darth_borehd's page

Is the strength bonus still 1.5X or is it doubled now? Also what if a character has a strength penalty, like -1. Can he get rid of the penalty by wielding his weapon two handed?

I started off using standard full HP + CON Bonus + other bonuses. I had a problem with the wizard of a newbie player in the group getting himself reduced to 0 or below often. However, the fighter who took the Pathfinder version of toughness was never running out of HP.

Instead I've been using a rule that instead of being dead at -10, your dead at -CON score (not bonus, score) - Best Hit Die for a class you have. So the wizard who had 12 CON would be dead -18. The result is that he was going down just as often but the rest of the party didn't have to worry so much about him dying.

Anybody have a good called shot system that works well with Pathfinder? I have my players asking for one.

The Pirate Queen sounds interesting. Where does she appear at?

How about getting rid of the different types of damage reduction entirely?

Just make all DR like the Barbarian's.

It fits with mythology and literature for creatures to have a weakness. The proverbial Achilles Heel.

I propose a couple of changes to the bard:

Bardic Music should be a unique type of bonus--not a morale, competence or other type. This way it will stack with everything.

Bards should never need material components. Fiddling around with bits of stuff is for wizards. Instead, I propose that spells that have costly components be replaced with Perform checks equal to 10 + 2*spell level + 1 for every 100 gp of the material component.

Then what would I use my d100 die for?? Seriously, you can do that, but I like the percentile rolls as a way to clarify that they aren't modified by anything. That's why stabilization check stayed as a percentage. The designers wanted to make it clear that it wasn't modified by anything.

Yea... but there is something very cool about casting a spell with pocket lint, six cheetoes, and a stapler.

Kind of makes me feel like a magical Macgyver.

Then you sir, are a wizard. Sorcerers on the hand, are supposed to be ones where magic comes naturally. If wizards are the MacGyvers of fantasy, then sorcerers are the Fonzies.

I think of Pathfinder as an alternative new edition of D&D. I agree that 3.5 had its rough spots. Pathfinder finely smooths out those rough spots and makes for a nearly flawless set of rules; while 4th edition chucks 3.5 and sets off in an entirely new direction. I don't like the direction that 4th edition went, so I'm sticking happily with Pathfinder.

I like the built-in Eschew Materials for a Sorcerer.
Although, I don't think IDENTIFY(and quite a few others) should be free for a Sorcerer. Even though currently a Cleric with the MAGIC DOMAIN can already do this(IDENTIFY free of charge) once he receives 2nd level spells.

I do not like the Emo Self-Cutter idea of "sorcerer's blood". It reminds me of the "Witch" prestige kit that was released. The witch required large quantities of human blood... aka cauldrons in volume.

Sorry, at the same time, I do not have a better solution. :)

I don't know what en emo self-cutter is and I never saw the witch prestige class. I was trying to come up with some way to balance sorcerers getting rid of ALL material components while still balancing it with wizards.

A Mark of Justice with a "Offensive spellcasting" trigger?

A pair of heavy gauntlets that incur a massive arcane spell failure chance?

Mark of Justice would work, but only if the town has a cleric high enough to cast it.

Arcane spell failure does nothing to stop the school-granted and 0th level spell like abilities.

Does a grappled or pinned creature that uses a Spell Like Ability need to roll a spellcraft check? What about the supernatural abilities some wizard schools get like Acid Dart?

I still need some help with this.

Whereas players like to be 'lucky' and score critical hits, they're pretty glum about fumbling, and it's a bit of a campaign derailer when you break your only silver dagger when fighting the werewolf.

But it makes for much more exciting battles. It might also force the players to have backup plans in place or to improvise creative solutions. The player who fumbles might be glum but the other players usually find it hilarious.

Also, with all the talk about how fighters fall behind in the damage stakes compared to spellcasters they don't need another hinderance.

Whoever says that is mistaken. A fighter equipped with appropriate gear for his level should be dealing out as much or more damage as a spellcaster, who are going to face more and more magic resistance or high saving throw monsters as they get higher in levels.

this belongs in the new rules forum

Oops. How do I move it?

darth_borehd wrote:

I noticed all the domains from the SRD were converted to Pathfinder except scalykind. Does Paizo hate kobold clerics??

I think the Mind domain also got left out.

The Scalykind domain does seem to share quite a bit (conceptually) with the animal domain.

I don't think the Mind domain is in the SRD.

Ok so here's my stab at a Scalykind Pathfinder domain.

