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

rainzax's page

1,908 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 2 wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,908 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

What are you going to do with the Children of Westcrown?

James Jacobs wrote:


I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans. Because beyond the two contradictions Mort pointed out above...

** spoiler omitted **

A quick glance at the other race ages listed in the ARG and all those look fine—either they're like drow or svirfneblin and have always had established ages, or they're new races who haven't had significant NPC appearances that rely heavily upon their childhood history being on a time scale equal to that of a human.

Now... I suppose I COULD say "Tieflings and aasimars age differently in Golarion," but that's super obnoxious. The rulebooks don't have a built-in campaign setting, but Golarion DOES assume you're using the rulebooks, and as such, what's in the rulebooks SHOULD match what happens in Golarion as much as possible.


Which printing of Advanced Race Guide has the proper (human-like) Tiefling ages fixed in the table?

You make excellent points all around, and for the most part I agree with you (as our projected numbers attest) on nearly all acounts save one: Perego Regicona. So I’ll speak to that. In general, I see two forces at play here.

One is the “land grab” you mentioned - during and after the Humanist-Diabolist Civil War, with the church of Aroden in question (thus it’s massive estates in Rego Sacero), I think both petty noble (“new money”) and gentry noble (“old money”) alike would lay claim to the now-illigitimacy of property rights of the fallen church. And so! I don’t see the “land grab” as materially or geographically motivated at all - I see it more politically, socially, and economically motivated. The Diabolist-Loyalist nobility took claim of the land because they could, not because they had to.

Two, and I think this cuts closer to the population discrepency between our opinions, immediately following the Civil War, their was a great “noble flight” to the newly relocated capital in Egorian. Here is my key sentence from Bastards of Erebus (page 7): “Those nobles who remained were largely old families rooted in their traditions and their pride, content to rot in their declining [estates].”

So the way I see it, considering the impact of the two forces above, even after 40 more years or so (depending when you start the campaign) of Thrune-Diabolist rule, Parego Regicona has a much lower population than it once did, certainly far below it’s capacity, and is inhabited primarily by super-rich families whose worth individually makes up the majority of distributed wealth of the entire metropolis.

That said, I think my initial numbers are too low, so perhaps I can modify them into something like:


Population by District

Rego Cader - 5,400
Rego Crua - 37,800
*Rego Scripa - 16,700
*Rego Pena - 28,300
Rego Sacero - 12,800
Parego Regicona - 13,700 (Corna 4,800 - Laina 5,600 - Aerum 3,300)

= 114,700

*With the note that in mine, Scripa is the "industrial" district, with the shipping businesses and warehouses, and Pena is the "downtown" district, with the markets, trades, and taverns.

Good luck with your reboot. I know your players are lucky indeed!

Esoteric Metamaths Idea #1


Priced Proportionally to Metamagic Rods

+1 Metamagic Rod costs 11,000
+2 Metamagic Rod costs 32,500
+3 Metamagic Rod costs 54,000
+4 Metamagic Rod costs 75,500

And all of them can be used 3/day with virtually infinite charges.

That means the "daily unit cost" can be found by dividing by three:

+1 Metamagic Rod costs 3,667
+2 Metamagic Rod costs 10,834
+3 Metamagic Rod costs 18,000
+4 Metamagic Rod costs 25,167

But this is still the once/day cost - very different than the once/ever cost.

So here are the maths for dividing these unit costs by 20 and 50 respectively.

+1 Metamagic Rod costs between 183 and 73
+2 Metamagic Rod costs between 542 and 217
+3 Metamagic Rod costs between 900 and 360
+4 Metamagic Rod costs between 1258 and 503

Is this a fair band to price the cost of a one-off metamagic effect?

Esoteric Metamaths Idea #2


Priced Proportionally to Esoteric Component Table

The math of the table is calculated using the product of the Caster Level x Spell Level.

So, to keep things simple, what if we used Caster Level x Spell Level x Metamagic Slot Increase.


