Matthew Trent wrote:
Its piss poor form to volunteer and then bail just because you don't like a class.
Agreed - it's poor form to ask anyone to leave a table and doesn't reflect on your skills as a GM.
A competent GM makes an enjoyable game out of whoever sits down at his/table.
Our hobby is about including people, not asking them to leave. That includes; the necromancer; summoner, gunslinger and everything else allowed by PFS rules.
The Don't be a Jerk rule applies just as equally to GM's as it does the rest of the people at the table.
Have a permanent glamour/illusion cast on the coach.
But otherwise expect people to react the same way they would on The Walking Dead... it's cool flavour otherwise, they'd never get tired and could run through the night etc...
I have always differentiated between public and private casting;
Private casting (i.e. mage armour) is usually cast first thing in the morning as part of the mornings rituals. It's a residual effect and shouldn't be an issue.
Public casting is a bit trickier; for example a cleric casting purify food and drink[i] might be like saying 'grace' before a meal.
At some diplomatic events I find it hard to think what people wouldn't be wearing illusions and glamour's - [i]if they could afford to.
I could a caster asking for permission to cast prestidigitation on the party before meeting a king but certainly wouldn't be casting a spell in front of the king without express permission. It's not just rude but tantamount to suicide.
On occasion I have PC's excuse themselves to their room, cast detect magic and return to the common room whilst concentrating to check for aura's.
On the other foot; If an NPC started casting a spell in front of most parties he/she had better have a good reason because that tends to be the moment when 'it' hits the fan...
I have had run a Paladin through this one; there are a number of different ways to play through the scenario.
It was a challenge and they enjoyed themselves immensely. (they were experienced players).
Is Destroying a Fellow Player's Raised Dead / Commanded Undead an action that Constitutes PVP in Society Play?
Walter Sheppard wrote:
Well done and eloquently said..
Too often a vocal minority hijacks an edge-case issue; passions run wild, things are said and before we know it a million voices are left crying in terror...
"Explore, Report, Cooperate" is the motto - and maturity and acceptance is the key.
We all work together for the good of the organisation; just make the effort not to antagonise PC's in the party or the rest of us sitting round the table. It's a social game after all.
The issue is less about casters and more about the influence of magic in your world. Simply p play a low-magic campaign. I don't understand why in ' your' world wizards can cast spells but' fighters' are unwilling to wear magic armour.
perhaps plan some games in the mana wastes..
If you'd like to put up your god wizard build I am sure people will come up with creative ways to kill it
The melee role can be filled by any number of builds and casters? There are boards full of builds. Just type in DPR and learn for yourselves - it's not hard, it simply takes time.
Your arguments have the sound of reading rather than actual table experience actually playing through these classes and concepts. There is a great difference between what we might see on paper
How many times a round is a fighter hitting a target? Wan't to stop a 9th level spell - try readied action!
Both of you obviously have no idea how much damage an effectively (not cheesed) built front-liner can do. Easily 70-80 per hit... by level 10...sheesh..
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Personally I'd prefer it if casters could cast more spells, but had to be significantly more specialized. It's just kind of overwhelming how they get access to every tool.
Caster's get may access to a wide range of spells. However they can only cast one per round (perhaps two at the most). It only seems overwhelming at first glance. Caster only get limited number of them per day per day, your archer can keep shooting for as long as she carries arrows. (Action economy is a wonderful thing)
That's the great thing about parties; not everyone is the same and everyone has a role to play.
Nope, the counter to magic users is usually a hail of magical arrows or a cleaving greataxe. Especially at high-levels; please take the time to look at the DPR threads for stats on high level fighters/archers. They do horrendous amounts of damage on casters who traditionally don't have too many hit points.
Melee builds use magic as well, it's simply crafted into their items.
Some helpful soul has put together a file of "Getting X to Y".
It breaks down what stats can be used for skills and abilities; it's always a good place to start but you will need to follow the raw to it's source to make sure it's correct for your build.
Is Destroying a Fellow Player's Raised Dead / Commanded Undead an action that Constitutes PVP in Society Play?
Nobody is suggesting that one persons rights at a table are any more or any less than another. The dont' be jerk rule applies to everyone equally.
Your right to play a necromancer doesn't mean others at the table should have to play lawful stupid...
Playing some classes and concepts requires maturity and a willingness to recognise that some PC choices are going to attract more attention than others in normal situations - just remember you are all on the same team working to achieve the same goal.
The Beard How do you reconcile being the PC wandering about with undead...the "not-tame" death machines...
p.s for the record two characters in society of mine were; a dhamphir undead lord and a human undead scourge paladin... they might have had an interesting conversation if they'd met.
