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

kinevon's page

Goblin Squad Member. FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 3,302 posts (4,465 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 27 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Sczarni ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dylos wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Senko wrote:
Yes its essentially the Shinto of Golarion which seemed appropriate for the character. I'm not really a fan of the core gods so I'll probably leave it blank since I don't need a deity for a wizard. I have the guide but I wanted to get a second opinion to catch things I missed (like Tamashigo). I can provide the rules but I'll keep that in mind if I'm away from the local group.
It's a legal choice for anyone that's not a cleric.
Well, just as legal as worshiping Razmir, which you also cannot write in your deity box legally.

Say what? Where does it tell me that my Razmiran Priest cannot worship Razmir?

Razmir is the source of all that is good and beneficial. Those other so-called deities, who are not living gods, just make their followers dependent on them, instead of making them upright and stand-up types, like us Razmiran Priests are.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just a couple of notes, for those of you saying that the writer of the words on one thing actually knew what, exactly, the other thing referenced was going to be: False.

Pathfinder Core Rulebook:
Lead Designer: Jason Bulmahn
Design Consultant: Monte Cook
Additional Design: James Jacobs, Sean K Reynolds, and F. Wesley Schneider
Additional Contributions: Tim Connors, Elizabeth Courts, Adam Daigle, David A. Eitelbach, Greg Oppedisano, and Hank Woon

5 designers, 6 additional contributors

Creative Director: James Jacobs
Editing and Development: Christopher Carey, Erik Mona, Sean K Reynolds,
Lisa Stevens, James L. Sutter, and Vic Wertz
Editorial Assistance: Jeffrey Alvarez and F. Wesley Schneider
Editorial Interns: David A. Eitelbach and Hank Woon

Editing, if you count everyone listed: 11 people

Total pages: 575 through the Index.

You seriously think all 11 people went over every single word on every single one of those pages as a group?

Almost certainly not.

Someone was probably in charge of each chapter, but I would suspect that the coordination between chapters was fairly loose. Let's consider, the feat Brew Potions, and compare it to the Creating Potions section of the Magic Items chapter. Is the fact that you cannot make potions from spells with the Personal range in both sections?

Brew Potion (Item Creation) wrote:


You can create magic potions.
Prerequisite: Caster level 3rd.
Benefit: You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures or objects. Brewing a potion takes 2 hours if its base price is 250 gp or less, otherwise brewing a potion takes 1 day for each 1,000 gp in its base price. When you create a potion, you set the caster level, which must be sufficient to cast the spell in question and no higher than your own level. To brew a potion, you must use up raw materials costing one half this base price. See the magic item creation rules in Chapter 15 for more information.
When you create a potion, you make any choices that you would normally make when casting the spell. Whoever drinks the potion is the target of the spell.
Creating Potions wrote:

The creator of a potion needs a level working surface and

at least a few containers in which to mix liquids, as well as a source of heat to boil the brew. In addition, he needs ingredients. The costs for materials and ingredients are subsumed in the cost for brewing the potion: 25 gp × the level of the spell × the level of the caster.
All ingredients and materials used to brew a potion must be fresh and unused. The character must pay the full cost for brewing each potion. (Economies of scale do not apply.) The imbiber of the potion is both the caster and the target. Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions. The creator must have prepared the spell to be placed in the potion (or must know the spell, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) and must provide any material component or focus the spell requires.
Material components are consumed when he begins working, but a focus is not. (A focus used in brewing a potion can be reused.) The act of brewing triggers the prepared spell, making it unavailable for casting until the character has rested and regained spells. (That is, that spell slot is expended from the caster’s currently prepared spells, just as if it had been cast.) Brewing a potion requires 1 day.
Item Creation Feat Required: Brew Potion.
Skill Used in Creation: Spellcraft or Craft (alchemy)

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And, on that note, do I get to say my tanglefoot bags are actually syrupfoot bags? Either way, it is a sticky situation, although maybe I should go for molasses, instead.

"You, sir, have been blackstrapped!" Which also suggests a new alchemical power component for the black tentacles spell...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brian Lefebvre wrote:
Serisan wrote:

Technically, the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play is part of the core assumption, so the player isn't technically required to bring that resource. It's only the Additional Resources that require the resource to be produced.

So says the Guide, at least.

The core assumption is what every participant is suppose to have, not the stuff just the GM is expected to have.

