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

goldomark's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Marathon Voter. 411 posts. 3 reviews. 1 list. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 411 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The review of this product needs to be removed. It is a spambot.


Gates. Gates are the way to export/import merchandise between cities.

No need a bunch of high level wizards constantly teleporting stuff. Just a few high up wiz who build gates once. That is much more cost effective.

Now the game is about guarding those gates, who gets to use them, the quantity of goods one merchant can send through a gate, sabotage, invasion...


lemeres wrote:

I'd also throw in something like the bard's performance or an inquisitor's judgements, along with the weapon.

This is because, while summoners are fantastic spell casters with access to lots of buffs (at levels earlier than any other class) as well as standard action summoning, they do not have much in the way of bonuses to combat abilities. That is why they have eidolons: those critters have more than enough combat prowess to make up for it.

Actually, following the weapon training that sohei monks get would work out well balance-wise. You know, the one where it gets an extra +1 to attack and damage at level 6 and every 6 levels after (so +3 at level 18). Not great enough that they completely overshadow bards, but more than enough that others couldn't say "wouldn't this work just as well with a half-orc rogue with your buffs on it?" or "couldn't you just play a magus instead?".

Hmm...maybe add in that their summoner level counts as fighter level for feats though (and possibly use their level instead of BAB for prerequisites). The feat investment necessary is enough that it seems fair, and it again makes the summoner better at what you are trying to do here: hitting things while still having magical abilities (without stepping the the magus' toes too much). Add on the black blade mechanic from Magus and it should be fine. I'd play it at least.

That is the plan, but I wanna make sure I do not give access to a weapon that will be too powerful.

I want to give the weapon a +1 enhancement bonus at level 1 and one more every 4 levels (max of +5 at level 17). I also want to give a +1 bonus for special abilities starting level 3 and one more every 4 levels after that (max of +5 at level 19). The abilities would be limited at first and the list expend as the summoner increases in levels.

Too powerful, considering only the summoner could use it and BaB stays 3/4?


How many NPCs does that amount to?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Nelson wrote:
Lots of quasit love!

Low CR mythics are welcomed and desired.


Quasit
Bodak
Shadow Demon
Gulgerak


I'm working on an archetype that would make an eidolon a magical weapon instead of a monster. How much is an eidolon worth in gp, depending on level, of course?


Stats on couples in PF adventures are clearly needed.


If Epic and Mythic are so different, why do I need them to fight Demon Lords like Dagon or Pazuzu (both have stats in 3.5 and PF)?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:
So the REAL question is, would you prefer The Genius Guide to Horrifically Overpowered Mythic Feats (which takes existing Mythic feats, and overpowers them horrifically), or The Genius Guide to Mythic Horrifically Overpowered Feats (which would do mythic versions of the existing Horrifically Overpowered feats)?

Bolded part. Super powered mythic feats I do not need them... Yet.


I guess some people will say that 3e D&D has nothing to do with 3.5 D&D.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
LazarX wrote:
ShortRedandLoud wrote:
Mythic is more comparable to Epic levels in 3.5, than Divine ranks. Some similarities, though.
It's not comparable at all. mythic ranks are not class levels, the way epic ones were. They're also not a system that does not activate until level 20, they are a parallel system that can be used as early as first level.
Stop being overly pedantic, dude. Mythic tiers may not be exactly the same thing, but Mythic Adventures can quite obviously be seen as Paizo's parallel to WotC's ELH.

How could it be parallel?. ELH doesn't start until after level 20 and consists of advancing class hit dice and classes beyond level 20.

Mythic Tiers does not advance hit dice, can be started at any level, and does not expand the 20 character level system but sandwiches in between.

There's not one shred of similarity to them.

Mythic like Epic, gives PCs new and powerful abilities, introduces powerful enemies and iconic enemies, like Demon Lords, changes the fluff of the game by giving them a legendary aspect or cosmic importance that is not necessarely present in other games, etc...