Is Destroying a Fellow Player's Raised Dead / Commanded Undead an action that Constitutes PVP in Society Play?
Forget about factions for a moment and visualise what is being created (when animating undead), you are animating a shell with malevolent evil force (or neutral evil force).
Think about the show The Walking Dead...
That's it... you are the guy/gal walking around with "not-tame" death machines...
Why is this concept so tricky for people to understand?
If you don't make the effort to hide your creation. Then don't be surprised by the reaction of fellow party members. The average villager would likely greet your creation with pitchforks and burning fire. IRL I would be bringing whatever I had to deal with it too - you don't mess around with stuff that won't stay buried.
I could see a place derive some sense of satisfaction in commanding an evil creature to it's doom as you drove it a ahead of you to find traps etc... but there is the yuck factor as well - you are walking around a dead thing or riding a dead thing. It's not like a pet, without your control it would slay every living thing within it comes into contact with.
My PC's wouldn't deny healing to anyone in the party, but you better have some place secure to keep the walking dead because it won't be sleeping in my room/tent at night...
That's why we play with dice, death sucks.. (I have a couple of moments that still stick in the back of my noggin). I feel for you, it happens in some game systems. Once the person with the lowest Luck score at the table simply died, no save, no nothing - two years of gameplay gone...
If you really like'd the concept/character there is nothing stopping you bringing out his/her twin...
I don't tend to banhammer too much content at all.
Usually I allow all of PFS for two reasons; I need to be across the classes & races that are going to come up at a Con, it's a restricted playset that works and isn't complicated.
If it's not in PFS or Core then GM approval is required.
I think variety keeps things interesting.
I see a fair bit of optimisation (in PFS and home games) - it tends to happen after people have been playing for a while and want to to play a really, good character (and then they go overboard - or it's a more deep-seated need).
Let's not confuse optimisation with being effective in your party role.
The first rule is : Don't be a jerk
Then look at your role in the party; front-line, ranged, sneak, healer etc and aim for fulfilling that role.
Nobody likes the show pony who hogs the spotlight IRL and we like it even less at the table - that's the GM's job to handle party balance and difficulty - this is less an optimisation issue and far more a player/maturity issue.
I think when sitting down to table for the first time it's a good idea to ask (in character or not) peoples expectations in combat and their place in the party - this won't help if you have an uber-build cheesy monkey at the table but it helps. The real danger is some of these builds are so highly optimised that if something surprises them (something they haven't prepared for) the retire from a combat, because their trick doesn't work.
If it's any consolation; the uber builder's usually grow out of it (sometimes after someone has had a quiet word in the ear, but others get simply avoided and learn from self-reflection).
The most important thing at the table is having a character who you comfortable with and contributes to the story/game as a whole. It's all about balance; it takes experience to get the numbers right. So if worried ask for advice and then decide if you want to take it, there are lot's of opinions out there.
Yes, my paladin is a good pathfinder.
But this was helped by me not telling the other gamers at the table my PC was a Paladin. I simply played my character and told everyone she was a 'holy fighter' - there hasn't been a single point of conflict.
I have had an issue with someone else's Paladin who I felt was more interested in vengeance than healing/stabilising a colleague who was unconscious and bleeding heavily on the ground. (Not his finest moment).
..or just use your own house-rule that makes sense.
I had a party years ago that had a permanent item made using rope trick (basically you could use 1/day); I never had any issues. It's the same with a lot of rules in the game, most rules work just fine (we've had about 30 years to bed down most of them).
What's the issue with Rope Trick?
Or if you are a Summoner (and playing in PFS) you can start with a Serpentine Eidolon and build your own dragon with time.
It worked for me!
The only bans I'd consider are items created after the module or scenario was created. Anti-toxin & Anti-plagues for example (can break some early AP's - as the items were actually created from them).
The more complicated classes like Summoner, Druid and Wizard have a higher learning curve. I like Summoners for the flavour you can have with them, their flexibility and concepts you can make are pretty cool. But they really shouldn't be a players first PC.
I'd say have some limits - (I usually stick with what's allowed in PFS because it helps me prepare for the next con etc).
I don't disallow anything, except non-core races. GMing in PFS has given me a thick skin so I can cope with just about any table mostly.
Some personalities of players I find aren't suited to some classes; I think some maturity is required. Paladin and Summoners can be an example but party balance is a tricky thing.
It's not that summoners as are more over-powered than any class, they really aren't.
But a recent GM disallowed have disallowed 'Snowball', races that fly can be tricky as well, I dislike drow as PC's as well (unless it's a theme and everyone in the party is one).
Our party had some idea of who we were going up against. So the three weakest (7's) of us held back (letting the big hitters flush out the ambush).
