zagnabbit's page

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Good science fiction is always a cautionary tale. But Hollywood needs hype so laser beams and planets exploding is expected for a trailer.

That's a pretty impressive cast.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

This can only end well...

I've said this before regarding other applications........

The DUNGEONS & DRAGONS brand name is only worth a nickle outside of the gaming hobby. In truth, I feel that putting D&D into the final title of any live action film is a bad decision on a studio's part.

It carries connotations of high cheese and pre- pubescent silliness. We may hold the name D&D dear, but we are a TINY minority.

It was a good deal, at the time, for TSR to let Soloman have a continual license to make films branded as D&D. In context; the company was failing, the hobby was flooded and the former player base were writing their own stories only slightly influenced by the game. Those stories were just as likely, even more likely to be turned into celluloid. There was a real chance for the brand name to be circulated and recirculated in a different medium at NO COST to the company other than having their brand name attached to yet another bad "B" film.

No, Hasbro would never allow such a deal. Which is why Hasbro still hasn't made a film or allowed a film to be cut of any serious work. They slacked off on Dragons of Autumn Twilight, which Should have been a money maker, they've yet to do a Drizzt movie or adapt a single one of their enormously successful novels into a feature film.

Prior to LotR (which is a D&D movie, since D&D is a LotR ripoff at it's core). The idea of a well produced, Oscar caliber, sword &sorcery film was a pipe dream. Now with the insane success of Jackson and Columbus with the Harry Potter films and Martin with GoT, the studios will greenlight anything for preproduction just to have something that could be a hit.
Sadly, too many of the properties are in the hands of less than competent or less than influential people because they were optioned out prior to the current film trends.
Martin held on to Game of Thrones, which his contemporaries thought was dumb. LotR has been held by every major studio in the last 30 years. It took that long to get it made, competently, which with that property even coked out, transient, mid level film execs knew would destroy their careers if they goofed it.

A film based on D&D is silly, since D&D has mined (or robbed) everything. I'm not sure that you couldn't make any generic fantasy film and use most of the basic elements without stepping on any legal toes. A film based on The Icewind Dale trilogy or Dragonlance maybe has merit though DL is probably too big in scope.

If Hasbro/Universal wants to make a movie let them. If WB/Soloman wants to make a movie, let them. Heck if Paramount wants to make a Blackmoor game movie let them. Let them all vet realeased at the same time ( like Armageddon/Deep Impact, Mars/Red Planet, or the 2 Snow White movies). No film is going to be good unless they take it seriously and the D&D name pretty much GUARANTEES that it won't get taken seriously, not even by Hasbro. Who hasn't learned from their mistakes and seems to think that their IP covers everything, it doesn't.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Trust in the local currency is a big deal. One not supported in the core rules. The money changer was rampant in 1st Ed games. Bit I haven't seen deviated coins since Forgotten Realms.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I've regretted taking Abjuration as as on opposition school on 2 different occasions. Now you're not planning on anything past 5, which takes out the best stuff. But still.

Shield is Wonderous at low levels, Prot from arrows is nice too. But the Resist energy is money.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Ahhhh, another meme I've managed to cut out.

It's hardly a tax. Most of the BSF's skill points would otherwise go to either Perception or Intimidate? They still do, it doesn't take max ranks to mend chain mesh. A single point investment in either Craft (arms and armor) or Profession (Soldier) will do.

And yes there are benefits for the wizard in harvesting body parts Knowledge (biology) or Heal.

Not being able to buy "cool stuff" in an equal manner is already written into the core rules with the default crafting system and the wizards free bonus item crafting feats. The cost of the feat is far less of a hit for a caster, who's real class feature is spellcasting, than a fighter whose class feature is combat feats. Rogues are even worse off, though they could steal magic items for free I guess, but that'll blow the WBL guidelines out of the water pretty quick.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Lol
That made me smile.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

zagnabbit wrote:

The Spell Component Pouch is a glaring Achilles Heel for the prepped caster. I don't think it's a douche move to target it as such. It's not considered a douche move when you hit the fighter with Will Save Effects every other encounter (which happens in every game I play in as a pickup).

Except that the caster can be hit with the Fort Save Effects every other encounter too, so SCP =/= Will Save Effects.

Except, in practice, this seldom seems to happen.

Perhaps because the Fort Saves have a better chance of outright killing a character where will save just make them suck.

