Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant


Off-Topic Discussions

451 to 500 of 951 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

ciretose wrote:

@Ashiel

Examples of bad GMing don't convince me of your case. The spells says it makes someone friendly to you, but it explicitly says they aren't controlled.

I never said they were controlled. I did say that you can make them do things they wouldn't normally do, with your force of will. Why do I say that? Because that's what the damn spell says.


Ashiel wrote:
examples of in game situations.

How devoted the hobgoblin was, and how much trouble he might get in, and so on would determine if he gives those plans up.

As for betraying former allies, that depends on how close they were a I guess. In short it falls into GM territory to an extent because only the GM knows the how far a charmed spell can go with an NPC.

Stabbing a loved on in the face, which I understand is different than turning on an ally, would not take place. That is the area of dominate, and even then they get a 2nd save.

Getting the guard to not rat you out if he spots you trying to sneak by him is something I would allow.

Andoran

Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I disagree with your interpretation. By that logic convincing them to visit a sick child is the same as convincing them to kill their mother.

They aren't under your control. They simply are friendly to you and view you as a trusted ally. Friendly isn't even the highest descriptor under diplomacy. They like and trust you.

That is it.

It is a first level spell. It specifically says you don't control them and they aren't automatons. Your interpretation makes it one of the most powerful spells in the game. This is the kind of loose reading that causes problems to occur in games and casters to appear over powered.

Off to bed (it is late EST), I'm sure this will be resolved before I wake up with all parties in full agreement...


Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I understand that its magic, but my post explaining the intent of "anything" still stands. It never says the spell gets them to do anything. It is giving you the setup to get them to act outside of their nature.


wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
examples of in game situations.

How devoted the hobgoblin was, and how much trouble he might get in, and so on would determine if he gives those plans up.

As for betraying former allies, that depends on how close they were a I guess. In short it falls into GM territory to an extent because only the GM knows the how far a charmed spell can go with an NPC.

Stabbing a loved on in the face, which I understand is different than turning on an ally, would not take place. That is the area of dominate, and even then they get a 2nd save.

Getting the guard to not rat you out if he spots you trying to sneak by him is something I would allow.

Since Ciretose likes dropping names, James Jacobs wrote Red Hand of Doom, and specifically notes that the goblins are religious fanatics that fight to the death, believe irrevocable in military, and will not answer or help the PCs in any way...unless you use charm person or similar magics.

Again, something they normally wouldn't do =/= suicidal/obviously harmful. There are consequences to literally everything that you do. However, you could be charmed and told to stab someone on the street, and if the charmer's will is beyond you, then you will stab them. You'll probably go to jail, or at least be arrested, but you'll do it. It's not something you would normally do, but the action itself was not obviously suicidal or harmful to yourself.

Charms are pretty dangerous. There's a reason they are so easily dodged, grant opposed checks, and grant +5 bonuses if using them in combat. If a Paladin was charmed in my games and forced to do something he wouldn't normally do, I wouldn't strip him of his powers. Sure it seems like he went along with it of his own will, but it was because the spell and the caster's will forced him to do so. Fortunately, most Paladins are highly resistant to such things.


Back tot the original topic as noted: Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant
I have been gaming with Ashiel for the past eight years. So, I would bias like to nominate him for a paizo rules consultant; however, i would like to make a few objective statements about Ashiel as a Pathfinder/D&D enthusiast and as a DM.
-Ashiel has always found balanced ways to formulate characters, games, and tactics
-As a player, he forces a DM to appreciate the mechanics of the game (not as a munchkin). Ashiel has an astounding ability to make a character with a well thought out background and still have skills and talents that fit his story. What i am trying to say here is that he showed me that Pathfinder is not a game of power but a game of tactics and ingenuity. He has showed me that Pathfinder is not a table top version of some hack and slash side scroller. Each encounter is a game of chess where the first few moves can mean a swift encounter or certain death for some or all of the party members and potentially other npcs (not necessarily the ones that want to kill you).
-As a DM I have never hear him say "no" to a character idea (and their have been some outlandish ones). He has always formulated a way to make someones character dreams possible without being over powered or being overshadowed by rest of the party.
-Lastly, our gaming group has evolved in knowledge and tactics throughout our years of tabletop gaming. Above all I look for only two things in a game: for there to be an interesting story (if i find a book with a tenth of the story that our games have i am guaranteed to have just found a NYT best seller or a classic used in scholarly study) and a challenge (why would anyone play a game where victory was assured?). And, when i play in Ashiel's games i always find both.

