Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Kaiju, Mogaru

doc the grey's page

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 3,093 posts (3,118 including aliases). 16 reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 11 Pathfinder Society characters. 5 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,093 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SmiloDan wrote:

I think the main reason to use a reach polearm is to get lots of AoOs.

Maybe a way to use AoOs? Maybe the ability to make a 5 foot step after you make an AoO? Maybe you only get Precise Strike damage on AoOs? Maybe a way to spend panache to get a "cleave-like" extra attack against a different target when you make an AoO? Maybe a way to make any combat maneuver when you make an AoO?

Maybe a way to spend panache so you can attack a number of creatures within your reach equal to your Dex bonus? Written in such a way so you can combine that with the Vital Strike series of feats.

Hmm I like the idea of some sort of cleave buff. Maybe that she can move and cleave people at the end of it to encourage lots of mobility. Ooh like cleave on a charge, call it The Crashing Wave.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The Thread Necromancer wrote:
Do the Dark Folk have any pets or war "animals" associated with them?

Not that are immediately stated as far as I know but I assume you could go with a lot of different options that fit the subterranean vibe and still not intrude on the other guys. I could see them having spiders and a lot of blind albino animals like albino cave fish, giant albino newts, or giant albino cave shrimp like the ones out of B5 that have that hit so hard its like a sonic boom.

Non aquatic stuff is a little tougher but I could see them having solifugids or cave spiders & scorpions, I could totally see them having packs of albino cave solifugids they hunt with like packs of dogs. Part of me thinks they should have some mammals like a bat or something but can't really think of something that fits that isn't already really associated with something like the Urdefaden or Ratfolk.

Hope that helps man.

Shadow Lodge

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Crystal Fraiser wrote:
...and you daddy's cousin's great-aunt claims she spent a sweaty summer night with Mengkare.

HAHAHAHA! F+!~, I haven't laughed that hard here in a while.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Turgan wrote:
Precise Strike Damage halved perhaps? A swashbuckling dervish is an interesting idea. If only the swashbuckler would be a class more true to its name.

I was feeling something like that too while maybe letting the panache spend steroid be the same as before. That way it encourages more spending and risk reward behavior.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So I'm working on a new archetype for the swashbuckler focusing on glaives and other polearm like weapons that already fall under the swashbuckler's purview but am currently stuck on what needs to be replaced from the base swash and what to fill it with.

As it stands I know I want this to be something of a whirling dervish, designed to flow around the battlefield, dancing through combat, and smashing people before bounding on to the next target. I'm thinking she should have the whirlwind dance power from the Whirling Dervish, the Versatile Performance (dance) ability, and I think something to replace Precise Strike to balance out the damage bump from a 2 handed weapon but beyond that I'm not sure.

So does anyone have any ideas on cool abilities for a dancing polearm master or way to rebalance precise strike for a 2 handed polearm? Thoughtful advice is greatly appreciated.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lucus Palosaari wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Endzeitgeist wrote:

If you assume a default of early firearms being available fireworks behave as alchemical weapons, as they are based . That being said, there is a caveat for handgonnes and similar weapons in the lead-in section that discusses availability.

The section on firework weapons (New Firework Weapons) puts them directly in the same category as the fireworks in UE. Hope that helps!

Not really. I'm looking for information on the proficiency for Firework-Firearms rather than just firearms. The book makes a big deal of creating this category of these weapons that are kind of an inbetween state of the two like the Fire Lance and others but doesn't really define what kind of weapon they are in terms of proficiency.

Apologies Doc (and a special thank you to Endzeitgeist for attempting to answer) -- ironically Fourth of July kept me be busy and I didn't get a chance to really see and read your question till today.

They are meant to be both, depending on specifics of the setting and circumstance of their use. They are "alchemical weapons" a la existing fireworks, and typically speaking, rules for alchemical weapons would apply to them over "firearm" rules. That is unless they were beneficial, so like a gunslinger may get a bonus with firearms but not alchemical weapons, so you'd apply the better label as needed. With caveats.

I try to "get at" some of this, but it wasn't as clearly labelled as it could or should have been. Pg. 16 includes a comment about fireworks and pyrotechnics, and then pg 23 includes this block of text:

Firework-Firearms
In the original firearms rules published in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat book, the fire lance is a type of early firearm that is basically a javelin launched via gunpowder. Numerous similar weapons existed that launched everything from single balls of glass, porcelain, clay or stone to arrows and crossbow bolts to things as large as javelins or even as varied as pellets
...

Sort of but not really. The problem is that I assumed they were basically alchemical weapons where you don't need a specific proficiency but when I looked I realized the book doesn't give a hint of a ruling one way or another. The answer you give above kind of confuses the issue since if they always take the worst option that makes me think they would use a specific proficiency as it would fall under that, "unless they were beneficial" caveat you mentioned above.

I feel like they just need a sentence that says, "Firework Firearms count as alchemical weapons in terms of proficiency." That would clear up the issue and preserve balance since though the firework-firearms are good they come with a lot of downsides that balance the ease of use. Also now I can watch my party give commoner friends these things and pray they don't accidentally blow themselves up.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
...vile corruptions, where you have no control over the manifestations but can ignore the gifts to help you fight off the corruption's influence.

Care to elaborate on this more? As it stands this really doesn't make much sense. So you take a corruption, don't get any of its buffs, but get bonuses on saves against corruption?

Vile corruptions are an option for campaigns where corruptions are a horrid stain, as opposed to useful corruptions, which could lend itself to more of a "team monster rules!" boosted-power low-drawback variant, and the standard, which is somewhere in between.

Okay, but how exactly is it exhibiting that on a mechanical level? As it's presented it sounds like they really don't give you anything but a buff to fight corruptions which seems odd to burn book space on when I assume other preexisting feats fill that role (Iron Will etc.). If it's for narrative than how do these feats embody the concepts of a world where corruptions are even worse in ways that theme and narrative will not, what makes these corruptions so messed up that others will shriek in terror as compared to any of the others?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Also:

It looks like our Alchemist finally found Qyburn's manuscripts. It's good to see him picking up a hobby. Not so good for Valeros though, think we'll start calling him... Vincent Mighty, Tough Vince?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:
The death clutch spell causes someone's heart to leap out into your hand

Sweet we're finally getting Clutch of Orcus reprinted into PF.

Mark Seifter wrote:
Hive is related to a new subtype of aberration created by a depraved annunaki; while normally hive larvae gestate in your body for sustenance and then kill you, a hive corrupted character has survived a rare metabolic symbiosis, gaining hive-related powers instead like a hive mind or acid blood.

Sweet we're gettin' Xenomorphs! Surprised I haven't seen more people geeking on this. Does this mean we will get monsters in this book as well including the Xenomorph and more?