Also;
What's BSF? Help me out you lost me on that.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thats not quite fair.
Many of us who played the older editions of the game have been less than comfortable with the Magic Big Box Store that the game has devolved into. Gygax called it the "Monty Haul" campaign and it was something that was frequently avoided by long term groups but really popular with the newbies and the munchkins.
Many of those same players are still using their old homebrew campaign worlds or one of the older Pub worlds like Greyhawk or FR. Neither of which was designed as a place where you could pick up a CL 17 magic item as easily as a sway backed horse.

Also not everyone is convinced that the component rules are "flavor text". They are mechanically grounded rules. That the M is handwaived but the S is not is part of the reason for the thread. With each edition of the game the spellcasters get more powerful. But how much of it is a lack of system balance and how much of it is player base laziness?

If players disagree with a relative magic level they are welcome to do so, but if they aren't volunteering to run games as a GM then they can only complain so far. I play with a guy who outright bans spellcasters in any form. I like wizards but I still play with him because his games are fun.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'd actually agree with the availability of odd items issue.
But that is not to say that you could or should be able to reload for free anywhere on the planet. A village like Sandpoint has some stuff available, but not everything.

I also practice a theory that spell components are one of the best impetuses to an unforeseen adventure. After years of it it's pretty rare that the fighter doesn't opt to tag along with the wizard as he scrapes poo off rocks:
A) because it's funny to watch and mock his buddy in the process
B) because something exciting might happen
C) it beats staying in town and doing a "real job".

The Spell Component Pouch is a glaring Achilles Heel for the prepped caster. I don't think it's a douche move to target it as such. It's not considered a douche move when you hit the fighter with Will Save Effects every other encounter (which happens in every game I play in as a pickup).

Paldasan wrote:

What I want to know is does the OP make his players get wax for bowstrings, oil for wooden weapons, whetstones for edged or pointed metal weapons, basic smithing tools and an anvil to repair dents and chips in metal armor, leather strips for scabbards and ties? Do archers have to restring their bows at the start of each combat or is it okay for them to walk around with strung bows for hours (stretching the bowstring and making it useless), after rain (does it ever rain?) do players have to get the rust out of their weapons?

I'm not the OP, but I'll answer.

To a certain degree, yes I do. It encourages Skill Usage. Specifically Craft, Profession which are kinda ignored in some games. My players tend to take them and I ensure that there are benefits beyond just not having gear degrade. In the end my goal is not to punish players but to leave them with more well rounded characters. *

I do use a variant magic item crafting system, that doesn't require spellcasting and also offers some non magical masterwork mechanical advantages. So there are strong reasons for non casters to take craft skills without getting feat taxed into obsolescence. .

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Hush CHRIS!
I can't amaze peeps with my appraising skills if youse tell everyone how I do it.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'd actually suggest dipping some kind of monk if the zen archer is too close to your no supernatural clause.

3 levels of base monk gives you the save bonuses that replicate all 3 save feats.
More skills.
Evasion, which is useful in Anti-Blaster roles.
Dodge as a bonus feat, as well as a possible monk class boost, for your Touch AC.
Improved Unarmed Strike, just in case you get hosed by a Shatter or Grease spell.
Depending on the build/Archtype Stunning Fist, which is not the best save for most casters. Or maybe Punishing Kick, which is ruthless when you "base" a caster.

Grappling, casters suck at grappling. Even Druids who might, might be ok at it will be at a disadvantage if you focus on it. Defensive Casting is not hard to pull off, but doing it grappled is near impossible.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

If it's not PFS, just ask your DM if you can swap Knuckle Axe for Kama. My players do it all the time, especially with the weirder monk weapons.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Gold is expensive for us.
The value in a fantasy world is totally subjective. 1gp is worth 1gp. Now a Chelish 1gp might be worth less in Andor since it's "devil money". But that I'd not covered in rules but has a historical precedent.

One of those precedents is the Money Changer, a guy in town who converts foreign currency to the local currency for a small fee. Not uncommon in Old Europe. One of the reasons we no longer use precious currency is that it too easily can exit a state, which is bad for the (small)
state if all of their money ends up somewhere else. The above example of Roman coin manipulation, one of the reasons it hurt was that it devalued all Roman currency in the outskirts of the empire, which in turn cost it's wealthiest citizens money as their currency was no longer the dominant choice for transactions.

Yeah I occasionally use some money fluctuation in my campaign worlds, it's a great way for characters to keep up with the wider world with an actual impact on them as residents.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah I do (but I was in the other thread so you knew that). I wanted to point out I'm not a nazi about it though.

I too tend to slack off on the high strength guys but focus on the STR dumpers.

