golem101's page

Not cheating, I've already posted here.

Posting in this thread without looking at the other messages so I can reply later.
Seems a semantics contest to train for djinni-wishing, just from the title.

Would an enemy be allowed a reflex saving throw to avoid falling in the pit if they were moved the 10' by shifting sands?

If the enemy had previously failed the Reflex save to avoid becoming entangled - so that he's entangled in the sands until at least his next turn and save possibility - I'd rule that the shifting sand would automatically drop him into the pit; after all the description of the "Create Pit" spell clearly states that "Creatures subjected to an effect intended to push them into the pit (such as bull rush) do not get a saving throw to avoid falling in if they are affected by the pushing effect."

Given the relative short duration of both spells, I'd be inclined to reward the player's ingenuity and tactical thinking.

Hi all,

To the GMs out there: If given a stat block for a city in a published product, using the new city stat format presented in the Game Mastery Guide, would you prefer to see something like "Minor Items 4d4; Medium Items 3d4; Major Items 2d4" or be presented with a pre-generated list of specific items (as was done for Ravengro in volume one of the Carrion Crown AP)? Any feedback appreciated. Thanks!
M

Both. Even if I tend to limit the availability of the magic market a lot.

I like the pregenerated list, 'cause it gives me a quick reference of stuff available when I'm in a pinch, and it also works as a refence to thematically characterize the settlement in available goods (maybe lots of potions, or strange wands, perhaps mostly weapons and armors, a good selection of wondrous items, even a couple of powerful rings, etc.).

I like the generic random format 'cause if I have a specific idea in mind and enough time to rework the list from the ground up, I don't have to retro-engineer the exact number of dice I can roll to generate the list - a very minor hassle, but a hassle nonetheless.

Second Edition has a number of (IMO) sorely needed adjustements to races and origins/talents, in addition to the integration of a number of erratas and typo revisions/term switching.

It's quite interesting when comparing the balance issues that have been addressed, and I feel it's a great system. A definite improvement.
I'm still not really fond of the magic system, but it's a personal quibble.

Moreover, with the recent release of the Adventure Companion, which features more crunchy stuff (classes of all the three tiers, feats and combat tricks, campaign options), there's the possibility of covering a lot of fantasy archetypes that just weren't properly feasible with the core book - half races, to name one.

I found a guide to convert/add the d20 Conan setting to FC (google a bit), and I think that it would be a great fit for this ruleset, as it has minimal magic going around and the action dice/campaign qualities thing that's at the core of FC is just perfect.

I think that "vanilla" is intended for a setting without specific rules that more or less override those of the core rulebooks or that require specific add-ons to fully function as a whole.
Because otherwise, calling Golarion "vanilla" would be a rather embarassing mistake. :)

I tend to prefer vanilla-oriented setting (Golarion, the Scarred Lands) where minimal adjustements are needed - mostly regarding the gods/pantheon.
At the same time, I often (always) apply house rules to my games, from extra skills to radical changes to combat, to vetoed feats/spells/class options. This requires the infamous 10 pages of custom rules to be provided to the players.
Sometimes, I also apply changes to the setting, sometimes just in geographical features, sometimes greater ones to get a better fit for my adventures.

Having the adventure presented in the "here's the dungeon door, go kill something" was acceptable 20 years ago or so, but right now doesn't cut it anylonger...
To get the adventure/campaign started there's the need of a greater framework in which to fit the characters, the places, the monsters, the BBEG's plots, etc.

So vanilla setting, but no vanilla rules or adventures, so to speak.

Dotted. Great idea!

Aaaannnddd... it's shipping! Downloading right now.

Once again, thanks to the awesome Customer Service!

Just got the email.

It's coming! It's coming!

Woot!

Me too. A big hearty thank you to Sara Marie for clearing up a minor hurdle.

A level and class based defense bonus (basically a stacking untyped bonus which is lost when flat footed, as the Dodge subtype messes with touch attacks).
There is a great sub-mechanic in the Advanced GameMaster's Manual (by Green Ronin) which also has hints for monsters types, and IIRC, also in the UA rules.

First thing, great use of a low level creepy monster with no hard rules to back up its wickedness. DMing at its finest.

If you'd like to use it further during the campaign (which is a great idea: not only the legend of the PCs is growing, but also the shadow of their enemies), I'd suggest to avoid any direct showdown - or at least any definitive one - but rather use the developing thawn (rogue and ranger levels, maybe even an ineffective witch for a completely different ballpark) as an harasser during their movements and as a bogeyman for the fringe settlements of their kingdom.