Mark Seifter wrote:
...vile corruptions, where you have no control over the manifestations but can ignore the gifts to help you fight off the corruption's influence.

Care to elaborate on this more? As it stands this really doesn't make much sense. So you take a corruption, don't get any of its buffs, but get bonuses on saves against corruption?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Endzeitgeist wrote:

If you assume a default of early firearms being available fireworks behave as alchemical weapons, as they are based . That being said, there is a caveat for handgonnes and similar weapons in the lead-in section that discusses availability.

The section on firework weapons (New Firework Weapons) puts them directly in the same category as the fireworks in UE. Hope that helps!

Not really. I'm looking for information on the proficiency for Firework-Firearms rather than just firearms. The book makes a big deal of creating this category of these weapons that are kind of an inbetween state of the two like the Fire Lance and others but doesn't really define what kind of weapon they are in terms of proficiency.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So quick question. Are firework firearms supposed to be exotic weapons like firearms or alchemical weapons like fireworks. I'm assuming the latter considering all the drawbacks they have but want to verify.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Oh dear, the Errata has come. Time for a summation and evaluation:

** spoiler omitted **

Actually you're off on some of the mundane items. The price change in the shield entry on the weapons table just lists them with the price for buying either the wooden or steel varieties rather than just the steel, the spikes just makes it the price of the shield with spikes rather than the price for adding spikes to the armor, the aklys actually has its damage reduced rather than bumped, the bo staff damage isn't so much buffed as actually written as a double weapon so it's kind of a wash, and the scorpion whip only gets all of its buffs if you have proficiency with both it and the standard whip (i.e. you can only use it as a lethal whip if you can also use the whip).

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
N. Jolly wrote:
Evelyn Jones wrote:
As a fan of the Vigilante class' mechanics (if not their fluff), I'm definitely interested in seeing what other companies can do in regards to improving a class as versatile and surprisingly-effective as this one. I'll absolutely keep my eyes peeled for this one.

I have grown to really enjoy this class, and it is very versatile. At the same time, there's some pretty strict design space here with which I've been toying around, and I think you'll all like the results of it. The playtest itself should be starting sometime this weekend.

doc the grey wrote:

Lol yeah or the wildsoul (bear in particular), brute (cool but gets in the way of doing your hulk out barehands smashing), the magical child (was hyped for some sailor moon and only have something that kind of lets you play card captor sakura maybe), or the agathiel from spymaster's handbook (your vigilante form is just beast shape but with no stat bumps and a hyper limited number of abilities from the spell).

Happy I wasn't the only one who didn't like the gunmaster either.

Anyway we'll get some swashbuckling Zorro options?

Trust me, I straight LOVE the core class, but a lot of the archetypes just...lack impact. Wildsoul is flat for too long, brute is just trash, Magical child lacks synergy (although I have a feat that'll hopefully help with that), gunmaster is...not good, with agathiel lacking versatility (it was close though).

I actually don't have something like that in there yet, although since the playtest will last for 2-3 weeks (depending on how it all goes), I might one up in the meantime, as I have already added Arsenal Summoner while waiting for this thing to go live.

Cool. There's actually been some cool stuff in a thread in the suggestions forum trying to update the Brute and it's had some interesting ideas. Honestly I think if their heavy hands talent just gave them flurry of blows along with Improved Unarmed Strike and some nat armor he'd probably be in business. Hell if they wanted to get a little more technical I'd be down with a hp boost either in HD size or health buff.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
N. Jolly wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Interested. Want to get a look at the mechanics for them though before I get too hyped, god love the vigilante but it has a lot of archetypes that just don't deliver mechanically on their themes like they should.

This is an entirely valid point, which is one of the reasons we've decided to playtest this. Last thing we want is to have another 'Gunmaster' style archetype that feels like someone super glued trashy deeds onto the vigilante chassis.

It's why I want to give you all the chance to critique, playtest, and give your thoughts on things so I can make a more viable set of archetypes for everyone, as well as prestige classes and talents.

Lol yeah or the wildsoul (bear in particular), brute (cool but gets in the way of doing your hulk out barehands smashing), the magical child (was hyped for some sailor moon and only have something that kind of lets you play card captor sakura maybe), or the agathiel from spymaster's handbook (your vigilante form is just beast shape but with no stat bumps and a hyper limited number of abilities from the spell).

Happy I wasn't the only one who didn't like the gunmaster either.

Anyway we'll get some swashbuckling Zorro options?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Interested. Want to get a look at the mechanics for them though before I get too hyped, god love the vigilante but it has a lot of archetypes that just don't deliver mechanically on their themes like they should.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Other vermin I'd like to see stated as animal companions:

Solfugid: Its a spider crossed with a wolf and a mouth like a vice grip. Charging crusher mouth sounds awesome and with that art in B4-B5 would be great as an animal companion min

Giant Flea: Read that statline and picture a goblin cavalier
mounted on a flea. It would be glorious T-T

Jellyfish: Let it get big and follow my pirate ship, stinging and drowning enemies as I throw them overboard

Urchin: Similar to the Jellyfish but instead a tank that hangs to my ship hull and trundles up the side of my ship poking people I throw at it.

Giant Caterpillars: I want to majestically ride through the fields on the back of a giant flesh eating caterpillar that spits out blood silk. I don't know how awesome it would be but I'm down for an option of deadly, adorable, and horrifying.

Giant Butterfly/Moth: I don't think we have these yet in game but I could totally see them in game as a kind of vermin horse expy. They aren't great in combat but are awesome mounts. Elven chargers on mother back... Want.

Sea Scorpion: Scorpion in the water from prehistory is all I need to hear.

Giant Tick: it's gross and it's built to ambush, could totally get behind a stealthy ambush tick designed to sneak up and grapple people while sucking them dry, tanking hits till the guy goes down.

Giant Mosquito: (Gimme a bloodbug dammit) In all seriousness a Bloodbug would be awesome and you could do it like the tick, swap stealth and tank blood drain for speed and bleed output

Giant Cockroach: It's a bigger mor horrifying bug version of the dire rat and I love it. Want to build a beetlejuice inspired dhampir hunter with a a cockroach companion all set for trouble. Speed, stealthy, tanky.

Giant Maggot/Giant fly: I don't know how this would be any good or what role it would fill but would be really cool to be able to have an animal companion that starts out in one form (maggot) and then dramatically shifts once it hits a certain level. Something interesting there.

Those are just a few of my quick ideas on new vermin companions I'd like to see.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Blymurkla wrote:
Joey Cote wrote:

Sell it? Turn it into a tavern or inn?