I usually require a weight/ encumbrance balance between sessions but only get serious in game where large loot ends up in someone's hands.

I also try to balance loot between high value, light items (jewelry, art, rare books, magic etc.) and heavy trade goods (bolts of cloth, raw ore, booze, manufactured goods). I keep coins to a much more manageable level. I also use some higher value coins that ive liked since Forgotten Realms, analogs of the Harbor Moon.

In this, when loot is found, the characters can take the quick portable stuff and move on if they want, or they can work out the logistics of transporting the big score. Both choices have upsides and downsides.

As an aside, my players are pretty resourceful in having spare mounts and pack animals when needed. In our Kingmaker campaign, the Alchemist went straight to the Rich Parents trait to completely outfit for a long term expedition including 2 covered wagons. They came in very useful as that campaign progressed.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Vod wrote:

Coins are 50 to the pound, so that is only 240 pounds of gold.

Yet another abstraction. And significantly lighter that previous editions. Basically all coins are now the equivalent of a US Quarter. Though that means that gold coins are even smaller, like dimes maybe.

Yuck, how underwhelming.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Finding arrows is awesome.
Just like finding a bag of pearls that are perfect for Identify is awesome.

But yeah I've played in campaigns where material resources were completely irrelevant. It's fine for a night. But after awhile it strains my sense of immersion.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'm impressed then.
I used to hunt with a crossbow. I don't miss with a Barrett.

But a sling makes me a threat to any random object within 100 yards. Including my own skull. I find a Lansing Dart easier.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@theJeff,
When you find that dragon horde worth 12,000 gp; how do you get it to market? The RAW would indicate that if it's 12,000 gold coins, that weighs 1200 lbs. In the traditional 4 man party that's 300lbs a character.

This is the type of stuff that gets handwaived and drives me nuts. It may be tedious to keep track of a wagon full of loot, but getting a dragon horde to market, 100 miles from the lair is an adventure in and of itself.

Now it's pretty much assumed that Bags of Holding, Haversacks and even Portable Holes are ubiquitous. It's also not likely that said horde is all gold. The copper coins are exponentially more difficult to get home.

This stuff may be "unheroic", but it's not really heroic for there to be no real challenges to adventuring. Every year the game "abstracts" more of the mundane stuff that actually made up a lot of the old game.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

On arrows.
A Zen Archer can reasonably fire off 5 arrows a round pretty early. So he blows through a quiver in 4 flurry of arrows. That's not insignificant.

The cost may be irrelevant, but the actual space that's taken up by 80 arrows is quite significant.

Now an Effecient Quiver is a must for a Zen Archer. But at 15th level, that's not even adequet.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I usually like my Town guards to have cheap weapons. And less messy ones. Swords are messy.

To the OP.
I think Rapiers are a more civilian weapon where the longsword is a more military one.

I've never understood why the hand crossbow is an exotic weapon at all. The principle for firing one is pretty much the same as the big ones. Unless it's also a repeater, which also is a weird choice for exotic. These are easy to use.

But have you ever tried to use a stone age sling? That thing is a pain in the butt. It makes Nunchuks look like a huntin knife.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Zaister wrote:

rainzax wrote:

i have devised an abstract "Trinket" system.

Hey, I like your system! :)

hey thanks!

I like it as well. And may actually phase it in to my own game.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread does show an interesting facet of the game. At some point the economics fail. After what the 5th level? The only thing that matters is the secondary magic item economy.

Shallowsoul has been defending me all day. I do enforce material component rules, and I make players re purchase component pouches as they adventure and power up. The pouches have an increasing cost.

I do not require a spreadsheet that states:
12 pinches of bat guano
9 packets of colored sand
2 live spiders
3 pieces of goose down
Etc.

That's tedious.

Yet I have 0 issue with requiring a recurrent cost for components. Just as I have 0 issue with requiring a recurrent cost for arrows. Or a recurrent cost for stabling horses. Or eating. The cost of living rules are an abstraction to prevent micro management. But I've met players who own one set of clothes, have worn them everyday for 2 years of in game time and then think they can start talking to the local lord and be taken seriously. Because there is no rule that says otherwise. Someone upthread asked if there was a mechanical requirement to eat. Seriously? Is that needed?

There is no mechanical downside to be being dead either. But try it my table.

It's often stated that the game is about resource management. Those resources are actions, HP and per day abilities. Somehow, somewhen it stopped being about equipment. Apparently characters never have to face poverty or deprivation. Which is funny, since poverty and deprivation are one of the few things that would get me motivated to get into the situations my characters find themselves in.