Whenever they're in the wilderness, bad things happen to the creatures and the land surrounding them; if they stay for too long distant from a border hex with people living in (farms, watchtowers), creepy and bloody messages summon them... and so on.
If the PCs don't pay attention, the creepy messages transform into bloody attacks meant to punish them for their indifference. So, they have no easy rest during adventuring downtime, or the kingdom's Unrest (no pun intended) may grow suddenly.

The thawn could even develop unwillingly a cult following of sorts from displaced humanoids defeated by the PCs during their colonization of the Green Belt (a very long-term effect). A motley crew of vengeful monsters idolizing the mostly indifferent shadowy nemesis of the rulers of the land.

You could even work further some future connection with the main BBEG of the campaign, whose interest is piqued after a number of unsettling effects that the thawn manages to impart on the PCs.

Awesome cover.

I have recently picked up the revised second printing (that comes with a bunch of neat changes) and the Adventure Companion, that features three different settings (all of them quite interesting) and a lot of crunchy addons - two new base classes, a bunch of expert classes and even some awe-inspiring master classes.
Some of the new feats and specialties/talents round up nicely the classic fantasy archetypes and tropes (including half-races, sorely missing from the core book).

I am quite tempted to run a couple of Golarion based games, maybe converting some adventures such as the ones set in the Darkmoon Vale area, starting from the classic Hollow's Last Hope.
I feel that GM's action dice will be a lot of fun during the scenes of Carnival of Tears...

Mark Smilye again! *head_explodes*

Seriously, the new stunts for DragonAge (a system that is growing on me by the day, I just discovered the fan created "Esoterica from Thedas" volumes), the stunt inspired ideas for PF, the Mythos tainted inn, fireworks, columns... what a great issue!

There are rivers.

golem101 wrote:

On the other hand, I really don't think that RC is a joke in itself. Lou agresta, a bunch of proofreaders, the Ling9000 (is that the correct codename?) sweated way too much over it to consider it a joke.

Close enough, if it's not exactly the name Lou used. ;)

-- THE Ling9000

Looking forward (with due zen-like calm) for the pathfinderized version of RC! ;-)

To the north lies the nation of Brevoy. More infos in PF issue #31.

To the east there is the wilderness of ruined Iobaria. More infos in PF issue #33.

Southwest there is Pitax (detailed in issue #35) and southeast Mivon (detailed in Guide to the River Kingdoms).

In the distant west, beyond a stretch of Pitax controlled land, there is Numeria (look no further than the Inner Sea World Guide, but also in the Campaign Primer, and in the old in the Pathfinder Gazetteer and Campaign Setting).

Usually a trap has a point of origin for its effect and one or more triggers.
Let's say a swinging pendulum with an axe blade affixed to the ceiling and hidden in painted cracks along the stonework (point of origin) triggered by a large pressure plate or transucent tripwires (trigger points).

A magical trap that has an area of effect greater than the distance between its point of origin and the trigger point (the range of vision, I suppose), is quite clever in theory books but bound to frustrate players to no end, as they have virtually no means - excluding clever divination magic or clues dropped previously - to discover and avoid it.

Sounds like a bad design.

golem101 wrote:

Mr Baron wrote:

Would love to see Bill and Clark write an AP for Paizo!

The long time requested 128-page supermodule would be TEH AWESOME.

Bill is kind of doing that with Frog God. Go check out Slumbering Tsar he did with Greg Vaughn. It was slated to be a Necro product, but I released the rights back to Greg so he could do it with Bill. I was out of the picture and to make them do it as a Necro product, thus giving me a cut for doing nothing, didn't seem ethical or right. So he started Frog God and is doing that super-module. Go check it out.

Yup, I know of Slumbering Tsar. I'm just waiting for the final hardcover.

This is the most funnily terrifying goblin warchant sing-along ever.
Licktoad goblins prove they scary!

Oooooh. So much looking forward for the new products!

Blazej wrote:

When I went to bed yesterday I sort of assumed that LMPjr would have seen the negative reaction and worked more on an apology rather than continue with a joke that few seemed to show any support for.

I guess I thought too highly of him.

What does he need to apologize for? Letting people jump to obviously incorrect conclusions based on nothing more than wishful thinking? He made no false claims, made no derogatory comments, and forced no one to part with any money.

