goldomark's page

From RotRL and RotRL aniversary edition, the Scarecrow's (Skinsaw Murders) CR is different. Both use the Lifespark Construct template from Green Ronin's Advanced Bestiary.

The anniversary edition doesn't add any level to the CR of the flesh golem and it doesn't get the Open Mind ability, but the original edition does.

How can a construct get feats and skills, and not see its CR increase?

goldomark wrote:

When will the bundle be available for those who contribute? At the end of the funding?

I was intending to wait until the end of the project, as we are gaining more contributions almost every day. I will, however, find out if that's an issue and get back to you!

Just checking cause it makes sense. Will the bundle be sent by email?

Did you mount the monkey?

When will the bundle be available for those who contribute? At the end of the funding?

One word of advice, don't tell them exact details and don't do it in game terms. Say that since beastie X lives in hot volcanic conditions that you can assume the beast does not fear fire thus hinting that cold is the way to go. As soon as you give game details you've spoilt the creature.

There is a study that says that spoilers actually enhance the experience.

But you know, studies doesn't mean actual truth.

There really is no guideline and it is up to you.

Giving the info on an iconic attack or defense of a beasty sounds reasonable. When seeing a basilisk, her gaze attack might be the first thing that pops up in a PCs mind (before her mating habits).

After that it is what you want to tell them. You could ask if the players if focus on one aspect of the beasty over another. Like attacks, defenses, senses, movements, vulnerabilities, behavior, etc.

How rare or common the monster will affect this. If it is an Oni (rare in the Inner Sea region), PCs might get the less interesting and general info like dark vision, rather than some ability that is more important in combat.

Glad to see mythic NPCs stated up.

I find it a shame the point-base system is not considered for Pathfinder. It is a very interesting subsystem.

How much will this be related/interact with mummies in Bestiary 4?

Might I suggest the Expended Construct Armor Handbook? Construct armor can be found here (scroll down). It is OGL and I have seen other people request a rule expension for construct armors.

It is a nice concept, a bit mecha, but not too much. The rules need clarification and expension. I am not a sure a wood golem armor (for druids!) should have the same penalties an iron golem has. A flesh golem armor is pretty neat for a necromancer, but should it have the same spell failure chance as an iron golem armor? Can the necromancer boost his flesh golem armor? Extra limb/tentacle, two hearts, wings, maw (bite attack), etc.

Maybe create some variant golems. Like a light iron golem so a fighter can get one at lower levels. New types of golems for casters who want a construct armor, but still want to cast without spell failure. The smoke golem comes to mind. Smoke doesn't get in the way of movements, now does it? A shadow/umbral golem for rogues (and casters too)?

I do not see why the golem needs to be of the same size as the wearer. The golem can't be smaller than the pilote, but I see no problem with a small creature piloting a large golem (gnome in a cannon golem anyone?).

Like I mentioned above with the necromancer, there can be "add-ons" for the golem armor (light plating, heavy plating, night eyes (dark vision for the pilote), rotating blade, pincer hand (bonus to grapple), acid spray, etc).

You also have a bunch of potential feats for this book. Nimble Pilote to reduce penalties to Dex, Quick Escape to get out faster of a golem armor with not hp, Arcane Pilote to reduce spell casting failure, etc.

New spells too, like call armor a variant teleport object, a series of repair spells to heal damage to the armor, short circuit to make an golem armor inoperable for a short time, ghost pilote so the armor can fight by itself for a short period of time, puppeter or proxy to maneuvre the armor and see through its eyes from a safe distance, but you are in a trance, etc.

Maybe an archetype for druids that lets him replace his animal compagnion with a wood golem armor? Same for cavalier and his horse?

It has potential.PM me if you want more ideas. I might have some others. if you are running short on them.

like the verdant staff or the nightmare staff...

Oooooooh! Are prospects good for a second book?

I'd like some clarification about contradictions in the book.

On page 2, in the how magic implement works section, it is written: "The enhancement bonus of a magic implement adds to all attack rolls made with spells cast from the wand, damage dealt by the first die of spell damage (see Bonuses to Spell Damage, below), and to all caster level checks made for spells cast while using the wand [...]".

On page 4, in the pricing magic items box text, it is written: "Since our implements only add to damage [...]".

Does the enchancement bonus apply to attack rolls, damage, caster level or just damage?

It should be up now.

Reviewed!

Hope the grammar and orthograph is fine, English is not my first language.

I'l try to write a review tonight.

I really didn't expect the prevailing feedback to be "these are so good that I want to make my own, but I don't know how to price them!".

Bask in the glory! ;-)

Seriously, Apeiron staves are what staves should have been from the start. They certainly are more iconic than the SIAC staves we have now.

Yeah, just damage becomes boring and repetitive.