The Guide is a free download, so it should be easy for every player to save a copy of each year's guide during each season they play PFS. Which means if a particular item is removed from the Guide during an update they should have the older copy available to them.

At least as long as you aren't trying to save drive space by deleting obsolete material.

I don't have any Shadow Lodge or Lantern Lodge PCs, so I no longer have a copy of the GtPFSOP that contains any of those traits. I have several Andoran PCs, at least one of whom has Hunter's Eye, but I almost didn't have a copy of the GtPFSOP with that trait in it, because I was cleaning out old copies when I got the new Season 6 Guide.

Now, if I had deleted all my copies of the older Guides, would I have to replace that trait with a current trait? Or would my 12th level PC with that trait now be considered illegal for PFS, without an older copy of the Guide available? No way to retrain it, since there are no retraining rules for traits....

Hunter's Eye:
This was an incredibly wasteful choice for my PC who has it, as he started out with a level of Fighter, so he automatically had proficiency with both longbow and short bow. And, in the 11 levels I have played him, as an archer, only once have I been able to make use of the no penalty to attacks within the second range increment. 33 XP, one use of Hunter's Eye. Makes it about on-par with the banned Rich Parents trait, IMO.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pugwampis have an unluck aura, which is one of the roll twice, take the worst roll effects. There are some things that can make one immune to this aura, though.

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, a little history is in order.

Season 0, where it all started, you only got PP for completing faction missions, none for completing the Pathfinder mission. At that time, as well, most scenarios only had a single faction mission available, so a "good" result was getting a single PP for a scenario.

With Season 1, they added a few more scenarios with 2 faction missions, one "easy", one "hard", to get the possibility of getting two PP.

A while later, due to comments and complaints, it was decided to make a serious change in how PP could be earned. It was also, in part, a result of the Society getting the number of factions doubled from five to ten. 20 faction missions would have, pretty much, used up the word count available for the scenario. ;)

So, at that time, you could earn one PP for completing the mission that the VC gave you at the beginning of the game. Earlier seasons were retconned to do the same thing, along with allowing you to gain another for completing the faction mission, which worked fine for scenarios where each faction only had one mission. It was under a lot of discussion as to which mission to use for the scenarios where each faction had two missions...

Now, as of Season 5, the way to earn PP was, yet again, updated. Now, you earn one PP for completing the mission you are given at the beginning of the game, usually by a VC. You can earn a second PP for completing a semi-secret goal, not usually explicitly given in the briefing, although it is frequently hinted at there.

For earlier season scenarios, those secondary missions could be as simple as completing the primary mission, or be denoted by actually being told to give out the old faction mission slips. Many of them are in the spirit of helping the Pathfinder Society change its image from MurderHoboBums to the League of Civilized Adventurers.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wouldn't that be lesser evolution surge at 4th level, and 2 evolution points?

I don't see anything against it, except that each evolution would have to be a new evolution, cannot grant the eidolon any natural attacks above their normal maximum natural attack cap, and meets the spell requirements.

Might be good for a last-ditch effort, but it burns up those precious level 2 slots when you won't have a heck of a lot of them, for a minutes per level buff.

I can see it, since you would have to give up the same level spell slot as casting a 4+ person haste would take....

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Loengrin wrote:

Mmmh as I have said this ability things is strange, whan you make a skill check you do this : 1d20 + skill ranks + ability modifier + racial modifier.

Let's take Bluff which use Charisma Bonus, I can have a "add your int to Bluff skill" but not a "add Cha to your Bluff skill" ?

You already have a "add Cha mod to your Bluff skill" as a default.

Now, is there a feat, trait, class ability or anything else that gives the ability to "Add your Charisma modifier to your Bluff skill" out there?

Not for that specific thing, but you get a few things for other checks.

CMB, for instance, normally uses BAB and Str mod.
Weapon Finesse lets you use your BAB and Dex mod, instead of Str mod, for CMB when using a combat maneuver with a Finesseable weapon.
Agile Maneuvers lets you do the same thing, but doesn't require a Finesseable weapon, or even a weapon-based maneuver.

Fury's Fall, a feat from the Cheliax book, lets you add your Dex mod to your CMB when making a trip combat maneuver.

