paizo.com Recent Posts by seepaizo.com Recent Posts by see2023-01-23T07:28:17Z2023-01-23T07:28:17ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Changes to OGL and Effect on Paizo/other OGL companiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qfp&page=20?Changes-to-OGL-and-Effect-on-Paizoother-OGL#9992023-01-28T06:12:20Z2023-01-27T22:27:35Z<p>This is victory.</p>
<p>Seriously, in theory they might, in ten years, try to kill the OGL 1.0a again. But what would be the point?</p>
<p>The 5th edition SRD is now irrevocably available under CC BY 4. This means killing the OGL 1.0a will not allow them to protect the brand from people making compatible-with-5e product or advertising it as compatible with D&D. (They politely ASK that people not make compatibility claims, but CC BY 4 doesn't let them enforce it).</p>
<p>Heck, now whatever is done under ORC can, if ORC is properly drafted, directly incorporate everything that's in the SRD5.</p>
<p>All killing the OGL 1.0a from now on would do is get them the same bad publicity they just got, with far less upside. And they backed down this time in less than a month of publicity.</p>
<p>Victory <i>is</i> ours.</p>This is victory.
Seriously, in theory they might, in ten years, try to kill the OGL 1.0a again. But what would be the point?
The 5th edition SRD is now irrevocably available under CC BY 4. This means killing the OGL 1.0a will not allow them to protect the brand from people making compatible-with-5e product or advertising it as compatible with D&D. (They politely ASK that people not make compatibility claims, but CC BY 4 doesn't let them enforce it).
Heck, now whatever is done under ORC...see2023-01-27T22:27:35ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Changes to OGL and Effect on Paizo/other OGL companiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qfp&page=17?Changes-to-OGL-and-Effect-on-Paizoother-OGL#8352023-01-20T00:51:11Z2023-01-20T00:51:11Z<p>Note that the new license doesn't say anything about Open Game Content. So, if they actually can and do de-authorize the OGL 1.0a for WotC SRDs, all Open Game Content derived from any WotC SRD would be off-limits for new products.</p>
<p>You want to release a supplement for OSRIC or Pathfinder or Starfinder? Well, you can't just use the OGL 1.0a since it's deauthorized. And you can't just use the "OGL 1.2" because it has no provisions for use of Open Game Content. Hire a contract lawyer to navigate the provisions of the licenses and a copyright lawyer to navigate "derivative work" law, because all the safe harbors are closed to you.</p>Note that the new license doesn't say anything about Open Game Content. So, if they actually can and do de-authorize the OGL 1.0a for WotC SRDs, all Open Game Content derived from any WotC SRD would be off-limits for new products.
You want to release a supplement for OSRIC or Pathfinder or Starfinder? Well, you can't just use the OGL 1.0a since it's deauthorized. And you can't just use the "OGL 1.2" because it has no provisions for use of Open Game Content. Hire a contract lawyer to navigate...see2023-01-20T00:51:11ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Changes to OGL and Effect on Paizo/other OGL companiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qfp&page=15?Changes-to-OGL-and-Effect-on-Paizoother-OGL#7052023-01-14T05:40:38Z2023-01-14T01:33:17Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">LoreSeeker wrote:</div><blockquote>Even if they walked back all the way and said they considered OGL 1.0a holy writ until the end of time, how could <i>anyone</i> trust their word on that after all they tried to do?</blockquote><p>Their word, no.
<p>A slight revision to the OGL (an OGL 1.0b) that adds legally-binding text that declares that authorization is irrevocable, the license offer is irrevocable, the rights granted are irrevocable, and the license can only be terminated for breach, followed by releasing the SRD (3rd), MSRD (d20 Modern), RSRD (3.5), and SRD5 (5th) under this slight revision?</p>
<p>Well, then I don't have to trust their word.</p>
<p>"Walking things back" is accordingly something that requires action.</p>LoreSeeker wrote:Even if they walked back all the way and said they considered OGL 1.0a holy writ until the end of time, how could anyone trust their word on that after all they tried to do?
Their word, no. A slight revision to the OGL (an OGL 1.0b) that adds legally-binding text that declares that authorization is irrevocable, the license offer is irrevocable, the rights granted are irrevocable, and the license can only be terminated for breach, followed by releasing the SRD (3rd), MSRD...see2023-01-14T01:33:17ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Changes to OGL and Effect on Paizo/other OGL companiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qfp&page=15?Changes-to-OGL-and-Effect-on-Paizoother-OGL#7022023-01-15T01:59:56Z2023-01-14T01:15:29Z<p>I mean, I don't know what the experience of the rest of you was, but when I submitted stuff for publication to game companies back in the 1990s, both TSR (in a submission to Dragon Magazine) and Steve Jackson Games (a book proposal) required me to include a disclosure form that included rather similar "we can publish this without paying you" clauses. I think the stuff I actually got published later, submitted in open calls to White Wolf's Swords & Sorcery Studios, had a similar term governing submissions, but my memory is fuzzier.</p>
<p>That wasn't because TSR, Steve Jackson Games, or White Wolf was interested in stealing stuff that was sent to them; that was because they didn't want to have to deal with lawsuits over independent inventions of things they were already planning to publish, or might publish five years later, or whatever.</p>
<p>Indeed, the editor of Dragon, in issue #170 (June 1991), mentioned a case where<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>We once received module proposals from two authors (one in Texas and one in England) who each wanted to create a dungeon in an iceberg populated by people called "bergmen" — in each case led by humans named Ingemar and Ingrid. One thought we had stolen his idea and given it to the other author (which we hadn't), and in frustration we dropped the whole project.</blockquote><p>And, well, let's consider that in the RPG Superstar contests, the initial magic items were posted here on these boards, and "Users posting messages to the site automatically grant Paizo Inc the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, nonexclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, sublicense, copy and distribute such messages throughout the world in any media."
<p>Which means Paizo secured a right to take whatever magic items of those it liked, compile them, and sell them in a book, without paying a dime to the creators . . . not because they were planning to do that, but to avoid being liable to a lawsuit on the chance that something Paizo later published resembled something posted to these boards.</p>
<p>So, from my perspective, as someone who had submitted stuff to game companies for publication (two decades ago, really? Man, I feel old), that clause in the "OGL 1.1" didn't look like a big deal on its own. What made it sketchy wasn't language similar to that I'd seen many times before, but that it was part of a license that indicated a general breaking of faith with the 23-year community of OGL users.</p>I mean, I don't know what the experience of the rest of you was, but when I submitted stuff for publication to game companies back in the 1990s, both TSR (in a submission to Dragon Magazine) and Steve Jackson Games (a book proposal) required me to include a disclosure form that included rather similar "we can publish this without paying you" clauses. I think the stuff I actually got published later, submitted in open calls to White Wolf's Swords & Sorcery Studios, had a similar term governing...see2023-01-14T01:15:29ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Please launch merch to contribute to legal funds for ORC and OGL1.0aKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qku?Please-launch-merch-to-contribute-to-legal#182023-01-14T10:06:31Z2023-01-13T21:55:35Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kobold Catgirl wrote:</div><blockquote>Also, I don't think I would want any merch for ORC that took such a hostile, destructive tone as "an orc killing a wizard".</blockquote><p>As long as it's a gnomish wizard, I'm cool with it.Kobold Catgirl wrote:Also, I don't think I would want any merch for ORC that took such a hostile, destructive tone as "an orc killing a wizard".
As long as it's a gnomish wizard, I'm cool with it.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2023-01-13T21:55:35ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Changes to OGL and Effect on Paizo/other OGL companiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs43qfp&page=11?Changes-to-OGL-and-Effect-on-Paizoother-OGL#5262023-01-13T20:51:47Z2023-01-12T00:48:23Z<p>Note that the EFF statement got updated today, with a suggestion that the OGL 1.0a is NOT revocable.</p>Note that the EFF statement got updated today, with a suggestion that the OGL 1.0a is NOT revocable.see2023-01-12T00:48:23ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: American Equivalent to a British Phrase...seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r4gt&page=2?American-Equivalent-to-a-British-Phrase#542014-06-05T03:37:45Z2014-06-05T03:37:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">The 8th Dwarf wrote:</div><blockquote>Not every British person has escaped from a PG Woodhouse novel "pip pip old chap" or from East London "right you are gov, we best get this sorted before it goes all pear shaped". </blockquote><p>Of course not. Some British people are Scottish or Welsh. It's just all the <i>English</i> who speak those two ways. (Well, except in Cornwall, where the English pretend to be Welsh.)The 8th Dwarf wrote:Not every British person has escaped from a PG Woodhouse novel "pip pip old chap" or from East London "right you are gov, we best get this sorted before it goes all pear shaped".
Of course not. Some British people are Scottish or Welsh. It's just all the English who speak those two ways. (Well, except in Cornwall, where the English pretend to be Welsh.)see2014-06-05T03:37:45ZRe: Forums: Advice: Is a Combat-Focused Mystic Theurge Possible?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qhf6?Is-a-CombatFocused-Mystic-Theurge-Possible#272013-12-29T04:10:07Z2013-12-29T04:10:07Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Dragonchess Player wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Re: Spell-level slots</p>
<p>Just looking at the level of the spell slots and not comparing the spell lists doesn't always tell the entire story.</blockquote><p>Of course not. The other half of the difficulty is the significant caster level sacrifice trouble. Buffing, party- or self-, doesn't work well when your caster levels are trailing CR by seven levels. Per-caster-level effects are seriously weakened and resistance to dispel is lousy. You can't CoDzilla with a bard/paladin/MT because your caster level isn't up to it.Dragonchess Player wrote:Re: Spell-level slots
Just looking at the level of the spell slots and not comparing the spell lists doesn't always tell the entire story.
Of course not. The other half of the difficulty is the significant caster level sacrifice trouble. Buffing, party- or self-, doesn't work well when your caster levels are trailing CR by seven levels. Per-caster-level effects are seriously weakened and resistance to dispel is lousy. You can't CoDzilla with a bard/paladin/MT...see2013-12-29T04:10:07ZRe: Forums: Advice: Is a Combat-Focused Mystic Theurge Possible?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qhf6?Is-a-CombatFocused-Mystic-Theurge-Possible#172013-12-26T00:46:05Z2013-12-25T23:25:15Z<p>There's not much new analysis needed; we've had the mystic theurge to kick around for ten years. The basic lesson of MT analysis is that caster level and high-level slots are persistently better than "versatile" low-level slots with lower caster level. Any MT build is automatically a worse spellcaster than a pure build of the better of its two caster classes. What keeps the MT out of the "never" bin is that full-progression spellcasting is good enough at high levels that you can still have a viable MT character built around a full-progression class.</p>
<p>So, MT-centered paladin, ranger, and inquisitor combinations with 3/4 BAB arcane classes are consistently, persistently inferior to the 3/4 BAB arcane classes alone, which have better spellcasting before you go into the better class features and equal or better BAB.</p>
<p>MT-centered paladin and ranger combinations with full arcane casters could be viable since they're built on the base of a full-progression caster, but they are completely crushed by deliberate Eldritch Knight/Arcane Archer types of builds. There just isn't enough paladin/ranger spell power to justify any significant degree of MT when you could take full-BAB levels that also level your arcane spellcasting. If you're replacing some pure wizard advancement with MT near the top end in a EK build, okay, but it's minor filler.</p>
<p>Any combinations of 3/4 BAB divine class and a full arcane caster winds up with lousy BAB and HP, because that's what arcane and MT classes bring to the table. They can be mighty casters, but they shouldn't use weapons against anything with a CR in the neighborhood of their level.</p>
<p>Full divine caster MT combinations with 3/4 BAB arcane classes can be viable, though they start behind the 3/4 BAB progression. Holy Vindicator can fill in to boost that BAB; that puts you further behind in cleric spellcasting, but cleric spellcasting is good enough the result might come ahead of a 6-level caster anyway. If you want a "fighter/mage/cleric", a magus/cleric/holy vindicator/mystic theurge can scratch that itch and not be a total write-off. But it'll be a pain to build.</p>There's not much new analysis needed; we've had the mystic theurge to kick around for ten years. The basic lesson of MT analysis is that caster level and high-level slots are persistently better than "versatile" low-level slots with lower caster level. Any MT build is automatically a worse spellcaster than a pure build of the better of its two caster classes. What keeps the MT out of the "never" bin is that full-progression spellcasting is good enough at high levels that you can still have a...see2013-12-25T23:25:15ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: How do archer characters do so much damage?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qgyu?How-do-archer-characters-do-so-much-damage#252013-12-19T01:45:15Z2013-12-19T01:45:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Rynjin wrote:</div><blockquote> Well for one...they use those specially constructed Composite bows (or if they have at least an 18 Str, probably shell out 1000 gp for an Adaptive bow since it's cheaper at that point I think).</blockquote><p>Actually, an adaptive bow is more expensive than standard composite Str-bonus-based out until you're Str 30 (+10 • 100 gp).