1st Poisonous Bite (Su): You gain a poisonous bite attack that does primary and secondary damage of 1d6 Con. The DC is equal to 11 + your Charisma modifier. The DC increases by 1 for every two levels you attain.
2nd Body of the Snake (Su): Your skeleton becomes amazingly flexible for up to 10 minutes per caster level per day, granting you a +10 on Escape Artist checks. The bonus increases by +1 for every 2 caster levels you possess.
4th Jaws of the Crocodile (Su): You can unhinge your jaw to grab large things. You gain the Improved Grab ability 1/day for every 3 caster levels.
8th Poison (Sp): You can cast Poison 1/day.
12th Eyebite (Sp): You can cast Eyebite 1/day.
16th Creeping Doom (Sp): You cast Creeping Doom 1/day, except that is comprised of tiny snakes.
20th Regenerate (Sp): You can cast Regenerate 1/day.

I favour having commoners pick any four class skills and gaining the illiteracy class feature. I'd also like to give them a bonus to using diplomacy to plead for the lives of themselves or loved ones. It just seems something common in fantasy. And maybe add a class feature where if they know a person with PC class levels they are 75% more likely to be captured but 90% less likely to be killed.

We've always used these house rules and I think they would be a great addition to Pathfinder:

Deadlier Critical Hits: When you roll to confirm a critical, if the confirmation roll would also be a threat, then keep rolling until you don't get a threat. Each time you get a threat, increase the damage by another x1.

Critical Fumbles: If you roll a 1, roll again to see if that would also miss. If so, then you drop your weapon or fall prone if unarmed (or simply lose your turn next round if flying or swimming as you recover and turn around). If you rolled a 1 a second time and on each successive roll, then you not only drop the weapon but you must roll its damage against itself. If you are not proficient in the weapon you are using, then you also do 1 point of damage to yourself. Keep rolling until you do not get a 1.

Does a grappled or pinned creature that uses a Spell Like Ability need to roll a spellcraft check? What about the supernatural abilities some wizard schools get like Acid Dart?

I like the fact that you might keep different weapons on hand for different foes. I don't see why "golf bag" is a problem. It seems in the fantasy books I read that heroes often have to pick the right weapon for the job. Werewolves? I got my silver arrows here. Demons? I got holy weapons for them. Vampires? Here's my wooden stakes. Medieval legend is chock full of monsters that can only be killed by certain things.

On the other hand, I can also see very powerful weapons being able to hurt anything. So I would revise the list like this:

DR Type Bonus Equivalent
bludgeoning/piercing/slashing +4
cold iron/silver +5
adamantine* +10 (provided creature is not epic)
alignment-based +8 (provided creature is not epic)
Combination (ie silver & good) add equivalents (ie 5+8 = +13)

I think the DCs are pretty balanced. It should be hard to take out higher level PCs. The main problem in 3.5 was the save or die spells but Pathfinder has pretty much done away with those.

Pathfinder made improvements with the separate beast shape, dragon, and plant spells but I feel there is still room for improvement. The polymorph spells just seem to be missing a lot of things you find in fantasy movies and books.

Specifically:

• There is no way to turn yourself or another creature into a fine or gargantuan (or colossal for that matter) size creature. A high level spellcaster should be able to turn into a really big giant something. And becoming insect-sized has its advantages.
  
• There is no way to turn an unwilling creature into anything other than a 1 hd animal. What about turning a beautiful princess into an ugly ogre or turning the strong barbarian into a weak goblin?
  
• No ability to change into vermin. No ability to turn into giant scorpions or monstrous spiders or force enemies to turn into regular sized flies or beetles.
  
• No mass polymorph for any class except the druid's animal shapes. Why isn't there a higher level baleful polymorph to turn a group of enemy soldiers into mice? Or allies into gnolls?
  
• You can't impersonate a specific individual. Why? Isn't that a common fantasy element? Like Crouch impersonating Moody in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
  
• I'm not clear if Polymorph Any Object has been removed from Pathfinder. If not, does it still function the same way?
  
• No ability to change into oozes. Why?
  
• No ability to change into fey. Why?
  
• No ability to change into aberrations. Why?
  
• It's unclear if Alter Self and the like allow you change into monstrous humanoids.
  

While regular D&D had this problem as well, I think Pathfinder with all the spell like abilities have made it more difficult. basically the question is: how do you "disarm" spellcasters?

So imagine a scenario where the party gets captured or wants to enter a peaceful town that does not allow weapons. All the fighter types have to check their swords and bows and other weapons, but what do you do with spellcasters? Taking away their holy symbols, spell books, and component pouches is a start, but you still have those spontaneous casters and at will abilities to worry about. Any ideas?

I noticed all the domains from the SRD were converted to Pathfinder except scalykind. Does Paizo hate kobold clerics??

I gave this some thought a while ago ... why would anyone, including NPCs, take levels of NPC classes?

Rather than assign compensating abilities to make up for the lesser abilities of the classes, I decided that anyone who takes a level of expert, adept, warrior, or aristocrat gets a 25% 'bumper' of XP upon taking that level. So a 1st level aristocrat starts with 250 xp. Commoners get a 50% 'bumper'.