_______________________

*if someone wishes to know of a munchkin, I am the player who tries to break his d20 systems or exploit his games. I do this not because i am a power gaming munchkin, but because i think that the only way to find balance is to find the flaws.


wraithstrike wrote:
Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I understand that its magic, but my post explaining the intent of "anything" still stands. It never says the spell gets them to do anything. It is giving you the setup to get them to act outside of their nature.

Dictionary-Convince wrote:

1. to move by argument or evidence to belief, agreement, consent, or a course of action: to convince a jury of his guilt; A test drive will convince you that this car handles well.

2. to persuade; cajole: We finally convinced them to have dinner with us.

That's the dictionary definition of the word convince. If I win the opposed Charisma check, I convince my target. Since I have convinced my target, that means they agree to follow my orders.

That's the biggest problem with my stance on the spell. Sure, you can't control them as an automaton, because with an automaton, you don't have to convince it to do anything, it simply does. With Charm Person, there is always a chance you fail.

"Agree to my Planar Binding Terms" (opposed check, if the Ghaele fails, the Ghaele agrees to the terms, and is then subject to the terms of the Planar Binding terms, not Charm Monster).

"Give all of your wealth to charity" (opposed check, if the Ghaele wins, she refuses to give away her wealth)

"Do not resist the next spell I cast on you" (No check needed, she already views you as friendly; that the next spell is Geas/Quest isn't factored into the equation)

"Do not move as I line up this axe to execute you" (auto fail, the Ghaele is now free of the charm and very angry).


wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
examples of in game situations.

How devoted the hobgoblin was, and how much trouble he might get in, and so on would determine if he gives those plans up.

As for betraying former allies, that depends on how close they were a I guess. In short it falls into GM territory to an extent because only the GM knows the how far a charmed spell can go with an NPC.

Stabbing a loved on in the face, which I understand is different than turning on an ally, would not take place. That is the area of dominate, and even then they get a 2nd save.

Getting the guard to not rat you out if he spots you trying to sneak by him is something I would allow.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree. The exact wording is...

PRD wrote:
You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.

It literally says anything it wouldn't normally do. A dangerous spellcaster with an exceptional Charisma could force a child's nanny to drown the child, possibly killing the heir of an enemy, while possibly leaving the nanny to take the heat for it. Obviously in a world of magic, such a ruse may not be so easily believed, but it's a good start for a bad guy. It even says that you can convince them to do things that are very dangerous.

So like I said. Using Anakin and the Emperor again...

Emperor: "Okay, enough with the kissing. Go kill your Jedi friends." *did I mention my Charisma is pimp and you're a whiny kid who folds easily?*
Anakin: "..." *draws his hood*
Emperor: "God I love being evil."


Arcane Toolbox wrote:

Back tot the original topic as noted: Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant

I have been gaming with Ashiel for the past eight years. So, I would bias like to nominate him for a paizo rules consultant; however, i would like to make a few objective statements about Ashiel as a Pathfinder/D&D enthusiast and as a DM.
-Ashiel has always found balanced ways to formulate characters, games, and tactics
-As a player, he forces a DM to appreciate the mechanics of the game (not as a munchkin). Ashiel has an astounding ability to make a character with a well thought out background and still have skills and talents that fit his story. What i am trying to say here is that he showed me that Pathfinder is not a game of power but a game of tactics and ingenuity. He has showed me that Pathfinder is not a table top version of some hack and slash side scroller. Each encounter is a game of chess where the first few moves can mean a swift encounter or certain death for some or all of the party members and potentially other npcs (not necessarily the ones that want to kill you).
-As a DM I have never hear him say "no" to a character idea (and their have been some outlandish ones). He has always formulated a way to make someones character dreams possible without being over powered or being overshadowed by rest of the party.
-Lastly, our gaming group has evolved in knowledge and tactics throughout our years of tabletop gaming. Above all I look for only two things in a game: for there to be an interesting story (if i find a book with a tenth of the story that our games have i am guaranteed to have just found a NYT best seller or a classic used in scholarly study) and a challenge (why would anyone play a game where victory was assured?). And, when i play in Ashiel's games i always find both.

_______________________

*if someone wishes to know of a munchkin, I am the player who tries to break his d20 systems or exploit his games. I do this not because i am a power gaming munchkin, but because i think that the only way to find balance is to find the flaws.

I think I may cry...thanks buddy. Q.Q

It's good to see you on the boards. ^.^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It should also be noted the the enchantment school is split into two sub-schools

Quote:


Charm: A charm spell changes how the subject views you, typically making it see you as a good friend.

