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. 3,016 posts (4,173 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 27 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 226 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Andoran ***

7 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 ***

3 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?

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MrSin wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
What's wrong with the spell? How does it get abused? It seems rather mundane and well within the confines of a 1st level spell.
Staggered is a pretty powerful effect, and ranged touch almost always hits. It also falls under conjuration instead of evocation.

Might want to recheck the rules on ranged touch attacks.

Unless the caster has spent two feats, they are likely taking a -4 for making a ranged attack on an opponent in melee.

Then, unless the do some positioning, they are probably taking another -4 for cover.

Then they are a 1/2 BAB class, and probably don't have much more than a 14 or so in Dex...

Yes, it can do nice damage, except...
It is maximum 5d6.
Yes, you can exceed that, but it requires metamagic, which usually affects the spell slot it uses.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

... the Druid shows up in adamantine full plate.

... the Cleric shows up in a harimaki.

... the new player wants to run a Dwarven Fighter, who is going to multiclass to Wizard, with an Int of 14...

... the Rogue fails her save against color spray...

Spoiler:
And the GM forgets that she is being run as an iconic to fill out the table, so doesn't CdG her...

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If your GM allows it, there was an item from the old Magic Item Compendium, the Belt of Heling, which granted a number of charges each day for use to do some healing. It only cost 750 gp, had three charges, and did 2d8 per charge, spend an extra charge at the same time for another 1d8 healing. The charges replenished the next day.

1 charge = 2d8
2 charges = 3d8
3 charges = 4d8
when used all at once.

Using single charges was the best value, if you could afford the slower healing.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MrSin wrote:
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
"Racial abilities" might be the term I'd favor, the problem being some of them are racial disabilities - I'm not sure, how about "racial properties?"
Features or qualities wouldn't be shared. You could also replace traits with the term background traits or something similar. Maybe if they ever need a revamp I'm sure they won't use the same name twice again... I hope.

Well, just remember that it is not quite on the same level of use as level.

Although a Pathfinder 2.0, just to actually, I don't know, put rules on the same thing into a single area, so you don't have to reference half a dozen things to find out that you can't make, for example, potions of personal range spells...

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
...the bad guy can only hit on a 20, but is using a x4 crit weapon.

The main bad guy is using an x4 crit weapon, and has three minions with high crit range weapons, and Butterfly's Sting...

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And, yes, when you full attack with combat maneuvers, or do a combat maneuver as part of a full attack, it takes the penalty associated with which attack it takes the place of, -0 for the first attack, -5 if done on the first iterative, -10 if done on the second, etc.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Note that Manyshot and Rapid Shot can be stacked on the same full attack.

I forget exactly how the old Manyshot worked, but it used to be its own action, IIRC, and it used to apply a penalty to hit. The new one is just an option for use with a full attack with a bow, and has no drawbacks.

Against most targets, Manyshot just gives an extra 1d8+x damage. The second arrow on that first attack cannot, itself, benefit from crits or other damage multiplers that are not general.

It will work with Clustered Shots.

Whether it counts as another attack for that second arrow for Hammer the Gap is one I am unsure of.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jiggy wrote:
kinevon wrote:

you're running a scenario with a darkness using end guy, and the whole party is human, with a light spell and torches as their light sources...

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

I know:
But it would, at least, have neutralized the darkness in the same area, not that that would have helped in the least...

But it might have put some pressure on the creature, in some way.

Sigh. darkness at will sucks.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Working in retail: not necessarily.

Ruling over retail: probably.
:)
Why am I now tempted to make a campaign where the big bad is the Dungeon Mart corporation?

Shop Smart, shop S-Mart!

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As to counting as your own ally, I tend to consider that this feat goes by the same ruling as Gang Up, where you definitely do not count as your own ally.

As written, you would only ever be able to pass on a single crit, although, using readied attacks, if your GM allows, it might be possible for the crit fisher to get more of them passed to allies. That would require, though, figuring out some way to setup a ready for a passed on sting, and multiple high multipler allies, usually with a benefit from taking a single attack instead of just taking the single sting on their normal full attack.