<p>However, you still want it because it means you never get penalized for not having enough strength or get caught unable to use all your strength, no matter what powers and abilities are jerking your Str score up and down.</p>Rynjin wrote:Well for one...they use those specially constructed Composite bows (or if they have at least an 18 Str, probably shell out 1000 gp for an Adaptive bow since it's cheaper at that point I think).
Actually, an adaptive bow is more expensive than standard composite Str-bonus-based out until you're Str 30 (+10 * 100 gp). However, you still want it because it means you never get penalized for not having enough strength or get caught unable to use all your strength, no matter what...see2013-12-19T01:45:15ZRe: Forums/Paizo: General Discussion: Would Paizo ever buy the rights to the DnD brand from Hasbro?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q95q&page=2?Would-Paizo-ever-buy-the-rights-to-the-DnD#932013-10-16T08:30:07Z2013-10-16T08:30:07Z<p>A scenario where, if Next "fails" (whatever that means), Hasbro licenses the D&D brand to Paizo for TRPG use, retaining the rest of the IP, is not particularly implausible, and would help Paizo (being the <i>official</i> D&D game is worth something, and might help them get into places where they currently aren't) in the short term. But Paizo would probably lose it at the end of the first license period when somebody at Hasbro decided to do a new initiative anyway.</p>
<p>Anything else, no, whether Paizo would or not, Hasbro wouldn't. D&D is a "household name", and that's worth a lot as potential future revenue. It can potentially power novels, movies, board games (Dungeon!), computer games, TV series, even kids' toys. Imagine D&D-branded "Holy Avenger", "Twinkle", "Icingdeath", and "Vorpal Blade" all hanging in a toy aisle next to the lightsabers and various toy guns. I assure you, Hasbro execs can.</p>A scenario where, if Next "fails" (whatever that means), Hasbro licenses the D&D brand to Paizo for TRPG use, retaining the rest of the IP, is not particularly implausible, and would help Paizo (being the official D&D game is worth something, and might help them get into places where they currently aren't) in the short term. But Paizo would probably lose it at the end of the first license period when somebody at Hasbro decided to do a new initiative anyway.
Anything else, no, whether Paizo...see2013-10-16T08:30:07ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Scarred Lands returning?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q9db?Scarred-Lands-returning#72013-10-16T08:01:40Z2013-10-16T08:01:40Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Samasboy1 wrote:</div><blockquote> I still have all my Scarred Lands stuff. Whenever I come across an evil god, I always mentally compare them to Vangal and Chardun. </blockquote><p>Ooooh, Chardun.
<p>Man, he captured my imagination. Which resulted in me doing the open call entries that became R&R2's <i>Chardun's glory</i>, <i>Chardun's presence</i>, <i>Chardun's consecration</i>, <i>morningstar of the Black Thorns</i>, <i>sword of divine prowess</i>, and <i>warscepter of pain</i>. (And a few other things not related to Chardun, but.) It was a real kick to see the Order of the Black Thorn become more than a name in the <i>Guide to Rangers and Rouges</i>.</p>Samasboy1 wrote:I still have all my Scarred Lands stuff. Whenever I come across an evil god, I always mentally compare them to Vangal and Chardun.
Ooooh, Chardun. Man, he captured my imagination. Which resulted in me doing the open call entries that became R&R2's Chardun's glory, Chardun's presence, Chardun's consecration, morningstar of the Black Thorns, sword of divine prowess, and warscepter of pain. (And a few other things not related to Chardun, but.) It was a real kick to see the Order...see2013-10-16T08:01:40ZForums: Product Discussion: Scarred Lands returning?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q9db?Scarred-Lands-returning#12013-10-14T22:41:04Z2013-10-14T22:41:04Z<p>Though the <a href="http://theonyxpath.com/scarred-lands-finds-new-home-with-onyx-path-publishing-and-nocturnal-media/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">announcement</a> talks about re-imagining the system, which may imply something rather more extensive than "Move it to Pathfinder, the latest incarnation of the original system."</p>Though the announcement talks about re-imagining the system, which may imply something rather more extensive than "Move it to Pathfinder, the latest incarnation of the original system."see2013-10-14T22:41:04ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Adding Sorcerer levels to a dragon.seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q6m8?Adding-Sorcerer-levels-to-a-dragon#42013-09-20T19:08:09Z2013-09-20T19:08:09Z<p>Yes, it does stack; dragons explicitly have a sorcerer casting level.</p>
<p>Yes, it does count as a key class; the Bestiary says so.</p>Yes, it does stack; dragons explicitly have a sorcerer casting level.
Yes, it does count as a key class; the Bestiary says so.see2013-09-20T19:08:09ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: [GenCon 2014 Announced] Advanced Class Guideseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q29s&page=7?GenCon-2014-Announced-Advanced-Class-Guide#3092013-08-20T23:44:18Z2013-08-20T23:44:18Z<p>On the one hand, I think the optimal number of "real" classes for a class-based RPG is between six and twelve, which gives a variety of options while not being too many for GMs and authors to "keep in RAM". Anything over two dozen is decidedly too far.</p>
<p>On the other hand, there are lots of AD&D "multiclass" options that the basic 3.x structure doesn't handle well. (Multiclass doesn't cause the same degree of problems as class proliferation because they have the same interactions with the system as the combined classes). Saying, "Well, prestige class" doesn't fix that at low levels where most play happens. Hybrid classes seem a good idea here.</p>
<p>On the gripping hand, the magus is our example implementation, and that doesn't so much effectively blend fighter and wizard as it creates something very distinctly new.</p>On the one hand, I think the optimal number of "real" classes for a class-based RPG is between six and twelve, which gives a variety of options while not being too many for GMs and authors to "keep in RAM". Anything over two dozen is decidedly too far.
On the other hand, there are lots of AD&D "multiclass" options that the basic 3.x structure doesn't handle well. (Multiclass doesn't cause the same degree of problems as class proliferation because they have the same interactions with the...see2013-08-20T23:44:18ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Temperatures in F/Cseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pxez&page=2?Temperatures-in-FC#632013-07-11T01:44:26Z2013-07-09T18:47:14Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jeraa wrote:</div><blockquote>•(Come on, the metric system is all based on multiples of 10.</blockquote><p>Well, yes, if you use the parochial, human-centered base ten number system instead of the far more fundamental and basic binary system seen in, for example, nearly ever computer ever made.
<p>If you use the binary system, the only measurement units that even approaches easy usability are US units, which at least has a sensible system of fluid volume. In binary, 1 gallon = 100 quarts = 1,000 pints = 10,000 cups = 100,000 gills = 10,000,000 ounces = 100,000,000 tablespoons = 10,000,000,000 drams.</p>Jeraa wrote:*(Come on, the metric system is all based on multiples of 10.
Well, yes, if you use the parochial, human-centered base ten number system instead of the far more fundamental and basic binary system seen in, for example, nearly ever computer ever made. If you use the binary system, the only measurement units that even approaches easy usability are US units, which at least has a sensible system of fluid volume. In binary, 1 gallon = 100 quarts = 1,000 pints = 10,000 cups = 100,000...see2013-07-09T18:47:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Permanency: How often do you see that spell?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2px20?Permanency-How-often-do-you-see-that-spell#222013-07-09T18:10:15Z2013-07-09T18:10:15Z<p>Well, <i>my</i> PC has permanent Arcane Sight, Darkvision, See Invisible, and Tongues, and is planning a personal demiplane . . .</p>Well, my PC has permanent Arcane Sight, Darkvision, See Invisible, and Tongues, and is planning a personal demiplane . . .see2013-07-09T18:10:15ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Best Fifth Party MemberAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pwb1&page=3?Best-Fifth-Party-Member#1372013-07-08T16:17:19Z2013-07-08T16:17:19Z<p>FIFTH PARTY MEMBER CLERIC, LIKE PREVIOUS FOUR.</p>FIFTH PARTY MEMBER CLERIC, LIKE PREVIOUS FOUR.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2013-07-08T16:17:19ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Temperatures in F/Cseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pxez?Temperatures-in-FC#152013-07-07T20:26:33Z2013-07-07T20:26:33Z<p>Give the measurements in Kelvins and let everybody but the physicists convert!</p>Give the measurements in Kelvins and let everybody but the physicists convert!see2013-07-07T20:26:33ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: drugs vs. immunitiesseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ptz4?drugs-vs-immunities#112013-06-16T03:21:15Z2013-06-16T03:21:15Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">blackbloodtroll wrote:</div><blockquote><p> I just reread the newer version of Drugs.</p>
<p>They are Alchemical.</p>
<p>That is some weird science.</p>
<p>So, magic Cocaine huh?</p>
<p></blockquote><p>Poisons are pretty nuts, too. A fatal dose of hemlock being more expensive than masterwork full plate, for example.blackbloodtroll wrote:I just reread the newer version of Drugs.
They are Alchemical.
That is some weird science.
So, magic Cocaine huh?
Poisons are pretty nuts, too. A fatal dose of hemlock being more expensive than masterwork full plate, for example.see2013-06-16T03:21:15ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Extra-planar refrigerationseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pv0c?Extraplanar-refrigeration#142013-06-16T03:06:26Z2013-06-16T03:06:26Z<p>In fact, in an early explanation of the planes by Gygax in <i>Dragon</i>, they were other spatial dimensions beyond the first three. Certain monsters could only be hurt by magic weapons because they extended into these other planes/spatial dimensions (one additional dimension per plus) while non-magic weapons just had three dimensions.</p>In fact, in an early explanation of the planes by Gygax in Dragon, they were other spatial dimensions beyond the first three. Certain monsters could only be hurt by magic weapons because they extended into these other planes/spatial dimensions (one additional dimension per plus) while non-magic weapons just had three dimensions.see2013-06-16T03:06:26ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: A wizard's "known spells" versus "the spells in his spellbook"seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pv14?A-wizards-known-spells-versus-the-spells-in#332013-06-16T03:00:20Z2013-06-16T03:00:20Z<p>The problem here is the terminology is leftover from AD&D 2nd (itself an update of 1st edition rules), where there was a Chance to Learn Spell percentage check you could only make for a spell you found once a level, and an (optional in 2nd edition) limit on how many spells of a given level a wizard could ever know.</p>
<p>So, for example, your Int 15 wizard may have known four first-level spells, and found a looted a spellbook with ten new first-level spells in it. He'd <i>have to</i> first cast Read Magic to decipher the spellbook; <i>then</i> he'd make a percentile roll (65% in this case) to learn each spell and copy it into his spellbook, waiting until next level to recheck if he failed the roll. And under the optional rule he could only <i>ever</i> learn a total of seven of the ten anyway, since he was limited to 11 spells known of each level and already had 4.</p>
<p>Now, of course, you can freely copy any appropriate spell you find into your spellbook if you read magic it <i>or</i> pass the once-a-day spellcraft check. Treating "known" as "a spell you ever scribed in a spellbook of your own" works reasonably well as an interpretation.</p>The problem here is the terminology is leftover from AD&D 2nd (itself an update of 1st edition rules), where there was a Chance to Learn Spell percentage check you could only make for a spell you found once a level, and an (optional in 2nd edition) limit on how many spells of a given level a wizard could ever know.