Compulsion: A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way its mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject's actions or the effects on the subject, others allow you to determine the subject's actions when you cast the spell, and still others give you ongoing control over the subject.

Charm not should be able to do more than talk a good buddy into a bad idea.

Compulsion is what takes away free will to a large extent.


Tels wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I understand that its magic, but my post explaining the intent of "anything" still stands. It never says the spell gets them to do anything. It is giving you the setup to get them to act outside of their nature.

Dictionary-Convince wrote:

1. to move by argument or evidence to belief, agreement, consent, or a course of action: to convince a jury of his guilt; A test drive will convince you that this car handles well.

2. to persuade; cajole: We finally convinced them to have dinner with us.

That's the dictionary definition of the word convince. If I win the opposed Charisma check, I convince my target. Since I have convinced my target, that means they agree to follow my orders.

That's the biggest problem with my stance on the spell. Sure, you can't control them as an automaton, because with an automaton, you don't have to convince it to do anything, it simply does. With Charm Person, there is always a chance you fail.

"Agree to my Planar Binding Terms" (opposed check, if the Ghaele fails, the Ghaele agrees to the terms, and is then subject to the terms of the Planar Binding terms, not Charm Monster).

"Give all of your wealth to charity" (opposed check, if the Ghaele wins, she refuses to give away her wealth)

"Do not resist the next spell I cast on you" (No check needed, she already views you as friendly; that the next spell is Geas/Quest isn't factored into the equation)

"Do not move as I line up this axe to execute you" (auto fail, the Ghaele is now free of the charm and very angry).

+1 to all of this. Well presented Tels.


wraithstrike wrote:

It should also be noted the the enchantment school is split into two sub-schools

Quote:


Charm: A charm spell changes how the subject views you, typically making it see you as a good friend.

Compulsion: A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way its mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject's actions or the effects on the subject, others allow you to determine the subject's actions when you cast the spell, and still others give you ongoing control over the subject.

Charm not should be able to do more than talk a good buddy into a bad idea.

Compulsion is what takes away free will to a large extent.

Spells do what they say they do.


You have converted me to the Boards-side, hax. Admittedly, i have tried to stay away because this will envelop my time.


Arcane Toolbox wrote:
You have converted me to the Boards-side, hax. Admittedly, i have tried to stay away because this will envelop my time.

Well it's good to see you. Here, have a cookie. ^.^


Tels wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I understand that its magic, but my post explaining the intent of "anything" still stands. It never says the spell gets them to do anything. It is giving you the setup to get them to act outside of their nature.

Dictionary-Convince wrote:

1. to move by argument or evidence to belief, agreement, consent, or a course of action: to convince a jury of his guilt; A test drive will convince you that this car handles well.

2. to persuade; cajole: We finally convinced them to have dinner with us.

That's the dictionary definition of the word convince. If I win the opposed Charisma check, I convince my target. Since I have convinced my target, that means they agree to follow my orders.

That's the biggest problem with my stance on the spell. Sure, you can't control them as an automaton, because with an automaton, you don't have to convince it to do anything, it simply does. With Charm Person, there is always a chance you fail.

"Agree to my Planar Binding Terms" (opposed check, if the Ghaele fails, the Ghaele agrees to the terms, and is then subject to the terms of the Planar Binding terms, not Charm Monster).

"Give all of your wealth to charity" (opposed check, if the Ghaele...

That charisma check is not that hard if I focus on it. There are certain some monsters with high charismas, but not many of them will compete with a player.

You are still ignoring the post about the meaning of "anything" in the context of the sentence. The definition of convince was never in question.


Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
examples of in game situations.

How devoted the hobgoblin was, and how much trouble he might get in, and so on would determine if he gives those plans up.

As for betraying former allies, that depends on how close they were a I guess. In short it falls into GM territory to an extent because only the GM knows the how far a charmed spell can go with an NPC.

Stabbing a loved on in the face, which I understand is different than turning on an ally, would not take place. That is the area of dominate, and even then they get a 2nd save.

Getting the guard to not rat you out if he spots you trying to sneak by him is something I would allow.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree. The exact wording is...

PRD wrote:
You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.

It literally says anything it wouldn't normally do. A dangerous spellcaster with an exceptional Charisma could force a child's nanny to drown the child, possibly killing the heir of an enemy, while possibly leaving the nanny to take the heat for it. Obviously in a world of magic, such a ruse may not be so easily believed, but it's a good start for a bad guy. It even says that you can convince them to do things that are very dangerous.

