mdt's page

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can't get rid of fatigue without a full night's rest. ANd you can't get a full night's rest twice in one day, mDT. The Ring does not allow you to sleep twice in one day and get all the benefits of it, just like sleeping for 16 hours isn't going to help you.

You are making up rules again. The ring simply says that sleeping for 2 hours gives you all the rest as sleeping for 8. Nowhere does it say it only works once per day. You've obviously never done shift work. Example, shrimping. With shrimping, you most certainly do work around the clock, and sleep more than once a day. You work a four hour shift tossing out the nets, then you have a few hours off to rest/eat/sleep, then you work for 6 hours, pulling in the nets and sorting the shrimp, then you have another 4 hours where they boat is moving to a new area, nets are cleaned, meals cooked, and then you start putting the nets out again and repeat the cycle for weeks on end. It's a grueling job, but it's done because the fishing season is so short, and you have to maximize what you can get done. People would kill to get a whole 8 hours sleep in 2 hours on the boat.

From a personaly perspective, I've done major coding efforts where I coded for 10 hours, slept for 6, coded for 10 hours, coded for 6, and kept going like that for a week straight. Any ruling by you that you 'cannot sleep more than once a day' is a houserule, and quite frankly, one that is ridiculous based on reality. People sleep more than once in 24 hours all the time.

You're also willfully misinterpreting my arguments against crafting. If people can control and come to a consensus on Crafting, hey, go for it. Most people on these forums are fairly reasonable and wouldn't seek to overdo things.

I'm not willfully misinterpreting anything. I'm telling you what your posts sound like. If you don't like they way they sound, do feel free to modify what you say, but don't come on here and accuse me of lying about what you are saying.

But someone coming on and saying he is ENTITLED to do whatever he wants with crafting, and he will fight tooth and nail to get it, the rest of the party be damned? (his own specific example being that he'd continue crafting if the rest of the party was in a fight?).

Don't remember anyone saying that. I certainly didn't, so please don't conflate things someone else might say with things I've said, which you've railed at. Perhaps if you didn't mix my comments with others, you'd sound more coherent in your own responses?

Sorry, man, but that ENTITLEMENT rubs me all the wrong way, especially when he's shouting it out to the world that it's the way everyone should be able to play, and the GM is all at fault if they can't do it and it's be badwrongfun and you should just pick up and go if he won't let you craft, and for 1000 gp a day, regardless, too.

That's the attitude that sets me off. People who restrict themselves from abusing Crafting, who realize how imbalancing it can be, why would I have a problem with them? You're reading waay to much into my position, and I think it's because you're defensive about the topic.

Actually, I think crafting can absolutely break the game if it's not controlled. I simply do not like people coming on and telling other people how to play their game, or making up house rules and other requirements and saying they are RAW. If you want to say it's your opinion that it should require more and not work, that's fine, but you're saying it's RAW, and it's not.

As for crafting on the road, I've already said and I'll repeat it AGAIN that there are rules for crafting on the road, and people should make use of them. Generally speaking, you get half a normal day's time to work, and you get 50% of that time in production (i.e. 4 hours work, 2 hours actual production). The absolute most I see Sustenance adding to that is 4 hours, and that will still be at 50%, and I consider it very unlikely because you're going to have to roll 8 fatigue checks to get it done, and likely end up an exhausted puddle on the ground.

All the rules you've quoted are general rules. They specify the standard rules. There are always exceptions and interactions with other rules. You are basically taking the general crafting rules and saying 'These, these, and only these, and nothing else interacts with them'. There are feats that allow you to modify that base crafting rule, both the at home and on the road rules. But, you wish to lock everyone and everything into your way of doing things, which is what ticks me off, and you belittle and denigrate everyone that disagrees with you.

You argue the same way our congress does right now, not with logic and reason, but with insults and denigration, and yes, that pisses me off, and that's why I'm hammering you so hard. You lost any respect I had when you started spewing vitriol about people being 'entitlement' or 'cheese chasers' or all the other insults you've hurled. So, I'm happy to keep slamming back whenever you like. You want to opine the rules are the way you want? That's fine. But quit insulting everyone else, or else get used to be called out on it and argued with until they lock the thread.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just a note, I don't craft as a player usually. In fact, I don't think I've ever played a crafter character. So all of Aelyrinths vitirol directed personally at me as a 'cheeter' or 'cheesy player' is pretty darn misplaced. :) I run two games, and play a monk/cleric in the other game I'm involved in.

On a second note, I've had very few games where, after 5th level, the entire party doesn't have a RoS, primarily due to the 2 hours sleep thing, and it helping with watches at night to avoid being ambushed.

On a third note, yes, I've had plenty of players put rings on their ACs, their animals, their horses, whatever. Also had plenty use the golem rules to make golem horses that don't get tired and have better AC/HP/etc at 5+ level.

