy, but it is the giantess who prevents Balder from being rezzed.

In the version I read, the giantess was Loki in disguise. Killing people just to prove a point is evil.

I put a note that Loki begins as CN but becomes CE by Ragnarok.

And Odin would rather survive than make the sacrifice, destroy all evil, and hand paradise to his grandchildren, acting chaotic to prevent the Fates plan from bringing Ragnarok.

So, is this Lawful or good?

The question is would the ends justify the means? Should he serve the greater good? It wouldn't be just him that dies at Raganarok but a lot of the gods and the mortals on midgard too.

Loki is not evil. He's pragmatic to a fault and devoid of a code of honor, but he's not evil.

I agree he starts off more morally neutral. Like CN.

However, he starts to slowly become evil. By the time of Ragnarok he is plotting to kill Balder and seems to be interested in causing pain and destruction. I say that is evil.

No way. Definitely Chaotic Neutral. What you seemed to miss is that Odin gets himself in a lot of jams because of his tendency to do everything anything but straightforward. He hires a giant to repair Asgard's walls but instead of paying the man he offers Sif as a bride. Stuck in a bind

In the story I read, he only promised that because he didn't think he would have to deliver. When he realized he would have to lose his daughter-in-law, he swallowed some pride and begged Loki for help.

I would not call it as evidence of non-good behavior--just not lawful.

For me it's a choice between NG or CG.

Reminds me of the Deities and Demigods book for 3.X. Then again, some of the things in that book made no sense (Hades is NOT evil, damn it!!).

Anyway, these Norse gods are well-written and I hope you don't mind if I use them some day.

Not at all! That's why it is there.

I made two more gods' stats too. Should I show them too?
Druidic Domains: Caves, Swamp

Thank you!

Yes- Italian (Good = Buono, Evil = Malvagio)

Bardess,

I have added the stat blocks to the bottom of the document. I don't agree with all of your choices, but I would to use most of them with your permission.

What is the last line: "spells" for? I haven't seen that before.

Step 10) Lose profits as MGM sues your sorry behind.

All L. Frank Baum Oz books are public domain. Chomp on that, MGM!

Do you also need Quickdraw to change weapons to daggers?

King King would probably fit in the same future book as Godzilla, Mothra, Rodan, Mecha-Godzilla.

:)

It seems the most effective build for this class is a heavily armored bomb thrower.

Ok then. This class is even better than I originally thought.

If an alchemist take the Heavy Armor Proficiency, does he suffer an arcane spell failure chance when wearing plate mail?

If you have Quickdraw, I say yes. Otherwise, no.

This also brings up another good point: Why can't a Alchemist give away his Bombs?

Alchemist makes a Bluff check on ogre: "Here, hold this."

<alchemist runs>

darth_borehd wrote:

In the Oz novels, the tin man was like a magical cyborg. The witch had enchanted him to attack himself and he had to replace his missing body parts with tin replicas.

So use the half-construct subtype from ARG?

ARG?

darth_borehd wrote:

What fey animal template? Would awaken make him anthropomorphic at the same time?

Perhaps if you used the anthropomorphic animal spell from UM along with permanence.

It raises their INT to 3 but keeps them as the animal type. You would have to do some shenanigans with Time Stop or the like to get both Awaken and Anthropomorphic.

At least as far I can tell.

We have the scarecrow and the cowerdly lion would be easy just take a lion and awaken it or use Fey animal template. But as for the tinman well we will just have to wait for a medium size "tin golem" or something similar but with human level int.

In the Oz novels, the tin man was like a magical cyborg. The witch had enchanted him to attack himself and he had to replace his missing body parts with tin replicas.

What fey animal template? Would awaken make him anthropomorphic at the same time?

darth_borehd wrote:

Zombie half-dragon giants.

Any specific giant and dragon type combination?

Storm Giant and Red Dragon.

If you want the animals to use Aid Another when you think it is appropriate, then it is a Handle Animal check.

Otherwise the GM rules when animals might use this action.

Fighters are THE most gear-dependent class in the game. And guess who are the ones who make magical gear? THE CASTERS (*Shocked expression*)!!

Or anybody with master crafter, but that is irrelevant. Who says the fighter has to find people to make this gear when he can take it from treasure troves? Character Wealth by Level shows the value of possessions that PCs are entitled to have at every level. If not by outright purchase, then by slow acquisition of rewards.