So, NPCs who need saving throws, skill points, and feats, but no fancy class abilities to be better radish farmers, merchants, etc.

That's my solution, any way ...

I like that idea. I might go with that.

Multiclass XP penalties have been disappeared in Pathfinder. Instead, favoured classes grant you a bonus if you take them now (right now, it's one extra HP per level, though personally, I'd prefer an extra skill point. Makes more sense).

Where is this located at? I've looked all over the Alpha 3 release and I see where they get an extra hit point for being in a favoured class, but not where they remove the XP penalty for multiclassing out of the favoured class.

As for the rest: This is unnecessary. The NPC classes are fine the way they are. They don't need a power boost so PCs can take them. The're NPC classes, after all.

There are a couple of reasons.

#1) For roleplaying reasons, a character might want to take a few levels of a NPC class without also gaining the abilities of one of the PC classes. (your summer spent as a blacksmith expert does not grant you sneak attacks, etc)
#2) A player might need x skill or ability to enter a prestige class and doesn't want to get a multiclass penalty (again, I don't see where that has been removed) or taking another PC class to do so would not fit the character concept [see #1]

If players want one of them, they have to live with the fact that they're weaker than they could be.

Which punishes people trying to roleplay their characters and so by extension rewards power gamers for not taking them. That just doesn't sit well with me.

If you want a stronger warrior, get a fighter, or maybe a barbarian, paladin, or ranger. If you want a stronger adept, you become a cleric or druid, or maybe wizard or sorcerer or even bard. And so on.

All of which might be totally wrong for a character. For example, going back to the blacksmith PC. Which class do you take to represent this? Rogue? Bard? Wizard? All of them have abilities tied to them that just don't fit the concept.

Do adepts cast 0 level spells at will like the PC classes?

I think there are some reasons for PCs who might want to take these and there are lot of NPCs that seem to have a mix of PC and NPC classes (like the lumberjack in Module D0 that was Expert/Ranger). So I propose the following additions be made to them:

• NPC classes have no multiclass restrictions. They are not counted when determining if a character has a multiclass XP penalty.
  
• Once a day, adepts can add their adept level to a Spellcraft check, provided she is a location holy to her deity, surrounded by or protecting her deity's followers or holy relics, or furthering the cause of her deity.
  
• Once a day, aristocrats can add their aristocrat level to either a Leadership check or any one of her class skills.
  
• Once a day, commoners can add their commoner level to a diplomacy check made to plea for the welfare or lives of themselves or people they care about. If a commoner has ranks in another class, they may also add the commoner levels as a bonus to disguise or bluff checks to pose as just a commoner.
  
• Once a day, experts can add their expert level to a check in a class skill that they designate upon taking their first level as expert.
  
• Once a day, warriors can add their warrior level to a single CMB check.

A couple questions borehd, if I may.

1) Was the rest of the dungeon in stasis while she was casting away?

It was in the forest. I rolled for wandering monsters about 6-10 times. Twice something came and attacked her and she was able to overcome it.

Did you take into account armor and weight penalties for the swim check?

She had leather armor and a +4 bonus to her Swim check.

Did no one think to lower a knotted rope to her?

She was separated from the rest of the party except an NPC which amusingly enough was also failing his climb checks

Weights and measures was never my thing, how long would it take to fill the pit?

I actually calculated it. A 10 X 10 X 10 pit holds 7,500 gallons of water and would require 3,750 castings of create water taking 6.25 hours. After about her 10 failed climb roll, she opted for this instead of my offer to let her take 20 with 3d6 points of damage (estimating she would fail by over 5 about 3 times).

2) Was one extra HP really that overwhelming? Assuming that the party was scouting with their rogue, then I'd call this teamwork.

It wasn't one extra hit point, it was about +5. The spell has no limit on the number of times you can benefit from it. She kept casting it on the fighter during combat as well so he was getting 1 hp a round.

3) Acid spash doesn't bypass hardness. And again, I take it the guards were asleep?

Acid and sonic attacks bypass hardness, unless I missed that Pathfinder changed it. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/exploration.htm#hardness

Guards were outside the room. He rolled high on his Stealth checks and they rolled low on Perception.

4) Honestly I don't see an issue with this. He's a gorram wizard! He's at a disadvantage w/o the pouch, but with ray of frost online all day, he's not helpless. (As an aside, I do often take Eschew components as my human bonus feat, or play psions)

It does seem to be more in line with fantasy novel and mythical wizards who rarely resort to weapons. However, it changes the idea that wizards without spellbooks or material components or items are in serious trouble. It's not bad, just unexpected. P.S. I love Firefly too.