Low level, TWF kukris, two allies, each with high multipler weapons, one set to attack (Vital Strike?) on a confirmed-but-passed crit, the other just setup in the order after the stinger.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

you're running a scenario with a darkness using end guy, and the whole party is human, with a light spell and torches as their light sources...

TDWKP2:
Yep, a party of 4 humans, 1st & 2nd level, no one with an Ioun torch, just the cantrip and mundane lights. In an underground city, no natural light sources, and the BBEG is a Derro, with darkvision and darkness. Oh, and sneak attack damage...

And the only tactics for it I could find were to hide behind the door if the PCs made noise in the fight outside its door...

Andoran ***

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
gnoams wrote:
I used to play at a store where we had a number of pre-teens play with us. As long as everyone is comfortable with it, it's fine. We did have some parents thinking they could use us as free babysitting. We told them we were here playing games all day, they were welcome to join us, but if their kid wandered off we weren't going to stop them.
Free range children will be mistaken for halflings and shipped to cheliax.

Shouldn't that be Slipped to Cheliax?

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Te'Shen wrote:
Taskmagus Black wrote:

What about teamwork feats? . . .

See everything gets better if you work together.

Inquisitors get free teamwork ske...er feats, and benefit from said feats via solo tactics. However, at eighth level, he can smite a succubus with his piercing judgement...

LazarX wrote:
You do understand the concept that one special UNIQUE case doesn't make it the norm?
After this thread, I don't know if I can imagine a succubus not being into BDSM, even one that's been tricked into a helm of opposite alignment followed with levels in paladin...

So, she is a Chelaxian faction Succubus Paladin, working on, er I mean for, Paracountess Zarta Dralneen...

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
phantom1592 wrote:

My annoyance with 'levels' in a game... is A) that its not as innate as it should be.

You can call yourself a 5th level wizard... but where did you get that rank? Who gave it to you? Did you go back to the tower and take a placement exam?

If you focus a lot on training rules, then that works just fine.... but I don't see anyone in any book referring to themselves as '3rd level fighters...' so i'm not a fan of it tossed in with casters either.

and...

B) It sounds kind of stupid. Claiming your a 5th level wizard is much more dumb sounding then claiming to be a master of the Fifth ring of the Order of light....

Means the same thing, but I don't know... I just don't care for 'level-speak'

I think in-game, we currently refer to spells as being of certain 'circles'. Our sorcerer can currently cast a single spell of the fifth circle...

It's petty, but we like it ;)

And that works fine, in a closed group, where you are metagaming the meaning. The instant someone new joins your group, you either have to step out of character to explain it, or you have someone who is totally confused, and probably not having a bunch of fun.

OGL core refers to a bunch of things by the word level. Many of us either have been using the term for years as Gary & Dave defined it, or grew up using it that way.

Remember that what your group uses if it is non-standard, is fine for your group, but you need to remember taht visitors and new members will need to be brought up to speed on it.

For PFS, since it is an open campaign, using the standard terms is not metagaming, it is playing the game as written.

Can your PC tell the difference between a Fighter, a Ranger, a Paladin, and a Samurai? At times, they can all look almost identical to a casual viewer.

Fighter with a bow
Ranged Ranger
Divine Hunter (I think it is) Paladin
Zen Archer Monk

Overall, from a distance, they will look very similar.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
kinevon wrote:


** spoiler omitted **

When I think about it, I think wow if I were playing there I would have had my game wrecked.

You gave an example where a player is making bad choice after bad choice and you have to lower the bar to keep them playing.

I am sorry your example does not appeal to me only firms my stance. I want that challenge and threat. If I were you, I would have advised the player against the actions that could have caused that. As a DM of new players I say often hey I would advice against X and here is why. So they learn. You taught them they can play reckless with no threat. Again let them know when they are playing up how deadly it is, the threat involved. Say a pregen may be a good idea. If you really wanna play up, you NEED to play smart. Going toe to toe is a bad idea. You failed him letting a newbie walk into hat threat ignorant

Say what?

Did you actually read my spoiler?