You'll find me bothersome, but how did you estimate the price? 1/5 or 1/4 of the wealth of a given level per staff?

This is an interesting module. I must say I am surprised by the staves, they are more original and useful than I thought. I like how the description text of the staves was divided in clear sections.

Out of curiosity, what is the formula you used to price Apeiron Staves?

Monk/ninja, for the flavor and the MAD. I wonder if the ki pool would merge.

Yeah, I think there is a little irony in Unseelie's review.

No offense, mate.

Meh, you're just trying to pick a fight. Try somewhere else.

If you want to do a generalized formula for the gems, you could theoretically do:

(Feat/10) * (2^LevelBonus)

500 × 2^0 = 500
500 × 2^1 = 1,000
500 × 2^2 = 2,000
500 × 2^3 = 4,000
500 × 2^4 = 8,000
500 × 2^5 = 16,000
...

Very interesting that they possibly viewed consumables as 1/10 of the price of a metamagic feat.

Thank you very much! This is very useful.

We've told you the value is determined off the cuff by their perceived value.

There's no formula to pick just "go with what's been done and gauge price based off similar powered items" as the book says.

What people believe does not equal facts. I bet no one who responded in the thread lifted a finger on a calculator before posting.

The formula is hard so it is easier to believe designers just guestimated it.

goldomark wrote:

Holy #@$%!

Thanks! This is awesome!

...

...

...

Ok, what is the fomula behind those... ;-)

I don't know where they got the base price from, but they spell out the formula in the description. Basically 1,000gp for a +1 spell level metamagic feat, double it for each additional +1. Again, no idea where they got the 1,000gp base from, but I'm not too familiar with magic item pricing rules.

It seems to be:

1 level = 1k

2 levels = 2k (1k+1k)

3 levels = 4k (1k+1k+2k)

4 levels = 8k (1k+1k+2k+4k)

goldomark wrote:

Quote:

Maybe it would help if you told us what you're trying to price out.

Metamagic components. Basically a consummable that acts as a metamagic feat for one spell when used during the casting. Clearly which metamagic feat is used has a impact on pricing and so does the level of the spells it can affect.

You are in luck, then. Such an item exists in the Rival Guide.

Metamagic Gem

Holy #@$%!

Thanks! This is awesome!

...

...

...

Ok, what is the fomula behind those... ;-)

it's clear the value of the feat to the game is considered, there's no hard and cast rule about the price it's something they do off the cuff.

I've also shown you where feats are purchasable with items, so are you upset about ioun stones granting alertness, weapon proficiency, and endurance?

10k seems a good starting point if it's unslotted feat.

... I already mentioned ioun stones in the OP.

goldomark wrote:

Designers do not pull out magic item prices out of their hat. They use formulas. I figured that for minor rods they take the spell slot level increase the metamagic feat gives (Empower +2 level), add 1 and multiply that by 5k and then divide it by 1.66 to get the price of the minor rods (9k for minor empower rods). For a minor merciful rod it is 0.5 multiplied by 5k divided by 1.66. Makes sense since merciful doesn't increase spell level when it is applied to a spell.

This breaks down at +3 level minor rods though. But both +3 level and +4 level minor rods multiply 5k by numberX.6. I wanna figure out how they came to numberX and the .6.

Yeah, I got issues.

Yeah, you have issues. The biggest one is that you're making big assumptions about how they derived the prices for metamagic rods. I don't expect that they had a standard formula going in that they expected to apply to all meta magic feats. Instead, I suspect they followed the standard advice - eyeball it and compare to other things that are roughly as useful.

I make this huge assumption cause all magical items use a formula to determine their pricing. There might be corrections after the formula is used, but yeah, all item prices come from a formula, not from playing spin the donkey.

Anyway, I won't get any constructive advice here. Enjoy debating if rods are bad or not.

goldomark wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

A +4 Greater Rod is worth so much because it lets you do metamagic that should be "impossible".

Yes, I understand.

Quote:

The logic behind the pricing isn't "how many feats does this equal", but "at what level should this be affordable".

Feats/level is a linear progression. WBL isn't. Trying to express the value of a feat in money isn't going to yield sensible results.

Yet the designers didn't pull numbers out of their hat. They have a rational for a +0 level minor = half a feat, that +1 level minor rof = a feat or that +4 levels greater rod = 56 feats.

The dev have have give a value to metamagic rods, but there is no sign that that is based on the value of a feat, as metamagic feats are very different from what the rods do.

A item giving the feat would allow you to memorize or spontaneously cast an unlimited number of spells as if you had the feat, opaying all the costs of using the feat and with all the limitation of using the feat.

You are trying to discern a pattern with the assumption that the price of the rods is based on the price of a feat, but there is no proof that that assumption has any validity.

