|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Funny story for Unnatural Lust
My witch cast Unnatural Lust on a Mook - sending him after the PC Druids Big Cat companion... He scrambles over and hugs said kitty, and I then slumber hex him...
This means that later, when he wakes up, he remembers unnaturally lustful thoughts (and actions), just before he blacked out. Only to come to some time later, (and because we searched him while he as asleep) with his clothing in dis-array, with a happy lion sitting next to him purring.
Yah... what happens in Almas, stays in Almas...
I only skimmed this so sorry if someone else pointed this out... but...
If the item is just allowing the user to cast the spell on himself, and then has a limited duration... does that mean he can remove the item and have the spell still be in effect?
So a party of adventurers could make themselves invisible by passing a Ring of Invisibility around? Each putting it on, activating it, removing it and passing it to the next player?
I alway figured it was more limited than that...
Mark Stratton wrote:
I actually started to post yestorday when I first read (or mis-read I guess) what you said. I actually have no interest in playing any of the Bonekeep scenarios. I have played Bonekeep I when it was new, and from the experience I had with it decided not to play any others. So I would have been posting in support of the "no interest in playing" any of the Bonekeep scenarios.
The way they are presented are not my style of play - and I have no interest in repeating the experience, or inflicting it on people I play with. (and just to note - there were no PC deaths at the table I played at, so no, it is not because of loosing PCs that I feel this way.)
As I am working on my 5th star now, I guess it will just limit those Specials I can run... but I can live with it. The 5th star gets here when (if) it does. And I intend to enjoy "the trip" more than "getting there". And from what I have seen, the Bonekeep series is not enjoyable to me.
Hay, you know, maybe someone will read this and think of producing a Boon for running a Gnome-Aasimar or maybe a Tiefling-Aasimar... that would be a new twist to making Aasimar Boons
Back in the days, I can recall playing in a Rune Quest game where the hostage is being ransomed for ... 2 bottles of grain alcohol. The Mooks were a race called Trollkin (picture goblins) and the grain alcohol just made them drunk. When the PCs found out the cost of the alcohol (something like 2 gp - REALLY cheap) they just went to the ransom meeting with 4 bottles.
Problems ensued. The payoff was so going so easy the Trollkin suspected a double cross... and told PC A to drink some of the grain alcohol.
PC B: "He can't do that!"
If a group is disfunctional enough to be shafting each other... maybe they shouldn't play together?
Obscuring Mist and Darkness builds? Silence casters? Barbarians with low Will saves? there are so many potential problems I can't even begin to list them....
IMHO we as judges don't - in fact CAN'T - police this. Not effectively. We as players can, and in fact always have. If a player is a real pain to play with - we don't play with him. "Playground rules." In time he fixes his problem (whatever it is), or he goes and plays Warcraft or something (not meaning to imply Warcraft players are less that fine people - just picking a random other part of the hobby).
It's maybe not real nice, it might not be pretty, ... and I may out of the kindness of my heart try to "fix the problem" ("hey guy, don't cheat on dice rolls - yeah, we can all tell..."). But I don't have to fix it. And I don't expect the someone else, some "authority figure" to fix it, or "control it".
In the end, life is to short for bad games. Play with friends. Talk to people. If you want to pull some great gimmic, don't keep it a secret, share it with your "friends" that the table. Enjoy. PLAY!
"If it's not fun, don't do it."
sheesh, now I need to go wash my face... sorry about that
wait... we already have that problem now! even when they CAN'T talk.
I often see players/judges assuming the AC can do all sorts of complex things. At my local shop, persons running PCs with ACs normally just avoid playing them at my table - otherwise they have to do things like create a list of "tricks" and all that...
But having an AC that can talk?! think of the Role Playing chances!
Judge as AC: "Does this saddle make me look fat?"
I play with a high level group (played most of EotT with this) that used to use the Goz mask (we all had one) with an Eversmoking Bottle... until the Judge asked us to quit using it as we were breaking the game to much (and it was less fun for him). So we put it away, and promptly had our first KIA in the next meeting...
heck, meeting the same guys in different scenarios can be fun... even if they are only "bit NPCs"
During a scenario with a "local thug" encounter, where the PCs are confronted by "hired thugs" intended to warn them off of their research, we captured several of the thugs and were questioning them. My PCs tend to do this a lot... Our judge had run another scenario the week before where I had much the same encounter... so he and I (with several "new" Players/PCs) went thru the "interview" something like this....