So, for example, your Int 15 wizard may have known four first-level spells, and found a looted a spellbook with ten new first-level spells in it. He'd have to first cast Read...see2013-06-16T03:00:20ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Simulacrum Questionsseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2puxm?Simulacrum-Questions#112013-06-16T02:39:52Z2013-06-16T02:39:52Z<p>A wizard casting <i>simulacrum</i> is a lot like a wizard making a magic item. Sometimes it's obvious and straightforward (making a simulacrum of a human with levels in only one class is easy, just like making a <i>wand of magic missile</i>), sometimes it isn't.</p>A wizard casting simulacrum is a lot like a wizard making a magic item. Sometimes it's obvious and straightforward (making a simulacrum of a human with levels in only one class is easy, just like making a wand of magic missile), sometimes it isn't.see2013-06-16T02:39:52ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Race Builder & Medium Sized Quadrupedsseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pv24?Race-Builder-Medium-Sized-Quadrupeds#82013-06-16T02:25:28Z2013-06-16T02:25:28Z<p>I have yet to find any circumstance where the Race Builder is any more use than eyeballing anyway.</p>I have yet to find any circumstance where the Race Builder is any more use than eyeballing anyway.see2013-06-16T02:25:28ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Eldritch Knight vs. Magus?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ptfl&page=2?Eldritch-Knight-vs-Magus#682013-06-09T18:06:47Z2013-06-09T18:06:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Craig Frankum wrote:</div><blockquote> There have been a number of ways to go about this and many arguments for both sides. My question is simple. Why not PrC to Eldritch Knight from a Magus (or one of its archetypes)? </blockquote><p>Because you wind up a worse caster than the magus, worse for every level of EK you take. The first one costs you a casting progression level. Every additional level of EK costs you at least arcane pool progression, and usually useful additional magus class features. All for at best 2 BAB over straight magus.Craig Frankum wrote:There have been a number of ways to go about this and many arguments for both sides. My question is simple. Why not PrC to Eldritch Knight from a Magus (or one of its archetypes)?
Because you wind up a worse caster than the magus, worse for every level of EK you take. The first one costs you a casting progression level. Every additional level of EK costs you at least arcane pool progression, and usually useful additional magus class features. All for at best 2 BAB over...see2013-06-09T18:06:47ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=649?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Questions-Here#324142013-06-01T16:00:38Z2013-06-01T16:00:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote>Being able to make DC 70 checks (and I'm not sure how that's even possible, by the way)</blockquote><p>Not <i>too</i> hard to arrange, actually, given high-enough level and a character that made significant investment in the skill. For example:
<p>A halfling starts with +4 size bonus to Stealth. Starting 20 in Dex (18 +2 halfling dex mod), +5 level adv increases/+5 inherent bonus/+6 Dex boost belt, and the 36 means a +13 to the check, so +17. 20 ranks, +3 for class skill, +40. +6 from Skill Focus and ten ranks, +4 from Stealthy and ten ranks, and we're at +50. +15 competence bonus from leather <i>greater shadow</i> armor, +1 luck bonus from a <i>stone of good luck</i>, and he's rolling 1d20+66 on Stealth skill checks.</p>
<p>85% chance of making a DC 70 check (rolls of 1-3 fail), and we haven't left the Core Rulebook or used any spells.</p>James Jacobs wrote:Being able to make DC 70 checks (and I'm not sure how that's even possible, by the way)
Not too hard to arrange, actually, given high-enough level and a character that made significant investment in the skill. For example: A halfling starts with +4 size bonus to Stealth. Starting 20 in Dex (18 +2 halfling dex mod), +5 level adv increases/+5 inherent bonus/+6 Dex boost belt, and the 36 means a +13 to the check, so +17. 20 ranks, +3 for class skill, +40. +6 from Skill Focus...see2013-06-01T16:00:38ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pquw&page=6?Paladin-Alignments-More-than-just-LG#2592013-05-29T02:45:44Z2013-05-29T02:45:44Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">master_marshmallow wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Antipaladin wrote:</div><blockquote>An antipaladin must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if he willingly and altruistically commits good acts. This does not mean that an antipaladin cannot take actions someone else might qualify as good, only that such actions must always be in service of his own dark ends. An antipaladin’s code requires that he place his own interests and desires above all else, as well as impose tyranny, take advantage whenever possible, and punish the good and just, provided such actions don’t interfere with his goals.</blockquote>We can extrapolate from this that both 1) it <b>is</b> possible to have a restrictive code and still be considered Chaotic on the alignment scale, and 2) it <b>is</b> acceptable to "break" the code in extenuating circumstances so long as it furthers the overall goal of the character.</blockquote><p>None of that get-out-of-jail language is in the paladin code, and it is completely wrong to read it into the paladin code in order to reach conclusion 2 there. Indeed, what that language actually shows is that your conclusion 1 is wrong; antipaladins, unlike paladins, do <i>not</i> have a strict code. They have a list of suggestions they may freely violate whenever it would suit the self-interest of the character.
<p>A paladin who grossly violates his code or commits an evil act, <i>whatever</i> his ends, falls; that's what makes his code strict, and a character who adheres to it lawful. An antipaladin who ignores the various "rules" in his code, on the other hand, is fine as long as he can rationalize it as serving his ends (an example of the "freedom, adaptability, and flexibility" of chaos). Thus part of the "anti" of an antipaladin; he looks like he has a code, but doesn't.</p>
<p>A CG champion can have a list of non-binding suggestions he can violate to serve the greater good (like an antipaladin can violate to serve himself), sure, but cannot have a genuinely strict code. If he had one, adhering to it wouldn't be CG (and a CG god wouldn't expect him to adhere to it anyway). You can have a strict code of unbreakable rules written by someone else that you unfailingly obey <b>or</b> be of chaotic alignment, not both.</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">master_marshmallow wrote:</div><blockquote>we get people who say things like: anyone who has a code of conduct is Lawful, they don't have to follow local laws, or even national laws, they just have to have their own beliefs</blockquote><p>"Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties"; "Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, self-righteousness, and a lack of adaptability."
<p>It does not say anywhere in that explanation of what lawfulness is that they have to obey the local laws. The problem seems to be less any ambiguity in the definition, but rather that the definition does not match your notion of what "lawful" <i>should</i> mean.</p>
<p>Yes, the lawful do generally obey local laws, because that's respecting/obeying the local authority. But when there is a conflict between authorities (say, the rules of the paladin's god versus the laws proclaimed by the local baron), it is <i>not</i> a requirement of the lawful alignment to defer to the inferior authority's laws.</p>master_marshmallow wrote:Antipaladin wrote:An antipaladin must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if he willingly and altruistically commits good acts. This does not mean that an antipaladin cannot take actions someone else might qualify as good, only that such actions must always be in service of his own dark ends. An antipaladin’s code requires that he place his own interests and desires above all else, as well as impose tyranny, take advantage...see2013-05-29T02:45:44ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pquw&page=4?Paladin-Alignments-More-than-just-LG#1692013-05-20T18:37:09Z2013-05-20T18:37:09Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">ub3r_n3rd wrote:</div><blockquote>At my table when I institute the other paladins (and they WILL be called paladins), I will make sure that anyone who wants to play them reads up on their deity and said deity's tenets/codes.</blockquote><p>If the CG code, for example, is fully as restrictive as the LG code, and a character follows it, <i>that character</i> will be behaving in a lawful manner, because he will be adhering to a restrictive code written by others rather than the dictates of his own conscience.
<p>I mean, it's right there in the definition of the alignment: "A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him." Behavior, not beliefs, make an alignment. If a character adheres to any deity-written paladin-of-freedom "code" instead of doing what he thinks best, he's not behaving in a <i>chaotic</i> good manner.</p>
<p>But if the character does what he thinks is best in a given situation even if it contradicts the "code", he'll be violating his code. Either way, "chaotic good character who strictly adheres to a god's code" is a self-contradicting impossibility.</p>
<p>Not that a CG god would approve of any character who inflexibly adheres to a CG code. "Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility." "He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations."</p>ub3r_n3rd wrote:At my table when I institute the other paladins (and they WILL be called paladins), I will make sure that anyone who wants to play them reads up on their deity and said deity's tenets/codes.
If the CG code, for example, is fully as restrictive as the LG code, and a character follows it, that character will be behaving in a lawful manner, because he will be adhering to a restrictive code written by others rather than the dictates of his own conscience. I mean, it's right there...see2013-05-20T18:37:09ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Its Official, We Are Dumber Than We Used To Be.seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ps0t?Its-Official-We-Are-Dumber-Than-We-Used-To-Be#62013-05-19T17:29:48Z2013-05-19T17:29:48Z<p>You know what makes top tennis players (for example) so good? They take longer before they react to the stimulus of the ball. Now, after they react, they've got all their well-trained speed and strength and whatnot, and that goes faster than your average joe—but because they delay fractions of a second longer before acting, they've got more information to act on, and thus are less likely to do the wrong thing.</p>
<p>This sort of study where the stimulus was hitting a tennis ball in someone's direction would conclude that the best tennis players are more stupid, rather than more disciplined, than inferior players.</p>
<p>But, of course, <i>g</i> deniers have to come up with something as an alternative to <i>g</i>. If they admitted that <i>g</i> is intelligence, there would be all sorts of resulting conclusions that would be ideologically uncomfortable.</p>You know what makes top tennis players (for example) so good? They take longer before they react to the stimulus of the ball. Now, after they react, they've got all their well-trained speed and strength and whatnot, and that goes faster than your average joe—but because they delay fractions of a second longer before acting, they've got more information to act on, and thus are less likely to do the wrong thing.
This sort of study where the stimulus was hitting a tennis ball in someone's...see2013-05-19T17:29:48ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Paladin Alignments - More than just LG?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pquw&page=3?Paladin-Alignments-More-than-just-LG#1382013-05-19T17:08:35Z2013-05-19T17:08:35Z<p>Paladins have a code of conduct they cannot deviate from. A character who does not break a code of conduct even if it seems to his best judgment that it's a really good idea to make an exception in a rare case is lawful.</p>
<p>Paladins are then good because the code of conduct they follow demands they "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" and avoid evil acts. Anyone who followed the paladin's code as closely as a paladin has to would, as a result of his consistent actions, be a lawful good character.</p>
<p>You could invent alternate "paladin" codes for LN or LE characters. Those would work well enough, though you'd have to modify the class abilities. To make a "paladin" of non-lawful alignment, you'd have to give them outs for the code of conduct wide enough they don't bind a character very much (such as the CE antipaladin's "provided such actions don't interfere with his goals" and "evil cares only about results").</p>
<p>On other class alignment restrictions, I'd lift them all, except on druids. Druids I'd just change. Druids should be putting "nature" first. To me that means they can't put the welfare of sapient creatures <i>first</i>, which means they cannot be good. Any other alignment could be justified, though.</p>Paladins have a code of conduct they cannot deviate from. A character who does not break a code of conduct even if it seems to his best judgment that it's a really good idea to make an exception in a rare case is lawful.