Even if you have a castle, it doesn't always follow that you are going to be able to generate income from it. Owning a castle wouldn't automatically make you the lord of an area, obliging the locals to pay you taxes. A really cruel GM might even plop down a castle in someone else's territory, creating all kinds of trouble.

What sort of screwy pseudo-medieval world do you live in? =)

Where I come from, the owner of a castle is per definition the lord of the area, or vice versa. If a castle sits in settled lands, no lord would let someone else own or build a castle in their domain.

Now, if the castle is in abandoned and thus currently unsettled land (which we probably can conclude, since Dryko mentions there being no peasants there), you're only lord of as much as you can fight for. But you'd still enforce your law and your right to taxation etc. for any peasant willing to settle close by.

Joey Cote wrote:
The castle might be abandoned and infested with trouble. Clearing it out and restoring it, trying to settle the area could be a fun adventure.

This is a great tip. Make sure your GM gets it, Dryko.

___

There's a great 3pp book called A Magical Medieval Society: City Guide. Contrary to the name, it deals with more than cities, including feudal manors (which castles, in essential, almost always are). You could recommend it to your GM, Dryko. Maybe even get it yourself, read up and make a suggestion on how the castle should work, how much income it would give each year and so on. But using the guide extensively takes work, it's not a really toolbox where you can cherry-pick things as you wish. If your GM shows no real interest in making the castle a focal point of the campaign, it's probably not worth the bother.

To give you the guides example manor, it generates an income of 9700 gp each year before expenses. The total...

What this guy said basically. Traditionally a castle is like a cross between a fortress, Wayne Manor, and the federal court. If you own it you collect the taxes and count/keep them here, train and station your troops here, handle court stuff here, and hold all your swanky parties here. For all that to work though you have to have people who you, ya know, lord over or think you are allowed to rule over people. Otherwise you really have just a big haunted house. Now, that in and of itself might be cool but it's now more of a reward for the party than you in particular since you are basically squatting in a big building you don't have the manpower to really run, attract peasants to work for, or maintain control of the land.

Now if your GM has plans to start having dungeons pop out of secret doorways and lead you to ancestral family heirlooms for your character than never mind but without a better idea of what your GM wants to let you do with it I can't really say much more. In the end you should really talk to him about it and ask what's going on. Is he wanting to let this jump off some big political game where you now have to rule this little land and deal with suddenly becoming this "Lord of Winterfell" in a land of other lords and ladies, is this the start of you and your fellow castle squatters discovering a lost vault of shiny macguffins, or some combination of the two?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The title says it all really but to elaborate, I'm trying to remember any martial class options (archetypes, classes, feats, etc.) that allow a martial, nonspellcasting class to get combat benefits for Perform (dance) in pathfinder? It's been a while since I've looked and though I could swear there are some but I cannot for the life of me think of them off hand.

So does anyone know of any?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Luthorne wrote:
Hmm, a Medium archetype that channels the power of monsters would be interesting. Maybe something like Genie or Lich for Archmage, Archon or Troll for Champion, Golem or Treant for Guardian, Angel or Unicorn for Hierophant, Dragon or Ghost for Marshal, and Fey or Succubus for Trickster?

I'd rather it be just an option rather than locked to an archetype. As it stands the spirit ability of mediums is already pretty modular and well balanced against itself since you can't really stack them or benefit from more than one a day. The minute you start limiting the list we run the risk of optimizing out other options that don't stack up or people just never using one option outright. Besides, I'm more down to see mediums who can sit on the throne of a king for his political acumen one day, the cave of a great dragon to fly and spew fire the next, and then on the grave of a vampire lord in Geb at last to gain his deathly sustenances that next Tuesday. Also it lets me as a GM surprise a little more with what might show up at a locus point ^-^.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Motion City Soundtrack's entire discography save maybe Go. Caught them recently on their Farewell tour and have been playing them pretty nonstop since. It is a shame that they are finally closing up shop.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dragon78 wrote:
Dragon themed medium and spiritualist options would be interesting.

Yeah, I'd totally be down for a medium who can channel some Smaug and breath concrete melting fire on some s#*@.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

anyone know if there has been talk of some draconic medium spirits appearing in this one? I have a player interested to know.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Update: I've added another ability to their list for more battlefield utility.

Check it out in the link here

Now, the other thing I kind of want to talk about here quickly is some of the design philosophy going into the construction of the unchained fighter and the principles therein which break down like this.

1.) Give the fighter more to do during combat by granting him more opportunities for complexity: As it stands the fighter struggles to offer much that makes it either stand out or match up to many of the other martial classes in the game often due to a combination of a bonus feat system it shares to some capacity with so many other martial classes that it's unexciting and slightly stymied and a list of unique class abilities that are often unintersting and very uninteractive with the player after initial selection. This mod looks to grant fighters more options on how they play across multiple builds while carving out new niches for unexpected concepts (like say board and mace heavy armored fighters who now can use that insane amount hp on a heavy mace to both damage and soak hits).

2.) To better allow players to craft the professional soldier archetype in many of its forms within the fighter class. A fighter on the surface should be the go to class for martial master of his chosen weapons, forging his own unique combat style throughout his level progression that by 20th has likely been carved into the annals of history and potentially taught to generations of aspiring swordsmen, archers, etc. or the backbone on which nations start devising their military training and tactics (to either use or defend against). Unfortunately, the fighter as it stands sort of putters along, kind of filling space and taking about the same amount of time as any other martial class to fill whatever combat/weapon style or role they seek to fill. This is why the increased feat number is so important as it allows players to get to boons quicker than other martial classses but also encourages them to branch out and pick up other feats and feat trees that complement their core tactics but likely would have been avoided when they were more feat starved.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Some more ideas; feel free to grab any/all. My goals were to help the fighter (a) deal with common conditions and keep on coming, (b) control the battlefield, and (c) eventually awe the people around him with his sheer heroic presence. Helping him with gear (d) was a tertiary objective.

Warlord (Ex): At 11th level, the fighter’s prowess and renown are is such that he can assemble an army eager to serve under him. This requires 1 week and provides personnel as if the fighter had the Leadership feat (if he or she already has the Leadership feat, the effects stack). The newly-assembled army remains until the purpose of assembling is fulfilled, or after 1 month of inactivity in any event.

Interesting. I think the Warlord ability is pretty good idea but I still feel like the fighter needs some option to choose instead of just leadership stuff. Also I'd want to limit warlord down to something a bit more focused and less unwieldy than a clod of npcs on leadership. Maybe some combination of pregenerated troop and Mass Combat setup.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Bump

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Other Brute fix

While in his vigilante identity a Brute receives the Will save bonuses of a barbarian of his level including Indomitable Will at 14th. These bonuses do not apply to Will saves to return to his social identity.