Me: "So Mook, we meet again!"
All this while the other players just watched and enjoyed. After all, I said my guy was the "Face"...
"I think my GM unintentionally "cheated" and TPKed, what do I do?"
This is just my opinion- realizing that I was not there and am not likely to be able to effect this in any way...
#1 - Talk to the judge to express the issues. Always give them a chance to know and understand your feelings on the job they are doing. Feedback is important, it is often how bad judges improve, and good judges become great.
#2 - if you aren't satisfied with his response to your concerns...Never play for him again. If you don't think he will improve... don't waste the game time with him. Life is too short to waste on bad games... and the number of scenarios are limited.
"If it's not fun, don't play"
something to think about:
A senior monk and a junior monk were traveling together. At one point, they came to a river with a strong current. As the monks were preparing to cross the river, they saw a very young and beautiful woman also attempting to cross. The young woman asked if they could help her.
The senior monk carried this woman on his shoulder, forded the river and let her down on the other bank. The junior monk was very upset, but said nothing.
They both were walking and senior monk noticed that his junior was suddenly silent and enquired “Is something the matter, you seem very upset?”
The junior monk replied, “As monks, we are not permitted a woman, how could you then carry that woman on your shoulders?”
The senior monk replied, “I left the woman a long time ago at the bank, however, you seem to be carrying her still.”
It is best to try to leave the bad games behind you... leave this judge at the river (if you can).
The Human Diversion wrote:
or print on cardstock, leaving an edge to hole-punch and drop in the binder with the scenario. I did this for the maps for First Steps - the Warehouse is two cardstock 8X11 sheets taped together so they fold on the tape crease and hole-punched on one side. The allyway and the Para-Countesses rooms etc. the same.
I can foresee the use of "Tech" traps in the future - in NON tech related scenarios. This is after all an "undetectable" trap that can't be disabled by most rogues.
Locks that can't be picked... wow...
Maybe I shouldn't have pointed this out where scenario writers will read it.
"...using his connections within Numeria, the villian was able to install a techological trap on his secret lair ... that can only be detected/disarmed by someone with the Technologist Feat..."
Comments about playing on line...please take them in the friendly way they were intended...
I play RPGs to interact with a real breathing person, in the same room with me.
I think that at it's core PFS is a face to face social game; no matter how involved the internet may be in the game, it will (for me at least) never replace sitting down with people that I consider "fellow gamers" and rolling dice. I think I could have fun in an online game (I have before in other kinds of games), but it seems like there would be a diminished level of involvement for me as I'm not as totally immersed in playing with my friends as I would be in person.
And I don't think I'm the only one that feels that way...
will the players know this before they come sit at the table?
I have PCs who have taken every knowledge skill - and regularly max out the skills (it's part of the PCs Schtick to be a "know it all"). It would be kind of a let down to sit down at a table and be told that my guy can't "do his thing" because of a rule I had never hear of in a book I didn't own.... and that I couldn't fix at the table by buying the book online - because it took a feat and all my feats were already selected.
Raphael Valen wrote:
i was thinking devil-born with like a bone-devil parent lol
what would you need the transparent skin etc for? Here's my description from my table tent...
Female Tiefling, Black hair, Yellow Cat’s Eyes, Veiled face
No tail. No horns. Really.
add in the continual flame spell on a tongue ring, so whenever I smile (or talk) flames flash thru my teeth... so I wear a veil... though it still flashes whenever I talk ... ;)
Da Wander wrote:
I'm still wondering - For those people that think a robot is an object,
Can I cast shrink item on a robot to reduce it's size 4 catagories? And "...change its now shrunken composition to a clothlike one"?
and now I need to know, can a Dimuative clothlike compostion robot still function as a robot? (I have visions of being attacked by diminutive robotic rag dolls. any chance we will see these things as swarms?)
I often play for a judge who has 6 extra (still sealed) folios that he often hands out at the start of a game...
"here, you might need this later... give it back at the end of the game"
Its somewhere you can show in public right? Because we're not taking your word for it.
if it''s not where he can show it in public, I DON'T want him to show it to us...