LazarX wrote:
goldomark wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Again, Gods don't have stats in Pathfinder. At ALL. They're walking bundles of GM Fiat. If you're looking to change that, and do some 3.5 epic/divine/mythic mashup, you should be posting this question in the 3.5/Homebrew forum.
This is totally a GD topic about comparing things across editions.
Pathfinder isn't an edition of Dungeons and Dragons. It's not D+D, never has been, never will be. And I thank all of the gods for that.
How do you explain its similarities to D&D 3.5? Cosmic coincidence?
It's simmilarity to D+D ended when the APG was published.

What did the APG do to do that? The core rules are pretty much the same.


Matt Thomason wrote:
goldomark wrote:
There are some 3PP who are working on the closed playtest. They might be under NDAs, but can make compatible products read to be released when 5e comes out.
That's interesting to know, I just wish that sort of thing would be more open, even if it's an open "we haven't decided yet" just so we know a little more about what to expect. Then again, it's not like any announcement would make me likely to drop Pathfinder to go back (even if I wanted to, I don't have the time or the money for both so it has to be one or the other, and I have too much invested in this game now to switch for anything short of a free Ferrari with every PHB), it's just plain curiosity on my part :)

I understand waht you mean. A 3PP designer said so on EW and I happened to stumble on the exchange of posts. This was a few months ago, maybe things have changed.

The D&D boat as sailed for me. Too much money invest in PF to start buying and learning a new edition because it is super important to get new versions of the fighter and wizards. The alpha playtest was rather meh, too. Nothing very exiting.


LazarX wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Again, Gods don't have stats in Pathfinder. At ALL. They're walking bundles of GM Fiat. If you're looking to change that, and do some 3.5 epic/divine/mythic mashup, you should be posting this question in the 3.5/Homebrew forum.
This is totally a GD topic about comparing things across editions.
Pathfinder isn't an edition of Dungeons and Dragons. It's not D+D, never has been, never will be. And I thank all of the gods for that.

How do you explain its similarities to D&D 3.5? Cosmic coincidence?


MMCJawa wrote:
goldomark wrote:
It also raises the question as to what Paizo will do in a few years.
It's this reason which has always made me think that any future changes to the core rule set will be pretty incremental.

Yeah, I think PF 2.0 will be more a 1.5. Like PF is 3.75.

Some backward compatibility seems to be a must.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are some 3PP who are working on the closed playtest. They might be under NDAs, but can make compatible products read to be released when 5e comes out.


And CR 30 for beauties like Cthulhu.


Not to mention their already precarious financial health.


It also raises the question as to what Paizo will do in a few years.


Mearls has said they were aware of the problem with the GLS and they will try to do something about it. He does come from the 3PP industry. What Hasbro will decide that remains to be seen.

An open license for some rules would make sense. Enough for 3PP to use, but not enough to make an entire RPG game from it. But again, what VPs at Hasbro will decide...


What sort of restrictions did the GLS have the OGL didn't have?


PsychoticWarrior wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
PsychoticWarrior wrote:


Exactly my feelings. It may be cheaper to bundle the PHB and DNG into a single volume but the unwieldiness of that 500 page monstrosity (with its weak binding and easy separating cover!)
This is why gygax gave us ducttape.
And if I was talking about a WotC product you would likely not be nearly so flippant (or forgiving, apparently). Paizo, of course, gets the free pass on shoddy products because...well I don't really know why in this case.

He isn't being flippant, as far as I can tell. At some point we had to ducttapped our PHBs, cause we used them so much.


I'm sure some people will complain about 5e. No doubt about that.

What they will complain about is what interest me.


lokiare wrote:

My question is this: If they plan on releasing the start set in 2 months, does that mean they are pretty much done testing it and its gone to the printer?

Does this mean the starter set will have many rules changes between then and the PHB release?

Wht I want to know is:

1) Will people complain that there should have been a beta playtest because the rules are broken and CharOp people would have seen all the issues (whether true or not)?

2) Will people complain the alpha playtest was a waste of their time because the final product is very different from what was tested (whether true or not)?