Mental Trigger: The wild and uncontrollable power of your vigilante identity protects you from mental control while putting everyone else around you at risk. Whenever a Brute vigilante fails a will save against a mind effecting effect while in his social identity he can choose to transform into his vigilante identity. This transformation causes the vigilante to treat his roll as a success and follows all the rules for transformations as normal. This talent can only be taken by Brute vigilantes.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cyrad wrote:

The brute is honestly not as bad as most people think. What makes it "meh" is that:

1) The ability is really, REALLY poorly written with several redundant sentences, poor organization of perks, and a tone that makes the ability sound more like a giant drawback than a class feature.

2) The entire archetype is an antipattern in game design. The archetype forces you to divide your character's combat and non-combat activities between your vigilante and social identities since seeing combat risks your social identity involuntarily transforming in a way that could prove fatal. The big problem is that whenever a fight ends, you're forced to transform back to your social identity. So you end up going through the annoying process of having your allies change you back, wait 5 minutes to rest, and then transform again. It just makes the character a huge chore to play if you're in a dungeon.

3) The brute is super squishy. They take a hefty penalty to AC, can't wear armor, and have a d8 hit die. Your suggestions do address this but I'd rather have a Con bonus since the temp hit points don't do anything for me after I take damage.

Agreed. The other option is they could just get d10 hp. I mean, if you are already buried in penalties and hamstrings than the upside on a design level is you can put way more buffs into the kit. Sure your the broad side of the barn in terms of targets but you've got a pile of hp and can throw buses at them. The trick is to make the options enticing enough that the risks seem worth it which seems to be the biggest issue.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Starbuck_II wrote:
Piles of good s+@#.

A lot of awesome ideas, really dig the updates man, natural armor is something that makes so much sense I kind of wonder why I didn't think of it lol. The big update I've been doing is retooling Heavy Punches which feels like it's supposed to be the bread and butter pick for a hulk smash sort of build but doesn't really give you everything you need like iterative attacks. Will explain more after the update

Heavy Punches (Ex): The brute eschews civilized combat and prefers to wade into a fight with his fists swinging. While in his vigilante identity, the brute’s unarmed strikes deal damage as if he were a monk of his size and vigilante level and gains flurry of blows as a monk of his level. A Brute may use Awesome Blow and Total Destruction as part of this flurry. If he has levels in other classes that provide monk advancement for unarmed strike damage, his vigilante level stacks with those levels whenever he is in his vigilante identity.

The flurry gives the brute the option of iterative attacks and with the Awesome Blow/Total Destruction integration encourages Brute players to dive in and just chuck s#$~ everywhere. Now you can dive into a fight and just awesome blow people across the room helter skelter while chucking the wagon, the mule, and it's driver at the castle wall.

Ohh also for the Will bump I'd argue giving it the barbarian's raging Will bump and maybe give it a talent that's like a boosted version of the barb's superstitious rage power. He's already unable to distinguish friend from foe well, now he's got the ability to also shrug spells.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Das Bier wrote:
Just give them a feat every level, or 2 feats every level. 2 feats every other level is a head scratcher.

A feat every level puts your feat count at 30 still staggers your tree progression and discourages grabbing up other feats outside your tree and reduces your combat versatility. 2 feats a level puts that at 50 feats including character and if you wanna talk about complexity try having 25 feats you can all turn on at 10th and you've been playing for maybe 2 months or less. Finally keeping the slot progression keeps the same progression reward drip pace (the rate at which new abilities are acquired per level) near the same and doesn't allow for certain levels to bunch up and dump a ton of abilities into a single level, enticing players to dip or run up to a certain level and then stop progressing in the class.

Das Bier wrote:
Your armor training is paper intensive. Just have the bonus grant DR and you're done.

This really depends on perspective. Barbarians rage, false life, stoneskin, Protection from energy, and protection from arrows all grant extra hp bars in their own right and in the case of the spells, much higher quantities than any item hp of commiserate level. Second, you're already tracking these numbers anyways thanks to sundering and other options for item destruction, this just gives your fighter a way to utilize it specific to the class.

Das Bier wrote:
armor training is a ONE LEVEL ability. Levels 7, 11, and 15 have NOTHING. The insanity of a +1 scaling of a low level ability counting as a class feature doesn't apply to spellcasters or even barbs, why is it applying to fighters?

Yes, but rogues, slayers, and rangers do. The flat scaling is modeled off the ranger's favored terrain and favored enemy with the bonuses being smaller to match the amount of player control the PC has to exploit these bonuses as compared to the ranger. I.e. the bonuses are lower because I as a fighter can choose what armor to wear or weapon to use rather than a ranger who can't always chose his enemy or the environment he has to wander through. Second, a fighter is still getting other buffs from those levels of armor training with penalty reduction, max Dex increases, and utilize his full movement speed in even the heaviest armor. On it's own it might not sound like much but considering this can pull up to a -4 off of a skill its a pretty big buff to skills and out of combat play. But if that doesn't float you're boat with the advent of the new armor training powers you can trade away levels of the ability you don't want for something else that is more suitable to your defensive playstyle.

All of this and we still haven't gotten to the buffs the unchained build adds. I talked about this above but to elaborate, you basically get to double if not triple your health, ignore a ton of status conditions so long as the damage isn't sufficient to destroy your armor (on hit poisons & diseases, touch attacks, on hit status effects, etc.), gain hardness based mitigation (way better than DR), and a whole new variable when you buy gear. Armor training may reduce hardness but it doesn't effect other resistances. Now I can get a red dragon skin shield, divert all that fireball dmg to the shield, and watch the wizard skulk as I just walked out completely unscathed.

Das Bier wrote:
Furthermore, change the +dex limit to a simple dodge bonus, so it always applies. Monks don't need a high dex to qualify for their class AC bonus, why do fighters?

Hmm... not a terrible idea but it lacks scope. The problem with a dodge bonus has more to do with the idea that not all fighters are necessarily nimble. The dwarven fighter bedecked in stone plate or someone who's building say the mountain or a tank through dmg akin to a barbarian isn't really the character who's sitting on a giant dodge bonus or is just bouncing out of the way. He just takes it on the arm or armor because he doesn't give a s&## and will either shrug it or beat you down faster than his opponent will. The other big issue is that as you progress up in levels AC bonuses matter less and less as attack bonuses race pass them, damage soars, and the cost to increase AC starts to fall behind the bonus you're getting. Why Barbarian's DR is so awesome and things like DR, concealment, and hardness become so valuable and remain valuable even at early levels and why it's king once you start cresting 10th and definitely by 12th.