Now, the question that comes up is whether the Dex mod added from Fury's Fall has Dex as the source, or Fury's Fall as the source. If it is Dex, many feel that you cannot use it in combination with the Dex substitution provided by Weapon Finesse or Agile Maneuvers, as Dex would be the source for the mod in both cases. Others look at it as the bonus comes from Fury's Fall, in which case it doesn't matter that the user's Dex provides the numeric value, as the source is Fury's Fall, rather then Dex, and it would stack.

Which is what the whole question for this thread is, is what defines source for this kind of thing, as that defines what can stack,m and what cannot.

FrozenLaughs: Su, Sp, and Ex are not really sources, they simply give some rules for interactions between those abilities and certain other game effects, like whether the ability functions in a no magic zone, and whether it provokes an attack of opportunity by default.

Yes, two abilities, with the same name, but with different types (Su, Sp and/or Ex) will qualify as different abilities, but that is the whole thing taken together. Two different abilities, with different names, but the same type (Su, Sp, and/or Ex) can still stack, if their bonus type allows it.

The Dodge feat, for example, gives a +1 Dodge bonus to AC.
The Mobility feat gives a +4 Dodge bonus to AC in certain circumstances. In those circumstances, you would have a +5 Dodge bonus to AC, not a +4.

Now, if it were possible to take either feat twice, the bonus provided would not stack, since they would be a +x Dodge bonus from source feat X, even though, normally, Dodge bonuses stack. The feat, in this case, would obviously be the source of the bonus.
The type is Dodge, the source is the Dodge feat.

Hope that makes sense, and explains where some of us are coming from, and why we are confused when some people say that Dex is the source of the bonus from Fury's Fall...

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

"never gets hit" is a euphemism for 'gets hit so seldom that it really doesn't matter." Stop taking things literally in your nerdrage, please.

Guided is in a PFS AP, which is official enough for me and a lot of others.

Just to respond to these two comments:

Hit seldom means that you have to be able to survive it when it happens. Never gets hit was what you said, which never happens, no matter your AC.

And, on Guided: Yes, it is in an AP segment which has some material that is PFS sanctioned for use. Guided, however, is not one of those pieces. Guided has, so far, not made it into any Pathfinder source, and, since it is not sanctioned for PFS, please leave out arguments of, "If it is good enough for PFS, it is good enough for me.", since it isn't PFS sanctioned material.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalridian wrote:
Afaik, taking the aoo against the wizard would "discharge" your readied action, since you can't do anything else while having an action readied, so Cyrads idea wouldn't work.

AoOs and Readied Actions are separate things. Taking an AoO, unless it leaves you in a state that invalidates your trigger for your Readied Action, won't disable your Readied Action.

Indeed, depending on circumstances, it is possible to get both your Readied Action and an AoO against the same target.

Pole arm wielder, readies an attack against an enemy moving out of his threatened area. Enemy charges the PAW, moving from 20' away. As the charger exits the 10' square from the PAW, he triggers both an AoO, for moving out of a threatened square, and the Ready, for meeting the trigger for it. Even more fun, depending on the feats/build of the PAW, there is the possibility for the target triggering more AoOs,

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

However, if you pay gold, you can also reduce or eliminate the risk entirely by purchasing the services at higher than minimum level.

If you pay with Prestige, you can only get the spell cast at minimum caster level.

Sczarni ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atragon wrote:
I feel like a Razmiran Priest could get quite a bit of mileage out of the vestments, what with having False Focus and all...

Exactly what I was thinking, False Focus and a gold holy symbol, gives free castings of Heart of the Metal for any of the special materials.

Then again, for my Razmiran Priest, one of his first purchases was a gold holy symbol...

And a spare...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Changing your faction costs a number of

Prestige Points equal to 3 times your character level,
but does not alter your Fame score.

Note that there is NO COST for "switching" from Sczarni to The Exchange at the beginning of Season 6, that is the default change, since Sczarni has, essentially, been retired.

There is, also, a free faction change available, if The Exchange is not your faction of choice for your former Sczarni member.

Faction changes, beyond that, will cost as BNW posted.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

With a single caveat: As long as they have not taken an archetype that replaces their spellcasting.

I believe that at least Ranger has such an archetype, and, with that archetype, that PC would only be able to use wands via UMD.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given the existence of scanners, printers, and graphic editors, there is no way to truly secure any chronicle from someone who wants to cheat. Most of us operate under the honor system, in general. It usually works fine.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

ZenithTN: Please do not try and argue against the rules of the campaign.