I am looking forward to running this one
We made a Rod of Healing; Coud cast Cure Moderate Wounds 3/day only.
back in 3.5 I think you could make a wand that did the same thing but Cure Light Wounds 2/day only.
It's not for everyone (these would obviously be homebrew and not PFS)
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Play as if you were actually your character and felt their pain and feared their death.
And buy First Aid GlovesWhat you really need sometimes is Heal and Breath of Life. The gloves can get someone back twice...
Rather than derail the thread with the tired old debate about "in-combat healing vs. out of combat healing". The situation for the OP is what it is.
If outside of PFS; craft a unique item (rod or stave). Something that can cast heal would be ideal - it is that awesome.
Within PFS; make sure your tactics play to your strengths and you have more consumables; healers kits, anti-toxin, anti-plague potions of delay poison. As you will need far more items than a party with a dedicated healer. (It's common as some FS games to burn through an entire wand, personally I used 38 charges of my own at Level 3 which was 570gp worth of casting, at higher levels the cost scales with the damage taken).
How do you recover from massive damage in the suprise round without a cleric? (not saying it can't be done). But one the first round of one session recently, the only thing that kept me up was false life - without the channel there could have been a TPK.
You will be ambushed so give some thought as to what you'll need to turn and get back in the fight. If you spend actions healing then you aren't putting pressure on the bad guy. Sometimes Obscuring Mist can give your the cover your need to get back to a position you can hold. When going through a dungeon find a room you can retreat to if the going gets tough.
and really look at your magic item choice. look at saves etc.
I don't see where this benefits the game. From my viewpoint magic is not lacking for power where it is, so I'd have to first see a need for it, and why the game would be better for such a change. The big trouble with blanket rule changes of this scope is that you can't always account for all the floodgates you'd open.
Well, it's an edge case for PFS - obviously in home games there is no issue. But one of my players has a natural shifter boon and I am pre-empting the issue. I just couldn't believe I was the first to flag the notice/comment on this and I looked - I also looked for the right place on the boards to post/highlight the request.
I didn't want to change what I thought was the RAI of the feat; just open it to those races whose natural shifting ability the class ability druids wild shape (su): mimic's.
The example I used was the Kistune, simply because it was the only one I was aware of (and I opened up the thread for comment as I didn't know what impact it might have on the society). I can see why you might not including the sub-school spells - it opens huge door to abuse and re-skinning etc.
So why can't a Kitsune Wizard have the option of taking Natural spell and casting whilst in it's Fox Form? It's actually their own body, the feat didn't make sense. I suspect that there is a reason that the Dev's haven't opened it up - and I respect that - after all these guys and gals have a much bigger view of what is going on than I do and they can better judge the impact of a seemingly small change like opening Natural Spell to also "..or Change Shape (Su):" I would think that since 3.5 it would have come up in review meetings.
Anyway, I am grateful SKR took the time to respond (I was hoping for a different outcome obviously) but now the itch is scratched and I can go on knowing that I contributed constructively to making our game better.
Yep - There are exceptions - I didn't have the inclination to list them all.
But in Ustalav not being human is enough to get you noticed...
Only people who wanted to draw attention to themselves would take a tiger whilst shopping or stopping in for a drink at the local pub. Have a look at the party of your next table and 'see' what the party looks like from a local's point of view. If someone has a tiger it's a 600 pound, 9 foot long predator with teeth... it's going to get a second look.
Basically, anything exotic of different is going to stand out. yes you are going to see a new 'normal' in some foreign lands, PC's are very wealthy people.
(I have nothing against tigers, or cute tiny elephants, or faerie dragons, axebeaks - they are all very cool - no tigers were harmed in the crafting of this post).
(Mr Sin) I am not suggesting killing off a pet, but taking the time before the game starts and explaining how an animal companion actually works can be enlightening and make a game run smoother. It's about managing expectations and making sure everyone know you understand the rules of animal companions - be prepared, know your Handle Animal rules
(Samasboy1) Nope! if you look at the numbers; adventurers make up less than 1% of a world usually. Have a closer look at what sort of mounts are permitted in Absalom or even what happens when wearing a holy symbol in some cities - you can be arrested and dragged through the streets. Only Kaer Maga is relaxed enough to allow the weird and wonderful.
So if you walk down the street with a tiger you are going to get all sorts of looks from passers-by and that's not even considering their horses, lapdogs etc.. Your party could cause a riot. (Unless the locals know you...)
Yes I found out that he did have this, and now seems every cleric and now sorcerers with the sylvan blood line can take as well! Because last night played in a game which a teifling sorcerer had a animal companion as well, and of course he had the boon companion feat! With PFS is that you're supposed to legally have the book, but with PRD's and hero lab which have references it, you can take the feat because its there!