On a fourth note, if you really have trouble with someone travelling 8 hours, and then working 8 hours, the ring lets you sleep 2 hours for a full nights sleep. So, sleeping between actions means you're putting in a normal 8 hour work day to travel, sleeping 2, then putting in another 8 hour work day crafting, then doing it again. As long as you don't have to worry about the spells being cast, you're golden, with 4 hours left over for socializing. If you're the non-mage crafter, then you're golden. If you're a cleric/druid crafter, you're good to, you just have to pray at a certain time. Wizards, need to study spell book for an hour. Sorcerers & Oracles, no biggie. Just lose any slots you cast in the last 8 hours. Use items for crafting for spell prereqs, or just give up a slot a day to craft.

Again, not game breaking, and not against the rules. The only thing I've seen thrown up is non-rules fluff that people have sworn are required (resting horses, with the assumption they're using horses, which is not a good assumption, especially since they are assuming the animals aren't resting as part of the 8 hours travelling, nothing in the rules say a horse must rest after 4 hours travelling, or that said rest is not included in the travel time, which is much more likely, given the 8 hours of travel lists how far you get in that 8 hours, with no caveat about needing to rest every N minutes).

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Take Ciretose's advice with a grain of salt.

He's the president of the 'Players have all rights, and GMs have none' movement.

The truth is closer to the middle, the GM can have certain expectations of the Players (such as being treated considerately and politely, that the players will not be jerks, that they will have manners, that they will attempt to meet them half way). The GM has certain responsibilities as well (attempt to meet the players half way, adjudicate the rules in a fair way, don't be a jerk, don't play NPCs as GM characters, don't try to kill everyone off intentionally, etc).

Basically, the GM has the right to expect players to be civil and act like well mannered human beings, not escaped orangutangs from a petting zoo. And Players have the right to expect the GM to be fair to everyone and put in the effort to run the game.

Actually, you can reduce this all down to, both GMs and players can expect to be treated politely and that the other half will not be jerks.

It honestly sounds like you're having the old 'I am family and can treat you like dirt' thing going on with the sister/step sister. This is not really a gaming issue so much as it is a family issue. I'm guessing they do the same things out of the game. Until that's resolved out of the game, they'll just keep carrying it over into game.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Either outsiders are living, and are healed harmed normally by a channel, in which case this is one of the most useless feats I've ever seen. Honestly, it's a MAJOR corner case solved by a feat, and the biggest waste of space in the books. Or you can't affect them normally, in which case the feat is useful.

So, I repeat, *shrug*.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why would you need it to heal outsiders, if you can already heal them?

If you can harm outsiders with negative energy because they are living, why would you need a feat to do the same thing?

Cleric without Alignment Channel channel's energy to cure living within 30 feet. Outsider is 20 feet away. If the channel affects him, why would you need the feat to heal him then?

The feat only makes sense if you can't affect outsiders without it.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No, an eidelon doesn't heal except by the summoner spell that heals eidelons.

I believe this does not apply to an Unfettered Eidelon, however. Otherwise they wouldn't exist for long. :)

Now, on a related note, I believe a cleric with the channel that works on outsiders might be able to heal an eidelon. That would be more of a GM thing though.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mdt, does it offend you that dumb people with a limited vocabulary can be masters of strategy?

I can't be offended by something that doesn't exist.

On a separate note, you might want to consult a dictionary for the definitions of Strategy vs Tactics.

Unfortunately, I see no way to further respond to your argument at this point without violating posting rules. I honestly have been trying for an hour now. But it's devolved to the point where any thing I respond with is a personal insult toward you (or at least can only be taken that way), given your argument and the logical fault inherent in it.

Given my choices are to not respond further, or violate the posting rules... I'll simply bow out of any further discussion with you. Have a good day.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find it hilarious, and utterly saddening, that we are equating learning to play a game with being able to lead men in battle, and being able to think up complex tactics on the fly and respond to rapid changes in situations.

I am not in the military, I have had friends who were. I play every type of game from FPS to RPG to Action to Platform. I am utterly convinced that I would not be a good military thinker based on that game play. I am utterly convinced that someone can be taught small unit tactics. I am utterly convinced it will take 10 times longer to teach someone with a 70 IQ small unit tactics than it will someone with a 120 IQ. There is a reason the Military doesn't accept people with an IQ below 70, and entrance into command school requires enough testing that 70 isn't getting in. The idea that arm-chair nerds in their mom's basements are even semi-seriously, much less seriously, being put forth as examples of 70 IQ being tactical idiot savants is ludicrous.

/thread

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is not the case MDT. This would only be the case if you had to roll a d20 INT ability check (or any ability check) every time you spoke or suggested anything.

If you want to play a character who can converse like an average person, and has an average person's common sense, and an average person's magnetism, then may I politely suggest that you play a character with average stats? Your argument suspiciously sounds a lot like 'I want the benefit of having low stats (extra points) but I do not want to deal with any negatives from such that I don't have to'. Why are you playing a P&P RPG in this case? Why have a character if you don't want to role play that character?

A lot of conversation and extracurricular things are not defined by the skill system. Your decision making ability is one of them. Your words, vocabulary and course of action are others.

The point is, you as a person do your best to convey the character. The GM has to take into account when you roleplay your character sheet, and the fiddly little numbers on it, to see how the world reacts to your character. However, there becomes a point when there is a disconnect between the numbers and the way you role play your character, you are no longer role playing, you are min-maxing (note that I reserve that term for things like this, as opposed to optimization, which is a different thing, and not bad). Trying to get the benefit of the negative stats but minimizing the impact on your fun. Perhaps you could give up your ability to rhyme on purpose for a +1 to hit vs red-headed pixies?