A 1st level wizard casting an Extended Summon Monster I expends 2gp (1x2x1) worth of Esoterics.
A 5th level wizard casting an Empowered Fireball expends 50gp (5x5x2) worth of Esoterics
A 9th level wizard casting an Maximized Cone of Cold expends 216gp (9x8x3) worth of Esoterics
A 13th level wizard casting a Quickened Reverse Gravity expends 572gp (13x11x4) worth of Esoterics

Is this a fair band to price the cost of a one-off metamagic effect?


Having wrote that now, I think I'm strongly partial to the second method, if not just for simplicity's sake.

I guess my big question is "do you think this effect is undercosted or overcosted or about right?"

Things to consider:

1) Esoteric Components will be available for purchase.
2) I'd like a metamagic rod at higher levels to still be a sound investment.
3) Using Esoteric components is not a sure shot - I will lock it behind a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + twice the spell's level) - failure casts the spell normally but expends the components.


Thanks DCP.

I'm going with the whole "your consciousness stretches out a single split-second and lives out an entire quarter lifetime in an alternate universe" angle so yes, both the physical and mental effects of aging will apply.

I am also looking for a way to game the psychological trauma. Perhaps a permanent penalty to Sense Motive checks and saves vs. Illusion?

Ideas for this second aspect?

Hey community,
I need help developing (or finding amidst the splat) a spell or curse (works either way) that magically ages a person one whole age category permanently. That is, from Young > Mature > Middle-aged > Old > Venerable.

Also, they would also suddenly gain ranks in a skill as if they had in fact lived those additional years (as house rule, older character are entitled to more skill points). So, ideally some combination of Necromancy and Chronomancy.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Boomerang Nebula wrote:
rainzax wrote:

My players run my combats, keep track of all bookkeeping, and look up rules in a pinch.

I just do the NPCs and the metaplot.

That sounds like a good idea. Can you elaborate on how that actually works?


Just assign explicit roles for what you need. Tell them it's as essential to the game as having a character.

I bought one of those magnetized initiative trackers and tell them one of them must use it to track initiative for combats. Since it's magnets it fun, see? Next, when I announce treasure or other things, I tell them "somebody write this down because I'll forget" because it's true. Then, I ask that player to keep track of things between sessions and give us periodic updates. I find that folks who are drawn to Pathfinder are more likely to have a proclivity for minutiae, and chances are good such a person will end up in your group. Finally, I require that the folks at the table who have the most complex characters must do their own rules homework. And since that means they tend to become more familiar for the book, they become a shoe-in for the rules checker position.

But overall, I am just transparent with them in saying that if they help me do all the "other" DM stuff that that frees me up to think about the NPCs and metaplot.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:
The newness is starfinder folks. 5E is a similar yet different experience and folks who want gonzo fantasy stick with PF and thats not going to change soon. IMHO of course.

Half of my current group defected from 5e. I think of it as a promotion.

They all say that they wanted (and I quote) "more".

Captain Yesterday Smur wrote:
Hold on, I'm still trying to figure out what my THAC0 is.


It is precisely the "distance" between what you need to hit and your opponent's AC.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

My players run my combats, keep track of all bookkeeping, and look up rules in a pinch.

I just do the NPCs and the metaplot.

Raynulf wrote:

In terms of overall population: I was playing with these numbers;

Cader 4,200
Crua 30,200
Scripa 25,900
Sacero 13,100
Pena 5,800
Aurum 10,300
Corna 13,400
Laina 11,800

How do you figure Parego Regicona to hold just shy of 1/3 of the population?

The way I figure it, the "mainland" districts (especially Crua and Scripa, as you noted) are way more population dense than the scattered and walled off islands of the nobility - even nestled within a legion of servants.

I would *reckon* more like the following:

Rego Cader - 5,000
Rego Crua - 45,000
Rego Scripa - 30,000
Rego Pena - 15,000
Rego Sacero - 10,000
Parego Regicona - 5,000

= 110,000

I am no historian, civil engineer, nor geologist, nor do I have any training to support my claims, other than having travelled a little in my own life and read my share of books...