So like I said. Using Anakin and the Emperor again...

Emperor: "Okay, enough with the kissing. Go kill your Jedi friends." *did I mention my Charisma is pimp and you're a whiny kid who folds easily?*
Anakin: "..." *draws his hood*
Emperor: "God I love being evil."

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.


Dictionary.com: Anything wrote:


anything
[en-ee-thing]   Example Sentences Origin
an·y·thing
   [en-ee-thing] Show IPA
pronoun
1. any thing whatever; something, no matter what: Do you have anything for a toothache?
noun
2. a thing of any kind.
adverb
3. in any degree; to any extent; in any way; at all: Does it taste anything like chocolate?
Idioms
4. anything but, in no degree or respect; not in the least: The plans were anything but definite.
5. anything goes, any type of conduct, dress, speech, etc., is considered acceptable or valid or is likely to be encountered and tolerated: That resort is a place where anything goes!

Something worth pointing out is that charms are very difficult to land in combat situations. Unlike dominate spells, enemies save at +5. That's a pretty huge deal. In our Red Hand Remix, the party has been playing for about 5 sessions, and the resident charm-spammer has landed about 4 charms total. Most of those were on weak-willed mooks, and two spellcasters who rolled really, really badly.


Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3


I am sure I FAQ'd this before, but no answer. I guess I can do so again, but not right now. Tomorrow maybe. I then have to handle posters that harass devs so I can get the FAQ's back. :)


Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.


wraithstrike wrote:
. I then have to handle posters that harass devs so I can get the FAQ's back. :)

And wait till there back from Con and finish debating the Monk. ;P


wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.

Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^


wraithstrike wrote:
Tels wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Tels wrote:

You're missing one of the key words in the spell. CONVINCE. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, I have CONVINCED the creature to follow my orders. That's the part you are either ignoring, or missing out of the spell.

Charm isn't as powerful as Dominate because Dominate has less randomness in it. I can give someone an order via Dominate and they'll usually do it. But if I give an order via Charm, I have to CONVINCE them to follow it.

You're using yourself as an example. But the thing you're also failing to take into account in using yourself, is you aren't having your brain messed with via a reality altering force called Magic. Magic isn't just 'using words' it's literally altering the very neural pathways in your brain, to achieve the desires of the Caster.

I understand that its magic, but my post explaining the intent of "anything" still stands. It never says the spell gets them to do anything. It is giving you the setup to get them to act outside of their nature.

Dictionary-Convince wrote:

1. to move by argument or evidence to belief, agreement, consent, or a course of action: to convince a jury of his guilt; A test drive will convince you that this car handles well.

2. to persuade; cajole: We finally convinced them to have dinner with us.

That's the dictionary definition of the word convince. If I win the opposed Charisma check, I convince my target. Since I have convinced my target, that means they agree to follow my orders.

That's the biggest problem with my stance on the spell. Sure, you can't control them as an automaton, because with an automaton, you don't have to convince it to do anything, it simply does. With Charm Person, there is always a chance you fail.

"Agree to my Planar Binding Terms" (opposed check, if the Ghaele fails, the Ghaele agrees to the terms, and is then subject to the terms of the Planar Binding terms, not Charm Monster).

"Give all of your wealth to charity" (opposed check,

...

Anything has nothing to do with the sentence at all. The key word really is Convince. Regardless of what I ask the creature to do, as long as it isn't suicidal or obviously harmful, if I convince the creature, the creature agrees and follows through with the order.

Anything doesn't factor into it. Anything literally means anything, with the exception of something suicidal or obviously harmful. There is no context that I'm missing. If I win the opposed Charisma Check, then I have convinced the creature. Convincing the creature means it agrees with me, and if it agrees with me, it follows my order.

So if I order you to kill your wife, I get an opposed Charisma Check. If I win, I have convinced you that killing your wife really is a good thing, so you go ahead and kill your wife.

That's how Charm Person works. I really can't see any other possibility of interpreting it, that doesn't make it a totally useless spell. If all it does is turn people 'friendly' for the purposes of the Diplomacy skill, then the spell is pretty useless and doesn't need a higher level Charm Monster. However, that's not how it's used. It's used to alter the minds of the person, and to get them to do what you want, by allowing you to convince them it's a good thing.

Again, the key word is Convince. I use my words (via an opposed Charisma check) to persuade them into agreement. Convince is the single most important word in the Charm Person spell, at least in my opinion.

[Edit] If we're moving onto different subject and agreeing to disagree until some sort of official ruling. Please ignore this post.


Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.
Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^

What's your single most favorite encounter you've ever built, played in, or witnessed?


Tels wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.
Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^
What's your single most favorite encounter you've ever built, played in, or witnessed?

Oh boy, that is a very hard question. O.o

I'll be back and try to answer it after thinking a bit...


Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.
Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^
What's your single most favorite encounter you've ever built, played in, or witnessed?

Oh boy, that is a very hard question. O.o

I'll be back and try to answer it after thinking a bit...

How about top 5 or 10 then?


Tels wrote:
How about top 5 or 10 then?

Much easier, but it'll take some time to compile. To keep you entertained in the meantime, here's a copy/pasta of one of my recent favorite characters which I shared with someone PMing me with questions concerning playing undead PCs. I shared some advice with dealing with undead PCs (on both sides of the screen), methods of dealing with level adjustments (CR adjustments), and methods for creating lower powered templates from existing undead that can be applied on top of existing characters (so if you wanted an elf-ghoul vs a human ghoul).

Morgana Dreadscar:
Warning: Possible Curse of the Crimson Throne spoilers ahead.

Speaking of mummies and concepts. One of my friends online ran a game on OpenRPG for a while. Due to an interesting combination in the mechanics, I showed him that I could legally begin the game as a mummy at 1st level in his Curse of the Crimson Throne game. After talking it over (because he's not the sort to immediately dismiss anything, especially since he trusts me), he said that would be fine and would like to see how I handled it (another of our friends said he'd like for me to do it too). So this character was one of Gaedren's Lambs, who during her youth had a brother who was also an orphen slave of the dirty bastard. One night during a drunken fit, he killed her brother and slashed her across the face with a rusty knife. She fell limp into the bay and he left her for dead. Miraculously, she drifted ashore without getting eaten by Sawtooth sharks or gators. Half blinded by a mixture of sea water and her own blood, she crawled into an alleyway along the wharf. She nearly died, but was found by an unlikely savior. A cultist to a neutral god of shadows found her in the alleyway and took her to their hidden sanctuary. Her wounds were healed, and she remained there for some time. Being an orphan, she had no where to go. Gaedren thought her dead. She was filled with fear, hatred, and a great sense of loss. For a long time, she was quiet and didn't speak much. She worked around the hidden temple cleaning (sweeping, mopping, dusting, putting stuff away, fetching candles, etc). She just stayed there and kind of became one of the faithful.

When she finally came of age, the elders of the temple asked her what she wished for as her birthday present. She had lived with them for many years now, and had asked nothing of them; obeyed them obediently; and treated the others in the temple with respect and courtesy. She was for all accounts a very good person. Her request shocked them. She asked that she be given the power to avenge her brother's death, and bring his killer to justice so that others would not suffer at his hand. The elders of the temple were stunned. This young girl had nursed such vengeful thoughts all these years, and yet was so contained in her rage that they had scarcely noticed. After some deliberation, they deemed that her request was within their power and would be granted. So on the eve of her adulthood, she was placed upon the alter, and prayers spoke over her still living body. She clutched her hands and swallowed hard as they prepared the ceremonial dagger. It would be quick, and brief, but undeniably painful. As they finished their prayers for her to pass into the next world without regret or suffering, they plunged the dagger into her chest. As it pierced her heart, all awareness of her surroundings faded away to the memory of the blade scraping across her face, and the cold water on the docks that night. She awoke inside those waters, only now she was an adult. She watched all over again as an observer the events that occurred that night. It seemed to stretch on forever before coming to a close. The waters beneath her grew colder and colder, and then black as ashen coals. An angelic figure wreathed in shadows emerged from the depths and took her by the hand. Forcefully, and strongly. Suddenly, they plunged into the depths and she awoke again.

She screamed out, trying to grab her brother, as the light of the candlelit room filled her eyes, and the cold abyss of the bay of memories faded from her senses. She inhaled deeply, instinctively, but found no effects within the breath. There she was on the alter, completely naked, save for the prayer-lined ceremonial wraps that her body was placed in before the spells to call her soul back were uttered. One of the priests looked at her. She was small of frame, but stronger than she would have ever imagined now. "Welcome back. You have been born again." he said, stepping back to let her try out her legs. She stood, hesitantly. She shuffled about, getting her balance. She leaned against the alter as her mind adjusted to the way her eyes pierced the darkness beyond the candles. The elder priest approached her. "You have been given a gift, my dear. Let us pray that you will use it wisely. You are free to go, and see to what you must. You will be welcome here if no where else. Return to us again, and again, that my great grandchildren's children may look upon the miracles of the faith".