You don't need ranks in skills to be considered suave, savvy or smart. You can have ideas too.

If you have 7/7/7, then yes you do. Otherwise you're just a smelly, slow-witted, annoyingly gullible person (as a character that is, not a real life person).

If your character has 7 STR, do they fail at opening doors or moving a chair from a table? If your character has 20 STR do they break glass bottles when they hold them, unable to control the raw power at their disposal?

If the DC to open the door is 10, then yes, they do fail often (55% chance, more often than not). If the DC to move the chair is 5, then yes, they fail often (30% chance of failing on a DC 5). My wife is muscularly challenged due to a neuropathy, and she quite often fails to open doors and move chairs, because she has a lower than average strength. Just as 10 to 14 year olds sometimes fail to open a door or move a chair on the first attempt, or if it's heavy enough, they fail repeatedly or take 10 times as long to do the same thing.

As to the crushing a glass, it's quite possible. I have seen drunk football players smash beer bottles to shards just tapping the necks together too hard while drunk, because they forgot how strong they are.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

@Stynkk

Nobody is saying you have to play your 7/7/7 character in a specific way.

People have complained about people wanting to RP their 7/7/7 as a suave, savvy, and smart person.

He is not suave, he is not savvy, and he is not smart. He could be self delusional and think he is, but nobody is going to perceive him as such, unless he has spent a ton of skill ranks to prove it (although that is hard unless he is a rogue and thus has 6 ranks per level). To be suave, you'd need Diplomacy. To be Savvy you'd need Sense Motive and Perception. To be Smart you'd need 3-4 knowledge skills, and be able to converse on multiple topics. That's your skill points right there. And you basically don't have any of the other rogue standbys. In addition, people keep throwing out skill focus in one skill, but I find it a strawman argument, because nobody is going to play the following rogue character at level 3...

Str : 20
Dex : 14
Con : 14
Int : 7
Wis : 7
Cha : 7

Feats : Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Skill Focus (Sense Motive)
Skill Ranks : 6 (8 - 2 (Int)) x 3 = 18 (21 if you use favored class)
Diplomacy : +7 (3 Ranks + 3 CS + 3 SF - 2 Cha)
Sense Motive : +7 (3 Ranks + 3 CS + 3 SF - 2 Wis)
Kn (Local) : +4 (3 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Int)
Kn (Arcana) : +4 (3 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Int)
Kn (Religion) : +4 (3 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Int)
Perception : +4 (3 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Wis)

Now, this rogue can pass himself off as suave (diplomacy), Savvy (Sense motive and perception), and Smart (3 knowledge skills). But his rolls simply aren't that great, even with the skill focus, and he can't disable devices, he can't stealth, he can't acrobatics, he can't do much of anything. You could get another 3 ranks from favored class, woo hoo, one additional skill (which single one of the other rogue skills are you going to get, you know, those vital ones like stealth, acrobatics, linguistics, escape artist, use magical device, etc).

This is a classically 'self gimped' character, he's a face rogue with no face. This is the example of 'someone you could play' that people keep throwing up to say you don't have to RP your 7/7/7 character as an unkempt slow-witted gullible buffoon.

Looks to me like a disaster of a character waiting to happen, and a drain on the party. I see no reason why anyone would invite him into a party or keep him there.

If you try to make a fighter (which was the OP class) with the 7/7/7 he looks even worse.

Str : 20
Dex : 14
Con : 14
Int : 7
Wis : 7
Cha : 7

Feats : Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Skill Focus (Sense Motive)
Skill Ranks : 1 (2 - 2 (Int) = 1) x 3 = 3 (4 if you use favored class)
Diplomacy : +2 (1 Ranks + 3 SF - 2 Cha)
Sense Motive : +2 (1 Ranks + 3 SF - 2 Wis)
Kn (Engineering) : +2 (1 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Int)
Perception : +4 (3 Ranks + 3 CS - 2 Wis)

Now, tell me you would play a fighter who is using all his feats (non fighter feats) for Skill Focus as above? Nobody would, because he's a lousy fighter. So scratch +3 off those diplomacy and sense motive skills to make them a -1 each. Not at all a suave savvy smart individual. More of an in-duh-vidual. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Agreed, Weirdo.

People keep conflating skilled with smart, which is not the case. Someone who is smart is more likely to be highly skilled, but even someone with below average intelligence, or even borderline intelligence, can be skilled at something (idiot savants).

Too many people equate skilled with smart, which is not really the case.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

3 people marked this as a favorite.

As for how to model an idiot savant, that's actually not too hard. Most PCs won't want to do it, but it works really well for NPCs, and I've done it before.

Give the NPC Skill Focus (Skill), and call it a 'natural talent' for the skill. Skill Focus can represent all sorts of things.

If they have more than one feat, you can tap on a secondary feat if possible.

Traits work really well for this too, giving a trait bonus to a specific skill.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

6 people marked this as a favorite.