Why do Rich adventurers keep going?

As a flavor bonus, material components are a great reason for wizards to leave their towers, stop crafting, and travel the world. Doing stuff.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

But it's true. Making a wizard track spell components does literally nothing to reduce their in-game abilities, unless you get to the point of playing a game of Statblocks & Spreadsheets and track every individual piece of string or poop and restricting its availability. In which case the player would probably just pick spells that use string or wool fluff or matches or other common things.

All it serves is to annoy the player with incredibly irrelevant minutiae.

YES

This isn't a case of deliberate irritation. It's one of natural selection. Magic Missle, has no M component. Both Sleep and Colour Spray do.

Which is the better spell?

There are literally hundreds of posts on this forum discussing how much better Color Spray (my favorite spell incidentally) is than Magic Missle. Yet the difference, and value, of NOT having a M component is never figured in to those mental calculations. Yet that component and the component rules are there for a reason.

I always have Magic Missle as a player. Frequently Spell Mastery for Magic Missle. So I can always cast it.

If you pull out your CRB and go through all the "no brainer" spells you'll find that most of the better ones have a M component. Some of them have weird or not necessarily cheap or readily available components. Ground Mica? Gem Dust? Dragon Scales and Demon's Blood, these are but in limiters to more powerful spells. It's subtle but it's there.

On a completely different note there are a bunch of good spells that have no S component, so you can cast them in full plate without risk of ASF. That's there for a reason too.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

It depends on who I'm playing with.
But.

Yeah I enforce the M components.
I also use Encumbrance, ammunition tracking, the environmental rules, and whether there is food out in the wilderness (rations).

All of which has led to me being called a jerk by certain "types" of players.

I'm old school.

While I appreciate players not wanting to play "Ledgers and Accountants", my suggestion is to not automatically go for the classes where that's necessary at some level.

I have a player who always, always plays a wizard. I've learned over time that he has to provide me with a spell list, each game day or I have to refer to him as Schroedinger.

If I don't check encumbrance, in a point buy game at creation, he will have dumped his STR to 7 and be wandering around with 45lbs of gear. He'll always be lightly encumbered, even after he just looted a small fortune in rare books.

And Spellbooks, are heavy and awkwardly sized.

Spell component pouches, are NOT infinite. They have everything a 1st level caster needs. As he levels up the pouch gets more expensive. Expensive Focus items aren't free (after 1st level), they have to be purchased.

Pouches are 10gp at Lvl1, that price doubles at every caster level. I don't generally go after the pouch, but it happens. I usually leave familiars and bonded items alone, it'll be rare that I go after one (familiars especially).

Profession and craft skills ranks can be used to supplement your pouch.

We also use a variant houserule for components, sometimes other stuff works. Weird components can actually duplicate meta magic. Ex. A Solar's arrowhead makes a Magic Missle spell Maximised for free; a Leonal whisker makes Cat's Grace function at +5 cl.
My Player's have tried some weird combinations of stuff just to see what happens.

Ktulu wrote:

Because despite people saying that the wizard (and other spellcasters) is overpowered, the tendancy over time hasn't been to nerf the class, it's been to nerf the classes weaknesses (or eliminate them altogether).

Bingo, this is the single truest statement I've ever seen regarding Caster/Martial disparity in several years of reading this forum. Most people have just come to accept that Wizards have no down side. It isn't true.

Now I don't require constant ledgers, but my regular group knows full well that some aspects of the game are actual parts of the game. If I ask for something pertaining to THEIR character, they need to know the answer. Like how much their gear weighs or if they have the ability to start a fire.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah I guess it would work with something like Chill Touch.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

No one has mentioned it.
But

The Madu is remarkable in combination with CE and Fighting Defensively or both.

Madu

The madu is a round, light shield with four spikes extending from the sides. 

Benefit: If you are proficient with the madu, you may wield it and fight defensively with a –2 penalty instead of the normal–4 penalty for fighting defensively, and your attack penalty for using Combat Expertise improves by +1 (minimum –1 penalty). You cannot hold anything else in the hand that bears a madu. If you are not proficient in madu, treat it as a light spiked shield.

Source Adventurer's Armory, Legacy of Fire Player's Guide

Now you need an Exotic Profeciency, which is a tax, but think about what this actually gives.

Shield Bonus +1
Fight Def bonus -2/+2
CE bonus _/+1

It can be combined with Crane Style.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah......
Ranged Feint exists, but it's not just Improved Feint with a ranged weapon. It's been a class feature of PrClasses every time I've ever seen it.

