ghettowedge's page

I will now roll a 5, an 8, and a 4.
3d10 ⇒ (5, 8, 4) = 17

I think this thread raises some serious questions.

I know that Paizo's message boards don't have a "rating" or "age-appropriate" categories.

But I do think this is something the company should think about.

Not because the material is pornographic, but because "she" is cruising a site where a lot of young people traffic.

"Jenny" may be exactly what she says she is.

But trolling sites looking for contacts with young people, using a distinctly sexual come-on, is something that should raise red flags.

In at least one place "she" asks for a means to communicate privately with posters.

If I were the folks at Paizo, I'd think about this carefully. Again, this "persona" could be entirely innocent.

But the next sexualized avatar cruising this list might be deliberately predatory.

On a more personal level, the entire "Jenny" persona strikes me as creepy.

One of my biggest raves about 3.0 (and subsequent iterations of the game) was the effort to tone down the overt "barbarian in a bikini" sexism.

(Of all the forms of sexism, this may be the most wearily sad.)

The fantasy genre as a whole outgrew that adolescent tripe about a generation ago.

Paizo's close affiliation with authors like China Mieville suggests that the company "gets" it.

I'll be blunt: That so many people here have been interested in this giggle-nudge stuff is depressing.

--Marsh

+1

Usually, the only things in a non-WotC book that aren't open are references to the setting or names of characters.

I don't see Close Wounds in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rule Book. Is it an at will, or a domain or something?

It's in the Spell Compendium. I referenced it because I didn't know you were being specific to PRPG.

Thanks for all your feedback, and, if you happen to see this listed in RAW, please send me the page number.... I'll be lifting my house rule soon, as I believe in house rules, but in this case it seems I was under a false impression.

In the Pathfinder Core Rulebook p. 190, it only says "when your character's current hit points drop to a negative amount equal to his Constitution score or lower, or if he succumbs to massive damage, he's dead." It does not say at the end of the round in which the damage occured.

P.s. So, let me just ask this as a follow up.

Scenario: Classic 20 foot pit trap.
Trigger: Rogue misses disable device check and the trap is triggered.
Area of effect: 1 other Player Characters is standing in the 20 foot area, two others very close.
Question: Do you, following the logic of the above, "dead instantly rule", have all the characters save at once else fall to their death? Do you not allow anyone to make a dex or CMB or Attack roll to grab the falling character or grasp the edge to save themselves? I guess, I am now feeling awkward about the discussion above, as it seems deviate from normal sensibility about "what happens in a round." I just don't like the logic this takes me to....
DM: Igglespot, you trigger the trap and Vorthsemith disappears from view, falling into a vast pit.
Players: Hey, can I grab him?
DM: No, the effect fully occurs on his count.
Players: Well, can I try to grab him on my turn?
DM: No, sorry, Dex, CMB, Attack Rolls would be way too powerful if I let you use them to affect Vorthsemith's fall.

This example actually helps me explain the close wounds thing because feather fall is an immediate action that can be cast in response to somebody falling. Note that you can't cast other spells (PCR p. 443). The rules for catching a falling character are on p.91 under Climb (I think this works being somebody falling is essentially provoking an attack of opportunity by moving through your threatened area). And most traps have a Reflex save to avoid a fall.

So, why shouldn't the GM pronounce death at the end of the round? The players attempt to grab him on their count, and if unsuccessful? Why shouln't the nearby cleric be able to cast a heal spell on poor Vorthsemith?

I wonder why I am having such a tough time with this instant death thing? Hasn't everyone always allowed the party a chance to save folks when their dying per RAW?

Admittedly confused,
-Pax

I think your confusion stems from the first edition method of initiative, where everybody declared their intended actions and then the initiative count determined when they actually happened. Thus a trap goes off at the beginning of the round, but nobody falls until the count comes up. A fighter could swing but the action would be negated because the rogue moved before the attack was resolve.

I don't know what edition actually dropped that system, but in 3.x everything happens when it happens.

Somebody really needs to help Sefra!