I stepped into this thread hoping to see some hints on using make-up as weapons, or in combat situations... you know, things like;
you know, "Cosmetic Weapons" - that sort of thing.
sigh... life is just full of disappointments I guess.
Michael Hallet wrote:
the point is not to "prove" it.
If someone wants to "cheat", they can just as easily just pull out a chronicle and write up the sheet themselves - never having played it or anything. No one that I know is going to check.
We're not going to check on you guy. That's the point of an honor system. I am not your mom, or a police man or anything like that. I don't check to see that someone is honest.
I might (and do) check for MISTAKES.
SO... what's legal, what's allowed, and what's not. I need to know this so that I can inform the players that ask me for help.
SO... legal questions now...
1) If a PC has been played before today as an Aasimar - can the 1st level re-write rules be used to convert the PC to a different type of Aasimar?
2) Can they be used to convert the PC to a Tiefling?
3) Can they be used to convert the PC to a Nagagi? (not a legal choice before the 14th - so it wouldn't have been legal when the chronicle on it was awarded).
Thanks for your input!
are we going to do this again? didn't we do this last month?
we can have one side getting upset because they think everyone is saying you have to pay for all your own healing, and the other side thinking that the other side is saying the party has to pay for all the meatshield healing (he get's a free ride)...
That is not what is being said.
Everyone chips in. Everyone contributes to the healing at the table. Even the girl getting the stuffing kicked out of her (be she the meatshield or the squishy).
Mark Stratton wrote:
but in the end, the monster died...
now, in a later game...
"my name is Kyle Baird ...you killed my monster... prepare to die."
Kyle Baird wrote:
you forgot the first two lines....
"I am Kyle Baird - "
This is going to sound snarky, but it isn't ment that way...
perhaps we should go back to the first option?
"Will not run a game with Pageant of the Peacock...", check to see if anyone at the table has this Masterpiece. If they do, don't run.
At the very least, determine how they think this Masterpiece works, and if it disagrees with your view, tell them how you rule it works before play so they have the option to switch PCs (or to drop the table).
I'm a bard (Street Performer: 11th level right now)
I don't have Pageant of the Peacock (yet, and with the Table Variation it has I am not likely to take it...), but I do have...
Versatile Performance (Ex): At 2nd level, a bard can choose one type of Perform skill. He can use his bonus in that skill in place of his bonus in associated skills. When substituting in this way, the bard uses his total Perform skill bonus, including class skill bonus, in place of its associated skill's bonus, whether or not he has ranks in that skill or if it is a class skill. At 6th level, and every 4 levels thereafter, the bard can select an additional type of Perform to substitute.
The types of Perform and their associated skills are: ... Sing (Bluff, Sense Motive)...
SO... because I sing really good, I have a +34 Sense Motive... How is this possible? I have a WIS of 7 and one rank in Sense Motive... But you know, I can really sing! The NPCs can't lie to me, 'cause I can sing good!
The fact that I can sing sort of trumps other PCs who put lots of resources into Sense Motive, ... so I guess I should start checking with Judges at the start of each game to be sure I can use this ability, right?
a friend of mine was handed a Barbarian PC to play during a game, one that had been drawn up by someone not at the game and not strongly reviewed by the players.
Getting into the character, she began "speaking like a barbarian" things like "Thog hit monster with big ax" or "Thog say - that best you got?"
This goes on for several hours into the game, everyone having fun and the story comes to an area where everyone needs to anounce their INT (I think there was an INT check for something) and she glances down and notices that this barbarian has a high INT... something like a 16. Everyone but her is speechless and takes a second to look at her. She just glances around at everyone looking at her and says..."W'ut? Thog not stupid, Thog just have speech im-ped-a-mint."
First, let me make a clear statement. A judge (and a player) always has the option to leave. Always. Whatever the reason. We are all friends here (I hope) and friends DON'T force friends to do things they don't want to. So whatever your reason for leaving a table, you always have that option (IMHO).
BUT...Having the judge decide who is or isn't allowed to play at a table... I personally think (again IMHO) this is a bad idea.
the players police this now the same way we always have. If the guy is a jerk, we don't play with him. Each time we sit at a table, we look around and see... is there anyone here I'd rather not play with?