But yeah you're right it's worthless for ranged attackers. Unless they are vulnerable when they get "based", where it becomes pretty handy. (Like a character that is so ranged focused that he has no melee abilities at all).

And no, Touch Spells don't qualify for Power Attack.
A touch spell is not a Melee Attack. It's a Touch Attack. They are different.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'd say a barroom brawler would be a good candidate for CE. Since he's almost certainly unarmored.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

The example is not really a case of balance.
It'd make no sense for 8 Orcs to only attack 1 of 4 people.

CE does prove useful in games where players get outnumbered. Those are likely not the norm, judging from forum examples; but it happens.

I agree that 8 on 1 is super unlikely, unless the overall odds are 6 to 1 or more, which is unwinnable unless there is a huge CR deficit.

But 4 on one, yeah, and that scenario means the PC is also flanked. AC boosts are indispensable there.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Rickmeister wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

Attack and AC changes just increase or reduce outgoing or incoming damage by 5%. The number of attacks don't matter. The total magnitude of damage may, but if you're on the wrong side of the damage disparity dropping both incoming and outgoing damage by the same ratio isn't helping you win.

You are not alone. While you can keep the 8 orcs busy, your teammates have more time for a variety of things :)

But then you run into the question of why the 8 Orcs keep swinging at the guy they can't hit instead of going after the real threats.

This is where RPG combat FAILS to accurately represent the historical melee.

Players are always attempting to conduct an ongoing threat assessment of the battlefield. In effect, PLayers are all generals who survey the battlefield from a detached aerial viewpoint. Characters don't have that advantage. It's meta thinking, but it is unavoidable.

Why, why are the 8 Orcs disengaging from the opponent that is within range of their falchions and great axes to step back and find a new target? This makes no sense. At best the argument is that the Orcs would disengage (wasting possible full attacks) to provoke an AoO to then move and engage another target.

Wasted actions. In a tight action economy.

That makes Combat Expertise an exceptional feat.

Of course the above example is actually rare. Very few encounters are written that way in the modern era, because humanoid swarms are extremely dangerous to PCs and have an ability to kill off PCs almost accidentally. To most players that is ignominious.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah that's interesting.
It also seems very powerful to me. I think I'd have to test it.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

LE RESISTANCE!

...God, that would get super old super quick.

Yep.

That's the point.

I've yet to meet a player that could actually pull this off for 3 straight hours, and that's with a functioning chronograph.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Wouldn't detect magic pick up lingering effects?

Like the sword that got cracked and hand a mending cast on it.

Or the gold coin or staff that had been repetitively used as the focus for a Light cantrip.

Or any form of construction that had ever been spell manipulated. Stone Shape, Wall of Stone, Excavate etc.

If Prestidigitation was used to clean and polish some boots? Or spice up some food?

Detect Magic as an always on forgone conclusion has problems as well.

And Resistance;
Resistance has a duration of 1 minute. The assumption that it's always on AND initiated just prior to any initiative roll or saving throw is hardly realistic.

I use this house rule on occasion. If a player operates on the assumption that these abilities are ALWAYS on they have to RP it.

You must say RESISTANCE' ( in a bad French accent ) every 60 seconds of REAL time.

This works with Detect Magic as well. Except it's DETECTO MAGICA ( in a Hermione Granger accent ).

This is realistic, and it's hysterically funny on the first night you use it.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

To paraphrase what I said erlier: It MAY be ok for one pc to cheat on the other pcs IF the players are ok with it. But it is never ok if one player (with the help of the GM)cheats on the other players.

DING DING DING!

We have a winner!

You're being set up. This is a trap.

I'm guessing Andy is the old 2nd Ed. Player? Or is he A newbie?

If it's the latter, this is him not getting what the game is, PVP, while long established is a very different sub-genre of RPGs. One that everyone needs to be aware that they are potentially participating in. The CORE game and it's mechanics don't actually facilitate this type of play. It makes the GM's job much harder. You can hit him with STD checks and local law enforcement as a" get on track " technique but that's playing to HIS game, him vs. everyone.

If it's the former, and he is a veteran of old school Rpg games, he knows that this will end poorly. He has seen it before. It may have been a case of being mistrained in his neophyte games but I doubt it. The old game actually had rules to handle this sort of stuff, but they weren't great.
In this he is taking advantage of your inexperience. This scenario is what makes or breaks groups. Not everyone want to be on CBS's Survivor. But everyone on that show knows what's going on. They know the rules. You've got potentially 70% of your table that doesn't know what game they're playing. Can't end well.