Nice job with that last move Mythacris, awesome :)

Never actually played with a wizard in the group before, sad to say, I'm likin it.

Thanks. I've only played with "striker" type wizards before. Despite being able to damage multiple enemies, I was never impressed with them. I'm not really doing any damage, but I think I've got a solid handle on the control part of my job.

What about the delayed action? What if Thebius the Ever-Watchful choses to use a Ready action, "If Willowurt the Injury-Magnet gets attacked, I cast heal."

Well, a delayed action doesn't matter because when the character jumps in, it's on the next initiative count. But a readied action essentially happens before the action that triggered it, so that would help.

are you suggesting, that if your players reach -CON you say, "You're dead," on the spot?

Yep.

What about the others in the round who haven't acted yet?

Sucks to be them.

Hmmmn. this issue vexes me greatly. Initiative count is an abstraction that facilitates game play i.e. if a group of 6 selects to run (move x4) in a round, the GM doesn't stagger their squares in a line based on count, so why shouldn't others in a round (ostensibly free to move to equal positions normally, somehow prohitited from enacting a "Heal the dying before the end of the round" move on their count? This just doesn't add up - pun intented. lol

You've figured out the reason they've added interrupts like close wounds to the game. If you house rule it your way, you've made cure spells a lot more powerful. Look at how much close wounds prevents. It's less than cure light wounds, but a level higher. Why? Because it can jump in and save somebody's life, but cure light wounds can't.

With a scream the bandit falls back in the hole. And he takes 8 damage.

A'loran's turn.
The Map
A'loran - 20 (26/32 hp)
B1 - 18 (-34 hp; bloodied; sanctioned; prone)
B2 - 18 (-25 hp; bloodied; cursed; knocked prone on a hit; -2 defenses; sanctioned; prone)
B3 - 18 (-32 hp; bloodied; cursed; knocked prone on a hit; -2 defenses; prone)
B4 - 18 (-18 hp; bloodied; knocked prone on a hit; prone; -2 defenses; sanctioned)
Tregger - 18 (-57 hp; marked; bloodied)
Kava - 18 (39/39 hp; 5 thp)
Latro - 14 (35/35 hp)
Canas - 13 (40/40; 6 thp; prime shot vs. B3)
Rulf - 5 (36/36 hp)

I once had a party fight a room full of fiendish house cats.

Ah, good times.

Do I have this right?

Per RAW, you die the moment your hit points reach -10 or less. The only thing that can save you at that point is an interrupt (like close wounds).

I hadn't noticed that it was happening at the ends of turns, I was just going by the text. The only reason I questioned it was if I was aware it would have changed my action.

This is going pretty great for me too, despite being halfway dead since my first turn.

I don't want to clog the main thread with a rules discussion, so:

Mythacris wrote:

Xabulba wrote:

Mythacris teleports away from Dagon’s side only to be pulled back and into the lightning field, he does manage to re-dominate Dagon and and damage hunter 2 with writhing shadows.

<Eye of the Abyss, aura 10, enemies that start their turn in the aura are pulled 5 squares>

What pulled me? I didn't start my turn out there.

Mythacris wrote:

Use my extra move action from Planeshifter's Action to teleport to U28.

U28 is exactly 10 squares away from Dagon and therefore you would be affected by the Eye of the Abyss.

If Eye of the Abyss says enemies that start their turns there are pulled, how come I was pulled halfway into my turn? Are you saying that it doesn't happen at the start, but anytime after I start? I'm not going to argue how you rule this, but I need some clarification for future reference. This is a departure from how I've played start of the turn events.

The Chelish Inquisition wrote:

eirip wrote:

ghettowedge wrote:

There still is a risk of hitting an ally. If the ally is between the character and the target, the ally provides cover to the target (+4 AC), and if the attack roll misses the target by 4 or less, but high enough to hit the ally's AC, it hits the ally.

Could you state where those rules are at? I have never heard of this rule for 3.5 although I have heard a few people claim that there is such a rule.