Yet I demonstratd the connection between the worth of a feat and those of the minor rods. First the price of a feat, how is it 5k gp?

Gloves of arrow snatching do what that feat does, but only twice a day. How did they get a price of 4k for it? Well snatch arrow is a feat that needs deflect arrow, another feat. That is a total value of 10k gp for two feats, right? But you can only use it twice a day, so you adjust the price by dividing it by 5 divided by 2 (the number of uses per day) = 2.5. Divide 10k by 2.5 and you get 4k, the price of gloves of arrow snatching. So we know that a feat is worth 5k. Another example is a dark blue ioun stone that gives the Alertness feat. Slotless items are worth double the price of items that take space (liek gloves). So a dark blue ioun stone is worth 10k gp (5k for the feat multiplied by 2).

Take a minor merciless rod, it is worth 1,5k gp. Take that price and multiply it by 5 divided by 3 (1.66) and you 2,5k, half the price of a feat. For a +1 minor feat (worth 3k gp) multiply that by 1.66, you get 5k, the price of a feat. The number (5k) is not a coicindence.

Designers do not pull out magic item prices out of their hat. They use formulas. I figured that for minor rods they take the spell slot level increase the metamagic feat gives (Empower +2 level), add 1 and multiply that by 5k and then divide it by 1.66 to get the price of the minor rods (9k for minor empower rods). For a minor merciful rod it is 0.5 multiplied by 5k divided by 1.66. Makes sense since merciful doesn't increase spell level when it is applied to a spell.

This breaks down at +3 level minor rods though. But both +3 level and +4 level minor rods multiply 5k by numberX.6. I wanna figure out how they came to numberX and the .6.

Yeah, I got issues.

A +4 Greater Rod is worth so much because it lets you do metamagic that should be "impossible".

Yes, I understand.

The logic behind the pricing isn't "how many feats does this equal", but "at what level should this be affordable".

Feats/level is a linear progression. WBL isn't. Trying to express the value of a feat in money isn't going to yield sensible results.

Yet the designers didn't pull numbers out of their hat. They have a rational for a +0 level minor = half a feat, that +1 level minor rof = a feat or that +4 levels greater rod = 56 feats.

goldomark - Metamagic rods do more than just grant access to a feat, so there's no reason to assume that they should be priced based on magic items which grant access to a feat.

But they are.

Take the minor merciful rod it is worth 1,500 gp. Reverse engineer the price of a rod by multiplying it by 1.66 (when determining the price of item, once you have a price if the item has charges per day you need to divide the price by 5 divided by the number of charges per day, here it is 3 charges per day, so 5 divided by 3 = 1.66) and you roughly get 2,500 gp, half of 5,000 gp. Half a feat.

Take a +1 level minor rod. They cost 3,000 gp. Multiply it by 1.66 and you roughly get 5,000 gp. The price of a feat.

What I want to know is how they arrived at the conclusion that a +0 level minor rod is worth half a feat, while a +1 level minor rod is worth a feat and that a +4 levels greater rod is worth 56 feats. What is the logic or the math behind this priceing?

Maybe it would help if you told us what you're trying to price out.

Metamagic components. Basically a consummable that acts as a metamagic feat for one spell when used during the casting. Clearly which metamagic feat is used has a impact on pricing and so does the level of the spells it can affect.

goldomark - As lantzkev points out, there's a formula for pricing metamagic rods.

Yes, I know. What is that formula?

and also only go to lvl 1-3.

Quote:

Metamagic Rods: Rods in this special category hold the power to grant metamagic feats to a wielder's spells.

Rods

Metamagic, merciful, minor 1,500 gp
Metamagic (+1 spell level), minor 3,000 gp
Metamagic, merciful, normal 5,500 gp
Metamagic (+2 spell level), minor 9,000 gp
Metamagic (+1 spell level), normal 11,000 gp
Metamagic, merciful, greater 12,250 gp
Metamagic (+3 spell level), minor 14,000 gp
Metamagic (+1 spell level), greater 24,500 gp
Metamagic (+2 spell level), normal 32,500 gp
Metamagic, quicken, minor 35,000 gp
Metamagic (+3 spell level), normal 54,000 gp
Metamagic (+2 spell level), greater 73,000 gp

Metamagic, quicken, normal 75,500 gp

Metamagic (+3 spell level), greater 121,500 gp
Metamagic, quicken, greater 170,000 gp

Clearly the OP hasn't read up on rod pricing in the Ultimate Equipment.

I have, champ. What I want to know is the formula to get from 5,000 gp to those prices.

From the price of a Dark Blue Rhomboid Ioun Stone and Gloves of Arrows Snatching, you can deduce that feats are worth 5,000 gp if they were magical items with space limitation.

So how is the value of Metamagic Rods calculated? I'm lost here.