Raynulf wrote:


Westcrown is one of the largest cities of the Inner Sea region, but also one of the least detailed, making it something of a challenge to really bring it to life. In a city of 114,000 where a chunk of the city is abandoned we should expect (from Medieval Demographics Made Easy and 3.5 DMG2);
  • About 6 square miles (3,648 acres) of city
  • About 22,800 buildings (6/acre), with about 70% occupied (apply equally).
  • About 6,840 residences (low and middle class)
  • About 1,140 administrative buildings (town halls, militia barracks, city centres, military installations etc)
  • About 1,140 entertainment buildings (taverns, gambling houses, brothels, playhouses, theatres etc)
  • About 2,280 industrial buildings (shipwrights, carpenters, masons, slaughterhouses, lumberyards, fishmongers etc)
  • About 1,140 noble buildings (mansions/Vaneos, Villas/Viras, townhouses etc)
  • About 2,280 shops (smiths, bakers, jewellers, grocers, alchemists, curio shops, etc)
  • About 3,420 slums (flophouses, shanties, shacks etc)
  • About 1,140 public works (temples, parks, graveyards, schools, libraries, public forums etc)
  • About 1,140 nearby farms (mostly occupied)
  • About 760 to 1,300 law enforcement officers

For fun, what do you think the (rough) population breakdown is by district? Specifically:

-Parego Regicona
-Rego Sacero
-Rego Pena
-Rego Scripa
-Rego Crua
-Rego Cader

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ciaran Barnes wrote:


I basically agree with everything you said in your original post. These are things I have wondered about many times over the years, but you have a lot more knowledge on actual armors. My perfect solution is this: what if medium armor reduced your speed less than heavy armor does? Right now, they reduce your speed by 1/3. If medium armor reduced it by 1/4 - 1/6, then there would at least be a small tactical advantage for using medium armor.

If "Slow" movement was set at base 25 (instead of base 20), this would give a nice spread.

30/25/20 and 25/20/15 for "regular" and "slow" races.

I like your plan

Cinderfist wrote:
For those who might be interested here is what I went with.

How Big and how Fast is your Swarm?

I'll divide maps into two types: Geographical and Strategic.

I like to start my sessions with a Geographical map of where the game takes place. I am currently DMing a game that largely takes place in a city. It helps me and my players "get back into" the setting as characters, and I usually add some new background information to help breath life into the game. Perhaps that is choosing a single district and using skill checks to solicit information about that district, largely places of interest, perhaps a little history, and other background information. I find it grounds the session before we get into the main part "so what are your characters doing?"

Or "battle maps" either drawn freehand on-the-spot, flipped open from a stash of generic flip maps, or revealed part-by-part through the process of exploration. My players and I like them because we enjoy the "chess" elements of the game. Sometimes I use "abstract" maps that treat distance and time as approximate values to determine the order of things set in motion by player choice and pre-set random tables (which I generate for some scenarios). I'm not opposed to "narrative" combats and situations, but generally prefer the grids to more-or-less denote exact position within a scene.

Dunno if that helps - good luck with your paper!

Hey community,
I recently included Esoteric Material Components in my game and had a (possibly original) idea.

I'd like to discover a way to price the usage of these special components to achieve Metamagic effects at a similar cost-ratio when one compares the per-charge usage of metamagic rods. Here is my initial outline:

1) I am already using the Optional Components and Greater Component Effect rules.
2) The "type" and "school" must match for Metamagic uses up lest the caster require double the amount of material (and thus, cost).
3) I've already interposed a Spellcraft check at time-of-casting to get the Greater effect, setting the base DC at 20 + twice the spells (effective) level.
4) I'd like them to cost anywhere from 100% to 150% of a "charge" from a similar rod when used properly.
5) I'm considering the Metamagic usage of the components to take additional casting time (like when a spontaneous caster uses metamagic).

Anybody else doing this in their home game?



Before anybody leaps in and cries "MCD!" I'd like to share that I already use many house rules to address this situation, as well as developed a trust with my players in that they won't wreck the game for themselves or me. So, in effect, I've really already decided to give casters a little "boost" in this way because I know it will add some spice to my game. But thanks for your concern anyhow!