This rule is in the 3.5 DMG on page 24 under the variant rule section Striking the Cover Instead of a Missed Target.

Something seems odd about this though...

What if you're fighting a monster with AC 35; Normally it would take a natural 20 to hit the thing with your arrows... BUT if you aim for the tree behind it (AC 10), then you now have a 4 in 20 chance to hit the creature. lol

Ultradan

You still have to roll high enough to hit the cover's AC. If not, the cover gets in the way, causing you to miss the target, but doesn't damage the cover.

There is no penalty to attack a mounted opponent. However, with a DC 15 Ride check you can use your mount as cover (no action, roll before opponent rolls attack). Rules Compendium p.88.

And as long as you have the Mounted Combat feat you have a chance to negate the hit if your opponent hits the cover.

I just checked the map page and Norton told me the site had 3 security threats. If your computer isn't protected be careful.

I'm thinking about dominating Dagon out of the pool. Never thought in a million years I'd be dominating a demon lord.

For a while I was running a 4E game on Wednesdays, 3.5 every other Saturday, and PRPG every other Sunday, until time constraits forced me to drop one (Sundays).

This was during the infancy of 4E and PRPG so the words "I like this better in the other game" came up pretty often. As to issues, I still have two players that play in both games, and rule mix-ups happen from time to time. Luckily (or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it), I'm a rules lawyer, so I' pretty quick to spot any discrepencies.

For a while after running 4e I was the most vocal about wanting to switch all my games to 4e. However, after a year or so, I've come to see some of the headaches in that system too (I traded easier prep for bogged down combat in paragon tier). So now I'm trying to appreciate each system for what it is.

Sorry for not citing the reference.

Precise Shot negates the -4 pretty quick and the cover rule helps make archers at least move around a little. And the rule helped teach my players how cover works pretty quick.

There still is a risk of hitting an ally. If the ally is between the character and the target, the ally provides cover to the target (+4 AC), and if the attack roll misses the target by 4 or less, but high enough to hit the ally's AC, it hits the ally.

I don't know if it matters, but I'll be unable to post Friday-Sunday. My wife and I are going away for the weekend to celebrate our birthday (the 9th).

Just letting you know that I'm going away for the weekend (celebrating my wife's birthday and my birthday early - both are the 9th), so I won't be ableto post Friday - Sunday.

I've bought a lot of minis from Auggie's through ebay in the past and can attest to their reputation.

Excellent!

Now - before I forget and decide to stick with a sorcerer of some kind - what do you all think about triple strikers? Good thing? Bad thing? Tell me to go away and cook up something else entirely?

I hardly ever play fighters (don't like them much), but it might almost be fun for a one-off battle if you all think we're sticky defender light.

Play what you want. For one extended battle it's not going to be that big a deal. We'll either win or lose, hopefully that will be dependent on more than what role you play.

I have a PS2 already, I was hoping to consolodate.

Dot

Thanks for the info, but last night my wife jumped the gun and bought me a PS3 as an early birthday present. My only regret is that I was going to try getting a backwards compatible model on ebay. Don't get me wrong though, the one she bought is pretty awesome.

I meant to get equipment purchased today, but the wife gave me an early birthday present (PS3) and that got put off. The character should be 100% by this weekend.

I've got all the books and DDI so go ahead.

Would you like the character file? If you don't feel comfortable posting an email address, I'm ghettowedge@yahoo.com.

Sounds like fun. I'd like to play a wizard, probably an illusionist. I can hit the character builder right after work.

BTW, in case it matters, Wednesdays are a no-post day for me, as I have work and a f2f game right afterwards.

From last night's Savage Tide session: 3 vrocks can do a dance of ruin (20d6 in 50' radius). They're more likely to complete it if they're invisible and silenced (I didn't do that, but I thought about it).

I am about to buy a PS3 and I need some help.