The cover art is awesome. Where do you guys get this? I'm guessing it is not stock art.

Jotungrip (Ex)

At 2nd level, a titan mauler may choose to wield a two-handed melee weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. The weapon must be appropriately sized for her, and it is treated as one-handed when determining the effect of Power Attack, Strength bonus to damage, and the like.

This ability replaces uncanny dodge.

Seems pretty clear it is not a two-handed weapon anymore.

From a comment James Jacob made in this thread, are there any reasons why Valkyries are not psychopomps?

Nice idea about the trunk as a prehensible tail.

As for the gore attacks, elephants only get one. One gore, one slam.

I can't seem to find a place that tells me the elephant's slam attack is its trunk or the elephant stomping.

Any clue? It sort of matters for a arm wereelephant in hybrid form.

Incantations? my brain is missing the exact thing your talking about?

They appeared in 3.5's Unearth Arcana.

Kobold Press gave them a new life. I saw some in the Midgard Northland supplement.

They are very cool, since they are spells for everyone to use. Very flavorful too.

If I were to put a monk level on a Ubue or Ettin, who that mean the Ubue would get three unarmed strike and an Ettin two?

This wouldn't mean anything with flurry, but I'm not sure if they do not flurry.

My eyes! My eyes!

Will there be a book 2 with more rogue talents in it, like for the talented fighter?

Are there options, say a feat, to take talents from another class?

This book sounds like an awesome idea.

Some new templates and monster feats are needed.

Monster prestige classe is a great idea. It is a nice way to scale monsters, specialize them and add texture to them.

Monster archetype!? I'm listening.

Templates are awesome, but useful and flavorful templates aren't that numerous.

In another thread, someone suggested including stat blocks for humanoid monsters with class levels. For example, the bugbear Organization line says, "... warband (7–12 plus 2 warriors of 1st level and 1 chieftain of 3rd–5th level)," so it could have stat blocks for bugbear war1, war 3, war4, and war5.

Do you think that would be useful?

Yup. Plus drow party 1, party 2...

Stating up anti-paladins would be awesome, with the other alternative and base classes too.

Because in 2000 WotC allowed Necromancer Games to publish Tome of Horrors, an OGL bestiary that included dozens of up-to-then WotC IP monsters. Among them, apart from Orcus and Jubilex, were dark creepers/stalkers, shadow demons, nupperibos, lurkers above, flumphs, and many others. Some things (such as references to proper names in D&D campaign settings) were filed off, but Orcus-goat-headed-demon-lord-of-undead and Jubilex-formless-demon-lord-of-oozes were left pretty much intact. So, under OGL, anybody can use them as long as they're not connecting them to Greyhawk or FR or whatever else that is WotC closed content IP. And that's exactly what Paizo has been doing for some time, because both Orcus and Jubilex have an established presence in Golarion.

Demogorgon was not included in ToH, sadly. The actual name "demogorgon" is drawn from real life and thus open for use, however the appearance and lore of Demogorgon the twin-headed-tentacle-armed-demon-lord is closed content. So no dice there.

Is Cthulhu OGL too or has the IP on it expired?

Usualy I kinda of tired of thr Big Books O' Monsters by the third one....but Bestiary 3 was really good. So I have hope for Bestiary 4. Though I do hope you stagger the releases of the Bestiary's with NPC Codexes...

+1

Cthulhu!? Mythic I see.

Will Kaiju also use mythic or have their own set of rules. I remember reading James saying that Kaijus need their own (long) subsystem.

Doh! Thanks.

No specific rules on how long winding them up takes?

I like the idea that winding takes 1 round per HD of the clockwork creature (so one day of activity per round of winding) and it provokes an AoO. Any better suggestions?

Sorry for the necro, but where are the Clockwork Creature's winding and swift reactions special qualities described? I imagine swift reactions give the bonus feats, but winding is a mystery aside from the Clockwork Soldier.

Is winding a non-soldier clockwork creature good for one day per HD it has?

Thank you.

You planning to make plague babies from Demon's Souls goldomark?

I plan on you ending up slashing kids cause "mother" said so.(/evil grind).

But yeah, Young + vampire spawn + Weapon Finesse (and now Toughness) = seems to point to CR 4.

I want to add the young template to vampire spawns to have creepy undead kids running around.

I was wondering how the lack of Con of the undead will affect the -1 to the CR since an undead is less weaken by the template than other creatures.

In the same line of thought, the wights (base for vampire spawns) have Skill Focus (Perception) as a feat. I would like to replace it with Weapon Finesse now that the Young template gave it a interesting Dex score. I know all feats are supposed to be equal so it is not suppose to change much of anything to the CR, but this really makes a the vampire spawn more powerful (aside fom the -2 to natural armour).

Should I keep the CR 4 or is it a CR 3?