Paladins are then good because the code of conduct they follow demands they "punish those who harm or threaten innocents" and avoid evil acts. Anyone who followed the paladin's code as closely as a paladin has to would, as a result of his consistent actions, be a lawful good...see2013-05-19T17:08:35ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Paladins should eat Goblin BabiesKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pr7b?Paladins-should-eat-Goblin-Babies#62013-05-12T00:21:58Z2013-05-12T00:21:58Z<p>You misspelled "gnome". Paladins should eat gnome babies.</p>You misspelled "gnome". Paladins should eat gnome babies.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-05-12T00:21:58ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: If a feat is worth 5,000 gp, what is the math behind the pricing of Metamagic Rods?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pr5g&page=2?If-a-feat-is-worth-5000-gp-what-is-the-math#532013-05-11T23:50:19Z2013-05-11T23:50:19Z<p>If you want to do a generalized formula for the gems, you could theoretically do:</p>
<p>(Feat/10) • (2^LevelBonus)</p>
<p>500 × 2^0 = 500
<br />
500 × 2^1 = 1,000
<br />
500 × 2^2 = 2,000
<br />
500 × 2^3 = 4,000
<br />
500 × 2^4 = 8,000
<br />
500 × 2^5 = 16,000
<br />
...</p>If you want to do a generalized formula for the gems, you could theoretically do:
(Feat/10) * (2^LevelBonus)
500 × 2^0 = 500
500 × 2^1 = 1,000
500 × 2^2 = 2,000
500 × 2^3 = 4,000
500 × 2^4 = 8,000
500 × 2^5 = 16,000
...see2013-05-11T23:50:19ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: If a feat is worth 5,000 gp, what is the math behind the pricing of Metamagic Rods?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pr5g?If-a-feat-is-worth-5000-gp-what-is-the-math#482013-05-11T23:21:24Z2013-05-11T23:21:24Z<p>Was beating my head around looking at various places where it's been tried, and I think I've found a working formula.</p>
<p>(MaxSpellLevel/9]^2) × 5000/(5/UsesPerDay) × (LevelGain × 2 - 1) × (49/6)</p>
<p>Let's try it out.</p>
<p>Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 0 level:</p>
<p>(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1/9 × 3000 × [0 replaced by 0.5] × (49/6)
<br />
1,361 (rounded up to 1,500)</p>
<p>Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 1 level:</p>
<p>(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1/9 × 3000 × 1 × (49/6)
<br />
2,722 (rounded up to 3,000)</p>
<p>Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 2 levels:</p>
<p>(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (2×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1/9 × 3000 × 3 × (49/6)
<br />
8,166 (rounded up to 9,000)</p>
<p>Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 3 levels:</p>
<p>(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (3×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1/9 × 3000 × 5 × (49/6)
<br />
13,611 (rounded up to 14,000) </p>
<p>Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 4 levels:
<br />
(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (4×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1/9 × 3000 × 7 × (49/6)
<br />
19,055 (way off)</p>
<p>Normal rod, three times a day, that adds 0 level:</p>
<p>(6/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
4/9 × 3000 × [0 replaced by 0.5] × (49/6)
<br />
5,444.44 (rounded up to 5,500)</p>
<p>Normal rod, three times a day, that adds 1 level:</p>
<p>(6/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
4/9 × 3000 × 1 × (49/6)
<br />
10,888.89 (rounded up to 11,000)</p>
<p>Normal rod, three times a day, that adds 2 levels:</p>
<p>(6/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (2×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
4/9 × 3000 × 3 × (49/6)
<br />
32,666.67 (rounded down to 32,500)</p>
<p>Normal rod, three times a day, that adds 3 levels:</p>
<p>(6/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (3×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
4/9 × 3000 × 5 × (49/6)
<br />
54,444.44 (rounded down to 54,000) </p>
<p>Normal rod, three times a day, that adds 4 levels:
<br />
(6/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (4×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
4/9 × 3000 × 7 × (49/6)
<br />
76,222 (reduced to 75,500)</p>
<p>Greater rod, three times a day, that adds 0 level:</p>
<p>(9/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1 × 3000 × [0 replaced by 0.5] × (49/6)
<br />
12,250 (EXACT!)</p>
<p>Greater rod, three times a day, that adds 1 level:</p>
<p>(9/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1 × 3000 × 1 × (49/6)
<br />
24,500 (EXACT!)</p>
<p>Greater rod, three times a day, that adds 2 levels:</p>
<p>(9/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (2×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1 × 3000 × 3 × (49/6)
<br />
73,500 (rounded down to 73,000)</p>
<p>Greater rod, three times a day, that adds 3 levels:</p>
<p>(9/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (3×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1 × 3000 × 5 × (49/6)
<br />
122,500 (reduced to 121,500) </p>
<p>Greater rod, three times a day, that adds 4 levels:
<br />
(9/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (4×2 -1) × (49/6)
<br />
1 × 3000 × 7 × (49/6)
<br />
171,500 (reduced to 170,000 even)</p>
<p>Now, I have no idea at all where that (49/6) factor comes from in the pricing (thanks to xaeyruudh on the Candlekeep forums for pointing it out this February), but given that weird bit, and acknowledging a fudge factor for round-ish numbers, the formula works pretty closely for everything except the lesser quicken rod. Just assume that was a playtest adjustment, and you have a formula.</p>Was beating my head around looking at various places where it's been tried, and I think I've found a working formula.
(MaxSpellLevel/9]^2) × 5000/(5/UsesPerDay) × (LevelGain × 2 - 1) × (49/6)
Let's try it out.
Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 0 level:
(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
1/9 × 3000 × [0 replaced by 0.5] × (49/6)
1,361 (rounded up to 1,500)
Minor rod, three times a day, that adds 1 level:
(3/9)^2 × 5000/(5/3) × (1×2 -1) × (49/6)
1/9 × 3000 × 1 × (49/6)
2,722...see2013-05-11T23:21:24ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Explain like I'm 5 - Spiritual Weaponseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqq0?Explain-like-Im-5-Spiritual-Weapon#262013-05-11T05:31:42Z2013-05-11T05:31:42Z<p>In Kobold Quarterly #14, Skip Williams (3.0 core developer, long-time Sage Advice columnist) in the "Ask A Kobold" column said that the spiritual weapon keeps attacking the square the invisible creature was in and has the normal 50% miss chance if the creature is in the square. You can actively direct it to another square if you think the enemy left the square.</p>
<p>- - - - -</p>
<p>As far as: "The weapon always strikes from your direction."</p>
<p>This is a leftover artifact from the wording of the spell <i>spiritual hammer</i> in previous editions, when facing was part of combat:</p>
<p>AD&D 1st Edition PHB, <i>spiritual hammer</i>: "Note: If the cleric is behind an opponent, the force can strike from this position, thus gaining all bonuses for such an attack and negating defensive protections such as shield and dexterity."</p>
<p>AD&D 2nd Edition PHB, <i>spiritual hammer</i>: "The hammer strikes in the same direction as the caster is facing, so if he is behind the target, all bonuses for rear attack are gained along with the loss of any modifications to the target’s AC for shield and Dexterity."</p>
<p>This was carried forward into later editions as:</p>
<p>D&D 3rd edition PHB, <i>spiritual weapon</i>: "The weapon always strikes from the character's direction."
<br />
D&D 3.5 edition PHB, <i>spiritual weapon</i>: "The weapon always strikes from your direction."</p>
<p>The way to handle this in facing-free 3.x is to usually ignore it, unless there's some specific battlefield circumstance.</p>
<p>- - - - -</p>
<p>Similarly to the facing issue, I'd say the lack of commentary in the spell as to how to handle ranged weapons is that, when re-designating it from always-a-hammer to the favored weapon of your deity, nobody actually thought about the effect of deities with ranged weapons as favored weapons. Instead, it was supposed to merely be a cosmetic change from a warhammer (note that in 3rd it always had the same crit range/multiplier whatever the form, bolstering the "100% cosmetic" intention).</p>
<p>3.5 started to take the weapon's appearance as a more-than-cosmetic thing, but again nobody thought about ranged weapons; even though form is not entirely cosmetic anymore, it's still supposed to work like a spiritual warhammer where not otherwise specified.</p>
<p>- - - - -</p>
<p>To summarize: This game wasn't really "designed". It was accreted, revised, accreted, and revised again, by lots of people over four decades, working on publishing schedules. There are accordingly rough patches in the rules. When you hit 'em, just do your best. Lots of people are willing to give you advice, but there's not always actually an unambiguously right answer.</p>In Kobold Quarterly #14, Skip Williams (3.0 core developer, long-time Sage Advice columnist) in the "Ask A Kobold" column said that the spiritual weapon keeps attacking the square the invisible creature was in and has the normal 50% miss chance if the creature is in the square. You can actively direct it to another square if you think the enemy left the square.
- - - - -
As far as: "The weapon always strikes from your direction."
This is a leftover artifact from the wording of the spell...see2013-05-11T05:31:42ZRe: Forums: Advice: Smallest group of 20's to fell the Tarrasque?Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqm9&page=3?Smallest-group-of-20s-to-fell-the-Tarrasque#1032013-05-10T04:07:10Z2013-05-10T03:35:26Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Artanthos wrote:</div><blockquote> Neither the bag of devouring nor animate dead would work. Given that even disintegration and wishes do not stop the Tarrasque from spontaneously reforming, lesser magics are unlikely to succeed.</blockquote><p>So, how'd you come to the conclusion that a bag of devouring is a lesser magic? If you yank out any of <i>true resurrection</i>, <i>miracle</i>, or <i>wish</i> to try to bring back someone consumed by a bag of devouring, what happens? Oh, yeah, 50% chance of permanent failure. Looks like it's literally evenly matched with those spells to me, and certainly a lot mightier than a mere <i>disintegrate</i> (which would be overcome by any of them).
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Artanthos wrote:</div><blockquote>Feeding the Tarrasque to a bag of devouring would result in spontaneous reformation either next to or inside the bag. (resulting in a destroyed bag)</blockquote><p>Actually, reformation, if possible, would happen inside the extradimensional creature for which the bag of devouring is a mere "feeding orifice". You're invited to guess at what chance the tarrasque would have <i>there</i>, but, since we don't have any information that's PF canon beyond that a <i>wish</i> only gives a 50% chance of bringing something back, it's hardly certain the tarrasque can manage it.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">SPACEBALL12345 wrote:</div><blockquote> As far as the bag, you are right, that probably won't work. It needs an hour to digest. </blockquote><p>That's what happens with ordinary matter. With creatures, a bag of devouring pulls them in as a free action, and then the creatures drawn within are consumed in 1 round.Artanthos wrote:Neither the bag of devouring nor animate dead would work. Given that even disintegration and wishes do not stop the Tarrasque from spontaneously reforming, lesser magics are unlikely to succeed.
So, how'd you come to the conclusion that a bag of devouring is a lesser magic? If you yank out any of true resurrection, miracle, or wish to try to bring back someone consumed by a bag of devouring, what happens? Oh, yeah, 50% chance of permanent failure. Looks like it's literally...Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-05-10T03:35:26ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: Swashbuckler Base Class Advocacy Threadseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqqy&page=3?Swashbuckler-Base-Class-Advocacy-Thread#1262013-05-09T04:52:45Z2013-05-09T04:52:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Robert Brookes wrote:</div><blockquote> We live in a world where duelist exists as a prestige class, so we should design to consider duelist and accommodate for it, especially since it would be a solid option for swashbucklers. </blockquote><p>Mmm. We live in a world where the Eldritch Knight is a prestige class, but it isn't a solid option for a magus.Robert Brookes wrote:We live in a world where duelist exists as a prestige class, so we should design to consider duelist and accommodate for it, especially since it would be a solid option for swashbucklers.
Mmm. We live in a world where the Eldritch Knight is a prestige class, but it isn't a solid option for a magus.see2013-05-09T04:52:45ZRe: Forums: Advice: AC Items for Sorcreerseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqgr?AC-Items-for-Sorcreer#332013-05-06T22:41:58Z2013-05-06T22:41:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Aelryinth wrote:</div><blockquote>Basically, for mages you concentrate on all the other AC boosting stuff, right up until you get to Dex booster +6. THEN, you start upgrading from Mage Armor to Bracers of Armor. That first one is going to cost you 25k gp...there's no bigger cost for +1 AC for any mage. Then run it up to +8 and you're done.</blockquote><p>Let's be clear that a Bracers of Armor+X is not an efficient use of gold if you can have a Haramaki+(X-1).
<p>Bracers of Armor +5, +5 armor bonus to AC : 25,000 gp
<br />
Haramaki +4, +5 armor bonus to AC : 16,153 gp</p>
<p>Bracers of Armor +6, +6 armor bonus to AC : 36,000 gp
<br />
Haramaki +5, +6 armor bonus to AC : 25,153 gp</p>Aelryinth wrote:Basically, for mages you concentrate on all the other AC boosting stuff, right up until you get to Dex booster +6. THEN, you start upgrading from Mage Armor to Bracers of Armor. That first one is going to cost you 25k gp...there's no bigger cost for +1 AC for any mage. Then run it up to +8 and you're done.