On the upside, it doesn't sound like he wants the money for more gear. Which is just candy asssed whiner gaming.

I'd let him swipe stuff, make him roll a d20, when someone(else) asks why, make him explain it. If they want to counter roll, they now have that option.

I don't ascribe to the school of thought where the DM is playing against the group. It's a component of the job but a minor one. Yet a DM who is in collusion with one person against the group without freely offering that option to everyone else is not only in an adversarial position but FAILING to do his basic job. Referee & Judge.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

The only advantage of PS over PA is the prerequisites are different and they are driven by 2 different stats. So with a STR of 18 it doesn't matter with fists on a monk.

The monk has no "off hand attack", it's all primary.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

That thing is massive. It'd be heavy as heck.

I'd go with Curve Blade stats.
Exotic/Finesse/2 handed
Make it a Monk Weapon. (this currently bypasses TWF)
Let it use Dervish Dance, I could totally see it as a weapon that Sarenrae would like, it looks like the Sun.

She attacks one handed as a spin maneuver, that'd take 2 hands to get going. It is basically a huge chakram, but 1d12 is too much unless it's a 20/x3. Plus it'd tick me off if someone wanted that and a heavy shield.

I don't know about being a double weapon, it only has one "head". If it's double you get into weirdness with enchantments and pricing. Also it could only be made with one special material.

It's really a big Moon and Fire Wheel, but that weapon isn't statted in Pathfinder.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

My bad.
What I'd meant was don't start them at lvl 3 or 4... I see people do that too much, especially when newbies are involved. The game is complicated to start with. Some folks, the rule loving types who seem to end up as GMs, sometimes think, "I'll start you off at level 3 so you can do all this cool stuff", without stopping to realize that with newbies basic stuff like Inititive and simple Stat Bonuses are totally New Concepts.

All Virgins to PNP games should be started at level 1. IMHO.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

To the OP.

If it's a bunch of newbie players, just use the CRB. Block the rest of it, APG, UM, UC etc. Too many options is bewildering to new players. I'd also advise NOT to advance their starting levels. Use the KISS principle.

Of those.

Imp. Initiative
Dodge
Iron Will
Weapon Focus
Power Attack
TWF
Weapon Finesse
Point Blank Shot

One of those work for everyone.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

SAD vs. MAD.
The full caster classes need a little MAD in their lives. SAD building strategies are really dull in a lot of the pickup games I've played in this year.

Stat Boosts.
They are silly in how they are handled on magic items. For it to be permanent, as in more spells, the item can't be removed. Think about that, your cleric, Mage whatever is going to sleep and bathe with a circlet on all of the time.

Although I'd be fine with removing the extra spells all together, the DC boost is enough of a positive that you'd still see the stat booster items chosen before most everything else.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Combat Expertise, I became virtually invincible against most enemies. It never occurred to me until I started reading these forums that it wasn't a good feat.

Don't make the mistake of confusing the highly subjective opinions on this forum as facts.

The feat is not horrible.
In the right game it's very good.

Most of the arguments against it here are based on it not furthering a SAD build strategy. That's Power Gamist, which is bad usually. Most of the arguments fail to recognize that the value of certain feats depend highly on game style, encounter design, play style and story.

I do not mean that in a bad way. Most people play with the same people over and over, certain expectations are met in every session. Point Buy is being assumed, And lethal force is always your first option.

Let's look at CE.

Int 13 is a weird number. It's odd and in point buy that means it's one you want to boost later. Sadly the characters that would use this feat are not Int boosters. So yeah a 12 would be better.

BUT, having more skill points is not a bad thing for Fighters, Rogues or Bards (or Monks who can actually bypass this and get the maneuvers anyway). Most of the arguments in this thread ignore this benefit, likely because they play in low skill focus games. More languages is ALWAYS good, unless you play in one if those games where everyone speaks Common like it's Star Trek. That's silly common actually.

CE stacks with Fighting Defensively, so the original premise to this thread is shot. Yet it points out one of the HUGE advantages to CE, it stacks with a bunch of other things. This gets missed by even experienced players.
At first level, you can stack Dodge, Combat Expertise and Fighting Defensively. that's a big deal for a 1st level rogue that can be one shotted by a lucky goblin with a horse chopper.

It does add to your skill with Maneuvers, specifically your ability to resist them.

It's a dodge bonus to AC, so it boosts your Touch AC. Which is stupid good against things like Shadows and Spell Casters.

So it's not a straight feat tax.
A feat tax is a non combat option for a PrC like Skill Focus.