Beyond that not an awful idea, I'd just want to play with it more to let it open up to more character concepts that don't want to go more nimble and better accounts for the environment past 1-5th and 5-10th level play.

Das Bier wrote:
Insert automatic AAT options there.

Not sure what shorthand you're using here, guessing advanced armor training but I'd rather wait for confirmation on your end.

Das Bier wrote:
Your WT starts at 5. The fighter once again is the only melee class without a damage bonus at level 1.

Actually, they kind of do from your bonus feats. Weapon focus, power attack, piranha strike, point blank shot, two weapon fighting, and splintering weapon are all just a few options to boost your atk or dmg output as a fighter at first. The problem is that since they are feats that everyone could theoretically take at 1st it usually gets overlooked and with only one and feat taxing one often has to go through one has a tendency to not pick them up. The upside of the increase in feats is it allows fighters to grab up some of these feats if they want while still having room to pick up the feat taxes they need to get to whatever their build needs.

Das Bier wrote:
Parry, as armor, paper intensive. Drop it. just give +1 Weapon groups and +1 to WT as a scaling bonus, and find something else to put in there at 9, 13, and 17. Find another way of soaking damage then having the fighter bleed gold for fixing his gear.

See the armor answer above as well as the swashbuckler who can perform a similar ability at 1st with a limited pool mechanic they have to juggle. The ranger favored enemy argument is more applicable here as well as the weapon groups put even more control in the hands of the player than favored enemy hence the lower atk & dmg output. See the slayer favored target power for another example of this.

As for the fixing, mending is a 0 lvl spell that any divine caster can grab up and immediately endear themselves to the fighter. As for mundane means repairing an item costs 1/5th of its total value and in a pinch an oil of mending will cost you 12.5 gp, slightly more than a single bullet and powder. Also mending.

-------------------------------------------

Das Bier wrote:
Where are your movement options?

Armor training and item mastery feats (dim door & flight off your magical gear, the latter of which you can get off of your physical stat buff belt) give them the options on their own and allies help buff the rest. Realize that an update needs to allow the class to better exemplify his narrative niche alongside a team, not overwhelm and push out everyone else.

Das Bier wrote:

Skill points? Skill bonuses?

Out of combat options?

Answered in previous response.

Das Bier wrote:
Recovery/healing options?

Explained above with the ability to transfer damage around your gear. It allows the fighter to protect themselves by spreading the damage around their gear rather than themselves, keeping them safe and potentially mitigating some serious status effects. A 3rd level fighter against a wight can choose to throw a slam onto his shield or armor rather than himself, taking nothing and negating the fort save or neg level he would have gotten if it hit him. That's pretty powerful.

Das Bier wrote:

Any warlord/marshal options?

Leadership options?

I've wondered about this a lot and I am interested in the option but still fiddling with how to implement it. If you want to talk about increased complexity issues try having X number sentient goons you or your fighter PC gets to control and move around the field. It's like a summoner with a pile of loyal mortals who aren't so alien they could want to be paid in rocks and only fight underground or be paid in conflagrated children and calling upon them rots your soul. It takes a very special player to run a bunch of intelligent characters together well and not cheese it and that's not something every player wants. Still, there's something here to mull over for a base class sans an archetype.

Das Bier wrote:
Are your capstones equivalent to 9th level spells?

I think this is kind of a false comparison on a couple levels. 1, 9th level spells are something that all casting classes have long before 20th and aren't really capstones. 2, by what 9th level spell you compare it really changes your metric of success. Do you compare it to something like freedom, spell that is very powerful in a specific circumstance, or something like wish, gate, or time stop that have such wide ranging power in their own right that they are nearly impossible to balance against in every instance that one could think up in just 5 mins or so?

Das Bier wrote:
Defenses and immunities?

See multiple damage spreading mitigations mentioned above from armor and weapon training. Again to restate, hardness is like DR but applies to ALL forms of damage not just physical and the training doesn't mitigate resistances on the items or the inherent immunities items have for being items. Pretty awesome to have a black dragon shield to block acid arrow with or a red dragonhide shield to eat a fireball.

Das Bier wrote:
Do you have a feats update or rewrite?

Not really, I try to avoid rewriting feats rather than the class since it means a ton of work on my end for things not every fighter will be seeking to use while a fix to the class is something all of them immediately benefit from. Second, it allows for less updating of preexisting fighters as possible, allowing GM's and players to slot this stuff in with as little fuss as possible.

That said, I have been looking to fiddle with the way combat maneuvers are implemented in combat. Likely pulling them off of attack replacements and putting them in as options after the hit like a wolf's trip or something akin to that. Likely keeping the AoO without the commensurate feat. Stay tuned for more on that.

Das Bier wrote:
These are the main fighter problems.

Thanks for responding! Hope this answers a lot of your questions ^-^.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Sir Charles the Bold wrote:
You've given fighters more options in combat, which i feel isn't quite what the fighter needs. A fighter needs more options out of combat, with skills and other ways to affect the story. What you made is interesting, but i don't think it hits the nail on the head of the issue. Why do you think the fighter gets left behind?

Honestly, the biggest issue with the fighter is how quickly other classes (martial & magical) begin to outstrip the fighter as you move along the level progression path. Barbarians get rage powers, wizards hit the arcane spell bump around 5th and their battlefield utility explodes, and the improvements to paladins smite let them completely dominate in a lot of encounters and their spellcasting helps supplement that in any case where smite isn't really usable.

Meanwhile, the fighter just kind of chugs along. The vast majority of builds get pigeonholed by deep feat trees that soak up all of your feat slots to pay out really late compared to the wait for casters or other martials like ranger or Barbarians who start paying out rage powers, favored enemies, favored terrains, even ranger combat styles let you get into powers you want quickly without having to invest down a tree.

And all of this doesn't make any sense. The fighter is the professional soldier, the all day muscle, the clock in killer. This is the dude who wakes up sharpens his blade, checks his armor straps, and then goes out and stabs people and gets stabbed for people for his daily bread. Barbarians fight cause they have to do everything, rangers hunt and try to avoid being hunted, paladins are the educated hands of their faith, but the fighter is a professional soldier solely. With all that in mind it's a damn shame they don't compete.

So my goal was to try and bump that back up, give the fighter more umph on the battlefield. So to start I looked at what all of those classes really get on a mechanical level and what those abilities bring to the table during combat. In the end the biggest thing is versatility. Rage powers, spells, smites, favored enemy, all of them give a character utility on the battlefield beyond just flat dmg output and have some sort of control vector to entice the player to use them. The fighter doesn't really have a lot of ways to get that level of battlefield complexity on it's own barring feats which in and of itself isn't really unique, everyone gets feats and getting slightly more very specific feats isn't even unique to them. What they need is some way to pull that way more if bonus feats has been designated their thing and some more powers that they can make their own.

