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

kyrt-ryder's page

12,914 posts (12,991 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 12,914 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

WormysQueue wrote:
And in the typical AP situation it's "if you don't save the day, no one will".

It's close a necessity for the writing of the AP's to ensure the entire AP actually get's played, but it's a form of railroading I hate as a player.

I would infinitely prefer to play in a world that's flexible enough to account for my choices and continue to exist 99% of the time. You can only do a 'the world ends because you chose not to participate in this specific set of events' plot so many times before it becomes incredibly stale beans.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
SlimGauge wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Where has all the magic gone

and where are all the CoDz...

Myself, I'd have gone with Peter, Paul and Mary.

Where has all the magic gone, long time passing?
Where has all the magic gone, long time ago?
Where has all the magic gone?
Gone to the big six, every one
Oh when will they ever learn, oh when will they ever learn?

Fluff the magic roleplayer

lived by the sea
and frolicked in the openness
in a land called D&D...

You mean lived by the Sound

More specifically Puget Sound [kind of ironic all the RPG development that's come out of this area.]


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Like a bad fanfiction.


I'm rather fond of non-linear stories where the challenge level of an encounter isn't dictated by its place in the plot.


Terquem wrote:

I hate the concept of the

"Boss Fight"

Likewise.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fletch wrote:
While I'm not a big fan of Magic Mart, I do get that sometimes a player wants something particular for his character. In those cases, I encourage a search for a quest that will uncover such an item or at least commissioning it from a wizard who needs them to go get ingredients or complete some tasks while he makes it. They still get to select their items, but have to work for them rather than just picking them off a rack.
This is Pathfinder. Your characters are always going to be 'questing for that new piece of gear' rather than getting on with the story if you go this route.
Quote:
RealAlchemy wrote:
Suppose you include a way in your game to transfer the enchantment on a found weapon or piece of armor to a different item? A spell or crafting feat might be able to accomplish that.
That's a pretty good idea. I'm totally adding this idea to the idea pool. Perhaps there's legend of an old, Dwarven forge that can transfer enchantments into a newly-made weapon.

Works best if it's not made complicated. Either a ritual any temple of any deity can perform, or perhaps a ritual each smith acquires as part of reaching 5 ranks in his craft skill.


thejeff wrote:

Well, if you want to have an actual campaign, you can't have more than a tiny minority of encounters have a significant chance of being a TPK. Because odds add up and if even one boss fight per level has even a 10% chance of TPK, you don't get very far.

Now, they can seem tougher than they really are, but they can't actually be tougher. If they are, the campaign ends in a TPK.

Even too much of a chance of a single (unraisable) death leads to the kind of thing Set describes. That final encounter can be nail-biting, but it really should very rarely lead to actual death.

Quite frequently on these boards I see GMs talking about needing to create 'real threat' to their players and ramping up encounters [creating more work for themselves in the process]...

... and then frequently use fudging to save the characters from the exact threat they themselves created.

That's not to say these aren't useful tools in the GM toolbox, but using one tool only to use another to fix it seems like a wash filled with wasted time to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rub-Eta wrote:
Wrath wrote:
I'm running 5th ed at the moment, where you cant buy magic items.
Yeah, I noticed that. Made me wonder why money was a thing at all.

IMO money should be about interacting with the real economy of the gameworld. Creating a second EXP track in the form of wealth both complicates character power scales and creates all sorts of undesirable [to me] consequences re-money.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Again, Red Hand of Doom has an explicit "ticking clock" while the enemy marches forwards. Doing it like the Wizard but slower means it might not get done before everyone dies.

I really think that running an adventure where the players literally cannot get past the challenge without magic or a class ability that they could have, but don't, is bad GMing. Like if in order to prevent catastrophe, the party needs to cross an ocean in a week, but they don't happen to have magic available to do that, you either make magic available (there's a wizard who will let you pay him to cast the spell) or you extend the timetable.

Telling the party "y'all failed because none of you elected to play a wizard" is not something I'm interested in doing. It's fine to run an adventure that's written like that, but when your party consists of characters that are largely incompatible with the written narrative, you have to change it (this is part of why I don't run pre-written stuff, since I have to change so much of it anyway.)

If we're talking about a party of player characters of high enough level that the Wizard could teleport [level nine], there's no good reason that the Fighter shouldn't be able to swim there. Even a mild 10 miles per hour would cover 240 miles per day. Beowulf raced in the ocean for several days straight without pause.


Derklord wrote:
Turelus wrote:
Also remembering this is a team based game, the rest of the party can help and adapt to the situation to assist the martial class regaining their weapon, or just helping them through the encounter so they can regain their weapon after the fight and continue.
So your idea of teamwork is to make the martial useless and have the casters carry the combat and exploration?