Mostly right, You still need the reference book (Herolab and PRD don't count as having the content to use.
That said, GM's can have a lot of fun with animals. You should note that it's the GM who controls an animal companion not the PC. Animals don't have the intelligence of a familiar and require training for tricks and even need to learn to attack unnatural creatures. They only have an Int of 2 (..mostly)
There are all sorts of issues when travelling in a city; where exactly does one keep a tiger while it's owner is inside a pub having a quiet drink? How is the local constabulary likely to act when seeing a wild beast? etc..
Has anyone found the reference for time between scenarios? It was some time ago but I thought the time issue came up when people were looking to retrain tricks for animal companions when they have to be replaced.
There is matriarch of a certain family whose stronghold required the strongest purification by fire - my cleric even salted the earth afterwards - the incident brought us together as a party ... Nick Logue really got us with this one.
By the time we had finished with them a shower was going to be need to wash away just how disturbing the experience was. A definite sense of satisfaction when finally we got through it. (I have yet to read how much was our GM and how much was Nick, but I suspect it's a fair bit of both (having played more of his work).
Those that have played it will know, for the rest...
any Creepy Soulbound Doll....
Oh... The Cult in Cult of the Ebon Destroyers... take your pick there... there are any number of bad guy's that will make an impression.
I have also found in some occasions it's generally inexperience at building Eidolons that led to errors and disparity.
Sometimes people get advice for builds off the boards (with errors) and without understanding the nuances, build something that is broken etc..
I haven't found too many players deliberately cheating with companions (not that they don't exist). I tend to find with companions that some playstyles don't really consider handle animal and the player tries to play them with a higher intelligence than 2-3.
From memory; You get a week off between each scenario (or in some cases months if specified - in a couple you can be travelling weeks to a destination).
But mechanically a week; look into the threads and rulings or the FAQ. A lot of people have asked about the time due to needing to train animal companions tricks.
If it is the week (and I am unable to find the reference for you now_ then it would stand to reason that (if you had the ability to charge it yourself) the stave could be recharged over that time. Quite possibly the cup as well.
some further research
So the Natural Spell feat us unchanged since it's use in 3.5.
No real glaring issues have raised their heads (this thread hasn't set the boards on fire).
The idea would be to change the current prerequisites of Natural Spell from: Wis 13, wild shape class feature.
To: Wis 13, Wild Shape (su): class feature, or Change Shape (su): class feature.
I don't think you're missing much (or much more than me).
It's the final forms I am interested in. Why should a druid in fox form be able to cast using Natural Spell and a Kitsune in it's natural fox form be penalised and excluded from the feat?
I enjoy the idea that playing a scenario unlocks a boon (I may not play it) but it was a great suprise and opens up a character concept I hadn't even considered.
And if I GM some of the ones I have played there is the opportunity to give the new PC's some great flavour and items.
Actually, Druids aren't natural shapeshifters, they aren't born being able to shift, while those races that are born with the ability to shift are unable to take this feat unless they become a druid.
Cheers dude/dudette! you made me lol.
Actually my this, my first thread was created in the Rules Section only to be moved here to Homebrew by the development team (or PDT). If you go back up the page you'll see their slightly terse response.
Thanks for taking the time to post though, What's your opinion on expanding Natural Spell to include other racial supernatural abilities?
So Supernatural shapechangers get some flexibility without unbalancing things too much.
But I am a bit scared to open up the idea to the bloodlines; If there was a supernatural shapechange ability I think it would be limited to rounds/level I would guess that it wouldn't be too unbalancing but its that then a stepping stone to considering all polymorph spells (this issue has been commented previously on other threads in great detail....).
Are the bloodline abilities all Supernatural abilities?
Thanks Bobson - you can do anything as a houserule... that's a given - most of us have been doing this for a while, some of us for decades.
The point of my question and the original FAQ - back in the original thread, before it was moved to Homebrew - was in fact to try and get the feat updated/considered for a review.
A lot of publications (i.e. dictionaries, laws and statutes) get reviewed from time to keep them relevant. My point was that the Natural Spell feat can only be taken by one class, one with Wild Shape (Su): and as now we have new races that have Change Shape (Su): I am asking if now is time for that review.
Now, I am not saying I have examined all the impacts across the ruleset - the dev's will be able to see the bigger picture, they are the experts. But I noticed to the issue and am highlighting for them. If Natural Spell then gets flagged in the next review meeting that's fine but they may not have been aware of the issue until I raised it.
What I would like from people is any helpful comments or suggestions that the dev team can use in their internal discussions. So what are the balance issues? How much of a impact will this change have on the game?