Now the extra feat and stipulation help there. With 2 feats every other level a fighter can start to develop a fighting "style" long before every other class. A Human fighter at 2nd is now sitting on 4 feats from their class alone and another 2 character to do with as they want, giving them a lot of upfront space to build complexly. This is especially true for feat heavy builds that usually don't get much play like crossbows, 2 weapon, sword & board with multi focus (think shield feats & weapon feats), slingers, etc. On top of that the tree limiter encourages investing in feats that can be useful to their concept but are outside of those feat trees. Things like lunge, shattering weapon, shield focus, dazzling display, and other lesser used feats become more attractive in your build when you have a free feat slot, your ahead on the feat tree, and something like lunge would really complement your reach build.

Next up the deflection power grants you extra health bars that can potentially double or triple your health easily. A suit of scalemail is sitting on 20 hp and 10 hardness, a greatsword has 10 hp and 10 hardness, and you can totally purchase both on a 1st lvl fighter's salary. Once he's got both your average fighter (+2 Con for math) has doubled his health AND and ignore most poisons, injury diseases, and on hit status conditions since once the damage is on your gear the effects transfer over and are in most cases negated. This also prioritizes sundering into a lot of builds as a way to handle the black hole that is hitting this new fighter.

Finally, the extra feat opens up your character feats that are gained through leveling and lack restrictions for a multitude of other options. Now that the rush burden is better handled by the fighter feats those slots can be used to collect up things like skill focus, eldritch heritage, or whatever non combat feat that fleshes out your concept or increases your out of combat utility if that's what you're aiming for. Also, considering that the character feat doesn't have the same restrictions as the bonus feats it makes it a work around if you really want to rush into a tree.

As for the out of combat stuff I'm honestly not that interested. As stated above, the fighter is a specialist focused on beating the snot out of others for fun and profit. The soldier doesn't do the diplomacy stuff it's why the gods gave him bards, he doesn't pick locks because the specialist does that and in exchange he cuts the orcs on the other side of the door into tinier fractions of orcs, and magic for the most part is the stuff the wizard does to the other wizard and his crew and in exchange he keeps said wizard and his cronies from killing his wizard. Now, this does not mean he is necessarily incompetent in the performance of some of these tasks (traits, skill focus, etc. can get you pretty far) but he also knows that his training is all about the battle field and things directly pertaining to that. Along with that, with the decreased burden of feat selection thanks to the bonus feat increase and the inclusion of item mastery feats to the bonus feat roster the fighter has more room to build in utility than ever before! Compulsion Mastery & Illusion Mastery give you social utility with access to a Con based Suggestion and Minor Image while the Dispel Mastery, Flight Mastery, Telekinetic Mastery, and Vision Mastery feats give tons of exploration utility and responses to magical hindrances they lacked before barring the aid of a caster.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Luthorne wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
psychie wrote:

In addition to the previously requested rogue talents and enchanting courtesan prerequisites, I would also appreciate info on the rogue archetypes and the vigilante talents.

Thanks!
** spoiler omitted **...
You actually can take harsh judgement as any vigilante, the Zealot already has there own version of this just with the full suite of options for judgement rather than the smaller list this gives.
While I'm not going to quote anything, given it's a week until the pdf comes out, you might want to reread the last sentence of Harsh Judgment.

Crapspackle, you are correct. That makes that ability far less appealing than it was before. Wanted to see a Brute of a demon lord with the ability to throw down judgements when he's all hulked out. Hate having to house rule around s#+! like this...

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
dragonhunterq wrote:

I don't believe it is spelt out specifically anywhere, and I'm not aware of a darkwood tower shield being out there somewhere to use as a comparison,but the consensus when I asked a similar question about mithral is that the ACP for masterwork is already factored in.

That said, the wording on darkwood might be sufficiently different from that of mithral in that "2 less than an 'ordinary' shield". I'd say that a masterwork shield is not ordinary.

Yeah that's what I figured. That said I do wish the wording was a bit clearer about whether certain reductions are based on materials or on the masterwork quality of the work.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So I've been working on some updates and redesigns for some of the core classes and was wanting to get some feedback on some of the redesigns and right now I want to talk about the fighter. One of the backbone classes of the game the fighter always feels like it gets left behind by the time you reach 5th as the complexity of combat increases but the fighter himself never really gets a chance to catch up. With these updates I'm hoping to bolster them up a little and give the class a bit of that complexity and more options while on the field.

Check out the link here and let me know what you think and I'll answer any questions and explain design decisions below.

Edit: Anything that is not mentioned is left unchanged from the original work.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Does the -2 AC penalty reduction shields get for being made of darkwood include the reduction from being masterwork or is it separate and needs to be calculated together? I'm guessing it's the former but it's not easy to find an example in print that answers one way or the other on this.

Any answers with sources would be greatly appreciated.

Shadow Lodge **

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey, I messaged you guys about my schedule about 3 weeks ago and still haven't heard back. I've got questions that I'm really looking for answers to.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Tentatively excited? I really want this to be good but considering it's the same universe in the future I'm a bit more interested in seeing what that world is supposed to look like and what things are changing mechanically before I get too excited.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Porridge wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
psychie wrote:

In addition to the previously requested rogue talents and enchanting courtesan prerequisites, I would also appreciate info on the rogue archetypes and the vigilante talents.

Thanks!
** spoiler omitted **...
You actually can take harsh judgement as any vigilante, the Zealot already has there own version of this just with the full suite of options for judgement rather than the smaller list this gives.
What's the Zealot ability you're thinking of? (I can't find it...)

Opps you are correct. Must have been thinking of the version the zealot had in the playtest. Instead they have access to the smite power AND could take the harsh judgement ability so you could theoretically throw on both.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Luthorne wrote:
psychie wrote:

In addition to the previously requested rogue talents and enchanting courtesan prerequisites, I would also appreciate info on the rogue archetypes and the vigilante talents.

Thanks!
** spoiler omitted **...

You actually can take harsh judgement as any vigilante, the Zealot already has there own version of this just with the full suite of options for judgement rather than the smaller list this gives.

Also, there are social talents in here as well.

Social Talents:
Bellflower Innuendo: You can deliver secret messages to others in the same amount of time you would a normal conversation and divination spells need to make a CL check to sus out what you're actually saying.

Companion to the Lonely: You draw strength and renewed vigor from the passions you share with others. 1/day you can hook up with someone and get a morale pool that you can burn points from to reroll Cha skill checks or Will saves.