PFS does NOT allow crafting in general. There are a few, very few, specific instances where crafting is allowed, but those are clearly spelled out and demarcated.

Crafting zero GP items is NOT in the allowed area for crafting for PFS, so it cannot be done.

So, a Druid cannot craft a club between sessions in PFS because it is disallowed by the Organized Play campaign rules.

To be honest, as a GM in a home game, if I had a player coming in with an attitude like the one demonstrated by the whining posts, "Why can't I do this?" and not accepting my statement that it is not allowed, you would get kicked from my table.

So, in the end, it isn't allowed BECAUSE the PFS OP rules say it isn't allowed. You cvan come up with your own reasons behind it, but the simplest one is the slippery slope one, where you then get the "If I can craft a club with my ranks in Craft (Weapon), why can't I craft a Greatsword? It is the same skill!"

Also note, most PFS GMs, in my experience, will let you either "pick up a club" on the way into the dungeon, or will hand wave your having purchased a zero cost item before you left town.

Items you could pick up for free, and should always have in your inventory until you can afford better:
Club or quarterstaff (B for skeletons, depending on PC strength)
Sling and sling stones (everyone should have some sort of ranged option)

Just mark it, you can always claim, if it doesn't eat up game time, that you made it yourself.

But don't be a jerk about it.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome wrote:
Alex McGuire wrote:
Sometimes those boons come from scenario chronicles.
Hmm... Okay.

Yep, as an example, there is a chronicle boon that gives you the option to make new Thassilonian Specialist Wizards, once you receive it.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Profession Sailor actually comes in useful in a few scenarios as more than a day job. It saved us a lot of trouble in [REDACTED].

Yes, but it won't substitute for profession ([REDACTED] Sailor), since my PC with ranks in Profession (Sailor) couldn't sub it in. :(

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
FLite wrote:

Blood Reservoir of Physical Prowess

Charge it between adventures. 4 points of emergency healing for physical stat damage. Or pop it off for +8 to a physical stat for one round. Pretty nice for 2K

most judges would not let you start a scenario with this "charged"

Why not? It is, in many ways, functionally identical to other items that the rules say can start charged, like a ring of spell storing.

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
RainyDayNinja wrote:
Dylos wrote:
Dazz wrote:
The only real problem I can see on the twins character is you could confuse the GM who's reporting it if you're going as a different name than what's connected to your character number.
The character's name on the sign in sheet doesn't have to be the same as the name I give to the other players, and the name of the alias on the paizo forums could include both names. For example, let's say the twins were named Bob and Sue and their last name was Porter, the alias could be Bob/Sue Porter, though that may lead to even more confusion.
You could just name them both Darryl.

I think Larry would object, he already has his AC, Darryl, and his riding mount, Darryl.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Akerlof wrote:

There's a very important difference between the Paladin's Detect Evil and the spell Detect Evil: Paladins "concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil... the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range." So many people stop reading after "Detect Evil" that this comes as a surprise to them.

That means they don't get a cone of evildar. They have to pick out the specific evil cleric in the crowd in order to detect the ambush, they don't get an Aliens style radar of people who ping as evil. So there's no question of using their Detect Evil to find hidden or invisible enemies, and they have to spend a move action for each skeleton in the crypt to figure out which will animate.

Bob Jonquet wrote:


It is certainly within the GM's perogative not to have a creature ping based solely on its intentions, but it would be poor form, to do it and then screw anyone who used that information to cast a spell or performs an action based on the result.
I agree with this: Imminent evil intent pings as evil, but it's left to GM's prerogative to decide what "evil intent" is. The GM can decide that a Neutral enemy is intending to commit the non-evil act of defending his home instead of the evil act of murdering a party of Pathfinders for fun and profit. Or maybe he thinks that he's the good (or at least non-bad) guy; just working for the Aspis Consortium, arbitraging between local rubes and nobles who are willing to part with obscene sums of cash for those under appreciated cultural paraphernalia; and he's fighting the good fight against those murder-hoboing Pathfinder freaks that really should be in a circus with their horns and halos and wings and tails.

Note: Paladin: Detect Evil:

At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell. A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.

So, part 1: At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell.

Standard to use, gives the 60' cone.

Part 2: A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.