Let's be clear that a Bracers of Armor+X is not an efficient use of gold if you can have a Haramaki+(X-1). Bracers of Armor +5, +5 armor bonus to AC : 25,000 gp
Haramaki...see2013-05-06T22:41:58ZRe: Forums: Advice: Smallest group of 20's to fell the Tarrasque?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqm9?Smallest-group-of-20s-to-fell-the-Tarrasque#492013-05-08T20:31:35Z2013-05-06T22:26:14Z<p>I would suggest gnomes have the best chance of defeating the tarrasque, and only if we run out of them should other beings be tried.</p>I would suggest gnomes have the best chance of defeating the tarrasque, and only if we run out of them should other beings be tried.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-05-06T22:26:14ZRe: Forums: Advice: Smallest group of 20's to fell the Tarrasque?Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqm9?Smallest-group-of-20s-to-fell-the-Tarrasque#482013-05-08T20:31:24Z2013-05-06T22:24:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote> I do not know what you are, but your "mouth" seems too small for the task,</blockquote><p>Yep, it looks small. But there's nothing that says I have <i>any</i> limit on the size of creature I can swallow in one gulp. And you regenerate . . . where? You don't have any body left, not anything, not even the bit of stuff left after after a <i>disintegrate</i>. You're just <i>gone</i>. Even effects that don't need a body only have a 50% chance of allowing recovery from me.DM_Blake wrote:I do not know what you are, but your "mouth" seems too small for the task,
Yep, it looks small. But there's nothing that says I have any limit on the size of creature I can swallow in one gulp. And you regenerate . . . where? You don't have any body left, not anything, not even the bit of stuff left after after a disintegrate. You're just gone. Even effects that don't need a body only have a 50% chance of allowing recovery from me.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-05-06T22:24:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: Smallest group of 20's to fell the Tarrasque?Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqm9?Smallest-group-of-20s-to-fell-the-Tarrasque#182013-05-08T20:20:00Z2013-05-06T20:31:02Z<p>To get rid of the tarrasque, FEED IT TO ME.</p>
<p>"Creatures drawn within are consumed in 1 round. The bag destroys the victim's body and prevents any form of raising or resurrection that requires part of the corpse. There is a 50% chance that a wish, miracle, or true resurrection spell can restore a devoured victim to life. Check once for each destroyed creature. If the check fails, the creature cannot be brought back to life by mortal magic."</p>To get rid of the tarrasque, FEED IT TO ME.
"Creatures drawn within are consumed in 1 round. The bag destroys the victim's body and prevents any form of raising or resurrection that requires part of the corpse. There is a 50% chance that a wish, miracle, or true resurrection spell can restore a devoured victim to life. Check once for each destroyed creature. If the check fails, the creature cannot be brought back to life by mortal magic."Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-05-06T20:31:02ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=630?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Questions-Here#314842013-05-05T19:36:22Z2013-05-05T19:36:22Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Daethor wrote:</div><blockquote> 1) To your knowledge, does a feat already exist that makes flanking easier (e.g. allies only have to be adjacent to the enemy, not on opposite borders/corners)? If so, where?</blockquote>1) I bet so... but I can't think of one. There's probably a teamwork feat that does it. There's also a 0 level spell called unwilling ally in the APG that can help.</blockquote><p>As mentioned upthread, Gang Up, from the APG.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Daethor wrote:</div><blockquote> 2) To your knowledge, does a feat already exist that increases the bonus to attacks from flanking? If so, where?</blockquote>2) Same. Not sure. I actually don't have a huge knowledge of the thousands and thousands of feats we've published.</blockquote><p>The teamwork feat Outflank, also from the APG.James Jacobs wrote:Daethor wrote: 1) To your knowledge, does a feat already exist that makes flanking easier (e.g. allies only have to be adjacent to the enemy, not on opposite borders/corners)? If so, where?
1) I bet so... but I can't think of one. There's probably a teamwork feat that does it. There's also a 0 level spell called unwilling ally in the APG that can help.As mentioned upthread, Gang Up, from the APG. James Jacobs wrote:Daethor wrote: 2) To your knowledge, does a feat already...see2013-05-05T19:36:22ZRe: Forums: Advice: AC Items for Sorcreerseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqgr?AC-Items-for-Sorcreer#72013-05-05T04:32:20Z2013-05-05T04:32:20Z<p>At low levels keeping <i>mage armor</i> on <b>all</b> the time would mean spending most of your spells on it. A 3 gp haramaki is hardly a major expense for a bit of extra always-on-even-when-you're-surprised AC.</p>
<p>At higher levels, yeah, it's not there for the AC. Instead, it's a slot to hold various armor special abilities, including the ones that can't be put on <i>bracers of armor</i> or an <i>amulet of natural armor</i>. Like <i>determination</i>.</p>At low levels keeping mage armor on all the time would mean spending most of your spells on it. A 3 gp haramaki is hardly a major expense for a bit of extra always-on-even-when-you're-surprised AC.
At higher levels, yeah, it's not there for the AC. Instead, it's a slot to hold various armor special abilities, including the ones that can't be put on bracers of armor or an amulet of natural armor. Like determination.see2013-05-05T04:32:20ZRe: Forums: Advice: AC Items for Sorcreerseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqgr?AC-Items-for-Sorcreer#32013-05-05T03:47:17Z2013-05-05T03:47:17Z<p>If they're allowed in the campaign by your GM, consider the advantage of a haramaki. +1 AC, no penalties (even if non-proficient), no ASF, and as actual armor can later get the sort of armor enhancements that aren't bonus-equivalents.</p>If they're allowed in the campaign by your GM, consider the advantage of a haramaki. +1 AC, no penalties (even if non-proficient), no ASF, and as actual armor can later get the sort of armor enhancements that aren't bonus-equivalents.see2013-05-05T03:47:17ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Paizo Blog: Announcing Bestiary 4!seehttps://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5leps&page=4?Announcing-Bestiary-4#1742013-05-04T12:54:28Z2013-05-01T20:27:53Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Berk the Black wrote:</div><blockquote> Formians? As in originally from the Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus?</blockquote><p>No, as in originally just another inhabitant of the material plane (<i>AD&D Monster Manual II</i>, 1983), and then from Arcadia (<i>Planes of Law</i> boxed set, 1995). They were only moved to Mechanus in 3e (2000).Berk the Black wrote:Formians? As in originally from the Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus?
No, as in originally just another inhabitant of the material plane (AD&D Monster Manual II, 1983), and then from Arcadia (Planes of Law boxed set, 1995). They were only moved to Mechanus in 3e (2000).see2013-05-01T20:27:53ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Paizo Blog: Announcing Bestiary 4!seehttps://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5leps&page=4?Announcing-Bestiary-4#1722013-05-01T20:16:45Z2013-05-01T20:16:45Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">F. Wesley Schneider wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Mead Gregorisson wrote:</div><blockquote><p> 1. Will there be race creation costs for the abilities of the new pc races?</p>
<p>2. Will we be able to redeem Cthulhu from the dark side?</p>
<p>3. Will there be mythic muskrats? </blockquote>A definite maybe to all three. </blockquote>NO to 2! Cthulhu's too bad to be good! </blockquote><p>Anyone can be redeemed. It just takes four little words—
<p><i>helm of opposite alignment</i>.</p>
<p>Sure, Cthulhu probably has a Will save high enough he only fails on a 1, but that's still a 5% chance.</p>James Jacobs wrote:F. Wesley Schneider wrote: Mead Gregorisson wrote:1. Will there be race creation costs for the abilities of the new pc races?
2. Will we be able to redeem Cthulhu from the dark side?
3. Will there be mythic muskrats?
A definite maybe to all three. NO to 2! Cthulhu's too bad to be good! Anyone can be redeemed. It just takes four little words— helm of opposite alignment.
Sure, Cthulhu probably has a Will save high enough he only fails on a 1, but that's still a 5% chance.see2013-05-01T20:16:45ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Profession (engineer) vs Knowledge (engineering)seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppur?Profession#432013-05-01T02:49:29Z2013-05-01T02:49:29Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">see wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:</p>
<p>If you want to make something, use Craft.
<br />
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
<br />
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.</blockquote>No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about the profession; that is, know something. Your approach might make a good house-rule, but it's not how skills <i>actually</i> work in Pathfinder. </blockquote>Yes, yes, you're quite right. </blockquote><p>Thank you.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>So, a naturalist might know how to farm, how to harvest, how to milk a cow, how to catch a beaver or a rabbit, how to collect healthy berries and avoid poisonous ones, how to market his food and furs, how to supervise his employees, and how to deal with problems like bad crops, pests, infertile fields, maybe even how to birth a calf.</blockquote><p>Right, exactly. Which is to say, your earlier three-sentence bit was an oversimplification. After all, the naturalist can't avoid poisonous berries unless he can tell which ones are poisonous. If you need to know, "Hey, are these berries poisonous?" ranks in the appropriate Profession will give you an answer.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Quote:</div><blockquote>So I stand by what I said,</blockquote><p>You mean the oversimplification which was directly contradicted by what you just said?
<p>As to the reason your oversimplification was a problem (as opposed to your properly nuanced response), it leads to people posting things like this:</p>
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Bruunwald wrote:</div><blockquote>When your character IS adventuring, and he and his party come to a wide chasm underground, and he needs to build or repair an old bridge that is spanning a chasm, or needs to determine if the bridge is still safe, he rolls his Knowledge (Engineering) skill to see if he can make good with his skill. He very much is concerned with a specific object or area in this case.</blockquote><p>"So, is this bridge safe?"
<p>"Don't ask me, I just build and repair bridges for a living. Can't tell a thing by looking at this one in particular."</p>DM_Blake wrote:see wrote: DM_Blake wrote:Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession...see2013-05-01T02:49:29ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Profession (engineer) vs Knowledge (engineering)seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppur?Profession#372013-05-01T00:11:08Z2013-05-01T00:11:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">DM_Blake wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:</p>
<p>If you want to make something, use Craft.
<br />
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
<br />
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.</blockquote><p>No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about the profession; that is, know something. Your approach might make a good house-rule, but it's not how skills <i>actually</i> work in Pathfinder.DM_Blake wrote:Pathfinder skills don't work like that. The system is too simplified and abstract for real-world logic to apply. What we have to do is simply follow the abstract rules:
If you want to make something, use Craft.
If you want to know something, use Knowledge.
If you want to earn a consistent living, use Profession.
No, you are oversimplifying and abstracting things despite explicit contradictory RAW. The rules explicitly state someone with Profession can answer questions about...see2013-05-01T00:11:08ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Profession (engineer) vs Knowledge (engineering)seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppur?Profession#312013-04-30T21:55:37Z2013-04-30T21:55:37Z<p>Well, let's see:</p>
<p>Knowledge: "Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions)."</p>
<p>Profession: "You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher."</p>
<p>So, by pure RAW, the Profession should have a DC of about 5 lower (basic questions 10 versus 15), right?</p>
<p>The real difference to my view is that with Profession: Engineering, you're answering questions about how to <i>do</i> engineering. Let's look at the Knowledge Engineering example checks:</p>
<p>1) Identify dangerous construction: DC 10
<br />
2) Determine a structure's style or age: DC 15
<br />
3) Determine a structure's weakness: DC 20</p>
<p>The first there is definitely a "do" question, and it's definitely basic; you're not much of a practical engineer if you can't tell what's a bridge at risk of collapse. The third, similarly; it's arguably only a DC 15 Profession check to figure out what the weakness of the bridge is.</p>
<p>But the second? You don't need to know who made the bridge or when to do bridge engineering. The fact that it's "obviously" a duergar-made bridge while the older neighboring construction is all svirfneblin work isn't something you need to know to build, maintain, or destroy it. The Profession-only character is going to miss the hint that there are a bunch of invisible poison-wielding sadistic bastards in the cave ahead.</p>Well, let's see:
Knowledge: "Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions)."
Profession: "You can also answer questions about your Profession. Basic questions are DC 10, while more complex questions are DC 15 or higher."
So, by pure RAW, the Profession should have a DC of about 5 lower (basic questions 10 versus 15), right?
The real difference to my view is that with...see2013-04-30T21:55:37ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Run Away! Run Away!seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppm6&page=2?Run-Away-Run-Away#862013-04-30T21:28:50Z2013-04-30T21:28:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Atarlost wrote:</div><blockquote>I'm no poker expert, but I think your hand is the one you can effect.</blockquote><p>Only in draw poker. In straight, stud, or flop poker, you can't change your cards.Atarlost wrote:I'm no poker expert, but I think your hand is the one you can effect.
Only in draw poker. In straight, stud, or flop poker, you can't change your cards.see2013-04-30T21:28:50ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Point Buy creation method leads to less Human PCsKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppxk?Point-Buy-creation-method-leads-to-less-Human#272013-05-01T01:43:36Z2013-04-30T21:15:08Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Artanthos wrote:</div><blockquote>6 gnome adventurers walk into a bar.... </blockquote><p>And then what? Does it have a happy ending, or do the adventurers survive?Artanthos wrote:6 gnome adventurers walk into a bar....