What I always find ironic about these discussions is people who want to do 7/7/7 mental stats don't want any penalties for them beyond the purely mechanical. No repercussions for being a 7 int, and they usually play humans so they can have that minimum 2 or 3 skill points per level (min 1, +1 human, +1 favored class). To advocate for this (and here comes the ironic part), they always say 'it's only a -2 difference, you're only 10% worse than an average person at X).

I've got a math degree, and one of my favorite sayings is, there are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.

Here's a statistic that is just as valid, but nobody in the above group ever utters a word about.

A 3 Int is -4. That's only 20% worse than average at X. However, it is the lowest possible int you can have, and you are barely better than a ravening animal with that int. That 7 is actually, statistically, only twice as good as the person who is an utterly stupid animal brained beast (-2 is twice as good as -4), and is only halfway up to average (or in other words, they've got half the brains an average person does, being halfway between average and minimum sentient creature).

Same numbers, statistics, those damn statistics.

Anytime someone starts arguing by using statistics to show that they are right, you can usually find the same numbers prove them wrong. It's just in how you slice or dice the statistics. That's why people pay really really good money to marketeers to dice those statistics to show the company is healthy and growing right before it goes down the tubes. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

23. Use alchemy and magic to artificially enhance a common white mouse. Find out his Int is 3, his Wis is 20, and his Cha is 20. Sigh, change formulas, and try it on a second mouse. Find out his Int is 50, his Wis is 1, and his Cha is 3. Assign the Brainy mouse the job of taking over the world. Give him the idiot as an assistant to balance out his lack of common sense.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sounds good to me. I was just poking... Poke... Poke...

Rolls over in his sleep, snaps his teeth together, chews for a few minutes, and swallows.

Rumbled in sleepy tones. "It is unwise to poke sleeping dragons..."

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If were to get sucked into an RPG world, any RPG world, I would want to be the same thing I am right now...
.
.
.
.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

*facepalm*

I totally read that as '5ft of reach' instead of 'reach of 5ft'.

Whistles innocently.. then points in a random direction "BABY WOLF!"

Runs off while everyone is distracted...

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the FAQ answer on crafting is, to say the least, not a good idea.

However, I have let my players decide what they want, and they like the ruling, so I shrug and go with it. I just have to adjust the CR of encounters to compensate for the extra power level to keep challenges actually challenging.

I personally would not play with the GM for a different reason, the whole 'you will get this exact item and like it' would be too 'in your face' for me.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

3 people marked this as a favorite.

mdt wrote:

CG Paladin : If there is a difference between the Paladin Code, and the Paladin's Belief, he (as a Chaotic entity) Fails. Either he violates the code (which fails him) or he follows the code (which eventually changes his alignment to LG, since he's obeying things he doesn't agree with, putting Law over Chaos).

If the CG paladin was trying to follow a lawful code you may be right. But following a good code makes you good and following a chaotic code makes you chaotic and following an evil code makes you evil.

If paladins were allowed to be 'any good', then the code they would follow would be good.

So basically, you are saying that any code a non-lawful paladin would follow would be a non-restrictive code.

Not sure how you can figure out a code that isn't going to conflict with something the character watns at some point. I do notice you don't bother coming up with codes, because someone will poke a hole in your stance.

it seems to boil down to 'I follow a code that I always can agree with and never disagree with so it's ok and I can never come into conflict with it'. That honestly sounds to me more like 'I just want the powers, not the fluff, and I want a way to use smite and lay on hands and throw out everything else that limits me in any way'.

Quote:

And no, the argument 'but I always agree with my code' is not valid, there is always going to be instances where they don't, that's the whole point to a Paladin, they have a code, and eventually the code is going to require something they don't want to do. Whether it's a chaotic code or a lawful code.

Even if that were true, that wouldn't prevent CG people from becoming paladins. It might make their average length of service shorter.

It's not up to anyone else to tell them they can't accept because they might think it won't last. It's up to the CG guy to accept this service or not.

Basically, you're advocating then for a class that can't last much more than 1-3 levels before they become an Anti-Paladin.

I could live with that. Honestly. I could live in a game where you were able to be any non-LG Good Paladin you wanted, but, you would eventually fall and end up going the AP route.

The biggest problem I see with it is that LG paladins would soon begin putting any non LG paladin in jail, because they were inevitably going to fall to evil.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing I did as a houserule in the past (and it worked pretty well) was this :

Halve the # of skill points each class get's per level. So, Fighters/Wizards get 1, Rogues get 4, Bards get 3, etc.

Grant everyone skill points equal to their stat bonuses that can only be spent on skills associated with that stat.

So, someone playing a fighter with the following stats :

Str : 16 (+3)
Dex : 14 (+2)
Con : 16 (+3)
Int : 10 (+0)
Wis : 12 (+1)
Cha : 8 (-1)

Would have the following skill points to distribute :

Class : 1
Str : 3
Dex : 2
Wis : 1
Cha : -1

So they'd be very good at physical stuff, not so good at mental, and awful at charisma things.

You were allowed to trade 2 of one stat skill points to get 1 of another (so 2 str's to get one cha for example) to indicate concentrating more on diplomacy than on climbing or swimming.