A few days later, she found a mysterious harrow card in the wrappings over her heart...

Original Description + Story:
This is the original description and backstory details that weren't entirely ironed out, but also include the names of some NPCs I invented to flesh her out and give my GM some extra options if he wanted to use them for something.

Description: Before you stands a tall woman in beggar's clothing. About six feet tall, give an inch or two. Her clothing is a mixture of rags, bandages, and a tattered cloak that has many rips and tears in it around the edges. Her face is mostly concealed by bandages or cloth wrappings, of which a pair of piercing gray-blue eyes can be seen peering from within. Hanging from several patches of her cloaking are slongshots, which seem to just blend into the folds. She wears three belts around her waist at varying degrees of loosness, which carries a clearly visible club.

Backstory: Morgana "Dreadscar" grew up as a nameless orphan in the streets of Korvosa, and like many other children, was inducted into Gaedren Lamm's service by force, along with her younger brother Daniel. While life was hard, and vicious, she managed to take care of her brother well enough that they survived for some time. The hope of freedom never left them.

However, that hope would be crushed one night. In a drunken rage, Gaedren stabbed Daniel to death because he lost his stolen goods due to the holes in his clothes. Morgana attempted to stop him from hurting her brother, but was slashed across the face with the rusty knife, and then kicked off the pier into the dark waters below. Miraculously, the girl washed to shore without being devoured by sawtooth sharks, devilfish, or reefclaw, or ol' Gobblegut who are often found nearby. Cold, wet, and in shock, she wandered the streets in a daze before passing out in a small dark alleyway where she would have probably died.

As fortune would have it, a member of a secret cult located in the back of the alleyway was passing through and noticed her. Realizing she was hurt badly, soaked to the bone, and half-starved, he scooped her up and brought her to the basement temple beneath an old pub called the Rusty Nail. There, he and his fellow dark clerics breathed life back into her with their healing magics, and bandaged her wounds. The cut on her face was too deep and had not been tended to soon enough to fade away; leaving a terrible slashing scar diagonally across her face; which she would later use as her surname.

With no where else to go, the young street orphan was indoctrinated into this mysterious cult of necromancers. They called themselves the Night Saviors, and they mostly dwelt within the basements, sewers, and other deep areas beneath the slums of Korvosa. Disguised as beggars and street rats, they secretly tended to the needs of some of the dregs of society. Studying and healing various diseases and maladies, and dissecting the remains of those found dead with no one to claim them. She was tasked with keeping up their main temple beneath the Rusty Nail. Day in and day out she would clean the alter, replace candles, dust the alcoves and scrub the floors. Each night, the memory of her brother haunted her, and she attempted to find solace in the teachings of the underground church. She could not, however, let go her need for vengeance.

During her training, her mentor Vanlen Silvermoon – who found her in the alleyway - attempted to teach her that her anger and rage were like a powerful fire. Such dark emotions could be used to fuel the greatest of changes in the world, or could be let loose to consume you from the inside out. Under his tutelage, her need for vengeance slowly gave way to the desire for justice and retribution. So she continued her duties until she was to come of age.

When she finally reached adulthood, the temple she had now spent the last few years in celebrated her rite of passage. They feasted, and promised her a boon from their sect. A single birthday gift from the dark church. Having thought long and hard about her desires, and long being haunted by the memory of her lost brother and the cruelty of their captor, she made a startling request. She begged the circle of priests to kill her, and return her to life with the power to seek justice for her brothers murder. To hold a terrible sway over evil men like Gaedren Lamm and those who would share his ways. The council of priests convened for a time to discuss her wish. It was so very different than they had expected...

After seven days of deliberation, and careful discussion with her mentor, they agreed to grant her request. And so, upon the very alter that she had cleaned a thousand times, she transcended mortal life and was reborn. There she was ritually killed with a dagger engraved with the names of angels, and as her life began to slip away, the inside of her body was ignited with black fire to burn away the impurities of a mortal body, and preserved through enchantment. They anointed her dead heart with sacred oils, and filled her body with flowers, incense, and small prayers written on holy papers. It would be from these that her new organs would grow, strengthening her body unlike her mortal shell. Finally, she was wrapped in bandages made from the very tattered clothes she was found in, purified and blessed, as a symbol of her journey and her future. Then, the priests combined their power to call forth an awakening of her, and her soul back to her new body.