Prime Evil wrote:
One interesting question is whether WoTC are planning to offer some kind of licensing arrangement less restrictive than the 4th Edition Game System License. WoTC pretty much lost the entire third-party publisher ecosystem to Paizo overnight when they abandoned the Open Game Licence in favour of the GSL. While the direct economic value of the third-party ecosystem to WoTC is small, it is important to them in capturing mindshare and building a community around their products. I would argue that the rise of Paizo has been at least in part due to the effort that they have invested in building a strong community of third-party publishers around Pathfinder - this has helped to build a buzz around their own products and to demonstrate their respect for the broader hobby.

What were the differences between the OGL and GLS anyway?


Not really. Mythic is something rather unqiue in the history of D&D/PF.


The North has been detailed many times. Seems like pay for a product I alreayd bought... 3 times already?

Now had that this is compatible with an editoon that stil hasn't came out (and probably will be very different from the playtest), yeah, no.


32$ for that!?


Shweeeet!

Thanks!


CrazyElf wrote:

A wizards bonded object uses a slot if it's a ring or an amulet.

If the item were say a "Hand of the Mage" amulet, and I paid double because "An item that does not take up one of the spaces on a body costs double", would it then no longer use up a space on the body?

I'm thinking it would.

It wouldn't take a slot on the body, but then you wouldn't be wearing it, thus you would need to roll concentration checks when you cast spells. There are no loopholes.

You could invent a unique hand of the mage that bypasses this rule or an archetype that does that.


Steven T. Helt wrote:

Which one was yours, brah?

And, Chopswil:

** spoiler omitted **

The elixir of last will.


chopswil wrote:

bunch of monsters and magic items from superstar 2013 are included

nice touch!!!

Which one? I'm curious because I was asked if my item could be used in the module.


Will Khepri have a beetle for a head?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LMPjr007 wrote:
OK I never really understood why people LOVED Spelljammer. Was it because it WAS D&D in space? Or was something else I was missing. Please explain it to me. Thanks!

In part because it was D&D in space. It opened up an all new location to exploire (e.g. space, moons, asteroids, planets). It also gave us cool micro-settings, like the asteroid city The Rock of Bral and the Astromundi Cluster.

It connected all the settings and had lots of "alienish" elements. In a way, it was an early version of Planescape. I still think the two are complementary and if WotC revisites either settings, it will have t merge them somehow.

It also gave rules to have naval combat with a lot of different ships. Some were pretty cool looking.

A bunch of new races and monsters(e.g. Arcanes, Giffs)and new takes on old ones (e.g. Imperial Elves, Giths, Beholders).

There was lots of silly stuff, but those are easy to ignore. Focus on the cool and what stimulates your creativity.


Any word if the magical technology that lets pyramids fly comes from another planet?

Marathon Voter 2013

Are mythic items permitted? I'm guessing they are and will be all the rage this year (quill of mythic filigree?), but I want to be sure.

Thanks.


MR 10 = 10 surge per day. He only has that when he is on his Abyssal Realm only.


Where was that info on Demon Lords pulled from?


He doesn't have the demon, chaos and evil subtypes. Normal or error?


These are your arteries on fat.


This means that a +1 inherant bonus to an ability score is worth 1,250 gp (so if an inherant bonust ook a slot it would cost 625 gp!!)!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gruesome monstrous humanoids has potential. Depends on the templates themselves, but a parasite infested gargoyle or a lepreus hag can be gruesome. Serpentfolk, scorpionfolk, harpies, medusas, etc, have a nice gruesome potential.

Gruesome humanoids too. A secret cult in a village with its members having something gruesome has potential. Humanoids can be used in so may situations, good templates for them are always welcomed.

So do outsiders with the evil subtype.


Amber E. Scott.


Will the short story by Ed be in the Deep Magic book?


For the AP I wonder if 2,001 backers is the key to unlock it.

Is it reasonable or are you a bit of a tease, Wolfgang?


I'm curious how all the new magic will be handled. Will the new magic (like ioun stone for example) get a small description and than we get the spells in the first or second chapter of Deep Magic or will the new magic spells be with the rest of the spells.


Ooooh, subsystems.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nice. Now for the Bureatucratic Treaty of the Self-Controlled (like chronicles of the righteous, but for neutral powers).


Sounds cool.

No avatars though. :(

1 to 50 of 411 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.