And then what? Does it have a happy ending, or do the adventurers survive?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-30T21:15:08ZRe: Forums: Advice: How necessary is Augment Summoning?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppn7?How-necessary-is-Augment-Summoning#372013-04-29T23:16:12Z2013-04-29T23:16:12Z<p>Augment Summoning is not merely an incredibly useful feat for anyone who does summoning, it's the prereq for Superior Summoning, which is similarly of great use.</p>Augment Summoning is not merely an incredibly useful feat for anyone who does summoning, it's the prereq for Superior Summoning, which is similarly of great use.see2013-04-29T23:16:12ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Run Away! Run Away!seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppm6?Run-Away-Run-Away#102013-04-28T03:14:54Z2013-04-28T03:14:54Z<p>I wonder what people think equipment list items like caltrops are there for. I mean, now we've even got stuff like tanglefoot bags and shard gel . . .</p>
<p>Yes, it's hard to run away if you have made no preparations (in chargen, equipment, spell selection, et cetera), <i>and</i> you don't do it before battle has been joined based on a scout report, <i>and</i> nobody's willing to stay behind to cover the retreat.</p>I wonder what people think equipment list items like caltrops are there for. I mean, now we've even got stuff like tanglefoot bags and shard gel . . .
Yes, it's hard to run away if you have made no preparations (in chargen, equipment, spell selection, et cetera), and you don't do it before battle has been joined based on a scout report, and nobody's willing to stay behind to cover the retreat.see2013-04-28T03:14:54ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!Reaper of Reputation (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=624?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Questions-Here#311702013-04-28T00:32:46Z2013-04-28T00:25:10Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">John Kretzer wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">James Jacobs wrote:</div><blockquote> like rust monster licks. </blockquote>So hw many licks does it take to get to the middle of a Iron Golem? </blockquote><p>The world <i>may never know</i>.John Kretzer wrote:James Jacobs wrote: like rust monster licks.
So hw many licks does it take to get to the middle of a Iron Golem? The world may never know.Reaper of Reputation (alias of see)2013-04-28T00:25:10ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: What fighters DO.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppj3&page=3?What-fighters-DO#1282013-04-27T23:56:38Z2013-04-27T23:56:38Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Pendagast wrote:</div><blockquote> Animal beat drums, Fighter beat kobolds! </blockquote><p>See that? Yeah, this is why we <i>need</i> caster-martial disparity. Otherwise these over-muscled thugs will never get their comeuppance.Pendagast wrote:Animal beat drums, Fighter beat kobolds!
See that? Yeah, this is why we need caster-martial disparity. Otherwise these over-muscled thugs will never get their comeuppance.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-27T23:56:38ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Monks and Haste: The Question Hath Been Answered! (New FAQ)seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ppjr?Monks-and-Haste-The-Question-Hath-Been-Answered#242013-04-30T00:29:33Z2013-04-27T23:41:43Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">AnnoyingOrange wrote:</div><blockquote>There will likely be people looking to dig up all those abilities to get as many attacks as possible right now</blockquote><p>Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting . . .AnnoyingOrange wrote:There will likely be people looking to dig up all those abilities to get as many attacks as possible right now
Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting . . .see2013-04-27T23:41:43ZRe: Forums: Advice: Do I need a cleric?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pp5p&page=2?Do-I-need-a-cleric#672013-04-29T02:15:25Z2013-04-27T20:35:51Z<p>COME WITH ME IF YOU AM WANTING TO LIVE.</p>COME WITH ME IF YOU AM WANTING TO LIVE.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2013-04-27T20:35:51ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Energy Drain is Brokenseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2povr&page=2?Energy-Drain-is-Broken#682013-04-23T23:10:52Z2013-04-23T23:10:52Z<p>A Dhampir isn't immune to level drain (it can still kill 'em), but they don't take penalties for negative levels either.</p>
<p>Deathless is a +1 armor enhancement that gives 25% resistance to level drain.</p>
<p>The <i>black soul shard</i> negates one level drain a week; the <i>scarab of protection</i> can absorb 12 drains.</p>A Dhampir isn't immune to level drain (it can still kill 'em), but they don't take penalties for negative levels either.
Deathless is a +1 armor enhancement that gives 25% resistance to level drain.
The black soul shard negates one level drain a week; the scarab of protection can absorb 12 drains.see2013-04-23T23:10:52ZRe: Forums: Rise of the Runelords: Killing goblin babies?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pp1g&page=2?Killing-goblin-babies#982013-04-23T19:16:01Z2013-04-23T19:12:55Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">EldonG wrote:</div><blockquote>I suddenly have this overpowering urge to build a gnome pally. :p </blockquote><p>You'll want to optimize. The ideal array for a 15-point buy gnome paladin is:
<p>STR: 7 (5 after racial mod)
<br />
DEX: 8
<br />
CON: 7 (9 after racial mod)
<br />
INT: 18
<br />
WIS: 16
<br />
CHA: 8 (10 after racial mod)</p>
<p>Put your favored class bonus into a skill, and be sure to take lots and lots of Professions, because you want to be able to do anything. Your feat should be Skill Focus in one of the professions, so you're really good at it.</p>
<p>Now you're ready to go into the first-level dungeon to fight kobolds with your mighty, uncovered gnome paladin fists.</p>EldonG wrote:I suddenly have this overpowering urge to build a gnome pally. :p
You'll want to optimize. The ideal array for a 15-point buy gnome paladin is: STR: 7 (5 after racial mod)
DEX: 8
CON: 7 (9 after racial mod)
INT: 18
WIS: 16
CHA: 8 (10 after racial mod)
Put your favored class bonus into a skill, and be sure to take lots and lots of Professions, because you want to be able to do anything. Your feat should be Skill Focus in one of the professions, so you're really good at it.
Now...Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-23T19:12:55ZRe: Forums: Advice: What would cause an anti-paladin to fall?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pp3h?What-would-cause-an-antipaladin-to-fall#92013-04-25T03:21:44Z2013-04-23T17:58:15Z<p>Letting a gnome live.</p>
<p>(Or at least it <i>should</i>.)</p>Letting a gnome live.
(Or at least it should.)Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-23T17:58:15ZRe: Forums: Rise of the Runelords: Killing goblin babies?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pp1g&page=2?Killing-goblin-babies#872014-07-24T19:40:02Z2013-04-23T17:55:11Z<p>On the one hand, baby goblins are disgusting creatures.</p>
<p>On the other hand, maybe they'll eat the paladin.</p>
<p>I don't know. Is the paladin a gnome?</p>On the one hand, baby goblins are disgusting creatures.
On the other hand, maybe they'll eat the paladin.
I don't know. Is the paladin a gnome?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-23T17:55:11ZRe: Forums: Advice: Lamashtu's do-gooders, Gnomes, and Goblin Babies.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pokq&page=3?Lamashtus-dogooders-Gnomes-and-Goblin-Babies#1122013-04-23T17:47:34Z2013-04-23T17:47:34Z<p>Feed the gnome to the goblins.</p>Feed the gnome to the goblins.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-23T17:47:34ZRe: Forums: Advice: Just want to know if anyone else would play these stats?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2poe6&page=2?Just-want-to-know-if-anyone-else-would-play#862013-04-22T03:56:55Z2013-04-22T03:56:55Z<p>I'd have played them.</p>I'd have played them.see2013-04-22T03:56:55ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Bestiary 4 Wish Listseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mzi1&page=44?Bestiary-4-Wish-List#21942013-04-20T04:40:35Z2013-04-20T04:40:35Z<p>Right now, we don't have any dragons that make sense for a from-first-level mount for a cavalier archetype.</p>
<p>Also, we don't have any dragons that explain how you can get dragonhide medium full plate for a mere +1,650 gp premium (the only Colossal dragons in the whole game are linnorms and great wyrms, and the rarity of such suits alone should drive a premium higher than making full plate out of mere <i>gold</i> at +13,500 gp).</p>
<p>A single relatively weak monster of the dragon type (say, with a modified progression starting as a Large "wyrmling" about as strong as a horse and peaking in power as a Colossal "young adult") could both enable a dragonrider archetype and explain dragonhide armor.</p>Right now, we don't have any dragons that make sense for a from-first-level mount for a cavalier archetype.
Also, we don't have any dragons that explain how you can get dragonhide medium full plate for a mere +1,650 gp premium (the only Colossal dragons in the whole game are linnorms and great wyrms, and the rarity of such suits alone should drive a premium higher than making full plate out of mere gold at +13,500 gp).
A single relatively weak monster of the dragon type (say, with a...see2013-04-20T04:40:35ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: Can a Qinggong Monk be a Zen Archer as well?seehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2poeg?Can-a-Qinggong-Monk-be-a-Zen-Archer-as-well#42013-04-17T21:39:25Z2013-04-17T21:39:25Z<p>It's been argued both ways and there is no official FAQ answering it. Some people say making the ability swappable is itself a change to an ability by the archetype, and thus Qinggong is incompatible with pretty much every monk archetype. Others say Qinggong doesn't change an ability unless you choose to swap it. Ask your GM, or decide for yourself if you are the GM.</p>It's been argued both ways and there is no official FAQ answering it. Some people say making the ability swappable is itself a change to an ability by the archetype, and thus Qinggong is incompatible with pretty much every monk archetype. Others say Qinggong doesn't change an ability unless you choose to swap it. Ask your GM, or decide for yourself if you are the GM.see2013-04-17T21:39:25ZRe: Forums: Advice: Gnomish CavalierKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2po0g?Gnomish-Cavalier#112013-04-15T07:43:40Z2013-04-15T07:43:40Z<p>No, no, blackbloodtroll was right in the beginning. No gnome has a soul.</p>No, no, blackbloodtroll was right in the beginning. No gnome has a soul.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-04-15T07:43:40ZRe: Forums: Advice: Salvaging Metal in a Low Resource Campaignseehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2po2m?Salvaging-Metal-in-a-Low-Resource-Campaign#92013-04-15T06:51:05Z2013-04-15T06:51:05Z<p>Okay, first thing is, stuff isn't going to add up perfectly. The abstractions used in the crafting system don't line up very well with actual costs of inputs and whatnot.</p>
<p>Second, though, the major expense in medieval blacksmithing (especially of good steel) was the large quantities of fuel required. Access to a forest you basically own means you have gone a long way to covering that cost (in the short term, at least). However, you're going to need people who know how to burn wood into charcoal (colliers) and, presumably, pay them. (In addition to the people to cut the wood and drag it to the collier, etc., but you apparently have already been repairing walls so you have some idea what that'll cost you.)</p>Okay, first thing is, stuff isn't going to add up perfectly. The abstractions used in the crafting system don't line up very well with actual costs of inputs and whatnot.
Second, though, the major expense in medieval blacksmithing (especially of good steel) was the large quantities of fuel required. Access to a forest you basically own means you have gone a long way to covering that cost (in the short term, at least). However, you're going to need people who know how to burn wood into...see2013-04-15T06:51:05ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: OP/Broken ClassesKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pjf7&page=2?OPBroken-Classes#612013-03-11T02:13:41Z2013-03-11T02:13:41Z<p>You know what's really OP?</p>
<p>Gnomes. </p>
<p>Especially gnomes that take eight levels in paladin, four in bard, and then go mystic theurge.</p>
<p>Though the ones that take all their levels in Expert or Commoner are even more OP.</p>You know what's really OP?
Gnomes.
Especially gnomes that take eight levels in paladin, four in bard, and then go mystic theurge.
Though the ones that take all their levels in Expert or Commoner are even more OP.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-03-11T02:13:41ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=583?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Questions-Here#291132013-03-07T00:47:56Z2013-03-07T00:47:56Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ravingdork wrote:</div><blockquote><p>Which is the OFFICIAL correct designation for the weapon in Pathfinder? What should I be putting on the stat blocks?</p>
<p>SHORT SWORD or SHORTSWORD? </blockquote><p>"Gnomesticker"Ravingdork wrote:Which is the OFFICIAL correct designation for the weapon in Pathfinder? What should I be putting on the stat blocks?
SHORT SWORD or SHORTSWORD?