When she awoke, she awoke with a scream. Even on the edge of death the nightmares haunted her, but as her eyes opened it was like seeing the world for the first time again. Over the next few days, she learned to cope with her new existence, and planned her actions. Along with the blessed wrappings, she clothed herself in second hand tattered robes and clothing. At first glance, she would have looked like a homeless person, wrapped in rags. This was to her comfort, as this was the life she had always known.

Some days after her rebirth, she collected up a few pieces of junk, fashioned a simple sling, and collected a bag of rocks and stones that washed up with the waves of the bay, where she had washed up years before. Then it was only a matter of time to decide when to strike. On the eve of her brother's birthday, she found a strange card wrapped within her rags...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Arcane Toolbox wrote:
You have converted me to the Boards-side, hax. Admittedly, i have tried to stay away because this will envelop my time.
Well it's good to see you. Here, have a cookie. ^.^

Don't eat it AT, once you eat it you can never leave!

I haven't gotten anything done all week.


Grimmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Arcane Toolbox wrote:
You have converted me to the Boards-side, hax. Admittedly, i have tried to stay away because this will envelop my time.
Well it's good to see you. Here, have a cookie. ^.^

Don't eat it AT, once you eat it you can never leave!

I haven't gotten anything done all week.

Yeah, I've been pretty much consumed with this, and the Hate Monks threads.


Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:
How about top 5 or 10 then?

Much easier, but it'll take some time to compile. To keep you entertained in the meantime, here's a copy/pasta of one of my recent favorite characters which I shared with someone PMing me with questions concerning playing undead PCs. I shared some advice with dealing with undead PCs (on both sides of the screen), methods of dealing with level adjustments (CR adjustments), and methods for creating lower powered templates from existing undead that can be applied on top of existing characters (so if you wanted an elf-ghoul vs a human ghoul).

** spoiler omitted **...

Ugh, stuff like this that makes me wish my Computer hadn't pooped on me. All my Pathfinder files and Hero Labs stuff was on it. Thankfully, the memory is fine, the motherboard just broke. So I'll be able to recover it once I get another computer. Anyway, this makes me want to sit down and figure out how you got a CR 1 Mummy.


Tels wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:
How about top 5 or 10 then?

Much easier, but it'll take some time to compile. To keep you entertained in the meantime, here's a copy/pasta of one of my recent favorite characters which I shared with someone PMing me with questions concerning playing undead PCs. I shared some advice with dealing with undead PCs (on both sides of the screen), methods of dealing with level adjustments (CR adjustments), and methods for creating lower powered templates from existing undead that can be applied on top of existing characters (so if you wanted an elf-ghoul vs a human ghoul).

** spoiler omitted **...

Ugh, stuff like this that makes me wish my Computer hadn't pooped on me. All my Pathfinder files and Hero Labs stuff was on it. Thankfully, the memory is fine, the motherboard just broke. So I'll be able to recover it once I get another computer. Anyway, this makes me want to sit down and figure out how you got a CR 1 Mummy.

Well it's a bit of a sham. I didn't get a CR 1 mummy. Instead, I found a trick within the material the GM was allowing to begin play as a mummy. Basically it involved the traits Rich Parents (starting gold 900 gp) and Agent of Dusk (double starting gold and connections to underground markets); which gave enough starting wealth to purchase the create undead spell which is available in a city of Korvosa's size. I mentioned it to the GM, explained what I wanted to do with it, and after some consideration he agreed on the basis that he trusted me and thought it was an amusing use of resources. It helped that another of the players and our friend was like "I wouldn't mind if you allowed it. It could be interesting".

So the actual result was immediately becoming a CR 5 undead creature with starting resources. I don't recommend it to just anyone. It was fun though. I didn't begin with much else in the way of gear, and was seemingly just a homeless woman, right up until she threw giggles into a pile of fish guts. Her Intelligence sucked hard (mummies have a -4) which perfectly fit the fact she grew up with basically no education whatsoever, and she wasn't the brightest tactician for a long time. She was a blast to play however. All brute force. Deathly afraid of alchemist fire though. >.>


Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.
Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^

I don't have anything. :)


I can see that, but I don't think the two traits stack. Agent of Dusk doubles your normal amount of gold, while Rich Parents modifies your starting gold, i.e. it's not the normal amount.

But, given the right person, I would allow something like that to happen. It'd need to be the right person, someone I trust not to try and game the system though.


Tels wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Wraithstrike wrote:

I am sure you are misreading it.

I will rewrite it.
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to get him to do anything other than what is exactly in his job description.

That is basically how it converts.

It is not:
You can try to get James to do some work, but you must double his pay to make him do anything(no limits) that is outside of his job description.