My Self wrote:
Instead of having the strange class skills math (1x class skill level + 1/2x non class skill level) for determining max ranks you can have in a skill, perhaps you simply can't raise a skill to over 1/2 your level if it isn't a class skill this level?

This is pretty much what I meant to say. Skill Points still purchase Skill Ranks 1-for-1, but a character cannot raise a cross-class skill past half the HD (minimum 1) of that class.

Another thing to consider is the Hybrid classes that have "counts as [other class] levels for feats" (ex. Brawler's Martial Training) count as synergy towards the skills of those class as well.

If you go this route, you may consider also allowing the "skill feats" (Athletic, Skill Focus, etc) grant one of the skills they modify as a class skill in addition to the feats normal benefits. That way, if a player really want to be good at a cross-class skill, they can leverage their feats to effectively remove this cap.

Happy homebrew!

Ok I do have some feedback as I am deciding which template to add to another bestiary creature.

Some of the templates add spells to the creature's capabilities. However, I find some of the spells to be inappropriate for for low level creatures. Perhaps add a scaling HD (or CR?) range? Like HD 1-4 gain the "3/day" powers instead 1/day, HD 5-8 gain the "3/day" and "1/day" powers normally, HD 9-12 gain unlimited use of the "3/day" powers and the "1/day" powers instead 3/day, and HD 13+ gain unlimited use of all powers.

Maybe rename the powers "primary" (1/day) and "secondary" (3/day) and they could universally adhere to this scheme.

That's a quick fix, but something like that.

My Self wrote:
rainzax wrote:

What about making class skills matter more?

Maximum number of ranks for cross-class skills are half that of class skills (minimum 1) cumulatively.

So, when your wizard reaches 7th level, he still gains (2+INT) skill points, but can only have a maximum of 3 ranks in Swim and other cross-class skills.

Or, when your multiclass fighter-wizard adds his 4th level of wizard on top of his 3 levels in fighter, he can have up to 5 ranks in Swim and other cross-class skills.

This has the side effect of making traits matter more.

So 3e, but with more non-class skill ranks, basically.

Basically. But notably lacking both the "fractional arithmetic" and the "half-strength" rank-for-rank efficacy, thus forcing high skill-point but low-class-skill characters to spread out their ranks, or to multi-class, in order to get high skill bonuses with non-INT cross-class skills.

Simply divorcing skills from INT removes the primary incentive to invest in INT balanced against the other 5 ability scores (for any character not casting with it), and any ability score with negligible mechanical importance may as well be removed from the game altogether - or be explicitly conceded as a dump stat.

But if you are deadset on it, perhaps develop a rubric for rewriting which classes get which number of ranks per level?


Base: 3 ranks per level

Full BAB +0
3/4 BAB +2
1/2 BAB +3

Full Spellcasting -3
2/3 Spellcasting +0
4/9 Spellcasting +2
No Spellcasting +3

Three good saves -1
Two good saves +0
One good save +1

note this gives you vastly different results than classes as-printed

What about making class skills matter more?

Maximum number of ranks for cross-class skills are half that of class skills (minimum 1) cumulatively.

So, when your wizard reaches 7th level, he still gains (2+INT) skill points, but can only have a maximum of 3 ranks in Swim and other cross-class skills.

Or, when your multiclass fighter-wizard adds his 4th level of wizard on top of his 3 levels in fighter, he can have up to 5 ranks in Swim and other cross-class skills.

This has the side effect of making traits matter more.

The players in my game who wanted to invest in more skill points intentionally prioritized INT along with their various other ability score wants. So, had I used this house rule with them at character creation, I imagine that my PCs would be less intelligent than they are now - for better or for worse.

Perhaps give something back to INT?


Let INT add to CMB and CMD.
Let INT add to Initiative checks.
Let INT add to Perception checks.
Let INT cover a saving throw; Reflex or Will could make sense.
Change Aid Another to add the helper's INT to the helped check.
Consolidate all Knowledge skills into a single skill with each rank purchasing a new area of study.