"Gnomesticker"Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-03-07T00:47:56ZRe: Forums: Advice: Mystic Theurge, how to make it work?Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pjlr?Mystic-Theurge-how-to-make-it-work#312013-03-06T08:01:52Z2013-03-06T05:27:06Z<p>How to make a Mystic Theurge:</p>
<p>Play a gnome. Take 8 levels of ranger. Add 4 levels of bard. At 20th level, you'll be casting as a 16th level ranger and 12th level bard!</p>How to make a Mystic Theurge:
Play a gnome. Take 8 levels of ranger. Add 4 levels of bard. At 20th level, you'll be casting as a 16th level ranger and 12th level bard!Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-03-06T05:27:06ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Boycott KoboldsKzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2hw31&page=2?Boycott-Kobolds#822013-03-03T00:13:52Z2013-03-02T21:25:13Z<p>Yes, yes, please boycott our lairs. That'll show us! In fact, set up picket lines to stop adventurers from entering them! At least for the next few weeks.</p>
<p>Also, I need . . . 17 crossbows. For my giant wa—um, Completely Peaceful Purposes machine.</p>Yes, yes, please boycott our lairs. That'll show us! In fact, set up picket lines to stop adventurers from entering them! At least for the next few weeks.
Also, I need . . . 17 crossbows. For my giant wa—um, Completely Peaceful Purposes machine.Kzkarz Gnomehammer (alias of see)2013-03-02T21:25:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I found a way to defeat the Tarrasque.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pgrc&page=5?I-found-a-way-to-defeat-the-Tarrasque#2122013-03-02T01:06:48Z2013-03-02T01:06:48Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TriOmegaZero wrote:</div><blockquote><div class="messageboard-quotee">Hungry, Hungry Bag wrote:</div><blockquote> You know, these claims it could regenerate after I ate it? They're giving me indigestion. </blockquote>Then prove it can't. </blockquote><p>WOOOOOOOSH!
<p>I say, I say, it was a <i>joke</i>, son.</p>TriOmegaZero wrote:Hungry, Hungry Bag wrote: You know, these claims it could regenerate after I ate it? They're giving me indigestion.
Then prove it can't. WOOOOOOOSH! I say, I say, it was a joke, son.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-03-02T01:06:48ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I found a way to defeat the Tarrasque.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pgrc&page=5?I-found-a-way-to-defeat-the-Tarrasque#2092015-01-15T15:37:13Z2013-03-02T00:26:34Z<p>You know, these claims it could regenerate after I ate it? They're giving me indigestion.</p>You know, these claims it could regenerate after I ate it? They're giving me indigestion.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-03-02T00:26:34ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I found a way to defeat the Tarrasque.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pgrc&page=4?I-found-a-way-to-defeat-the-Tarrasque#1662013-02-27T02:02:27Z2013-02-27T02:02:27Z<p>If you think the limit of how much I can hold in my mouth is the same thing as the limit of how big a creature I can consume in a round, no, I can only manage to consume Large creatures (humans are about 3 cubic feet, so doubled in all dimensions is about 24 cubic feet; colossal beasts are way too big).</p>
<p>However, I want to be clear that there is, in fact, nothing actually on the paper there that says when I consume a creature, I'm limited by the amount of matter I could hold in my bag-of-holding-like mouth. So I get to eat the tarrasque RAW!</p>
<p>Though, toss in some onions, too. Almost everything I eat is a bit gamey.</p>
<p>(Remember, when I'm feeding, I can't pun. Line up those herd animals . . .)</p>If you think the limit of how much I can hold in my mouth is the same thing as the limit of how big a creature I can consume in a round, no, I can only manage to consume Large creatures (humans are about 3 cubic feet, so doubled in all dimensions is about 24 cubic feet; colossal beasts are way too big).
However, I want to be clear that there is, in fact, nothing actually on the paper there that says when I consume a creature, I'm limited by the amount of matter I could hold in my...Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-02-27T02:02:27ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I found a way to defeat the Tarrasque.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pgrc&page=4?I-found-a-way-to-defeat-the-Tarrasque#1562013-02-27T01:31:59Z2013-02-26T23:54:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Tacticslion wrote:</div><blockquote>eeding Big T (in bite-sized chunks) to a Bag of Devouring is a surprisingly viable solution, actually, if Big T can be cut into enough pieces rapidly enough</blockquote><p>Nah, forget pieces. Big T is one creature. When he's helpless, stick his toe in me, and there's a 60% chance I suck him down, consume him in one round, and he's <i>gone</i>. If not, stick a different toe in me next round.
<p>Yeah, it might seem silly that I can consume one creature without any statement about size, when I've got a limited capacity for objects. But, really, I'm that good with living prey. And I like my interpretations like I like my food - RAW!</p>Tacticslion wrote:eeding Big T (in bite-sized chunks) to a Bag of Devouring is a surprisingly viable solution, actually, if Big T can be cut into enough pieces rapidly enough
Nah, forget pieces. Big T is one creature. When he's helpless, stick his toe in me, and there's a 60% chance I suck him down, consume him in one round, and he's gone. If not, stick a different toe in me next round. Yeah, it might seem silly that I can consume one creature without any statement about size, when I've got...Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-02-26T23:54:50ZRe: Forums: Advice: Cleric... What is it??AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pipc?Cleric-What-is-it#302013-02-26T19:54:22Z2013-02-26T06:20:23Z<p>SIMPLE QUESTION, SIMPLE ANSWER. CLERIC AM CLERIC. NOT SHOEHORNED: AM WEARING SANDALS.</p>SIMPLE QUESTION, SIMPLE ANSWER. CLERIC AM CLERIC. NOT SHOEHORNED: AM WEARING SANDALS.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2013-02-26T06:20:23ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: I found a way to defeat the Tarrasque.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pgrc&page=4?I-found-a-way-to-defeat-the-Tarrasque#1512013-02-26T21:20:09Z2013-02-26T01:56:55Z<p>Beat on it until it can't move, then feed it to me.</p>Beat on it until it can't move, then feed it to me.Hungry, Hungry Bag (alias of see)2013-02-26T01:56:55ZRe: Forums: Product Discussion: Pathfinder Player Companion: Animal Archive (PFRPG)Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)https://paizo.com/products/btpy8w7p/discuss&page=5?Pathfinder-Player-Companion-Animal-Archive#2342013-01-21T08:44:52Z2013-01-21T08:44:52Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Kevin Mack wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Set wrote:</div><blockquote><p> Nice picture! I'm not terribly sure what that squirrel is hoping to accomplish, but bless him for trying!</p>
<p></blockquote>Hey dont diss the squirrels a pack of them brought down Doctor Doom once. </blockquote><p>Not true. In fact, it wasn't even a proper Doombot. It was a cheap knockoff copy of a Doombot made by a renegade Stark Industries employee.Kevin Mack wrote:Set wrote:Nice picture! I'm not terribly sure what that squirrel is hoping to accomplish, but bless him for trying!
Hey dont diss the squirrels a pack of them brought down Doctor Doom once. Not true. In fact, it wasn't even a proper Doombot. It was a cheap knockoff copy of a Doombot made by a renegade Stark Industries employee.Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)2013-01-21T08:44:52ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Who wins: AM BARBARIAN's RAGELANCEPOUNCE or Ditka.Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p4zb?Who-wins-AM-BARBARIANs-RAGELANCEPOUNCE-or-Ditka#132012-11-11T04:32:05Z2012-11-11T04:32:05Z<p>They fight, I win.</p>They fight, I win.Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)2012-11-11T04:32:05ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: All Hail Vic Wertz: Cosmic OverlordAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p058?All-Hail-Vic-Wertz-Cosmic-Overlord#442012-10-17T12:10:26Z2012-10-17T12:10:26Z<p>WHAT DOMAINS AM VIC WERTZ GRANTING?</p>WHAT DOMAINS AM VIC WERTZ GRANTING?AM CLERIC (alias of see)2012-10-17T12:10:26ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: All these Rogue Archetypes that drop TrapfindingAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p04y?All-these-Rogue-Archetypes-that-drop-Trapfinding#482012-10-10T16:34:01Z2012-10-09T07:22:34Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">sunbeam wrote:</div><blockquote> I'm sure all these non-rogue ways of dealing with traps work, but my mental picture of a Rogue is a guy with lockpicks jammed between his teeth muumbling "Red Rune or Blue Rune?"</blockquote><p>RED RUNE, BLUE RUNE, CLERIC AM THE ONE WITH THE GOD.sunbeam wrote:I'm sure all these non-rogue ways of dealing with traps work, but my mental picture of a Rogue is a guy with lockpicks jammed between his teeth muumbling "Red Rune or Blue Rune?"
RED RUNE, BLUE RUNE, CLERIC AM THE ONE WITH THE GOD.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2012-10-09T07:22:34ZRe: Forums: Rules Questions: All these Rogue Archetypes that drop TrapfindingAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p04y?All-these-Rogue-Archetypes-that-drop-Trapfinding#322012-10-10T16:30:51Z2012-10-09T03:52:29Z<p>CLERIC AM WISE, AM HAVING AWESOME PERCEPTION. CLERIC AM HAVING "FIND TRAPS". CLERIC AM HAVING "DISPEL MAGIC". LEAVE SNEAKY ROGUE IN TAVERN. ROGUE AM BEST HOME PICKING POCKETS, HIDING FROM GODS' WRATH. GO TO TEMPLE, GET PARTY SECOND CLERIC. GODS LIKE CLERIC, CLERIC AM WINNING.</p>CLERIC AM WISE, AM HAVING AWESOME PERCEPTION. CLERIC AM HAVING "FIND TRAPS". CLERIC AM HAVING "DISPEL MAGIC". LEAVE SNEAKY ROGUE IN TAVERN. ROGUE AM BEST HOME PICKING POCKETS, HIDING FROM GODS' WRATH. GO TO TEMPLE, GET PARTY SECOND CLERIC. GODS LIKE CLERIC, CLERIC AM WINNING.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2012-10-09T03:52:29ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Why are people reluctant to play clerics?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2orcq&page=2?Why-are-people-reluctant-to-play-clerics#972012-08-28T17:25:00Z2012-08-28T17:25:00Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">KenB3 wrote:</div><blockquote> I once played a half-orc cleric of Tempus with the idea of being a war priest. I figured I would heal the party some but that wouldn't be the main focus of my character. The DM looked at me and saw hit points recharging. "The villagers come to you for healing."</blockquote><p>AM SMASHING VILLAGERS FOR FUN.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">KenB3 wrote:</div><blockquote>"Oh, you're healing people in town."</blockquote><p>AM HEALING STUPID WITH BLOWS TO HEAD.
<div class="messageboard-quotee">Greatbear wrote:</div><blockquote> Last time I played a cleric, every time one of the other characters got so much as a paper cut, they started crying "heal me! heal me!"</blockquote><p>AM POURING SALT ON PAPERCUT, AM LAUGHING.KenB3 wrote:I once played a half-orc cleric of Tempus with the idea of being a war priest. I figured I would heal the party some but that wouldn't be the main focus of my character. The DM looked at me and saw hit points recharging. "The villagers come to you for healing."
AM SMASHING VILLAGERS FOR FUN. KenB3 wrote:"Oh, you're healing people in town."
AM HEALING STUPID WITH BLOWS TO HEAD. Greatbear wrote:Last time I played a cleric, every time one of the other characters got so much as a...AM CLERIC (alias of see)2012-08-28T17:25:00ZRe: Forums: Advice: Party composition balance - what should I do?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2op4l?Party-composition-balance-what-should-I-do#172012-08-19T20:16:39Z2012-08-19T19:57:47Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">EDekar wrote:</div><blockquote> Actually, I know that we're starting in a desert region and that we'll be up against undead. How long it will last I don't know, but if that sways opinion at all it's something to consider. </blockquote><p>CLERIC.
<p>CREATE WATER, BURN UNDEAD, BUFF ALLIES, HEAL SICK, STAND STRONG BETWEEN SHOOTY-GUYS AND FOES.</p>EDekar wrote:Actually, I know that we're starting in a desert region and that we'll be up against undead. How long it will last I don't know, but if that sways opinion at all it's something to consider.