Finally, if you had a negative stat, and you wanted to spend points on it, you had to spend enough that level to 'overcome' the negative. So from our example, if you wanted to put a point into diplomacy, you had to put spend your class point (1) to negate the -1 charisma skill level, then trade in two attribute skill points (1 str/1 dex, 2 str, 1 dex/1 wis, etc) to get another Cha skill point.

This worked really well, it gave people more skill ranks overall, but it also meant they usually ended up with skill curves that fit their stats, those who were smart ended up with lots of INT based skills, those who were really strong but not so bright (18 str/8 int) usually ended up with lots of climb and swim and not so many Knowledge skill.

EDIT : Note class skill points were 'unaligned' and could be spent on any skill.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Right, so,
Here's the issue, which seems to be being ignored by the CG Paladin crowd.

LG Paladin : If there is a difference between the Paladin Code, and the Paladin's Belief, he (as a lawful entity) goes with the code, or he fails as a Paladin.

CG Paladin : If there is a difference between the Paladin Code, and the Paladin's Belief, he (as a Chaotic entity) Fails. Either he violates the code (which fails him) or he follows the code (which eventually changes his alignment to LG, since he's obeying things he doesn't agree with, putting Law over Chaos).

In other words, the entire concept of a Chaotic Good Paladin is an inherent Paladin Falls situation, since you can't win in that situation.

And no, the argument 'but I always agree with my code' is not valid, there is always going to be instances where they don't, that's the whole point to a Paladin, they have a code, and eventually the code is going to require something they don't want to do. Whether it's a chaotic code or a lawful code.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

mdt wrote:

Angry Stuff

My bad.

No problem,

I'm just a bit sensitive on the topic. There's a sub-species of forum troll that will take any position that isn't aligned with 'Player gets whatever player wants no matter what' and portray that as 'GM is an unmitigated jerk and is having wrong/bad/fun and needs to be banned from being a GM unless they change their horrible/evil/disgusting ways'.

I'm of the opinion that a game is just that, and part of the GMs job is to come up with a world that he can visualize in his head, whether that is based off a published world or a custom world, and to keep track of the npcs and cultures and etc. As part of that, the GM should have the right to say 'Hey, this gives me problems with versimillitude, so it makes it harder for me to do my job, so I really would like you to do something else'.

This statement unfortunately sets off the sub-species of troll who scream about player entitlement and GM abusiveness and almost always includes personal insults on the poster's intelligence and character, calling them things like powertrippers or tyrants or dicators.

I find it ironic that these same people don't recognize that their stance is 100% dicatotorial and tyrannical, with the insistence akin to a religious fanatic.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The Crusader wrote:

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

If behavior and alignment are meaningless, why not just write LG on your sheet and go about your day?

This.

Why does he get a favorite? I said it!

There, that help? :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only real rule I have a major issue with is +5 to crafting DC being able to overcome the 'must be level 3*X' to craft +X weapons/armor/bonus attribute items.

Well, that and I think scry and fry is too easy, but that's more of a bad spell design than a bad rule.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Really depends on where in my world you are.

Northern Continent : Any non-eastern class (monk excepted) except gunslinger.

Southern Continent : Any non-eastern class (racial restrictions on Barbarian, monk excepted). Gunslinger allowed with primitive firearms options.

Eastern Continent : Any eastern class (Samurai, Ninja, Monk), Alchemists, Oracles, Rangers, Rogues, Fighters, Sorcerer, Wizard, Witch, Cavaliers. No gunslingers, no clerics, no druids, no paladins. My have missed a class in there.

Aerial Continent : No spellcaster of any type. Gunslinger allowed with advanced firearms. Limited racial selections. All DSP Psionics classes.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I know I'm old, but when did things change so much? When I used to play this game we never talked about the social contract between Players and Dungeon Masters. We never talked about Player Privilege or Dungeon Master abuse of the fiat.

And I suppose it may be because every time I played this game, it was with people who I considered to be my friends, not my adversaries.

Things changed when the internet rolled around.

It's not that most people don't just get together and play.

it's that now people can sit around and theorycraft about the social implications of game playing.

I've only ever had occasional issues in a game, and only once anything serious. If you go by the internet, every game I've ever had should have been a tsunami of angst and OOC violence. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The way I would get around that is to make the wizard allocate all his spell points each morning. He could do it as 15 1st level spells, or 3 3rd levels, or whatever he wanted, but he had to allocate them ahead of time. Or he had to leave points unallocated, but require the same time required to fill unallocated slots under existing rules.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Assuming I was a player, and assuming my character was one of the ones that voted against attacking the ogre skeleton, I would have handled it like this if it was the first time.

OOC : Turn to the player. "Hey John, just so you know, this is all in character at this point, ok?"

IC : "Look Gunther, I know you want to attack the skeleton, but nobody else does. We are supposed to be a team, if you want to run off and attack things, then that's you're business. But we're not going to put ourselves in danger for it, ok? We're going to fall back, set up a defensive position, and let you do whatever you want. All we ask is you give us a slow count to 100 before you attack."

OOC : "John, seriously, do a sense motive, my character is ticked off, and would be happy to let Gunther go get himself killed if he insists." Later, if the fighter survives, my character would heal him. Then again, OOC, I'd turn to John. "Sorry John, but Gunther is not behaving like a team player, so again, this is all in character, ok?"