This. I preordered both Razor Coast and The Anarchist GameMaster CookBook as soon as they were announced (preorders still standing), I had hopes at LPJ's words, and I had a good laugh mostly at my own gullibility when the joke was in the open.

On the other hand, I really don't think that RC is a joke in itself. Lou agresta, a bunch of proofreaders, the Ling9000 (is that the correct codename?) sweated way too much over it to consider it a joke.

The only thing I've noticed in GMing without a screen is that players are somewhat encouraged to metagame, deducing the enemy's combat modifiers and guessing skills and whatnots from the rolls and the game results.

Not really my style.

Other than that, as others have already said, the screen is useful for notes, minis, counters, and even more stuff.

Would love to see Bill and Clark write an AP for Paizo!

The long time requested 128-page supermodule would be TEH AWESOME.

Serpent body with human(oid?) head, and the trademark sorcerous powers are good enough to qualify them as aberrations, IMO. Usually I give them an aura of mistery, with time lost traditions and habits, and a general indifference to others' cultural values.

Not really monstrous humanoids (head/face only), not really magical beasts (nagas have a closer connection to civilization). Things really weird. Maybe with a weird brain too.

golem101 wrote:

Cool background story. Sounds inspired (in part) by the revenge of the 47 ronin.

Good eye. :) I'm a big fan of that story. A few years ago I actually wrote a heavy metal song that tells the entire story of the 47 ronin from start to finish (though most of it is screamed rather than sung). Because really, what's more metal than a bunch of samurai on a suicide mission?

A two years long suicide mission, suffering disgrace and shame, only to reach the optimal conditions to exact revenge and restore their master's name. Ah! :)

Cool background story. Sounds inspired (in part) by the revenge of the 47 ronin.

John Benbo wrote:

I finally got to sit down and look through it this weekend. Very good stuff ... I'd like to see some orcs or even duergar in a future Tribes supplement.

Really glad you like Lizardfolk of the Dragon Fang John! This was a blast to write and a joy working with Raging Swan :)

I have no idea if there are orcs or duergar on the horizon for TRIBES, but I can say that I will be writing a Sahuagin TRIBES that I am really excited about !

Hell yeah!

Seems that Preview should be fixed to correctly show the PDF...

golem101 wrote:

I would be very unhappy with a game that openly does not allow me to custom-fit the rules to my preferences.

How would that work, exactly, anyway? In the case of tabletop RPGs and outside of standardised leagues or playing societies like the Pathfinder Society, nobody can tell you how to use the game. They could write and speak about it until their mouths and hands fall off, but it would not change the fact that you can ignore them.

Of course, a book stating that you may not change the rules even at your own private table in your own house probably isn't that good to start with, and people writing crap like this into their books don't deserve to earn money with their writing, but sometimes, jerks do create useful stuff, stuff awesome enough to use it despite the jerk's jerkiness.

Each and every copy has a hidden chip with GPS and recording/transmitting abilities, that sends data straight to the authors network.

Then, if you change the rules, an army of pirate ninja cyborgs with occult power ups is sent your way. YOU WILL OBEY THE RULES. :-)

Seriously, just a reference in the foreword or a sidebar ("You'd better not make any change to the rules presented in this book, because players expect the game to be consistent with each and every GM out there, etcetera") would be enough to put me in a bad mood.
The stuff written might be even good enough to make me use it nonetheless, but just the thought of having to deal with such an attitude in my spare time makes me frown. More probably I'd leave the book on the store shelves.

golem101 wrote:

They have their class feature. They also know that some creatures are not so vulnerable to the the same class feature...

...

True, it's called Immune to Critical Hits, and that doesn't encompass all undead.

Every class has a 'job' to do, as indicated by the abilities of those classes by the RAW. To alter that in any way runs the risk of making those classes less attractive to be played. That alone can be problematic.

Our group pretty much refuses to play a cleric by the RAW now. Limiting them in any way would only solidify their place among the 'never played' classes in our group.

So, I can agree with the sentiment, but not the changes you've implemented, sorry.

Oh, better to clear it now: I don't want you to agree with the changes I applied to the rules. That would be quite (a lot) arrogant by me.

I'm content to have my players agree with them and even propose them first.

I've seen enough characters breaking the mold of the "class job" to merrily disagree with that point, but it's a way different thing to discuss.

The root of my pain is a lack of using RAW as new players or players new to the system. Changing the RAW should only be done by those with enough experience with the system to avoid possibly unforeseen complications with other game mechanics.