A Paladin can then, once he has Detect Evil running, immediately (or anytime during the concentration time) use a move action to focus his attention on a single target in the 60' cone.

Note: YMMV, ETV, but this is how I read it. Only once a standard Detect Evil is running can the Paladin then focus fire it at a single target for immediate gratification, instead of having to wait until the third round.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The same holds true, other than the gold being reduced to 1,398 (Might be 1,399) for 3 XP modules, but all boons and access remain the same.

This got brought up because it can be used to "break" a PC, as some of the boons available in certain high level stuff can be significantly more "powerful", or at least noticeable, on a low level PC.

Note: This would be from playing an AP in home game mode, not from playing a module using a 7th level pregen.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
FLite wrote:

I am working on the assumption that you have MPD.

You right the stuff like the Confirmation.
Care Baird writes the stuff like The Sealed Gate.

It's the only thing that makes sense. :)

Confirmation nearly TPK'd our group in the first encounter. If we hadn't had two people who had a single session under their belt and could therefore afford certain crucial gear it would have been the end of all of us. If we had all been new level 1's we would have been utterly doomed.

To be fair we were largely a group of planetouched looking to be grandfathered in so maybe that would have been a good thing. We did just manage to survive and no-one even died. We dubbed the caves incompetent necromancer central on the basis that one of them appeared to have been eaten by his own minions.

Confirmation:
Note that the random table for that encounter includes a proviso for not using certain of the monsters for an all-new group that doesn't have that kind of item available.

One of the things the GM is supposed to do as Janira, during the intro section, is check to see if the party is equipped to handle certain kinds of encounters, so the GM knows if he needs to reroll or not.

Last time I ran it, I almost rerolled, but someone had purchased certain equipment. And, to be honest, there were a couple of PCs who had done some very ... unbalanced .... purchasing with their starting funds. All money spent on chainmail and a greatsword? Seriously?

Heck, I had one of the PCs have to keep changing his mind on what he spent his last few gold on, as he was running a Cleric, but hadn't purchased either a Holy Symbol or a Spell Component Pouch.

Andoran ***

11 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Dare you to start him off in The Confirmation.

I thought he already did.

Confirmation:
Where did you think that dead Dhampir Necromancer in that one room came from? ;)

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
kinevon wrote:

Note: Be very, very careful witht he Young template.

There are some creatures for whom the template is a boost, overall, rather than a reductio, in abilities.

As an example, anything with Weapon Finesse improves its ability to hit with this template, and its AC will also, usually, go UP.

the Weapon finesse builds get like 3 Extra points of accuracy, 2 points of reflex and 3 points of Touch AC, but they lose 2-3 points of damage per swing, lose 2 hit points per level and eat a -2 to fortitude saves

this is really only a boost for incorporeal foes who care more about non-strength based forms of combat such as level drain, spells or ability damage, and for weapon finesse builds built for undead, constructs and other creatures whose hit points and fortitude saves are not dependant on a constitution score

Huh. Tell that to my PC who was almost killed by a "young" creature whose poison, even after the young adjustment, had a DC 16 Fort save for a party at APL 5 or so.

And it delivers the poison through ranged attacks using quills. So, the save is slightly easier, but it hits more often, doing slightly less damage per hit. That, to me, adds up to an ugly situation for the PCs, especially since it also gets a higher initiative, so it is flatfooted for less time...

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Note: Be very, very careful with the Young template.

There are some creatures for whom the template is a boost, overall, rather than a reduction, in abilities.

As an example, anything with Weapon Finesse improves its ability to hit with this template, and its AC will also, usually, go UP.

Edit: Fixed some typos.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would treat an enemy escaping, if the players allow it within their RP, as under the creative solutions:

Quote:
Pathfinder Society Organized Play never wants to give the impression that the only way to solve a problem is to kill it—rewarding the creative use of skills and roleplaying not only make Society games more fun for the players, but it also gives the GM a level of flexibility in ensuring players receive the rewards they are due.

As long as they defeated the encounter, and having the NPCs run away is surely being defeated, they should receive the full rewards for the encounter.