IC : "I'd like to call a team conference. Gunther nearly got himself killed, and we got mauled, despite our express desire not to engage the ogre skeleton. I don't think I feel safe continuing on with Gunther in the party. Does anyone else feel this way?" Then call a vote in character.

OOC : "Sorry John, but your guy is acting like a @*#&."

If this was a repeated thing, with the player always doing this, across multiple characters, I'd call an OOC conference, and state to the group that I was tired of John going off like a random cannon all the time with every character being a foaming at the mouth battle psycho. If nobody agreed with me, I'd nod and give my apologies and exit myself from the game. If everyone agreed with me, I'd ask John to tone it down. If he refused, I'd shrug and tell the group that am unable to play with someone who ignores everyone elses feelings. Then it would be up to the group to either ask John to leave, or accept my leaving.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Zen Archer/Empyreal Sorcerer

Self buff with Mage Armor, Self buff with Gravity Bow. Limited healing ability if you are good. You basically have a SAD character (Wisdom for the win), and a sorcerer with a hefty AC/Touch AC.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll put my vote in for such a book.

Arctic
Tundra
Mountains
Desert
Hills
Forest
Savannah
Aquatic
Deep Aquatic
Underground

Now, on top of those, I'd really like :

Arctic should really be a template applied to other environments, for example, the North Pole would be basically Arctic Desert (no open water, no plants, no shade, etc).

I'd also like templates of other types (celestial, infernal, necromantic, etc) for each environment, which just gives rules mods for the environment to be mixed with these.

No new races. Possibly some archetypes based on extreme environments (arctic, desert, aquatic, deep aquatic). No new classes.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A ninth level Wizard isn't going to make the crafting DC needed. He can't take 10, he probably doesn't have the skill ranks needed, so no... it can't happen that way. And one can even levey a penalty for an extremely complex construction being rushed.

Headband of +2 int (Craft(Armor))

Headband of +2 int (Craft(Bows))
Headband of +2 int (Craft(Weapons))
Headband of +2 int (Craft(Whatever))

At 2,000gp a pop, a 9th level wizard can have a couple of such headbands each granting him 9 ranks of a craft skill. He just needs 24 hours of prep time to get ready to craft. Given if he's doing such crafting, he probably doesn't care about removing his +4 Int (Perception, Acrobatics) headband for a few days while he's making money doing crafting.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a rule, all paladin threads have to continue until they are locked by the website admins.

This one ran out of flaming and argument on the OP stuff, so people have been arguing alignment hoping to push the web admins over the edge into locking the thread.

That's why we're up to 1170+ posts.

Obviously people are not being snarky and belittling enough to each other.

The thread will continue until abusiveness improves!

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How to identify class levels on a standard bestiary entry :

Full BAB Class Levels : 1d20 + Observer's BAB + Observer's Wisdom

3/4 BAB Non-Caster Class Levels : 1d20 + Observer's Int + Observer's Wisdom

3/4 BAB Spell Caster Levels : 1d20 + Observer's Caster Level + Observer's Wisdom

1/2 BAB Spell Caster : 1d20 + Observer's Caster Level + Observer's Wisdom

DC = Bestiary entry DC + 1/2 Class Levels.

Explanations :

Full BAB Class Levels : Your chances of recognizing them as being a trained fighter is directly relatable to how well trained you are as a fighter.

3/4 BAB Non-Caster Class Levels : These are usually skill monkey class characters, and you're more likely to notice these guys have extra equipment if you're smart, or if you're wise, or especially if you're both.

3/4 BAB Spell Caster Levels & 1/2 BAB Spell Caster Levels : Your chances of recognizing another spellcaster is directly relatable to how well trained you are as a spell caster.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the trouble with the CG Paladin is you have to assume he never (or almost never) comes into conflict with his code so he doesn't have to defer to the code's judgement over his own. If he suppresses his own will to the code (enough times) then he becomes lawful and you've changed the basis of your character. If you never have to default to the code's judgement over your own and are just always doing what feels right, then why do you have a code?

Because you want to game the system and have all the niifty paladin abilities, but none of the paladin drawbacks?

That's the only thing I've been able to come up with after all this thread.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

mdt wrote:

However, I have also been lucky that I have never run into some of the posters on these boards, who have a sense of entitlement that their desires are more important than everyone elses desires either.

Impossible, you've had me at your table! 8)

Yes, but I had your wife there too, and she can beat you up. So I think it kept your ego under control. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Doesn't matter, the spell says 'any tongue spoken by any intelligent creature'.

Are druids intelligent? Well, most are. There are a few morons around.

Do druids speak Druidic? Yes.

Now, here's the thing, it doesn't teach you druidic, any more than it teaches you Ancient Sumerian, or Drow, or Aklo. All it does is allow you to understand and be understood. So yes, you can, for the duration, speak in Druidic. Then when the conversation is over, you no longer have that ability.