I understand that. Having played various RPGs since I was 13yo - now I'm 36 - and using the d20 system since 2001, I feel pretty comfortable in applying changes and barring options.

Lots of game balance mistakes along the road, too. Some of them coming from the very official rulebooks published for a now spellplagued setting. :-)

But I don't like the idea of needing a "Customization License" either. Messing around with the rules is a building block of gaining experience and confidence with a system, making a GM/player know where and when problems might arise by allowing, changing or barring a game element.

That goes for you, too, golem101! Let your rogues have their class features!

They have their class feature. They also know that some creatures are not so vulnerable to the the same class feature, but that class feature is not completely going away.

Same goes for clerics and their channel energy: I went for a more granular and custom based approach rather than the "blast of divine power", and used the options from The Book of Experimental Might, so a cleric must choose to develop undead turning or blasting insted of positive/negative energy channelling that influences outsiders, or healing powers, and so on.

Do these changes drastically nerf the classes? Not at all. Do they change the setting? Neither.
Do they make the game look and play better, or at least closer to my own and my players expectations? Indeed they do.
Do they make the designers disappointed or angry? I think/hope not, given the whole retro-compatible assumption of the PFRPG.

I would be very unhappy with a game that openly does not allow me to custom-fit the rules to my preferences.

Basically what i am saying is if it exists in Golarion as a player option i want to be able to use it, The world is built on the material presented and assumes that that material exists.

I beg to differ. On many PF books there's the note "this is your game, use this material as you want" from the very author's foreword, and while it's often referred to fluff rather than crunch, the designers themselves have stated more than once on these boards that house and table rules are to be expected.

As a GM, I know I have and use them in my games. For example I do not allow a bunch of options from the APG; others I have changed in various ways (favored class benefits, I'm looking at you). The summoner class, having 8 players at my table, is not allowed either.
The gunslinger class from the upcoming Ultimate Combat (and the samurai and ninja ones, barring one shots or specific campaigns) will not exist at all in the Inner Sea games that are played at my table.
I do not like the sneak attack on the undead change too, but instead that removing it completely I capped the damage that such an attack can deal. The list goes on.

Major changes to the setting (as for removing deities, feat chains, iconic spells, core classes, etc.) are not something that I consider. After all, if I want something radically different, it would be better to develop my own homebrew setting and ruleset.
Again, as the GM it's my duty to be as clear as possible towards players in presenting them the changes I applied to the printed rules, to avoid issues and misunderstandings during the game. And it's their duty to ask if an option that's in the rules is OK in the game, to properly plan a character development.

Ordering a GM to rigorously follow canon both in fluff and in crunch it's something to be expected only in PFS games, IMO.

As for the other picture... the idea there is a "what if" scenario—"What if Cthulhu attacked Riddleport?" Look close, and you can see the broken up cyphergate in the water...

*mind blown*

Saern wrote:

The "combat gear" section has nothing to do with in game verisimilitude. The "combat gear" section was invented purely because too many DMs ran published adventures, using stat blocks they did not write and were therefore less familiar with, and forgot that, say, a certain cleric in a certain three-faced temple had a certain potion of protection from arrows, which would have made him a really scary boss instead of arrow bait (true story from my time running AoW). It is purely for the convenience of the DM, and doesn't reflect any alteration or special arrangement of the game world's reality.

Fair enough. So, what you're saying is "decide for yourself if it's stowed or not".

Thanks,
Greg

Depending on the situation, the NPC could have readied the items for quick use (eg. alerted or already engaged in combat), or he may need to fumble a bit retrieving them (stealthy approach, ambush along the road).

It's really a thing of DM judgement on a case-by-case basis.

What do you think you'd do?

I think I'd be rather skeptical, but would consider the system of an hypothetical 5th edition based on its own merits.

Right now I'm playing PFRPG, which is my default system of choice; DragonAge RPG, which has some fun, fast and furious streamlined mechanics, and that despite the obvious shortcomings of the only set released so far (hurry GR!) looks promising; and WHFRP, that has such a different approach to roleplaying with all those custom dice and counters and cards and underlying rules that is a breath of fresh air - and a bit of a brain teaser.

And to be honest, I'm happy this way. A game that is detailed and flexible, with a setting I really like; a game that is simpler and relatively hasslefree; and a game that is "something completely different".