Quote:
Step 5: Determine the Max Gold for the scenario based on the PC’s advancement rate and the subtier played. Circle the applicable value (F). If the PC’s level is not within the subtier played (such as a 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-level character in Subtier 4–5), circle the Out-of-Subtier gold value or calculate the Out-of-Subtier value for Seasons 0–4 by taking the average of both subtiers and rounding down. Write this value beside area F and circle it. This value represents the total gold piece value a character may receive for defeating all enemies and finding all treasure in a scenario. If the player is playing a non-1st level pregenerated character, he may choose instead to apply this Chronicle sheet to a 1st-level character by reducing this value to 500 gp (or 250 gp for the slow advancement track). If the PCs failed to earn any of the rewards listed for an encounter, deduct the amount listed for the applicable subtier from the value circled in area F. If the resulting value is negative, use 0 instead. Place the result of this calculation in the shaded GP Gained field and initial the adjacent box (Q).

As long as the PCs defeated the encounter, give them full gold. As to access, if the NPC running away has something that grants access, use the creative solution solution, and give them a chance to find it along the way.

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Witch.

It is insane that the target of a hex can save, still be affected, then get cackled to death. Literally.

You saved versus the effect, why are you still suffering from it round after round after round?

Where, in that, is there anything that increases the fun for the GM who has to deal with that kind of BS?

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
We run 7-player tables when it is a new player, but otherwise don't.

I have reconsidered, and will run 7 player tables, if necessary, for Season 4 and up, the scenarios written for 6 players, since they shouldn't have much trouble with a 7th player.

For earlier seapon scenarios, and modules, I prefer 4 to 5 players.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:
The thing about Kitsune is they just beg to be "unique little snowflake" characters. The kind thats all about RP (as long as its about them and how cool/special they are and the spotlights on them).

Really? That's all you see for Kitsune?

Ummm. I have a now 6th level Kitsune Sorcerer, who spends much of his time being the quiet one, given that he doesn't understand non-Tian culture. He does support stuff, along with occasional Sorcerer blasty stuff, but he usually avoids the spotlight. Other than during his Day Job, when he proselytizes with Perform (Oratory) to gain converts for his god, Razmir...

Not all Kitsune need to be Starfox, or the center (centre?) of attention.

And scottish accent dwarves are just the ones that failed when they tried to be pirate accent dwarves... ;) Arrrrh, matey!

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another thing that can help with ugly effects is a potion of Remove Sickness instead.

Quote:
You quell feelings of illness and nausea in the target, giving it a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against disease, nausea, and sickened effects. If the subject is already under the influence of one of these effects when receiving the spell, that effect is suppressed for the duration of the spell.

Casting it, when possible, is more effective, but pouring the potion down your nauseated companion's throat, sort of like a dose of pepto, can be amusing...

Andoran ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.

9a) Do not force anyone else to roleplay. If someone is just there to kill goblins, let them. Some of us aren't deep into RP, and play to let off steam...

9b) Let others roleplay, even if it isn't what you want to do.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Calth wrote:
eldergod0515 wrote:

Q: What are the feats that will work with Spell Perfection?

I've searched the boards and found snippets of insight but nary an official response from a developer. I'm hoping to collect all knowledge re: Spell Perfection in one thread...

** spoiler omitted **

The description says “if you have other feats which allow you to apply a set numerical bonus to any aspect of this spell (such as Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, Weapon Focus [ray], and so on), double the bonus granted by that feat when applied to this spell.” The uncertainty is with the definitions of:

● set
● numerical
● bonus
● any aspect

Can these terms be defined with respect to Spell Perfection?

Q: What are the other feats that will work with Spell Perfection? From various threads it looks like the contenders are:

** spoiler omitted **...

A set numerical bonus is a +x to some aspect of the spell where X is an integer. So most of the metamagic feats you list are not affected by spell perfection.

Basically, Focused and Tenebrous Spell are, the rest no. At first glance, you would thing Intesified Spell would work, but the bonus is not actually set, its a range of 1-5 depending on your level, so spell perfection doesnt apply. Piercing Spell doesnt apply because it is a penalty on the target rather than a bonus to the caster. All the rest are generally of the form of X*Y, so they are not affected.

Regarding Intensified Spell, you are incorrect:

Quote:

Intensified Spell (Metamagic)

Your spells can go beyond several normal limitations.

Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat. An intensified spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell's actual level.

That looks awful lot like a specific number.

Spell Perfection on it would change that line to:
Quote:
An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 10 levels.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
FLite wrote:
I would try to keep the three parts of Destiny of the sands together, since as a campaign they don't make a lot of sense otherwise.