I do not want the judge to take that ability away from me as a player. Perhaps I like playing with Jo and her over-the-top bardic knowledge machine... and perhaps I don't. I sure as heck don't want to judge to make that decision for me by saying "you, Jo, play something else... or leave my table."
Are you saying you "Will not run a game with Pageant of the Peacock", even if all the other players are fine with it? Did you ask, or just assume you knew what was best for them?
my biggest problem with the many cute things mentioned on this thread is that often (some at least) judges we encounter will view anything "no one else seems to know about" with the view that the player is "trying to pull something". It boils down to the issue of player/judge trust - and some judges/players have been burned on this and have negitive responses built in about new things.
The only way to avoid this type of response from a judge is for each "gimmick" to be discussed with the judge before hand, so as not to "spring something" on him/her in the middle of the game. And even then it will sometimes "frost" the judge-player relationship.
But discussing each new thing with the judge before the game will result in "burning game time" (if you are at the game table when you do it - and you always are with judges you haven't played for before, you often only see them as the game slot starts). If every player at the table does this, 5 minutes of game time for each player results in half an hour of play time lost from the scenario...
Several other people on different threads have expressed this view by advising us to "avoid grey areas" when we play or build PCs. Yet this is not a lot of fun either... who wants to be the same ol' thing? Just like everyone else?
I don't really have a fix for it - just felt someone needed to point this out ... Now let's get back to the kewl stuff!
wait - what if I have a PC that plays as a tiefling or aasimar, gains one XP - and then I want to train him into something else? Say a Nagagi. Can I use the 1st level re-write rules to do that? or is the PC "locked" into being a tiefling or aasimar?
or if he was a Tiefling can I change him into an Aasimar before I play him at Level 2?
Or if he was one kind of Aasimar (say Anglekin) can I change him into another (say Musetouched) before I play him at Level 2?
Sammy T wrote:
well, let's look at the possiblities...
25% "act normally" (this is Garble - please define normal)
I need to put in a disclaimer here and say I have not (yet) played any games with Garble - and have formed my opinion from hear-say...
But do note that it says "bonus", not "modifier". Not the same thing. If you had a Dexterity penalty (from a Dex of less than 10), that would still apply.
which just makes me wonder -
If he WANTS to get hit, how come the klutzy guy with the DEX of 4 is better than the (DEX 10) average guy at doing it? and way better than the dancer with a DEX of 18...
Kyle Baird wrote:
Thanks Nosig! Totally picking that one up for Garble.
the difference is, most of my PCs have real problems doing any damage - unlike Garble...
not that it is a requirement to get the boon, but can Garble read? and would he take a boon for owning a BOOK?
The Pathfinder Tales chronicles...
My favorite one has saved the life of two of my PCs...
Desperate Bargain: Presented with a choice between damnation and domination, you chose the latter and might choose it again. As an immediate action when you are reduced to fewer than 0 hit points, you gain a number of temporary hit points equal to 2d10 + your character level that last for 3 rounds. During these 3 rounds, you are confused as per the confusion spell. Each round, you may attempt a DC 18 Will save to remove the condition. At the end of 3 rounds or when you successfully save against the confusion effect, all remaining temporary hit points are lost and you resume dying if your hit point total remains below 0. Once you have used this boon, cross it off the Chronicle sheet.
You get to assign these chronicles to your PCs if you own the Pathfinder Tales novel...
linking for other comments about StingChucks.
James Jacobs about using StingChucks - I esp. like the comment "Also, keeping your stingchucks fed and taking care of them is important, and if you ignore that, your GM has the right to have your stingchucks escape and get in your hair or pants or whatever."
I like the cheap things.
Like sunrods. It's always amazing how many people don't have a sunrod. Lasts for 6 hours. AOE is 30' (bigger than the 20' for light or for a torch). and it only costs 2 gp. Area is larger than a light spelll/torch/everburning torch/Ioun Torch etc.
but the best is the Whetstone (AA Pg9), gives a +1 damage for a normal weapons for the first time it hits after you sharpen it. Cost? 2 cp. Yeap, 2 COPPER PIECES! What 1st level PC (or 2nd for that matter) Can't afford this? And the RP of sitting around, sharpening a blade while the "Face" PC is doing an Intimidate roll...