Discreet Inquiries: can make gather information checks discreetly. It takes longer and costs 2d4 gp but you don't expose yourself to people who might wonder what you're doing looking into the goodly count who lives on the hill and totally isn't hosting ghoul murder orgies.

Kalistocrat Acumen: You follow the prophesies of Kalistrade and as long as you do you can treat settlements as bigger for the purposes of purchasing things.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Eric Hinkle wrote:
If Luthorne or someone else would be so kind, just what is this seamless skin magic item that he mentions?

It's a magic item that is made a full body suit made from the skin of a single humanoid. Anyone who wears it takes on the exact appearance of the person it is made from, match his size so long as it is within 1 step of your own, and gain stat buffs as per Alter self (but nothing else from the spell).

Just imagine a giant, flesh colored, vinyl body suit except its made from one guy and when you slip into it you look like him. Creepy, horrifying, and incredibly good.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Eric Hinkle wrote:
doc the grey wrote:

Oh my copies are in hand! So since initial thoughts.

2.) The Execution Inquisition is sadly underpowered. The initial power is good, but the 8th level is bunk. A 1/day ability that that just lets you make an attack as a standard action and IF it hits and they are flat-footed then the crit you might make auto confirms. That's a lot of qualifications for an 8th lvl to potentially work.

Hmm, my planned Inquisitor of Dammerich definitely knows what his Inquisition will be!

And that 8th level power, doesn't the game already permit you to make an auto critical hit against someone who can't move? Given that this seems intended for use with legal executions where the target won't be running and dodging, it does seem kind of unnecessary. Unless of course I'm just missing something that can be found in the actual book.

Yeah. In combat it's also crap since it basically requires you to give up a full attack for what is basically [i]the chance[i] to auto confirm a crit if you make it. Basically you are giving up all of your attacks that turn for a special attack that has a 5-15% chance of even triggering. And if you miss or fail to crit the ability is used up for the day and you'll have to wait till tomorrow since it's a 1/day. Not really worth it.

That said, the starter ability is really good. +3 to effective level with most of your attack and save judgements (but oddly NOT your atk steroid) against your chosen target is pretty slick.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David N Ross wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
3.) The wing staff is cool, happy to see the avatar flying staff statted out and addas a nonmagical item. Wish the angular descent thing was a little clearer but overall pretty cool.
I'm glad you like it! Thanks for reading.

Yeah I thought that was a nice surprise. But it does raise a few questions.

1.) When you say "...can glide downward at a 45-degree angle in a straight or diagonal line..." what do you mean exactly? If the use is already descending at around a 45 degree angle aren't they already moving in a straight line, does it mean they can zigzag around during their move, or is that meant to be that they can fly straight ahead or descend diagonally at up to a 45 degree angle?

2.) I'm surprised that their isn't anything in the write up about using blasts of air to delay your fall/give you ascent. How does that work with the rules at play, can an aerokineticist just throw gusts of air up under it to push themselves back up or would the wing staff requires some sort of feat investment or special rules to do tricks like that?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Oh my copies are in hand! So since initial thoughts.

1.) There are a lot of sex options in this book surprisingly. Inquisitior gets a seduction Inquisition, Companion to the Lonely social talent for vigilantes, Calistra's Kindness alchemical item, and the Enchanting Courtesan prestige class. Surprised, interested to see if they are any good mechanically and thematically.

2.) The Execution Inquisition is sadly underpowered. The initial power is good, but the 8th level is bunk. A 1/day ability that that just lets you make an attack as a standard action and IF it hits and they are flat-footed then the crit you might make auto confirms. That's a lot of qualifications for an 8th lvl to potentially work.

3.) The wing staff is cool, happy to see the avatar flying staff statted out and addas a nonmagical item. Wish the angular descent thing was a little clearer but overall pretty cool.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:

It never ceases to amaze me how strongly people feel about "Good" in D&D. I mean, you can put pretty much anything in a book about demons/devils - from baby-eating skin-wearing chainsaw-wielding splatter to "vaguely CNish bordering on redemption" and everybody is cool, except that one person who was tricked by their (ha!) friends into watching Martyrs and how as a panic trigger button that goes off every time the topic of flaying somebody's skin alive is brought up.

But put out a book about heavens and you suddenly get folks get up their arms about things such as their ideal vision of what celestials should look like, what their mental stats should be, what 'goodness' exactly is, how Arshea shouldn't be Good because she's really CN or how Ragathiel is really LE (yep, I'm a bit guilty of the last one) and what pronouns should be used in the context of ultimate benevolence.

I mean, folks, take a walk, go to a church, talk to Father Spirit, experience some divine transcendence on the top of the impossible mountain and realise that this is just a game of pretend-elves.

But I that sidesteps the whole point of contention. The problem is that though we the consumers can't decide on a consistent good it seems Paizo can't decide on a consistent theme for their good outsiders either and seems to want to just continue the course. Unfortunately that just leaves us with a lot of options for good creatures that just come off as boring or mishandled and this issue is rooted in the Azatas, Angels, Archons, and Agathions on a conceptual level. Each of them is so indistinct mechanically and thematically that you could mix them up and without the art not really tell the difference.

Angels have bird wings and are "not evil", Azatas are elves standing into the breeze, Archons are angels with some armor, and agathions all look like a new fursona for someone out their and that is really all that defines them. There descriptions even as races come off dull with most of these descriptions describing each race as "good" rather than defining what good means to them collectively. By what philosophy are Azata's designed mechanically and thematically to perform their good, what about Angels, why and how does the whole animal theme thing work with agathion design philosophy both mechanically and narratively? Hell, why are so many angels designed around war?

All of the outsiders come off like they were made by dozens of people working in isolation to answer these questions and no one ever sat down to collate and center these thoughts around some sort of idea. That whole feeling runs in direct opposition to the many awesome outsiders we have on the evil side like the Devils, Demons, and Daemons. Say what you will about them but we know when you read about any of them as a whole they have a thematic current running through every member of that subtype that informs their design from how Daemons each represent this nihilism and death to how Devils are all designed to enforce the rigid, militant lawfulness of hell from top to bottom.

I think until we get some sort of better definition of how each of these groups does good or a theme to the good they do we'll keep seeing this issue and I think boiling this whole argument down to people will fight about it so lets not is needlessly reductive to solving a problem that I think is well within Paizo's power to handle. Hell they made the Empyrean Angel, The Choral, and the Redeemer angel I think they can put something together that gives us some theme for each of the good outsider races.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Orang-pendak, androids, and Ghorans are all awesome new additions out of B5 that have seen a lot of play and use in my homegames alongside skinwalkers.