Just as an FYI, a 2nd level fighter, which is what she was playing, has both better defenses and better hit points than most 4th level casters.

Spoiler:
High AC fighter, going total defense for additional AC. Creature needs a 16 to hit.
A 16.
So, 25% chance of a hit.
10% chance of a potential critical.
25% chance of confirming that 10% critical.
2.5% chance of that bad luck happening.

That is neither challenge nor threat. That PC was in good armor, doing the appropriate thing to survive. Your response is neither appropriate nor reasonable.

Additional, semi-relevant information:
The player had already been using pregens at a local con to get 2 of the 3 XP that this PC had. So you want her to play yet another pregen when she was p[laying a perfectly legal PC who was legal for the table?

2nd level PC, in sub-tier 3-4 of a 1-7 scenario.

As a matter of fact, other than "Don't play.", we, GM included, were giving her good advice.

Caryatid column:
Damages weapons when the weapon hits them, so don't attack.
If you aren't attacking anyhow, you should just go with Total Defense, to increase your AC, and reduce their chance of hitting you.
2nd level fighter with a base AC of 20, Total Defense made it 24. That is a good AC for APL4, not so?

The casters needed someone to block the advance of the columns, so they can get spells off to try and destroy the columns.

Oh, and her PC had both the best AC and the best hit points in the party.

So, other than "Don't play this scenario, or don't play the PC you have built, and play yet another pregen that is, at best, not the build she wants to use, what would your reasonable advice be?

Or would your advice just be to kill her PC, with an evil laugh, and drive yet another new player away from PFS?

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:

A GM that softballs.

A GM that does not know the rules and does not wants too.

A GM that cheats, at all, even for the players. See softballing.

A GM that hates roleplay or combat, and avoids either.

A GM that starts the game off bashing the adventure. I am spending 4+ hours playing this do not start it on a bad step.

A GM that ignores people.

I softball, when it is needed.

Voice in the Void:
Running a group through at sub-tier 3-4. Only melee in the party is the 2nd level fighter, who has a good AC. And this is the player's first and only PFS PC, and the first time played at second level.

So, she is having her fighter going Total Defense, which increases her AC significantly. The caryatid column needs a 16 to hit at all.

So, she has already been hit once, took a small amount of damage during this combat. Her allies are using spells and ranged attacks to destroy the column. At this point, the column hits with a critical threat.

The PC can take a hit, and will be unconscious and dying. A critical, on the other hand, is virtually guaranteed to kill her PC. In the first room they have done more than get background in.

Is it fun for her or me if I then kill her PC, who, at this level, is not only dead, but probably won't be able to be raised?

Think about it.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
I have the same pet peeve, to the point that I don't allow numbertalk at my table... In terms of hit points, skill bonuses, or any other number. Players should be able to describe their characters in the same terms as they would in real life.

So, do you letr them set up consistent equivalencies, or do you just enforce mumblety g~##?

And what do you do when the real life descriptions would alreay be a number? "I am 5' 6" tall."

So, is a +9 Diplomacy good, mediocre, or excellent? Or would you just let me describe it as, "I can automatically assist anyone performing Diplomacy."?

Sorry, when a skill number can ligitimately range from -3 to +30 or more, not even counting ACP or encumbvrance, it is hard to force someone to use a non-numeric descriptor withotu a defining table.

Heck, even as a GM, I have to check the spell detect magic to give the proper aura strength reading...

Do Native Outsiders radiate their alignment at 1st level if they are not a Cleric/Paladin?

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Seth Gipson wrote:
nosig wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
nosig wrote:
SO, I'll just ask to be excused from this table please. Perhaps you can use the time savings from having one less player the judge needs to do paperwork to get in a few minutes more of the fun stuff - you know, the gaming. I'll move over to the table where the judge uses those minutes to provide a little more story/plot/Role Play or heck even a little more Roll Play.

You are more than welcome to have your own opinions, but holy moly do I think that opinion is ridiculous.

You seem to be making broad accusations here that you somehow think Doug or any GM who would try their best to follow the rules in a similar manner arent worth playing under because you wont have as much fun under their table. Or that they will somehow hurry the game along, so they have more time for the bookkeeping aspect of it.