I have nothing useful to add to this discussion - but I feel compelled to say.... "Bravo Bruno! I stand in honor of your skill as Gym Teacher at the Academe! Bravo Sir!" ... skill mastery should be recognized
Ok, here's a different spin on this (at least it looks different to me)...
Let's say on the 15th I sit down at a table and pull out my 3rd level PC, glance around and introduce myself as a Nagaji (spelling?) Warpriest... being built with Judge credits all from last few years. Without a race boon.
Would this PC be legal?
At the time the chronicles were assigned, the PC could not have been a Nagaji - and maybe not even a Warpriest for part of those chronicles.
"For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster's CR."
so for common monsters with a CR of 5 or less... anyone can try the Knowledge check - even if they don't have a rank in it.
I mention this as I have seen a table of experienced players, who know as players that you need to hit skeletons with blunt weapons NOT USING blunt weapons because no one at the table had Knowledge Religion - so... a bunch of players felt constrained to try to prevent "meta-gaming"... They knew that the monsters weren't taking full damage, but restricted their PCs, because they knew what to do (as players)- they didn't do it (as PCs). The player "meta" knowledge constrained thier PCs ... If the monster had been something called a "Green Wiglet" and they had noticed it wasn't takeing full damage they would have switched to different/back up weapons to try to find the DR type. It would have been a "puzzle" they would have enjoyed solving! (I can almost hear the table talk now..."Not Silver Blunt! switching to a Magic Slashing! You got that oil applied yet? Think it might be DR/Good then?")
Heck, these were not under-equiped PCs! They all had blunt weapons! they just were afread to appear to be Meta-gaming.... One of the players had a Dwarf that often switched off from Warhammer to Battle Ax, but he was careful to use the Ax so no one would think he was "meta-gaming".
I think the problem is more when he can't tell it from a chicken.
In my defense - I'm a dwarf and I haven't really been exposed to such exotic animals in my underground background. I did not grow up on a farm which has such things.
Undead chicken - that I can recognize most of the time (Knowledge Religion +2)... but I've got training for that...
The Fox wrote:
oh, I don't know, I could see it as a failed Kn(local) check... after all, if it HAD been something hold person worked on it would have been Kn(local)... ;)
(edit: yeah, I can totally see it going something like this...
Linking in another (older thread) on the same thing...
notice that the second post on that thread is Doug Miles linking to another even older thread on the same subject
and from one of my posts on that thread...
On Knowledge and table variations:
Knowledge checks = table variation
there is so much variation here I don't even know how to answer. And I have no idea how to fix this. (so the following is mostly just venting - skip it if you like).
I normally say: "I've got an XX, what's the most improtant thing for me to know?"
Many judges figure I am trying to pull something... when all I am doing is trying to NOT make this a game of Player Vs. Judge where the judge makes me create questions depending on what I as a player know about the monster, while he tries to conceal anything I might get wrong... in other words a Meta-Game Game. Tell me what my PC knows, so I know how to run him for you...
I personally know a lot of important "bits" about Flesh Golems. I can recognize them from their discription.... but my wife can't. She has no idea. "Frankenstiens Monster" doesn't mean much to her (she grew up in a different culture - different myths). So, her "3 questions" are going to be very different from mine. Then add in the judges who give "limited response" answers and we see how useless it is to put points into knowledge skills at some tables.
"What defenses does the monster have?" - "you can't ask that!" - "Does the creature have DR?" - "Yes. That's one question."
Mark Stratton wrote:
The "the flexible and undefined system" reduces a part of a players PC to Table Variation. Dependant on the whim of the judge...
Get a good judge and it can be a fun entertaining event (see some of the posts above) - even if it doesn't inform you of the "important bits" of knowledge.
Get a poor judge and it can contribute to a poor gaming experience (see different posts above) - even if it does inform you of the "important bits" of knowledge.
This is just another bit of YMMV - something that we'll need to work out at each table we sit down to play at. Gameing with strangers today? guess you need to learn the "table rules" on knowledge checks...
here you go... this might help for what to buy.Painlords list of what to buy
as to the points - you only get two, and I would suggest putting one in Diplomacy...