And where it really, really shines is when you have to fight your Dominated team mate or a bunch of mooks who swarm you. Not that this ever happens in some games, because that's not fun for some groups.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I'm probably the last person with a vested interest to see this.

Thank you to the rules team for the clean up. This was well done and more importantly simply done.

The flurry adjustment was one that could have become unnecessarily complicated. While they're are people that will intensely dislike this decision, I thank the lord that the end result is simple. For hardcore gamers, simplicity is almost a bad thing. For those of us who play more casual types, simplicity is a godsend. This method can be used and understood by a neophyte player without the need for a coach to hand hold them. That's good for the game.

The Ki Pool adjustment. Is likewise simple. It solves a longstanding problem. It prevents the "Monk's Arsenal" issue. It's cheaper and easier than my houserule fixes. It keeps the value of a single "special circumstance" weapon, yet that weapon will change over the course of the character's life and level progression. A nice balance has been struck.

The AoMF; I've been a very strident critic of this item for some time. I'm not sure that this fix is going to change that. It's still a Druidic (now Summoner) item. It's only boosted those classes. Yet the Monk is not quite crippled by it's necessity. It's cost reduction addresses its principal flaw, for the monk. Yet it's still not a Monk Item in the way that a Staff of the Hierophant is a Divine caster item or a Holy Avenger is a Paladin item.

Thank you.
I happily acknowledge that this is the most significant rule adjustment since the publication of the CRB. I believe this is an excellent step that will address the real issues with the class. Perhaps not the dream issues, but those will never go away.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Undead aren't ALWAYS evil. Just almost all of the time.

See Normalacy is restored.

Honestly though I'm not getting where the 3rd level spell trumps Pharasma argument is coming from? No where in the spell description is the former bodies soul even mentioned.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I see hardening as a viable alternative. Yet there are 10 years where the spell went to limbo.

I miss Glasse too.

Anyone remember the cloud giant fortress with Glassteeled floors?
Very cool spell.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Also;
It seems silly to argue ecosystems, and natural and unnatural when the campaign world is impossible by all of our understanding of ecology, physics, biology and genetics. The game worlds we play in do not make sense from a scientific perspective.
They never will.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Is it absolutely certain that mindless undead are inhabited by the souls of their former selves?

My opinion on Undeath has always been that it is unnatural and in some way defies the the physical (and metaphysical) laws of the universe. Much like Aberations, which are also almost always evil.

I've never viewed zombies or skeletons as a wholly evil abomination on the world. Neither would I say they lack sentience, they are at some level self aware. The process that creates them summons some form of Animus, that at it's core is not a benign being. If that animus is a being that, for whatever reason, is not supposed to exist on the mortal plane, it is at some level Evil.

Now Vampires are a whole different thing. They are self aware, self identified as their former, living, selves. In some way they are simply in a different state of being. But they subsist on the living in a parasitic fashion and they are not a component of the natural world. They have hunger; not the "I could go for a sandwich" hunger, but the "I'm fixated on THAT particular girl, I HAVE to tear out her throat" kinda hunger.
There's a place for touchy feely vampires. My rpg table is generally not that place. There IS a Lawful Neutral Vampire in Kaer Maga. There is also a LN ghoul, but she's an Alchemical creation, not a necromantic one, so kindof a special case to start with.

Liches; Liches are always evil. They are always evil because you have to do some seriously messed up stuff to become a lich. Now you could hand wave all the messed up stuff a lich needs to do to become an effectively immortal high level god wizard. In doing so you now need a reason why the world is not overflowing with kooky undead wizards, since wizards deal with weird unsavory stuff their whole careers so a couple of centuries as a lich doesn't seem that bad, unless it requires you to do some really heinous things to get there.
I prefer evil Liches. Preferably evil and mentally unhinged. No one is ever gonna change me on that.

I can see a place for no evil undead. But it should be rare. More importantly, Good and Evil are not philosophical concepts in Pathfinder, they are actual mechanics. If the mechanics say that evil=inimical to the Material Plane then the state of being that is Undeath, is evil. The actual intentions and motivations of individual undead are irrelevant, their existence is an evil act. That's their lot in (in)life.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Of all the post AP stuff, Galt has been the most fun. Also some of the hardest to do since their is almost no source material. If Paizo ever publishes a campaign book about Galt, the Aldori, Northern Casmaron or the Rogarvias it'll likely not mesh at all with the beast this campaign turned into.
I LOVE Kingmaker, but the last 2 years have been so demanding that I've retired from DM duties for the foreseeable future. The other GMs are already talking about a 4 th generation episode. That's one that'll be way out of "cannon" I think.
The PC's kingdom is so big now that the World Wound will have to be addressed at some point.