I cant sto you from feeling this way, and I wouldnt stop you from leaving the table if you wanted, but wow.

I am sure that Doug would do a great job of running the game, and it would be fun, I just would rather have 4 hours of fun than 3.5 hours of fun and a half hour of waiting for him to do paperwork for 5 other players.

But you are assuming that the game will be done in 3.5 hours because he is trying to make time to do the paperwork how he wants to. Perhaps the scenario is just short. Perhaps the party bypassed an encounter or two with solid tactics or Diplomacy? There are all kinds of things can influence the amount of time it takes to complete a scenario.

Stating you simply would prefer to have X hours of fun so you cant sit at GM Y's table is insulting not just to the particular GM, but to GMs in general.

Seth, what he is saying is that he would rather play the game, with the full alloted time, rather than have to worry that a GM is either going to be rushing the party through encounters to finish early, or have to call the game before the end, because he needs that last 20-30 minutes to do paperwork, rather than letting the game play at its own pace.

Would you rather play, say, The Blakros Matrimony in 3.5 hours, with a GM who is also making some of the players' play in a distracted fashion while they try to finish up his required paperwork before the end of the game, or have a full 4 hours time to RP that scenario, with all the players fully involved?

As with nosig, I would probably go looking for a table focused on playing the scenario, rather than focused on post-game paperwork during the game.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We have a variety of Paladins locally, yesterday we had the Seelah pregen being used at our table, while the other table's GM is one of the folks locally who runs a Paladin.

As an online player/GM, I see a bunch of Paladins in the online games, usually in mid-to-high-tier tables.

Locally, we do have some Wizards. I have one in my stable, another local loves them, but is using PFS to play other types of PCs that he is not as familiar/comfortable with. I have seen other Wizards, and arcane casters of various types, around our tables.

A lot of experienced gamers, in my experience, tend to use PFS as a testing grounds for PCs of types they don't normally use. That's how I do it, myself. My area of preference, for example, is ranged fighters, but I think I only have about 4 of them in my stable of PFS PCs, but I also have 4 sorcerers, 1 wizard, 2 maguses, 1 rogue, a couple of trip/disarm builds, 1 bard, and a couple of GM credit blobs in the wings...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Year of the Decemvirate

In which much is revealed, with the return of <redacted>, and his ascension, for real, into membership in the Decemvirate.

Time to schmooze the fun girl <redacted> again, as we pass through her garden. Again.

Oh, well, maybe we can actually bring back the ship this time...

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Negative levels are one of the few permanent negatives that won't get your PC marked as dead, so you can take your time removing them.

Note, however, that your future parties may not be happy with you, as you will be more fragile, and provide less benefit, to a party you are part of due to the penalties.

Removing a permanent negative level takes a casting of Restorarion, and I believe that the casting cost is either 1,280 gp or 4 PP apiece. Note that, during the course of the normal PFS adventure, you won't be able to get both done, as you have to wait a week between castings for this effect.

Between scenarios, you can get both done before your next adventure, due to the indefinite time between scenarios.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
A witch's familiar begins play storing all of the 0-level witch spells plus three 1st-level spells of the witch's choice. The witch also selects a number of additional 1st-level spells equal to her Intelligence modifier to store in her familiar. At each new witch level, she adds two new spells of any spell level or levels that she can cast (based on her new witch level) to her familiar. A witch can also add additional spells to her familiar through a special ritual (see sidebar).

That is under Familiar in the Witch entry from the APG.

Andoran ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
kinevon wrote:
Don't forget the level of Alchemist, so you can make 'em cheap yourself.
...dammit, he IS an Alchemist, so I should have been using that...
just make sure his craft alchemy is good enough... yeah, I've seen an Alchemist with no ranks in Craft Alchemy...

Sorry, after running Accursed Halls online on Saturday, I also ran Black Waters FtF on Sunday.

We had an alchemist/ragechemist at the table.
Sat there, as the GM, watching him fail rolls, because his Alchemy was +7, and he wants to make things with DC 25s.

1 to 50 of 226 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 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.