The way I treat it in my games is like a universal translator from star trek. You speak in your native language, but the magic translates it to the language being used by the person you are talking to. And, vice versa, it translates that language to your native language. So to you, it's all the same, you don't actually suddenly know druidic words, you just know what someone said in druidic, and they will hear your words back in druidic. Saves on the whole 'Ok, teach me druidic with tongues' cheat. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Haversack doesn't do anything when the PCs discover the 800lbs golden statue.

Sure it can.

One arm goes in the first side pouch (20 pounds), other arm goes in the other side pouch (20 lbs). Head goes in the main pouch (80 lbs).

That's 120lbs of gold. Now, you just need six other friends with haversacks to put the rest of the statue parts in. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a collaboration. The view I get by most responses concerning GM style here is basically an overlord that can't wait to TPK the party the moment anyone suggests something outside the status quo.

GMs should interpret rules. I never said they shouldn't. However, those rules interpretations should be up for discussion for reasons I've already stated that are backed up by the system itself.

Most games are not a collaboration, and I find it insulting when people claim they are.

I do have some collaboration with one of my players, we trade off on being GM, and we both bounce world ideas off the other. THAT is a collaboration, we both spend hours outside the game working up the worlds, detailing the gods, detailing the countries and peoples and cultures.

If you show up at the game and claim you are 'collaborating' with the GM, you are a liar and a fool. If you want to collaborate, then donate 5-6 hours a week to working out rules, plot, NPCs, treasure hoardes, and all the other pain in the posterior stuff that most players don't even think about.

The actual playing of the game is a collaboration on the storytelling.

The creation of the world is a d**n sight of work that players who b**tch and moan about 'you're ruining my fun' because you won't let them play their noble drow half-dragon half-fiend book of nine swords uber swordsman with leadership and a cohort who also has leadership (and yes, I did have someone b**ch and moan because I said no on this concept) never bother contributing to, nor bother thanking the GM for doing.

As the GM, I have to keep an entire world, a dozen planes, 30 or 40 countries, 27 gods and churches, four continents, an economic system, one to three major plots, and a dozen sub plots and red herrings. If you show up and have one character, and don't contribute in any other way than arguing with me and throwing hissy fits when I say there are no psionics characters on the continent the game is involved on then you are not only not collaborating, you are actively disrupting the game and trying to take over control of the game, in which case, you run the freaking game and I'll show up with my half-celestial fetchling synthesist summoner for your game.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the Paladin as presented in the CRB, but as someone said, it should be setting-neutral. And they're right, as much as it pains me to admit it. Alignment restrictions should be a setting-based thing, not a core-rules thing.

Under this logic, barbarians shouldn't be barred from being lawful, and no class that can't fit into any generic world should be in the core books, because some worlds might not allow their concept.

For example, get rid of Sorcerers because some worlds might not allow spontaneously cast magic. Also bards, summoners, and Oracles.

Get rid of witches and wizards and magus's, because some settings might not allow for magic to be anything you can learn, it might have to be a talent (spontaenous only).

Get rid of barbarians, because not all settings will have barbarian cultures.

Get rid of druids, clerics, oracles, inquisitors, paladins, and rangers because some settings don't have gods to give divine magic.

Get rid of Monks, Ninjas, Samurai, and gunslingers, some settings don't have eastern or wild west influences.

Hmm, seems we're down to Fighters and Rogues. Only fighters and rogues should be in the core book, as they are generic.

Sorry, don't like that plan.

The rules are setting agnostic. If your setting doesn't have divine warriors then the paladin shouldn't be in your setting. The alignment has nothing to do with it. If your setting doesn't use alignments, again, the paladin shouldn't be in it. Make a cleric who fights.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Some people confuse Chaotic with 'Random and idiotic'. It's not. Chaos has less to do with randomness than it does with a dislike of order. There is a subtle difference there. Chaos could be more accurately likened to a revulsion of stasis, while Law is a revulsion of change.

If you've ever played Whitewolf, they have a good take on it. Chaos is basically what is needed for life to be created, but Law (order) is required for life to survive past creation.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Talonhawke wrote:

Bill lets ignore the mom and baby.

It will cause a healer to decide to let a loved one die.
It will cause a pacifist to decide to break his peace and attack someone.
It will cause a priest chanting a ritual to close a hole to hell to decide that attacking the taunter is more important than keeping an invasion of balors from reaching the material.

It takes away the ability of the character to use reasoning and thought in their actions and simply attack in some way instead of doing something that might be much more important to them.

And even if we allow the "throw a rock" loophole it still waste a standard action and still can cause someone to act out of character.

And none of those people should ever be able to be provoked into losing control, blowing their gasket, or losing their cool against their own better judgment? It needs actual, magical mind control to achieve that? I don't see it.

And someone who has no knowledge of you or your buttons or what would make you go over the edge can always, on their first try, in less than six seconds, make you stop trying to pour the potion of healing down the throat of the most important person in the world to you because they said a few words to you?

Do you really think that's ok? Because if you do, then there's no reason at all to ever have any game balance at all.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cold Iron is just that, cold iron. It's not steel. It's iron that's been cold forged. In the real world, such a weapon doesn't hold an edge and it's easy to break or bend. It's pretty distinctive compared to steel. If you've ever seen unpainted wrought iron, you've basically seen cold iron. Here's an actual iron sword.