That is, not counting other system I own and like such as FantasyCraft, the various 3.5 settings with their own custom rules (Iron Heroes or Thieves' World), a large library of d20 3PP supplements, and two shelves of boardgames.

5th ed will have to conquer its own place with qualities that don't rely on the D&D brand name nor on assumptions based on the "reliable fan" effect.
If it'll go the 4th ed way, obviously will not be a game I'll be interested in; taking a step back toward 3.X doesn't sound too good, as that niche sees already some fierce competition; a brand new path has obvious unforeseen dangers (I hope that makes sense).
I feel too much of a dinosaur - MMO have zero appeal to me, same for social networks and such stuff - for something geared strongly to VTTs, but I also understand that I'm not the majority of the market.

You know Golarion doesn't exist, right? It's a fictional tool to help some GMs run fantastic games and the setting for Paizo games and novels.

What is the answer to the question, “are there any advanced firearms in Golarion?” The answer is, “ask your GM.” Game worlds, even published ones, have truths contingent on their GM's whims. We just provide tools for those whims.

If you are the GM, you get to decide.

Rule 0 is indeed Golarion canon. I love the Paizo attitude.

Excellent job, Jeff. Given the theme of issue #45, I think that Goodman Games "Complete Guide to Werewolves" and maybe also the "Complete Guide to Wererats" would be useful supporting material.

Now I'm curious. How many of y'all as GMs actually go through the rules to verify your major NPCs and, especially, the BB, can actually do major plot scenes like the above (or transform into a dragon or summon/conjure hordes of minions with a swift action as she makes her escape, etc....)

I usually stay within the rules own limitations and possibilities. When these hopelessly collide with the concept I developed, I use the one-shot, one of a kind, unmovable or unusable (by anyone else) magic item, recovered somehow by the BBEG.

However this is the exeption rather than the norm.

My wallet hurts. Hurts so good.

Is an orc/half-orc who gets the Sympathetic Rage lesser rage bonus effectively considered raging?

Because that would qualify also for the Amplified Rage, and I can see thematically fit but overpowered teams of orc barbarians with a switching "rage leader" that fuels teammates into a frenzy of whopping stacking modifiers...

First time only.

I find the idea of two different books for "generic rules" and "setting specific fluff/crunch" a great way to go.

So how long before this antiquated system gives way? When will digital be triumphant at Paizo?

Seems that Paizo has already answered.

While PDF documents are excellent for a quick reference at the gaming table, even the most "pro-digital transition" player I've met agrees that so far nothing beats printed books for ease of reading.
Both for the eyes, and for the tactile feeling of holding something WYSIWYG (no scrolling, zooming, etc.) and flipping pages.

As soon as electronic readers could give the same feeling and/or home printing or print-on-demand services allow for inexpensive harcovers of reasonable quality, I as a customer will be ready for such a transition.

Set, my part-time DM/part-time player who runs a FR game is considering the transition from AD&D2e to d20, and I think he'll like your ideas.

there are any number of spells that as a player i would use to prevent such a tactic. Entangle the area around you, stone spikes, etc. That gives a large area and will do alot of damage to them by the time they get to you. Not to mention it works as difficult terrain thereby slowing them down to half speed

Agreed.

Battlefield control/alteration spells can wreak havoc both on the melee characters's abilities and they morale - I've seen quite often that even a minor malus can deter some players.

I don't want my pre-order money back. I want a PFRPG copy (print and pdf) of Razor Coast.

I'm patient and willing to wait.

Agreed. Same for the Anarchist Game Master Cook Book.

golem101 wrote:

Argh.

I'm playing in such a campaign, in which the DM keeps the epic tone of the story to his desired levels simply by hardrailing our characters into "fringe" events, where the outcome seems constantly predetermined and our actions ineffective in the overall balance.

Hmmmm ... so maybe you feel like this? (link)

Another buddy of mine and I always joke about this - nobody can ever say anything even resembling "you see tracks" without the inevitable reply...

Not really, he's a bit more subtle (but not too much).

Like "We'd rather stay in the city and keep an eye on the situation, there seems to be a lot going on between the crime guilds and stuff (the previous 3 adventures)" - "No, your patron assures you that everything is kept under control by his agents, he'd send you to the frontier keep that stopped responding a month ago" - "Well, OK" - "When you get back to the city, you find it in flames, ruined and savaged by rebels who have acted without serious opposition" - "Ahrrr, let's join them, just to screw up the story".

A web enhancement add-on would be teh awesome.