Then, if you do some of the above, consider breaking apart INT as a single super stat for prepared arcane casters: divide "spells known" and "spells per day" between INT and a second mental stat. Perhaps WIS for wizards/alchemists/magi and CHA for witches/arcanists?

Lynceus wrote:
I house ruled Charmed Life to be a free action that can be done at any time, but it's still a fairly weak ability even then- why the Swashbuckler can't have an 'always-on' save bonus, or, you know, better base saves, I'm unclear about.

Perhaps a "gas tank" bonus (so long as the Swashbuckler has 1+ points of Panache)?

Also, have you considered implementing the Unchained Action Economy?

Vidmaster7 wrote:
Do you think it would be OP if the swashbuckler could make more Immediate actions in a round then normal maybe through a feat or as a added ability.

In short, if you did this as a class ability (and not a feat for reasons explained above), I would tread carefully. Maybe:

Quicken Deed
At 3rd level, and again at 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th level, a swashbuckler may forfeit a deed she would ordinarily gain to choose another swift-action or immediate-action deed she already knows to improve. The swashbuckler loses the first deed, and the second deed becomes "quickened": If it was useable as a swift action, it now becomes a 1/round free action; if it was useable as an immediate action, it now becomes a 1/round free action useable even if it's not her turn.

Perhaps allow swift actions to be traded for move actions (for all characters)?

Or make Charmed Life a free action?

Though I am neither person, taking a cue from Spellcraft:

Identify Feat - (*immediate, 15 + enemy BAB) Identify combat feat as it is being used
Counter Maneuver - (ready action) Identify and then counter combat feat for 1 round
Read Opponent - (free, 20**) Determine opponent’s rough base attack bonus (faint, moderate, strong)



*I changed the counterspell rules in my game from identifying as a free action to an immediate action - thus too with above.
**I use a different "Psychological AC" in may game instead of a flat "20" here.

Perhaps [2d4x2] Gargantuan Swarms of horses that take up 20x15 spaces using Trample fast approaching in [2d4] "waves."


Trample (Ex) As a full-round action, a creature with the trample ability can attempt to overrun any creature that is at least one size category smaller than itself. This works just like the overrun combat maneuver, but the trampling creature does not need to make a check, it merely has to move over opponents in its path. Targets of a trample take an amount of damage equal to the trampling creature's slam damage + 1-1/2 times its Str modifier. Targets of a trample can make an attack of opportunity, but at a –4 penalty. If targets forgo an attack of opportunity, they can attempt to avoid the trampling creature and receive a Reflex save to take half damage. The save DC against a creature's trample attack is 10 + 1/2 creature's HD + creature's Str modifier (the exact DC is given in the creature's descriptive text). A trampling creature can only deal trampling damage to each target once per round, no matter how many times its movement takes it over a target creature.

On the surprise round, players have an option to climb to safety, or cast fly or levitate or jump (or other evasive spell), or hide behind something (granting them cover).

Then, each round one "wave" comes. Since the width of the gully is 50' across and the swarms take up 20' width each, there happens to be two (randomly determined) "safe spots" each round (If you wanted to game this, you could have the PC make a Perception check to see where next rounds "safe spot" will be). And so, the PCs must play the avoidance game until the stampede passes.

So, when it does release, what is the action on my end to get it shipped?


And, consider that a staff can be seen as a way to make your own spells "go farther" (expending the staff instead of the caster), but also a way to gain access to new spells.

Maybe something like this:

Determine how many extra "days" they can squeeze out of their remaining rations - the PCs are essentially free to choose this number once the reality of scarcity sets in.

They don't have to make Starvation checks for that additional amount of days. But after that time has elapsed, they begin making the Starvation checks with an added penalty equal to the number of days they extended.

So: X more days, but then -X.

I don't mean to be a pledge brat but I was prepping my game the other night and I needed to build a monster and then suddenly I was like "Oh yeah whatever happened to that super bestiary I funded?" and I've never kickstarted a (D&D) product before so I thought I'd ask.


Perhaps some of your random encounters could involve the PCs essentially walking into another "encounter" between other NPCs - like a random street thug robbing a party of petty nobles, or a monster attacking a gang of street thugs, or two gangs of street thugs battling over turf.