Mithral I've always thought of as being more like white gold, it's silvery, doesn't tarnish, and is expensive. :) Or if you prefer, platinum.

Adamantine I've always pictured like Adamantine Spar, a shiny greyish/nickle metal.

Elysian Bronze, obviously, I've always pictured as a really heavily polished bronze.

Living Steel I kind of imagine looking like unpolished Tourmaline.

Viridium I imagine looks a lot like Green Hiddenite. The name of which I absolutely love by the way. :)

Bloodstone, of course, is the easiest to visual.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What? No it isn't. Dominate is WORSE! At least with this it's a single specific action with logical sense (the Antagonist enraged their target into attacking them in some means available to them) while Dominate can make those same mothers STRANGLE their babies.

Mind telling me which one forces the character to act more unnaturally?

Antagonize.

Dominate is a spell that FORCES you to do something.

Antagonize is a feat that makes you CHOOSE to do something.

It's the difference between having your baby knocked out of your arms by a charging buffalo and someone calling you a bad mother, and you throwing the baby over the cliff to go slap them.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love it when I am right.

"NO NO! Antagonize can't work on PCs, just like diplomacy and other skills can't work on PCs, they are metagamed to always behave however the PC wants, even if there's no good IC reason for it! So they are immune to antagonize! Nyah nyah nyah!"

Sickening.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Knocking him prone effectively ends his move action. Once you stop moving, your move action ends. Falling is stopping your move action. He can of course chew a standard action as a move action to stand up.

Of course that provokes another AoO which you can use for another trip...

Wrong, you can't trip lock someone. The attack of opportunity is provoked before the action completes. Just as moving out of the threatened square provokes before the move action completes, so does getting up. That means, when he provokes for standing, it provokes before he completes standing. Since you can't trip a prone opponent, all you can do is make a normal attack (or any non-trip manuever that is valid on an AoO).

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But why should it matter if he's a paladin by class?

It doesn't. As long as he follows the Paladin's code and is an accepted member of a Paladin order, then he's a Paladin, no matter what class he actually has. If he's not following the code, he's not a member of an order. If he's not a member of an order, he's not a Paladin.

If a paladin finds someone who is not a member of his order claiming to be a Paladin, they do the whole ask the god thing, and then get mideivel if you're not a paladin (regardless of your actual class).

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

mdt wrote:

They accept he's a paladin on faith, until he proves otherwise.

Why?

The same reason people in the wild west accepted someone was a Pinkerton on faith, until it was proved otherwise.

The same reason people in middle ages Europe accepted a guy in armor was a Knight and not a peasant who stole a knight's armor.

The same reason people in pre-reformation Japan accepted a man with a katana as a Samurai, until it was proved otherwise, and not a bandit who stole the sword.

Those are very trusting people if they did.

Why didn't more people take advantage of their good faith?

Because the Pinkertons were extremely violently opposed to people pretending to be them, and they hung, murdered, stabbed, shot people who did so. And often any friends they had and happened to be around at the time.

Because a peasant caught pretending to be a nobleman was whipped, drawn and quartered, hung, left in a cage to starve to death in public, etc. Often their family was as well.

Because people pretending to be nobles/samurai were tortured to death, burned alive, and generally killed along with their family.

Nobody in their right mind except an Anti-Paladin pretends to be a Paladin, because they then have EVERY paladin gunning for them. They may not kill the schmuck's family, but allies who try to stop them may just get killed in the takedown.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I handle leadership and cohorts like this :

A) You take the feat, great. Let me know a level or two ahead of time, tell me what you want, and let me set things up in game.
B) Take the feat. I create the NPC Cohort. You get input on what you'd like in a generic sense (I'd like a cleric who worships X god). I create the specifics of the character, and give it a background.
C) You control the cohort, but I reserve the right to override if I think you are abusing it. "No, Billy the Crafter does not yell "I'll cover you guys from the dragon, run!" and charge the ancient wyrm. He's already running away, shedding a tear for his soon to be lamented master."
D) If you don't like the cohort, that's fine, tell me, and next level, you and the cohort can part friendly ways. Tell me what you want as a replacement, and I'll work it into the plot so they are there before they become a cohort.

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In one of my games, a witch at 8th level had Improved Familiar, and took a fairy dragon as the familiar. At will invisibility, etc. Used it to scout.

First game, they saw, from 1000ft away, a strange rocky/mossy form guarding the path they were taking toward the woods. Instead of the ranger sneaking up closer using stealth, the witch stood up, said "I have this covered." and sent her familiar flying up the path invisible to scout.

The bandersnatch that was napping there, something big and nasty enough to convince them to take the alternate path, opened one eye, saw the invisible fairy dragon flying toward it, and zotched it with heat vision from one eye. Insta kill, just a pile of dust drifting down.

The player of the witch had a jaw drop moment, then sighed, turned in their character sheet, and pulled out their backup character while the rest of the group laughed and went back to town to pick up a new spellcaster. :)

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, GameMastery Maps Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We should just have one mega class with all class options and no restrictions, unfettered use of all abilities at will all day. Let the player pick the powers they want, and no stupid level restrictions either. Then everyone can do everything they want every time with no restrictions or balance. (S)