What I think I'm getting at is, you're kinda on your own at some point and just gonna have to make some stuff up. Just don't get upset when some sourcebook comes out in 2 years and contradicts all your made up stuff. Some people get crazy about Cannon, try to prep folks ahead of time for that.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not in the hate Eberon crowd. There is some cool stuff there. But I like steam punk, I liked Gamma World and Star Frontiers heck I even liked Boot Hill back in the day and I'm pretty sure I'm in a very tiny club there.

But I also like ancient Egypt. Now I get what you're saying, why is it so derivative? I think it comes from the simple truth that nothing in our historical framework comes close to ancient Egypt. Ancient China, Mesopotamia and India, even the Pre-Colombian cultures fail to have what Egypt has. Endurance? I'm not sure what it is. Egypt is old, older than most others that we're adequately familiar with. The art, fashion and architecture is extremely distinct. Their theology and it's development is known and understood. Because of the Bible, Egypt is Historical and yet Fantasticly alive for most people. The other cultures have never captured that kind imagination to such a broad degree.
All of this makes it hard to use Egypt piecemeal. If you borrow some stuff from Egypt, it just feels like Egypt. That's the issue I think. Other settings had their Desert Pyramid areas, but few made those areas culturally significant. Our Egypt, was the point around which the ancient world developed. Even today, Egypt is important, it's in the news nightly. The world still watches it, visits it, dreams of it, and sets stories in it.
I somewhat agree with you that Paizo went a little too Egypt with their Egypt, but given the slack treatment that other Settings have provided it's a welcome change.
It's also worth noting that Osirion is NOT Egypt. There are some spectacular differences. Yeah there's Pharohs and Pyramids and mummies. But the Royal Palace is in an enormous locust shell, the Pharoh is served by Genies and the desert beneath is a not a treasure trove of burial vaults but a labyrinth of horrors that guard some terrible things like a City of Ghouls.
The issue with Ossirion is the issue with Maztica. The culture it is based on is so non-generic that it's hard to do an "Egypt Lite" version while still not half assing it.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Oh and FREAKIN Minis.
This is terrible news.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Just found that.
That's kinda cool.
And awful. My game money is already stretched awful thin.

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

1 person marked this as a favorite.

J. Christopher Harris wrote:

It's a kitchen-sink world, and it's meant to be. For every person who doesn't like analogues for this or that real-world culture or location there are fifty other people looking at the world map, going, "where the &%$# are the Vikings? Where can I play Blackbeard?"

If Paizo is standing by, saying, " here's where you can play Blackbeard", and "rob the Pharaoh's tomb right over here" then they get that person's business, and hopefully the business of their gaming group. Then Paizo can use that familiar backdrop to layer in cool and innovative story, etc. It's an approach that obviously works.

There is certainly nothing wrong with a different approach, but it isn't going to draw as much business.

Again, I know that. I just think that with a bit of effort they could have made the "offending" parts both recognizable as well as less boring/jarring. See Eberron.

It would have made my work as a GM much more easier, as I have to alter those parts to be able to stomach them.

I know a BUNCH of gamers who HATE Eberon.

Have you ever encountered a campaign setting called Tek'umel, the Empire of the Petal Throne? It's old, like Blackmoor and Greyhawk old, arguably a little bit older as it was the setting for stories in the 1960s. It's one of the truly original campaign settings. It was created by an anthropologist named M.A.R. Barker who taught at some college during the early years of RPGs.

No?

It's not surprising. I've only met 3 gamers in 30 years of gaming who were even aware of it. AND it was published by TSR, at least I think it was.
It was huge and awesome and unique and wholly foreign in a lot of ways. It was also not popular enough to keep in print. You might find it on eBay. But it's a longshot.

There have been others, over the years. Dark Sun is pretty different. Spelljammer too, but for wildly different reasons. Planescape took root, but it's not even close to the "copy/paste" settings.

There was a setting from the 80's called Sky Realms of Joreune, actually a discreet game. Totally alien setting, absolutely awesome in every way. The art work looked like something from a Dutch Master. Way way ahead of it's time.
Yep that one dissappeared too.

Totally original settings are the province of DMs, as home-brews. The simple truth of this sort of thing is that to make something totally original also accessible requires a spectacular story teller sitting at the table to make everyone "get it".

Not all DMs are created equal; and the default settings have to account for that.