Or an encounter with a street thug who quickly steals one of the PCs valuables (perhaps using the Appraise skill to identify the PC with the most expensive item) and lures them into an ambush with the whole gang!

Or half-way through one of these encounters, another third party comes into the mix. It is a heavily populated city, after all.


1 - red herring
2 - "side" scene
3 - foreshadowing
4 - direct plot
5 - direct plot
6 - direct plot
7 - double encounter (roll twice)
8 - interrupted encounter (roll twice)

In short, it doesn't always have to be with X monster...

and Combat Feats!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can have it both ways.

You can run a linear plot, but insert a "random" table if the PCs venture through different districts at different times (night and day), crafting each "random" encounter to add to your plot, but rolling "randomly" at the table to determine exact sequencing.

Populate your table with encounters that either advance your plot directly, foreshadow something to come later, serve as a hook to a "side" scene, or even a red herring.


1 - red herring
2 - "side" scene
3 - foreshadowing
4 - direct plot
5 - direct plot
6 - direct plot

This leaves you with the flexibility to be (or appear to be) random, but also (since the actual table is on your side of the DM screen) choose by silent fiat.


That said, I do not have a need to recalibrate and condense every knowledge skill (I have other uses for my OCD!), instead, I have a need to maintain compatibility as much as possible with the CRB (Core Rulebook) as written, because of the abundance of new players I introduce to the game (thanks 5e!).

But this thread pointed out a "hole" in those knowledges that I can now address. Also, it got me going over each sub-skill with a fine tuned comb (to "doublecheck"), and brought to my attention the functions of Arcana that ought to be Spellcraft. I have fixed those now.

Lastly, my players aren't ready for a skill that deals explicitly with "martial knowledge" - which I would call in my game Warcraft (and model after Spellcraft) if I were to induct it - but if and when they are, I will include it.

Cheers gang!


What kind of change to the rogue do you seek? Can you specifically identify the areas you feel the rogue needs help?

Doing that may help to focus the discussion on an outcome you might like.

Umbral Reaver wrote:
Necromancy is a great way to deal with nausea, it seems.


I pledged. What happens now? When can I get my now Bestiary?

Thanks for the hard work!

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
rainzax wrote:
Finally, I give my rogues, whether they use one of the options above or not, two additional abilities to compliment they're being a (mostly) non-magical class in a magical world. The first is a limited ability to re-roll a d20 a limited # of times per day. The second is the ability to "take 10" with a few skills despite danger/distraction.
Obviously, I'm a fan of this.

There it is!

Perhaps, similar to Confusion, create a Nausea table, like:

25% - Queasy - limited to one Standard or Move action only
50% - Long Heave - Do nothing but barf profusely
75% - Big Heave - Buckle over in sickness, falling prone and dropping held items, limited to a Move action only
100% - Projectile - Barf on nearest creature within reach, who must save (same DC) or be Nauseated for 1 round

Two results allow limited action, Two allow no action and possibly worse, to balance against "old" Nausea

I give my players options.

First, is the impressive Legendary Rogue - a very versatile upgrade to the core rogue that keeps all the flavor and adds some punch.

Second, is the classy Glory Rogue - a more narrow build, but if you want a rogue who lives and dies by his DX and CHA scores, I definitely recommend giving this a shot.

Third, there is the Unchained Rogue - a tough skirmisher with cool de-buff attacks and an arsenal of special skill "unlocks" - this is recommended if 3pp options are off the table.

Finally, I give my rogues, whether they use one of the options above or not, two additional abilities to compliment they're being a (mostly) non-magical class in a magical world. The first is a limited ability to re-roll a d20 a limited # of times per day. The second is the ability to "take 10" with a few skills despite danger/distraction.

The rogue in my game who is using the 1st and 4th option is having a blast. I have had a blast playing the 2nd option in a game years ago. Haven't tried out the 3rd option personally yet.

We go live with this Sunday!

I figure every time I borrow your rules to create a monster to throw at my PCs, the least I can do is report back here. Cheers.