5) creative use of a cantrip. beats tearing his robes to mark trees all hallow.

It does and it turned out to be a neat idea. It was however, not something I anticipated.

I'm not trying to attack you personally, please don't take it as such. I'm just saying I feel there are rules already to handle the changes you present. Between that and a dynamic environment I don't think it's unbalancing.

Well, I think it is unbalancing but that its the DM/module side of things that needs to be fixed. I think Pathfinder needs a DM section that deals with how to compensate for the changes casued by unilimited 0 levels when using standard 3.5 adventures.

There are also mundane methods of handling a lot of things handled by magic.

True, but they all have a limitation based on finite resources. The 0 level spell like abilities can be cast an unlimited number of times. Not even material components are needed as far as I can tell. That fact alone causes changes. Take for example that a torch is worthless for its usual purpose to somebody that has light as a 0 level, whereas before it was useful when his slots/prepared castings were depleted. Enterprising low-level PCs can earn money by fixing things with mending or refilling waterskins with create water in hot climes.

Personally, I like that my party's battle sorcerer is acid splashing everything, or tearing into things with her claws. I like that my sorcerer can choose to have a witchlight (dancing lights) follow him and scount. I like that my wizard can cast detect magic and sense items "Because I'm a wizard." I like that my bard can snap his fingers and have a trumpet at hand. It's magic, it's flavourful, and it's my favourite change in the Alphas so far.

I mostly agree with you (of course it depends on the flavour of the campaign if you want your spellcasters to be using magic so casually). I'm just concerned that they have unintended results or create loopholes that some players exploit catching a DM without a good way to handle it.

I noticed a few things in the alpha 3 and I wanted to make sure the changes were intentional.

1) The barbarian no longer looses his rage ability if he becomes lawful.

2)The bard is any alignment now, no longer any nonlawful. By extension, they also no longer loose the ability to progress in Bard if the become lawful.

3) The paladin and monk may multiclass freely. I like this change and hope it was intentional. :)

If I've missed something, please point it out. If it's a mistake and has already been caught, please ignore.

I noticed those things too. I wonder if that it was intentional or not.

What happens when the favored enemy is normally immune to death effects, such as undead or constructs?

Is master hunter a death effect? Would a zombie be immune to this ability? Or is it an exception?

My personal interpretation is that it is an exception. I picture Buffy kicking a stake right into a vampire's heart or Ash decapitating a deadite in one stroke.

I had a very successful fighter/wizard build. Fighter levels specialized in bow and arrow and wizard specialized in conjuration. Not a front line fighter, but his lack of armor was rarely a big deal.

The 1st level druid in my first Pathfinder session used create water to get out of a pit trap. She kept failing the climb check and so just filled the pit with water until she could reach the edge and get out. I totally did not expect that.

She also was casting virtue over and over again when a battle was anticipated.

Then the wizard had trouble getting out of a chain that was attached to his foot. He used acid splash over and over again until it did enough damage to the chain for him to get away.

Also, even though the wizard had his spell component pouch and other items taken away, he was still using ray of frost on his kobold captors to good effect.

While lost in the woods, the wizard also used arcane mark often to see if he was walking in circles. The party was later able to find him by following the arcane marks using detect magic.

To make bards even more useful, I thought of making bardic music it's own bonus type, that way it stacks with other competence or moral bonuses. Anybody forsee any game breaking issues with this?

Eschew Materials just seemed like a step in the right direction. I think Sorcerers should be able to cast completely without material components. So I came up with this idea for a class feature to keep the game balanced.

Sorcerer's Blood
Since a sorcerer receives his spellcasting ability from his bloodline, a sorcerer uses his own blood as a substitute for material components. Whenever a spell calls for a component with a value greater than 1 gp cost, the sorcerer instead bleeds himself. Every hit point of damage he causes himself is the equivalent of paying 100 gp per sorcerer level. This is treated as subdual manage and must be naturally healed, not magically healed. The sorcerer must have a slashing or piercing weapon to use this class feature.

For costly spells, a greater sacrifice of a sorcerer's flesh must be provided. This grants a 1000 gp per sorcerer level for every point of CON damage. This damage is temporary but must be naturally cured. Magical curing will not work.

A sorcerer's blood is useless to anybody else but himself and it must be used immediately to cast a spell so it cannot be stored.

It seems like some might want both. I can think of a couple of ways to do this.

1) take a level of sorcerer with an arcane background
2) use a feat that allows you to summon a familiar, like that one from Complete Arcane.

Would there be any other way?

It seems to make sense to me that any soldier would receive training in battlefield medicine. It would also make fighters more useful once the battle is over.

The only tweak I would do on the Pathfinder bard is make bardic music a unique kind of bonus. In other words, it stacks with everything except itself.