I got a Wii as a wedding present a few months ago and it has helped get me back into video games. As happy as I am with the Nintendo frachise games (Mario, Zelda, Metroid) and the games my wife can enjoy with me (Guitar Hero, Wii Sports), I'm starting to look for a more hardcore experience. I think Silent Hill was the kicker because it didn't fulfill the SH experience I got from SH 1, 2, and 3.

Anyway, I've decided to get a PS3. I know what games I want and the Blu-Ray is bonus. So, what should I know before I buy one. What are the different hard drive sizes and costs vs. their worth. What are the pitfalls with a PS3 (does it die like 360's). Would it make more sense to buy on the secondary market (ebay or used) and what prices should I look for.

Any input would help, and thanks in advance.

Scott Betts wrote:

(let's face it, dragons are popular, aboleths not so much)

Funny, I would so buy an aboleth mini. In two years my game has "fought" one dragon. By fought I mean rescued, befriended, then went on a side quest to gain the blessings of a god to make it smarter.

I understand the need to have popular monsters in packs, but I would certainly buy more packs if I had a better idea if what I was getting.

But did you buy an aboleth. I know my FLGS still has dangerous delves packs with aboleths and unicorns sitting on the display.

You can do it!

I would also classify myself as anti-ghetto.

Why the hate?

No problems here. Feel better.

Paul Worthen wrote:

A big, big part of the easy factor is that everything you need to run an encounter is right there in the encounter writeup. The monster stat-blocks contain all the info you need to run the monsters, the trap stat-blocks contain all the info you need to run the trap, the terrain info is right there. You don't need to pull out other books or look anything up.

In 3.5, a big time-waster was monsters who had a long list of spell-like abilities. As a DM, you had to flip back into the PHB every time you wanted to use one of those abilities. An NPC mage was a nightmare to run, unless you had an encyclopedic knowledge of what every spell did. Then, if the monster had a magic item, then you needed to reference the DMG to find out what the magic item did. If it had some feat you weren't familiar with, you needed to look that up.

Ah, so you're saying it runs a lot easier because it's more effects-based?

Not that it's effects-based, but that the details for everything a monster can do is in the stat-block.

Skill challenges as-written punish people for playing naturally, and that is why they are broken. Anecdotal evidence can't fix a mathematically broken system, no matter how many times you say sentences that are synonymous with "I don't think there's a problem" or "I don't see any problem."

Sorry, I wasn't trying to argue with you. I've seen the empirical evidence and trust it, but I just wanted to say that in practice skill challenges have worked for me and my groups. Maybe people, especially those new to the system, should play a few out and see if the broken math behind skill challenges is a problem in their game before they start worrying about them. I run them as written and skill challenges have done what they were intended to do, making 4e easier to DM for me.

"I want this to be an easy challenge; how do I make that work?"

"I want this to be a hard challenge; how do I make that work?"

The actual answers to these questions are obscure and the written answers to these questions are wrong. The reason the system is broken (depending on the version) is that "easy" challenges are very hard and "hard" challenges are completely impossible, or that players are told that the good strategy is actually very weak, or other, similar flaws.

They're indistinguishable from just rolling dice and counting the number of rolls divisible by 3, because they're arbitrary, do not respond intuitively to strategy, and are completely imbalanced mathematically. You're suggesting obfuscating the math even more, which is a lot of work for zero payoff.

What's more, you're creating a whole complicated system of rules for challenges the players are expected to form some strategy to solve or defeat, then not telling the players about that system. It's a system meant to be "metagamed." Skill challenges are a challenge where the players are supposed to figure out what their character does best to solve the problem, then do that thing. That's how people figure out complex tasks in real life. The problem is that the system does not reward or replicate the real-life way of solving complex tasks: specifically, breaking it up into smaller tasks and having each person take the part best suited to their skills and temperament. Instead, it punishes that sort of strategy. Making it such that players don't get to form any strategy...

I run a 4e game, right now the PC's are at 12th level. There have been a few skill challenges. I've read how the math is broken, how the DC's are too high, and how the best option is to simply aid another so that only 1 character gets to play.