Orang-pendaks basically act as an offshoot species of playable bigfoots in my home game that also have a penchant for breeding Megaprimus in the few large mountain strongholds that exist. Meanwhile, most live in the great plains surrounding the area, living as migratory hunter gatherers that look to avoid a lot of the other human races.

Androids get a whole lot of use after the excellent ecology article in Iron Gods and get to fill this niche as the last inheritors (or projects) of this civilization that existed long before the rise of man and though many don't remember it their existence is a continuation of that legacy.

Ghorans are just cool since their whole design brings up a lot of interesting ideas about predation, predator prey dynamics, the mindset of plants, taste, and narcotics all in this one package. They are a plant race that originated as food stock that tastes so good creatures have an easier time holding onto them with their mouths. Their is a lot to unpack their that I'm interested in exploring both in characters and from a sociocultural narrative standpoint.

Beyond that I'm also really into hobgoblins as a player race since from what we know of them I'm really excited to see more. I mean, they are a meritocracy that doesn't demarcate their society down gender lines and assigns tasks without care for gender or sex. That's cool and leads to a lot of interesting questions like are they agender, what does gender and sex mean to them, how did their culture remove the reliance on the gender binary across the board from their culture? I got a couple more but that feels like enough to show off the possibility in unpacking those questions.

Also, totally with you in thinking the Lizardfolk are cool. Really wish we had more stat blocks for them that made them 0 HD and gave them some more diverse abilities to represent the plethora of reptiles that they can be inspired by.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CBDunkerson wrote:
Slithery D wrote:
Outside of fiction, where do genderless beings exist?
Ummm... here on actual non-fictional planet Earth?

This guy is right but to clarify, when we talk about the concept of gender we are talking about the mental cultural construct of sexual identification rather than the biological concept of sex. Gender is the idea that those who identify as men do certain things (beyond just having male genitals) that make them manly and women do things that we think of as womanly. Gender is why in the states the phrase "You throw like a girl" is an insult because it is built on the gender concept that women can't throw well/shouldn't be able to throw well or are not good at sports while men are.

From that, agendered people are those who don't really identify with any of the 2 (at least in the US usually) common gender options and instead fall somewhere else that could be in the middle, outside the scope, both, or something wholly alien. This in American culture (can't really speak to others too well atm) can be a big change to their assumed norm and at least a little alien to think about. Realize also this doesn't have anything to do with who they are romantically or sexually attracted to which is a whole other topic in and of itself. It also doesn't necessarily have anything to do with transsexuals, who identify biologically with another sex than the one they were born in.

Now, all that said we've had agendered people for a while we just often don't see them in American media and as an already small portion of the population are exposure to them at least in the states can be very minimal to nil but they are here. Adding characters to represent and explore these lives that we rarely see I think is an amazing opportunity for interesting narrative that has for the longest time in western media remained untapped and unexplored. That said, I do agree that we need to diversify our pronoun use to better accommodate the plethora of specific gendered identities that could fall under the use of "they" and to help avoid confusion, especially considering that these individuals will often be written as interacting with a small group of individuals who's pronoun is already "they, them, their" (the PCs). Otherwise I worry we'll start running into a "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo" style situation sooner or later and much more often than we might like.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jessica Price wrote:
Squeakmaan wrote:
Considering the criticism that just using "they" (Which is completely grammatically correct and has been in use for centuries) for beings without gender received, I highly doubt using any other terms would have been well received at all.
Yeah, and while I care if non-genderfluid/nonbinary people have trouble understanding it because of the pronoun choice, I don't really care if they don't like it, any more than I'd care if a guy didn't like women using "she/her" to identify ourselves.

So are you saying that you/Paizo will not change or consider changing the pronoun policy even if the grammar is stated to be confusing by customers but not necessarily its content (i.e. yay more agender/nonbinary, please use other pronouns to alleviate confusing sentences), that Paizo will consider a more diverse set of pronouns to help alleviate this confusion, and/or that only non-genderfluid/nonbinary people can be confused by this?

The last point in particular feels REALLY demeaning towards those of us that have voiced concerns about the use of they and as if none of us could be agender/nonbinary or deeply rooted in communities and cultures of agendered/nonbinary people or hell even sympathize. I feel like my thoughts are being patronized on assumptions about who I am rather than the merit of the argument, like I'm some kind of child without a thought worth assessing or that the thought that I could actually be someone who is agender/nonbinary and am talking from my own struggles and discussions or deeply tied to it is inconsequential because of a lens I'm being viewed through. It sounds a lot like I'm being mansplained at.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Slithery D wrote:
doc the grey wrote:


As for the review, click the reviews tab here, it should be the only one.

Seemed a little short.

Lol yeah but it was late and I didn't think I could write anymore. Think I should add another page? ;)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Uzziel the Angel wrote:

Yes, I have ADD too and used to get a great deal of D&D material created back during my finals weeks in college when I was supposed to be studying. :-D

Thanks for the review. So what's the CR of an empyrean angel?

Thank you ^-^.

The angel is a unique, CR 24 empyrean angel that serves Bahamut. Unfortunately that's about all that's really different about him. He's got another 5 HD and uses a quarterstaff and has one new special ability that really isn't anything to write home about that allows him to do 2d6 fire damage per round in a 10 ft radius and turn into a gold dragon 3 times a day. It's really depressing power since 2d6 fire on a CR 24 creature is basically just wasted stat line at that level and 3 transformations feels like too few for a powerful angel crafted by the god of dragons to watch over a chunk of his realm and seems like something he should just be able to do a la change shape. Hell, they could have taken a page out of Princes of Darkness and at least made the fire holy fire and make it half fire half raw good or something.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
CharlesMarkley wrote:

I notice that the Flip Mat: City Streets was re-released as part of the "Classics" line. Is there any plan to re-release this map pack? I'm not sure it is worth the $99.00+ price currently on Amazon.com for stockpiled copies, but I am interested in getting the printed version.

Thanks.

I don't know if they plan to do card pack re releases atm but I believe they reprinted these cards on the back of the new flip-mat as the interiors to the buildings they were originally meant to represent.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Uzziel the Angel wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Ohh cool, it's nice to see I'm not the only one having problems with this one! Been stuck in finals work for so long I was worried I would be the only one having problems with this book. Wrote a review, it is... critical to say the least.

Heh, my students are taking their finals next week (at least in two of my classes). Is finals week the best time to write a review? :-D

Do you have a link to your review?

*edit* Lol not really but this has been kicking around in my head since I got my copy and with my ADD and the bulk of my other work out of the way I figured I might as well get it up now rather than let it rattle around in my head for much longer. Also I wanted to try and get it up before it got out or was on the shelf too long so people could read about what they were getting into.

As for the review, click the reviews tab here, it should be the only one.

1 to 50 of 3,093 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.