A little bit difficult, since the first two are 1-5, and the third is 3-7...

Also note that, for the DotS trilogy, carefully running the Devil We Know tetrology from Season 1 (I think it is) might be a nice prequel, since it introduces some of the NPCs that show up in DotS.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CathalFM wrote:

Sooooo.....

I'm the only one who had images of Grandmaster Torch being passed from shoulder to shoulder festival style then....

Spoiler:
Sorry, you do mean bits and pieces of GMT, yes?

I just played <redacted> the other day, and someone in our party was willing to take an alignment infringement to finalize GMT after he got captured at the end.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also note that, against something immune to fire, it goes from great to worthless. Season 5, especially, includes plenty of creatures immune to fire, including at least one swarm.

Andoran ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Tier 1 & Tier 1-2 replayable scenarios, modules, and AP segments:

Scenarios:
Intro 1 - First Steps, Part I - In Service to Lore (1)
5–08 - The Confirmation (1-2)

Modules:
Crypt of the Everflame (1-2)
Master of the Fallen Fortress (1-2) *
Murder's Mark (1-2)
The Godsmouth Heresy (1-2)
We Be Goblins (1-2) *
Thornkeep - The Accursed Halls (1-2)

Adventure Paths:
Mummy's Mask - The Half-Dead City (1-2)
Reign of Winter - The Snows of Summer (1-2)

* These are Free RPG Day modules, so they are only 1 XP, and may only be 1 PP, that keeps changing as time goes by...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paz wrote:
I'm always keen to save paper; is there going to be any issue with printing the two 'Mythic Powers' chronicles back-to-back on one sheet of paper?

Possibly, since that will involve a lot of page flipping by any player using the powers from the chronicles, rather than using Mythic instead.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prethen wrote:

Whereas I totally understand it's not PFS legal to change anything as written, as a new GM, I do see the breakdown of this inflexibility in certain situations. All too often, mostly as a player and sometimes as a GM, I see the PC's easily overwhelm a scenario and the GM's hands are tied to add any extra challenge to it. Also, I could understand a reason for this inflexibility can easily be explained since how could you just let GM's randomly modify what's written and still have it as legal play.

It would be neat if Paizo could come up with some sort of system/way to allow the tweaking of the challenge levels in a consistent manner, especially for older seasons to ramp up the challenge level a bit. Not all scenarios need this.

I realize this is pie-in-the-sky. The alternative is simply to only play GM post-third season stuff (which I've still seen scenarios that haven't exactly challenged the party).

The more books that Paizo comes out with to do even more power tweaks to PC's (traits, magic items, feats) presents ever more overwhelming party potential.

Some players think it's fun to overwhelm ("break") a scenario. When that happens with me, I find it dissatisfying and even a bit turned off.

I get that players (even me!) like to optimize their characters to the hilt. With that ever increasing power, there should be some flexible system, if necessary (and agreeable to all?) for the GM to mitigate that type of party power dynamic in a scenario.

One of the things you can do, especially if you know or realize in advance, that the combats will be mostly walk-overs or not a challenge, is ramp up on the RP aspect of the scenario.

Figure out who and how you are going to utilize for it, but you can use RP to give out more of the "Background" section of the scenario than the PCs normally get.

One of the things I liked about Part 2 of Destiny of the Sands was how much of the background could be gotten through the play of the scenario. IIRC, we tromped most of the combats, partly through lucky/unlucky rolls, but the time we saved in the combats was well-spent in the RP arena.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dhjika wrote:
MrDNA wrote:

... You find your first bit of loot and realize no one at a 7 person table has detect magic prepared.

Happened to me last Friday

... Or that there are detect magics but no one took spellcraft (or knowledge: arcana)

Oh, someone was trained in Spellcraft, but it was the fighter.

Detect Magic, no Spellcraft or Knowledge (Arcana); Both Spellcraft & Knowledge (Arcana) but no Detect Magic.

Which is why my Lore Warden fighter picked up a Discerning wayfinder...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
Dylos wrote:
nosig wrote:
Dylos wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The gaming couple across from you spends the whole scenario making out...
but at least they are doing so in character.
it wouldn't be as bad ... if they weren't both older gamer dudes, playing a hot Aasimari couple...
Not a hot Ifriti couple? Or maybe an Ifriti/Oread, one has the hots for the other, and the other...

that would work I guess... wait... the other is just dirty?

ice skating close to the edge aren't we? going to get us deleted

Probably not, as long as you keep it within the same bounds as the naked female Druid grappling the Succubus thread....