Terrormonger Bat Swarm (CR 3)


N Diminutive animal (swarm)

Nature, Planes

Init: +2
Blindsight 20ft, Low-light vision; Smell Fear; Perception +15

AC 16, touch 16, flat-footed 14 (+2 DX, +4 size)
HP 17 (3d8)
Fort +3, Ref +7, Will +3 (+7 vs fear)
Defensive Abilities: swarm traits
Immune: weapon damage

Speed: 5ft, fly 40ft (good)
Melee: swarm (1d6) plus Feast on Fear (+1 damage vs shaken foes)
Space: 10ft, Reach: 0ft
Special Attacks: Fearsome Blow (free demoralize check +7), distraction (DC 11), wounding (1 HP/rnd)

ST 3, DX 15, CON 11, INT 2, WIS 14, CHA 4
Feats: (*Dazzling Display, *Disheartening Display, *Killing Flourish, Lightning Reflexes, Skill Focus (Intimidate)
Skills: Fly +12, Intimidate +7, Perception +12
SQ: swarm traits

(Dazzling Display, Killing Flourish, Disheartening Display)
*May demoralize all prey as a full-round action w/in 30 feet, or as a free action upon reducing a prey to 0 hp; those already under a fear effect see that effect increase by one step.

switched the skill focus from Perception to Intimidate for special effect

bitter lily wrote:
rainzax wrote:

I still use this system today for wands.

Perhaps if you could decide how you wanted staves to change, recharge, all that, we could begin to figure something out?

I went looking through the archives earlier, and saw your system. Sadly, it was too random for my tastes.

There's several problems with recharging staves as published.

(1) You have to HAVE a slot of the level of the highest spell on it before you can recharge a staff. This turns most of them into very, very expensive scrollcases for most of an adventurer's career. There really aren't very many staves where the designers kept to even just 6th-level spells or lower.

What about a Lesser Staff that used lower level spells only? Or that allows the use of higher level spells but at lower casting level? To compensate, they take 2 days to charge per spell level that exceeds the wielder's highest slot?...

Klorox wrote:
I'm not accusing you of anything. There is a system of consumable items in place, of which you change one element, I was simply asking if this will entail changing the rest too, or if you'll be satisfied with making potions as cheap/expensive as scrolls. I know now, and I'd like to have returns about how satisfied you are with this single change after you've had time to playtest it.

Sorry my humor didn't come across - I keep forgetting that tone is basically impossible to communicate intentionally over message posts.

Yes, just a little boost to "everyman" items (potions) and not anything else. And yes, I'll let you know how that goes.

That said, what Amaneunsis said upthread really got me thinking - I wish I could think like that on a regular basis. Instead my reasoning is something like "I want to give my martials a little boost"...

Will this be available in print?

I still use this system today for wands.

Perhaps if you could decide how you wanted staves to change, recharge, all that, we could begin to figure something out?

Do you want to be a gentleman fencer who can't swim?

Or a gentleman fencer who can't climb?

I'd scrap UMD - not a gentleman's job...

bitter lily wrote:
Can we talk here about the cost of scrolls? Or should that be a different thread?

As the original poster, to the extent I can call this "my" thread, yes.

I have too been interested in making staves more of a "thing." Where to begin?

Klorox wrote:
rainzax wrote:

After consideration, I'm going to go with "half" because it is a happy compromise between bringing potions into the "more affordable" range and the "easy to remember" house rule category.

And they will continue to be 1-oz weight-negligble items.

Thanks for the discussion folks!

Will yeu conversely cheapen scrolls ? (whose official price is the same you will apply to potions) which have the requirement of being an expert to use whereas anybody can benefit from a potion.

If you are accusing me of exacerbating the martial-caster disparity, worry not because potions will be available at the same price for both classes.

To answer your question: The first reason is that cheaper potions turning into cheaper permanent spells (via Alchemists) is less worrisome than cheaper scrolls turning into cheaper permanent spells (via Wizards). The second reason is that potions are capped at 3rd level spells.

Totally just bought the Plot Twist cards...

1 to 50 of 1,908 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.