FTFY


0o0o0 O 0o0o0 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Depends on how you define 'Progressive' [I am certainly not a fan of economic policies labeled such.]

I'd say Eberron's treatment of the gods as 'maybe yes maybe no' is pretty progressive.

Stuff qbout politics

That was iust an off-hand remark, no interpretation or criticism of Paizo intended.

RE: 'how is the uncertainty of gods existing progressive.'
It pulls the game out 9f the theistic rut and allows more complex characters and philosophy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Depends on how you define 'Progressive' [I am certainly not a fan of economic policies labeled such.]

I'd say Eberron's treatment of the gods as 'maybe yes maybe no' is pretty progressive.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't always use melee attacks but when I do I'm a druid or summoner.


Scythia wrote:
I don't up the difficulty just because players optimize. I'm content to run Dynasty Warriors if that's what the players prefer.

Just remember that dynasty warriors doesn't go past level 8 conceptually.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
That's an interesting perspective. I don't see it as increasing difficulty "for its own sake", but combats aren't fun to me if they aren't generally challenging. Some should be tough, some should be easy, and some should be extremely hard. You disagree?

I agree in theory, but the differing abilities of the party vs enemies in concert with the randomness of dice rolls supplies plenty of that in my experience.

Quote:
Or is your point that if players make powerful builds, it's a sign that they don't want challenging combats, and we should honor that?

At least communicate with your players first, see whether they want high difficulty or not.


1: the purpose of optimization is to hack the RNG, to create a character that won't easily die or fail so as to continue to experience the world through that character.

2: increasing difficulty for it's own sake is wrong. Minimal interference for the sake of fun for everyone at the table is welcome.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
For intelligent antagonists, I generally make their tactics at least as savvy as that of the PCs. For groups of PCs who regularly decide "kill the guy in robes before he can cast something"

So you're saying even the players realize the casters are the greater threat. Such a lovely balanced game we're playing.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
Ryzoken wrote:

Even if your fighter is better at fighting than my class feature, my class feature is the superior choice because your fighter (and this has been true of every single fighter ever put in front of me over 15 years of playing D&D 3.x and Pathfinder) is in no way as useful as what could've replaced your fighter in your player slot. If I can have 75% of a fighter and a full caster or a 2/3 caster with 4-6 skill points per level versus your fighter, I would rather not take your fighter 99.9% of the time.

No skill points, no magic, no ability to interact with anything beyond "swing sword, survive the experience." Literally no better than a trained dog.

And the dog cuddles and plays fetch.

I mean, til the time comes to sunder or steal the casters spell component pouch in order to limit the things they can cast

At which point the caster pulls out their secondary or tertiary or quaternary spell component pouch.

Quote:
or open a door.

How on earth does this relate to Fighter?

Quote:
No skill points? 2 feats = level X4 skill points.

Great idea, sacrifice the one thing that makes the Fighter unique in order to patch something he should have had to begin with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
Ryzoken wrote:

If I need a speedbump I'll buy a trained combat animal or roll a druid. That way my "fighter" has pounce and multiple swings that might actually hit. Oh, and if they eat it, the raise spells are cheaper.

And occasionally Mr Bitey likes to snuggle. Fringe benefit.

Have fun with Mr. Bitey, but I'll guarantee my fighters do a far better job.

Better than the animal sure.

The druid will individually be an inferior speedbump (at the low levels where speedbumps matter, inthe specific scenarios where they matter) but also comes with a scaling speedbump AND level appropriate spell resources.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Johnnycat93 wrote:
It's not, but since it is so incredibly rare on the players side of things very few people take it into account when designing encounters so it ends up breaking things. At the core of things its probably an overreaction to some of the Shocktrooper-Power Attack-Pounce exploits that were available in 3.5.

I've GM'd for characters that exploited that material to the fullest, with DPR over 1,000 per round when it worked.

Still found well-played full casters far more difficult to challenge, because in the end the fact will always remain.

Damage is only damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The 1k per shirt, change shirts between combat format worked very well.

A 20k shirt unlimited uses would be a nice addition as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who clearly need such tools the most.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why? For that same 1k your character can buy himself a mithral dagger to slit his own throat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Johnnycat93 wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Fighting is far more than dpr.

it's not really

people need to use readied actions and the like more often, also step up and strike line is(should be anyway) a common thing. also I mean fighters are the ones ones really capable of consistently 1 rounding CR+3 across all levels.