Andoran

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Because of the actual way cover works, as shown, M would be able to attack C, no cover from H. He can check for cover from M's upper left corner, and there is no cover from that corner to C. No more than if H were a set of walls instead of a creature.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:
The Fox wrote:
Amulet of natural armor and ring of protection. Ta da!
Thanks! Now I'll just put my Amulet of Mighty Fists on and we'll be away!

There are always choices.

Qui Gong monk, with the substitution allowing you to cast Barkskin on yourself, for the win.

Or, simply, a stock of potions, scrolls, or a wand for someone to use on you, including yourself with UMD...

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Silbeg wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
One players puns are so bad the DM rules they constitute PVP
Had that happen Saturday at a table I was GMing. Well, I didn't rule it as PbP, but I should have.

Puns are Play by Post, now?

... your Magus is the party healer, and is the only one with any sort of healing, and that requires rolling UMD... With a +5...

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Avatar-1 wrote:

I think the GM is right here. It's not unfair to ask the player for some description, even a weak description of how the rogue is disabling it.

If there's a mechanism, the rogue can say "I tamper with the mechanism". That's enough.

If it's a floor like this one, the rogue can't just say "I get to roll Disable Device because that's what it's for". The player still has to know what exactly the character is doing in the context of the game world. Rolling to use a skill is what the player is doing, not what the character is doing.

The fireball example isn't the same thing; there are rules for how spells are cast, and that can be described as well. I agree as much as anyone that rogues shouldn't be hampered, but that's not what's happening here.

If the floor is as trap, there is a way to disable it as a trap, pure and simple. If the floor is a hazard, as has been mentioned, there is no way to disable, although a clever party may be able to figure out a way to bypass it.

And the fireball thing is the exact same thing, there are rules on how skills work. Do you have your wizard player tell you how he uses spellcraft to decipher that scroll or do you just have him roll the skill check?

If youi make him have to come up with a way to do it, then you can ask the player for how to do a disable device. If you handwave getting detailed descriptions on how to use any skill, you should not be asking for detailed descriptions on any skill, then.

Now, if a player goes above-and-beyond, and gives you a fair idea of what his PC is doing when using X skill for Y purpose, you can give him a circumstance bonus, if appropriate.

For diplomacy, do you want, "I try to convince Kevin to help us out." or do you want, "I carefully spend ten minutes schmoozing Kevin, asking him friendly questions on his friends and family, commiserating about problems, congratulating him on his new grandkid, yadda yadda yadda, slowly leading into his providing us assistance on Y matter."?

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

... and the Cha 7 Fighter has the best Diplomacy at the table.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyle Baird wrote:
TanRu wrote:
Thanks again for the advice on The Confirmation. Sounds like the perfect starting point. We've traded in our tickets for Destiny of the Sands and registered for The Confirmation in the same slot. (So there are currently 2 more tickets for Destiny of the Sands for Saturday 8am).
I'm running The Confirmation during that slot, maybe I'll get lucky and you'll be at my table!

Spoiler:
Ruh-roh, Shaggy!
Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Note: There are a couple of item boons that are on chronicles that are both very unclear, and do not include the rules for it.

There is an early season chronicle that allows you to buy something thast is only described in the scenario itself, as it is not a standard item.

I managed to catch the GM while he still had the scenario avaialbel (printout in=hand), so we could look the item up, and, oddly enough, it turned out to be a slotted masterwork tool for Intimidate checks. The sidebar explaining it in the scenario was only about 3-4 lines, so it could easily have been printed on the chronicle, but it wasn't.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Elbedor wrote:

Huge Thread Rez here, but what if the opposite order were performed?

Abundant Ammunition on a bag of 3 normal sling bullets. Then Magic Stone on the bag. Per the rule of Magic Stone, "up to 3". But per the AA spell, "all projectiles this spell conjures are affected".

???

Per the rules for AA:

Quote:
If, after casting this spell, you cast a spell that enhances projectiles, such as align weapon or greater magic weapon, on the same container, all projectiles this spell conjures are affected by that spell.

So why do you even need to ask?

1 to 50 of 251 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 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.