CLERIC. CREATE WATER, BURN UNDEAD, BUFF ALLIES, HEAL SICK, STAND STRONG BETWEEN SHOOTY-GUYS AND FOES.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2012-08-19T19:57:47ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Who Would Win?: Batman vs. Doctor DoomVictor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ogll&page=2?Who-Would-Win-Batman-vs-Doctor-Doom#682012-07-19T03:49:04Z2012-07-19T03:49:04Z<p>I want to make it clear. Although I could win by time-traveling back and killing, say, the maternal grandmother of Thomas Wayne at age four, such tactics are beneath me. So, if Batman by some concatenation of improbable events did manage to defeat me, it would only be because I was too honorable to simply erase him from existence. Which would mean, in fact, the one who defeated me would be <b>DOOM</b>!</p>I want to make it clear. Although I could win by time-traveling back and killing, say, the maternal grandmother of Thomas Wayne at age four, such tactics are beneath me. So, if Batman by some concatenation of improbable events did manage to defeat me, it would only be because I was too honorable to simply erase him from existence. Which would mean, in fact, the one who defeated me would be DOOM!Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)2012-07-19T03:49:04ZRe: Forums: Off-Topic Discussions: Who Would Win?: Batman vs. Doctor DoomVictor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ogll?Who-Would-Win-Batman-vs-Doctor-Doom#352012-07-14T20:21:18Z2012-07-14T20:21:18Z<p>You know Alfred? Guy who raised Bruce Wayne for years? Knows all Batman's secrets?</p>
<p>Yeah, he's one of my robots. Has been ever since the original died of a heart attack upon hearing that Martha Wayne had been murdered. Just on the off chance that I might need an ace in the hole in the DC multiverse.</p>
<p>Such are the deep-laid plans of <b>DOOM</b>!</p>You know Alfred? Guy who raised Bruce Wayne for years? Knows all Batman's secrets?
Yeah, he's one of my robots. Has been ever since the original died of a heart attack upon hearing that Martha Wayne had been murdered. Just on the off chance that I might need an ace in the hole in the DC multiverse.
Such are the deep-laid plans of DOOM!Victor Von Doom, PhD. (alias of see)2012-07-14T20:21:18ZRe: Forums: 4th Edition: I hereby declare the end of the 1st edition warFirst Edition Warrior (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nf6n?I-hereby-declare-the-end-of-the-1st-edition-war#442012-01-10T23:27:20Z2012-01-10T23:27:20Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">LazarX wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Brix wrote:</div><blockquote><p> We fought long and hard. Finally our enemy is defeated.
</p>
However there is a shadow looming on the horizon. Friend or Foe? Only time will tell. </blockquote>You mean those 1st Edition Grognards have finally recognised D&D 3.0? That's a relief! </blockquote><p>Sure we have! B/X exists, it's the successor of the Holmes Basic and of the original D&D boxed set! It's a valued ally against the BECMI and AD&D 2nd degenerates!LazarX wrote:Brix wrote:We fought long and hard. Finally our enemy is defeated.
However there is a shadow looming on the horizon. Friend or Foe? Only time will tell.
You mean those 1st Edition Grognards have finally recognised D&D 3.0? That's a relief! Sure we have! B/X exists, it's the successor of the Holmes Basic and of the original D&D boxed set! It's a valued ally against the BECMI and AD&D 2nd degenerates!First Edition Warrior (alias of see)2012-01-10T23:27:20ZRe: Forums: 4th Edition: I hereby declare the end of the 1st edition warFirst Edition Warrior (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nf6n?I-hereby-declare-the-end-of-the-1st-edition-war#282012-01-09T23:13:55Z2012-01-09T23:13:55Z<p>The First Edition War will never end! Those heretics that use Unearthed Arcana must be smashed! Death to cavaliers, drow as a PC race, weapon specialization, cantrips, and <i>teleport without error</i>!</p>The First Edition War will never end! Those heretics that use Unearthed Arcana must be smashed! Death to cavaliers, drow as a PC race, weapon specialization, cantrips, and teleport without error!First Edition Warrior (alias of see)2012-01-09T23:13:55ZRe: Forums: Homebrew and House Rules: What if... what if everyone could spell sunder?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nctr?What-if-what-if-everyone-could-spell-sunder#132012-01-05T04:50:46Z2011-12-31T02:27:38Z<p>S-U-N-D-E-R.</p>
<p>NOT HARD.</p>S-U-N-D-E-R.
NOT HARD.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-12-31T02:27:38ZRe: Forums: Advice: Cleric or Paladin? Which should I play?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n7e5?Cleric-or-Paladin-Which-should-I-play#172011-12-01T01:29:37Z2011-12-01T01:29:37Z<p>CLERIC.</p>CLERIC.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-12-01T01:29:37ZRe: Forums: Advice: Should I be concerned with a level one party without any healing?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n59j?Should-I-be-concerned-with-a-level-one-party#452011-11-20T00:10:27Z2011-11-20T00:10:27Z<p>KILL PARTY. REPLACE WITH ALL-CLERIC PARTY.</p>KILL PARTY. REPLACE WITH ALL-CLERIC PARTY.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-11-20T00:10:27ZRe: Forums: Advice: Party must-haves, necromancy, and dramatic narrative v. goofy playersAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n40w?Party-musthaves-necromancy-and-dramatic#202011-11-13T04:57:37Z2011-11-13T04:57:37Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">sleepydm wrote:</div><blockquote>1. What does an adventuring party absolutely need?</blockquote><p>CLERIC.sleepydm wrote:1. What does an adventuring party absolutely need?
CLERIC.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-11-13T04:57:37ZRe: Forums: Advice: Single-Class PartyAM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n1q6?SingleClass-Party#232011-10-27T22:44:06Z2011-10-27T22:44:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Atarlost wrote:</div><blockquote> A party with nothing but 2 skill point/level classes that traditionally dump int is going to have problems outside of combat.</blockquote><p>AM LAUGHING. IF AM MANY CLERICS, SOME AM NOT DUMP INT. SPELLS AM BETTER THAN SKILLS. PARTY AM LOTS OF HEALING, WE AM NOT NEEDING HIT POINT.
<p>PERCEPTION, SENSE MOTIVE AM WISDOM-BASED. ME AM HEAR SNEAKY ROGUES, ME AM SEE THROUGH LIES, ME AM POUND SQUISHY ROGUE FLAT. ROGUE BODY AM NOW ROUGE BODY. ME AM LOOT BODY, THROW AHEAD TO DISABLE DEVICE.</p>Atarlost wrote:A party with nothing but 2 skill point/level classes that traditionally dump int is going to have problems outside of combat.
AM LAUGHING. IF AM MANY CLERICS, SOME AM NOT DUMP INT. SPELLS AM BETTER THAN SKILLS. PARTY AM LOTS OF HEALING, WE AM NOT NEEDING HIT POINT. PERCEPTION, SENSE MOTIVE AM WISDOM-BASED. ME AM HEAR SNEAKY ROGUES, ME AM SEE THROUGH LIES, ME AM POUND SQUISHY ROGUE FLAT. ROGUE BODY AM NOW ROUGE BODY. ME AM LOOT BODY, THROW AHEAD TO DISABLE DEVICE.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-10-27T22:44:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Your favorite classes!AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n0g8&page=2?Your-favorite-classes#652011-10-21T02:51:41Z2011-10-21T02:51:41Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">AM DRUID wrote:</div><blockquote> DRUID AM BEST CLASS.</blockquote><p>DRUID AM SQUISHY SOFT. CLERIC AM STEELY HARD.
<p>WHAT? AM TALKING ARMOR. "HIDE" AM WHAT YOU SHOULD DO IF YOU AM WEARING IT.</p>AM DRUID wrote:DRUID AM BEST CLASS.
DRUID AM SQUISHY SOFT. CLERIC AM STEELY HARD. WHAT? AM TALKING ARMOR. "HIDE" AM WHAT YOU SHOULD DO IF YOU AM WEARING IT.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-10-21T02:51:41ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Are there specific roles that must be filled to make an effective party, and if so, what roles?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mwzn&page=3?Are-there-specific-roles-that-must-be-filled#1092011-10-04T04:07:11Z2011-10-04T04:07:11Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Dorje Sylas wrote:</div><blockquote> All the "kill'um" power in the world won't fix a busted axel. </blockquote><p>AM THIRTEEN ORISONS. BLEED SUCK MORE THAN SPARKLY VAMPIRE. FOUR CLERIC PARTY AM CAN HAVE ALL NOT-SUCK PREPARED, EVEN WHEN AM FIRST LEVEL. AXLE AM MENDING-ED.
<p>BARBARIAN RAGE NO AM AXLE-FIXXY. VICTORY TEAM CLERIC.</p>Dorje Sylas wrote:All the "kill'um" power in the world won't fix a busted axel.
AM THIRTEEN ORISONS. BLEED SUCK MORE THAN SPARKLY VAMPIRE. FOUR CLERIC PARTY AM CAN HAVE ALL NOT-SUCK PREPARED, EVEN WHEN AM FIRST LEVEL. AXLE AM MENDING-ED. BARBARIAN RAGE NO AM AXLE-FIXXY. VICTORY TEAM CLERIC.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-10-04T04:07:11ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Are there specific roles that must be filled to make an effective party, and if so, what roles?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mwzn?Are-there-specific-roles-that-must-be-filled#402011-09-30T02:19:00Z2011-09-30T02:19:00Z<p>ROLES:</p>
<p>1. GUY WHO TANK, HIT THINGS
<br />
2. GUY WHO HEAL DAMAGE, CURE STUFF
<br />
3. GUY WHO FIND TRAPS, FIND TROUBLE
<br />
4. GUY WHO CAST MANY SPELLS MANY REASONS</p>
<p>ROLE FILLED BY:</p>
<p>1. CLERIC
<br />
2. CLERIC
<br />
3. CLERIC
<br />
4. CLERIC</p>
<p>GODS' POWER DO ANYTHING.
<br />
CLERIC USE GODS' POWER.
<br />
QED, CLERIC DO ANYTHING.</p>
<p>TRY ORACLE, DRUID, IF OUT OF CLERICS.</p>ROLES:
1. GUY WHO TANK, HIT THINGS
2. GUY WHO HEAL DAMAGE, CURE STUFF
3. GUY WHO FIND TRAPS, FIND TROUBLE
4. GUY WHO CAST MANY SPELLS MANY REASONS
ROLE FILLED BY:
1. CLERIC
2. CLERIC
3. CLERIC
4. CLERIC
GODS' POWER DO ANYTHING.
CLERIC USE GODS' POWER.
QED, CLERIC DO ANYTHING.
TRY ORACLE, DRUID, IF OUT OF CLERICS.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-09-30T02:19:00ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Caster-Martial Disparity Battleground - No Crying.AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mp01&page=11?CasterMartial-Disparity-Battleground-No-Crying#5212011-09-02T03:41:58Z2011-09-02T03:41:58Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">TarkXT wrote:</div><blockquote>The cleric casts Fabricate to create thread. WHERE IS AM BARBARIANS GOD NOW!?! </blockquote><p>TRIBE CLERIC AM KEEPING BARBARIAN GOD SAFE. BARBARIAN SUNDERING NOT-TRIBE GOD "ARODEN". NOT-TRIBE CLERIC AM HAVE NO GOD, NOT-TRIBE CLERIC AM CASTING NO FABRICATE. BARBARIAN VICTORY.TarkXT wrote:The cleric casts Fabricate to create thread. WHERE IS AM BARBARIANS GOD NOW!?!
TRIBE CLERIC AM KEEPING BARBARIAN GOD SAFE. BARBARIAN SUNDERING NOT-TRIBE GOD "ARODEN". NOT-TRIBE CLERIC AM HAVE NO GOD, NOT-TRIBE CLERIC AM CASTING NO FABRICATE. BARBARIAN VICTORY.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-09-02T03:41:58ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Monks: What is their "role?"AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mqig&page=6?Monks-What-is-their-role#2622011-08-29T02:50:13Z2011-08-29T02:50:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">LilithsThrall wrote:</div><blockquote> Don't get me started on clerics. I think they are the worse (not weakest, just worse) class in core. </blockquote><p>MUCH PAIN SOON, NO HEALING FOR YOU. CLERIC SMASH!LilithsThrall wrote:Don't get me started on clerics. I think they are the worse (not weakest, just worse) class in core.
MUCH PAIN SOON, NO HEALING FOR YOU. CLERIC SMASH!AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-08-29T02:50:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Clerics-Weaklings or Not?AM CLERIC (alias of see)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mqe2?ClericsWeaklings-or-Not#402011-08-23T19:29:21Z2011-08-23T19:29:21Z<p>HEAL? NOT NOW, AM KILLING. AM CHANNEL ENERGY AFTER BATTLE.</p>HEAL? NOT NOW, AM KILLING. AM CHANNEL ENERGY AFTER BATTLE.AM CLERIC (alias of see)2011-08-23T19:29:21Z