How is the fighter able to 1 round cr+3 enemies at all levels?

any time they get within range, then you stand up and strike. If they charge you, then it's a real winner. surprise round for fighter means they get with in range too, it's easy to sneak in heavy armor as a fighter.

like seriously, everyone else wastes a turn on buffing, usually to get good at killing a single enemy. fighter? higher DPR over 3 rounds and can kill more opponents using things like lunge or simply threatening more opponents.

okay specifics, my go to items for any melee build are quick runners shirt for that moment YOU NEED TO FULL ATTACK, boots of haste or whatever, and on fighter duelist gloves which is +2 to weapon training.

Just popping in to remind everyone that they nerfed the runners shirt and now it ends your turn after you use it.

Ugh Paizo why can't we have nice things? It was only once per encounter anyway.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Flexibility is crucial to fighting. The Brawler has more fighting potential than the Fighter, while the Magus has more still.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Fighting is far more than dpr.


I hope you do something good for rogues and monks Kanya.


Lady-J wrote:
MeriDoc- wrote:
Odd direction, my last table was 5 martials and a bard, we sailed through.
your dm probably wasn't following the tradition of target the bard 1st so he cant boost the martials that any intelligent enemies should do

Their table probably didn't go past level 12.

If it did, MeriDoc, I would be very intrigued to hear tales of play at those levels.


Tarantula wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Leap height is not counted, just like freefall distance.

"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That would include high jumps, as in my example, if you have a 5' movement speed, then you cannot high jump more than 5 feet.

Except vertical leaps [and freefall] don't count towards movement.


Leap height is not counted, just like freefall distance.


Jumping isn't charging through difficult terrain, it's chargingvthrough the air over it.


It doesn't exist. No martial classes do.

They're one class with full bab, all good saves, 8 skillpoints and customization towards a theme allowing any present concepts and many more.


In all fairness those magic swords often cost a quest too didn't they?


Tarantula wrote:
Jumping is not a straight line.

Wrong.

If it were not a straight line then sufficiently high vertical leaps would decrease movement range based on the height jumped.


Zweihanders are definitely non-reach polearms.


Jeez and here I thought m/c disparity was bad at my table. How do people still play martials if you don't even let them charge-leap over debris (or corpses) or gaps in the floor?


Of course ability to jump doesn't change the placement of the line, it merely relegates the 'obstacle' to a non-obstacle.

If you jumped over it then it neither blocks nor slows movement, the charge succeeds.


Derklord wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
In other words you can leaping charge over small obstacles (difficult terrain) or gaps in the ground/floor IF you succeed your jump check.

No, because you can only attempt a charge if you have a clear path in the first place.

"If any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can't charge." If you have to jump over it, it obvious blocks movement. If it is there, it is a square in the line between you and your target.

Read that again.

If the line blocks or slows movement you cannot charge.

There is no slowing or blockage ifvthe jump check successfully clears it.


In other words you can leaping charge over small obstacles (difficult terrain) or gaps in the ground/floor IF you succeed your jump check. Obstacles large enough to block your view prevent charging.


Wait... Where is this 'can't jump while charging' bull s$@@ written?


DM Livgin wrote:
Josh-o-Lantern wrote:
One of these days we'll get an official ruling...
While we are at it, can we get an errata that you can't pounce while staggered?

Never going to happen. Pounce is a monster ability intended to make pouncers more dangerous when they would otherwise only get to make one attack.


The head isn't a limb.


If you treat the party as being the level of the full casters it works well enough.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Realname wrote:
Spellcasters will always be the powerhouses in d&d, the fighters should be able to compete with weapons of tremendous magic. In 1st edition, belt of giant gave the fighter the strength of a titan (or cloud giant). Here is another example.
Assuming the fighter had a Strength of 20 before putting on the belt, a belt that put his strength to that of a storm giant would cost 225,000 gp, which would take basically all the money of a level 15 fighter. If it made him as strong as the weakest titan it would cost 625,000 gp which would take basically all the money of a 19th level fighter.

Pretty sure the point of the rant intentionally ignores the book value of these items Milo. He's trying to address a problem in the system, problems in a system are seldom fixed by operating within the rules of said system. Just look at American Politics :P

That being said such flat 'increase strength to X' items favors characters who can do great things using abilities OTHER than Strength. It's the wrong solution, but thinking outside the box is how we find solutions.


Smart enemies kite and cast.

Dumb enemies tank and kill.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wizard vmc can get an arcane discovery that resembles timestop.


*blows a trumpet*


'Freeway' implies one long route with the ability to change lanes.

'Highway' might be more appropriate, there are often a number of highways one can take to get to the same place, though some are shorter than others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wait... What? Please show me your Secret, Wizard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vrog Skyreaver wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
No, you can't.

Based on what? You haven't even seen any fighter that I have built, yet you're assuming because you can't build said fighter that it can't be done.

Because you can't build a fighter that can stop time or travel between dimensions with his own power.

1 to 50 of 12,914 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.