All of that might be true in thoery, but in practice, in actual play, I have to say skill challenges do what they're supposed to do. I give the players the set-up, and I emphasize what their goal is (not the skills to use, but the actual end goal). We take initiative and go around the table. I ask each player how he or she would like their character to contribute and have them make the relevant check. They succeed or fail and we keep playing. The success rate has been about 50/50 and nobody is questioning the system.

Sometimes there is a character that is the best in a situation. Sometimes there is a character that appears to have no way to contribute and can only aid another. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I seem to have players that would rather play D&D than win D&D. Some characters are better at hitting and dealing damage, but no party just aids another to let that character hit. Maybe people are just looking at skill challenges the wrong way. They aren't win or die situations, just a fun way to deal with non-combat situations that should allow all the characters to participate.

Just my experience.

So what do we have in terms of characters so far? What is everyone thinking of playing? I like to fill in the gaps with a role that hasn't been covered yet. :)

I'm building a tank fighter. Everything I have is going into AC.

No need to rush. I'll be busy enough trying to absorb the information. Those were just things I thought of while reading.

I plan on using the national bonuses, etc. from the IK core book for humans (otherwise you'd all be basically the same).

Just for clarification, instead of the floating +2 from PRPG, we'll be getting the regional bonuses and penalties from IK, right?

There is a good chunk of regional information. Is there a specific region we should be paying special attention to? I assume you're expecting characters from different regions.

I have a question: Will we be using battle maps, where position and tactics will matter, or will combat be done in more of a mind's eye fashion?

I'd prefer the former, but wouldn't be upset if it was done another way.

I'm at work, but I can't stop thinking about my character. I guess it's one advantage of 3.x over 4e. I don't plan at all with my 4e characters. I've think I've decided to go tank. Maybe fighter with heavy armor, shield and weapon expertise.

As soon as I downloaded the book I read through the healing section. My confusion with the system right now is the Mechanika (I think). I haven't thoroughly read the section yet, but skimming it left me intimidated. I can't tell, but it looks like those items are cheaper than magic items, but do the same stuff.

And don't worry, I'll have a ranged weapon. As a DM I've seen way too many melee characters become useless because they didn't have enough sense to even buy 1 javelin.

GW, yeah, I know what you mean with the opened booster packs. I would think that there new set up (one visible and better distribution) would also go a long way towards that. BTW, your mailer box is not an immortal part of my mini organization system, which has spilled over from two crates into three. Yay, Christmas!

You're lucky. I've sold off all my rares and around 600 commons and uncommons, yet mine are still taking up an entire bookshelf in the spare room.

Btw, you and everybody else that bought from me contributed too a fantastic wedding and amazing honeymoon. Thank you doesn't even begin to cover the memories I expect to have for the rest of my life.

I was thinking of playing a more melee oriented character.

My first choice would be a barbarian/rogue, a hot-tempered northman big and fast, and a terribly dirty fighter.

My second choice is a classic paladin of the Morrow, leading into Battle Chaplain.

I'm leading towards the first, but taking suggestions.

<Dotted>

I'm fine playing a human, especially since this is my intro to IK. I'm just downloading the book now and will try to get a concept up soon.

> I picked up 9 or 10 booster packs in a going out of business sale. Woot! Nothing much in there, but holy crap they use a lot of unnecessary plastic and cardboard to pack these things! Wonder if its to make it look like a greater value?

The extra packaging is to prevent shoplifting. I can't count the number of boosters I haven't bought because the bottoms were open, usually from chain stores.

And glad to see your still hating. I hope it keeps you warm at night.

Thanks! I'll download it and post a character concept after work.

RPGnow.com has the character guide on sale for $10 until the 7th. If I get approved I'll buy it, but not until then. And would this be the only book I'd need?

Also, I can post just about every day except Wednesdays. I have work all day and then usually go straight to a f2f game right after.

Got it. Not sure if/when I'll use it, but $10 is too good a price to pass up.

Looking to join in a pbp, but I also have no knowledge or access to the Iron Kingdoms rules.