And really, on a high-enough level (or even at low-levels) and with the right spells, a Wizard or a Cleric (Druid works too) could solo most encounters that aren't comprised of anti-caster monsters (and if the DM decides not to cheat). And even then the Cleric still has some armor to help him/her.

Are you claiming that you can make a single caster and complete a published adventure written for a balanced group of 4+ PCs?

I have played Pathfinder since it was in Beta. I have played D&D for 30 years in every edition. I have never, ever, seen or heard of this happening anywhere.

The only way this could happen is the GM designing or altering an adventure for a single character (I guess that would include no "anti-caster" monsters, whatever those are.)

people don't have fun on ANY level...sooo, yeah.

Insert "the consensus" into it then. Yes, some people refuse to have fun. That is not important. What is important is that every class has a role to play in the game at every level and Pathfinder has provided that.

Zombie half-dragon giants.

Icyshadow wrote:

Are you telling all those people who had played Fighters and had problems keeping up on later levels are liars? I doubt you could prove that without actual evidence (like, linking examples instead of just saying things). Here's my question: What can a Fighter do against a flying, teleporting, telekinesis-spamming Vrock?

Quick draw his magic longbow and stuff it full of arrows?

I second that. It's like people forget fighters at high levels carry an arsenal of magical weapons and armor.

Plus, no man is an island. You're supposed to work as a team, remember?

The bottomline is: are all classes fun to play at all levels? The answer is yes.

I've played lots of 3.5, but for the past few years I've been running 4E games. I haven't tried Pathfinder yet. We're starting a new campaign and we've decided to take a break from 4E. I've been trying to decide whether to use Pathfinder or True20. I like a lot of the flavour and such in Pathfinder, but I'm a bit hesitant to use the system because on the surface it looks like it would have all the same balance issues that 3.5 had (primarily- magic dominating the game at higher levels and melee characters having few combat options beyond "full attack, again"). For those of you who have played the game past level 9 or so, is this the case or have they managed to make some changes to alleviate that trend?

No balance issues between PCs at all in Pathfinder. It is one of the most perfectly balanced systems I have ever seen.

There are plenty of things for spellcasters to do at low levels and plenty of things for the martial types to do at high levels.

Mind you, this is including what I can consider to be the whole system (Core Rulebook, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat).

We have played through one campaign up to level 20 and absolutely nobody got bored or felt useless at any time.

I have been very pleased with James Jacobs and the rest of Paizo with bestiary 1 and 2.

I thought Bestiary 2 was the best monster manual I have ever seen for any game.

I have a preference for monsters from mythology, Wonderland, and Oz. So far it seems the Paizo team is reading my mind.

My pet peeve is the idea that just because you are not sitting around and talking, you are not role playing.

Mournblade94 wrote:

If a player builds a character with a magic item in mind, I tell them they will never find it in a magic shop, so hope for random. They then usually change their idea.

You realize that you just obliterated the concept of King Arthur, right ?

King Arthur did not buy Excalibur in a magic shop.

I'm hoping to get some interesting discussion here, kind of like this thread.

Do you think THF is overrated?

What's THF?

That wizards should be blasters?

The most effective wizard is one who controls the battlefield. Blasting is for recreation.

Maybe you think Rogues are overpowered! (Related to this statement: Perhaps you are crazy?)

Define overpowered. What are using for comparison?

Yes, they are overpowered compared to everything of the same CR. So are all the other PC classes.

A more prevalent meme I have seen is that they are underpowered. Not sure what they mean by that.

They are equally as much fun to play as any other class and equally valuable members of any party.

No, I am not crazy.

I think the key question is what is meant by "similar surfaces".

It looks like a case of GM fiat to me.

I say they are from two different sources and therefore they stack. One is an evolution and one is a feat.

Dragon78 wrote:

I hope the Ki-rin, Cheshire Cat, Ninetail Fox, Nekomata, Yuki-onna, Jub Jub Bird, Bigfoot, and Greater Medusa made it into this book.

You will be disappointed and delighted. I won't say yet which reaction will be stronger.

I am in suspense.

darth_borehd wrote:

If I summon Celestial Dogs and I speak Celectial, can I order them to do things other than attack? For example, attempt trips or disarms or attack the spellcasters instead of the warriors?

Yup!

Summon Monster wrote:

If you can communicate with the creature, you can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions.

So are they considered smart enough to understand me?

"Spot" used to include smelling as well. Only Listen was a separate skill.

If I summon Celestial Dogs and I speak Celectial, can I order them to do things other than attack? For example, attempt trips or disarms or attack the spellcasters instead of the warriors?