Why re-write it? It's already written. You can give a subject orders, but must make an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do (with no retries even). Sure, we could change it around and get something different, but that requires changing stuff.

Would you consider this a location that could be cleaned up in the rules? I mean, I fixed Simulacrum for you. :3

It definitely needs to be cleaned up. I do think your interpretation is valid, but I don't think it is the intent. I am surprised I never saw this come up on the 3.5 boards. I also wish I had been on the ground floor when PF was being developed. I came in just before the CRB was released.
Fair enough. Wanna talk about something else? ^-^
What's your single most favorite encounter you've ever built, played in, or witnessed?

I have had a few where the monster is down to single digits, and so are the players, and at least one player is bleeding out, or the party was close to defeat by other methods. The players pulled it out without my assistance(fudging dice, playing dumb). Those are the ones that I get the most praise for. It is probably my best asset as a GM since I do it on a pretty regular basis.


These are the best ^^^


Actually, after doing some thinking, I figured out my #1 favorite. But it's long and I need sleep; so I'll post it later today.


I'm reading your blog it's great


Curse of the Crimson Throne Spoilers:
During the Flameford Camp fight, was one of the most fun experiences I've had as a GM.

The party had just finished the Trial, and decided not to rest (well most of them) and decided to participate in pre-party events. The Dwarf Rogue/Shadow Dancer really embraced the Shoanti culture (was always an outcast amongst Dwarves). He shaved his head (kept the beard), got a tattoo and began wearing a bonechest piece (like this), even showed a Shoanti woman exactly why Dwarves are so short (well-hung). They drank, and danced, and partied before the celebrations, during the celebrations and most of them tanked passed out. The Mystic Theurge caught some shut-eye before the festivities, so did his Paladin-cohort and the Arcane Archer (I'll get back to him).

This all took place at the beginning of the session, mind you. I asked everyone what they were doing, and when I got to the Arcane Archer, he mentioned he was going to be patrolling the area. I asked him, "Really? In the heart of the most powerful of the Shoanti Clans, at their strong hold, you're going to be patrolling the perimeter while surrounded by dozens of warriors and tribesmen, who themselves are on watch? Why?"

He responded with, "Because the session just began and we'll probably be fighting soon."

If it weren't for this one player, I think the session would have been nothing but epic, but he really pissed me off with that comment. I told him that was seriously metagaming, but he didn't seem to care, and told me he's on patrol. He didn't partake of the ceremonies at all, certain they would be under attack because the game session had only just begun.

Anyway, the Gargoyles and Red Mantis attacked in the night, starting with all the Gargoyles (plus a few extra, we had a large party). Cinnabar had been spying on the party, and knew the Oracle of Fire loved tossing around Fireballs (default attack). She had the Gargoyles drop casks of oil all over the ground. They formed huge puddles of flammable liquid that also made it difficult terrain. Much slipping and sliding.

Anyway, the party first noticed the Gargoyles when they killed the Monk (who dropped entirely out of the campaign). The Dwarf woke up in a drunken stupor, naked, clutching his new bride (yes, they got married). He and his bride were the only other ones in their yurt, the others were out by the fire, nursing their drinks, singing and generally being the last ones to leave. When the Dwarf yelled, and leaped up to attack the Gargoyles in his yurt, the others thought he was just dreaming. It wasn't until he started screaming they were under attack, did they actually react.

Now comes the fun part. None of them were wearing armor. They had all gotten dressed up for the parties (except the Arcane Archer), so they had to rush back to the yurt and gather their stuff. They drove off the Gargoyles, when the casks began falling. They grabbed their weapons and rushed to battle.

It was a harrowing fight, I promise you that. There was a new player who had joined some 3 sessions ago. In that time, I killed off his character twice. He made some really bad decisions. Like not mentioning he was at 5 HP until a bullete was getting his Leap Attack off.

Anyway, in total, there were the barbarians, Krojun Eats-What-He-Kills, Kratchet (Cleric/Paladin cohort of the Mystic Theurge), Lucius (Cleric/Wizard-Mystic Theurge), Grendel Shadowbeard (Rogue/Shadow Dancer), Caresir (Fighter/Wizard-Arcane Archer), Oracle of Fire (who's name I can't remember Grr), Barbarian (who we never even named because the player dies so much), and Trinia. All them, verse the Gargoyles, Cinderlander, Cinnabar, and Red Mantis. Except for the Gargoyles, the other three were all updated by me for Pathfinder and this party.

At first, the party felt overwhelmed, then the Barbarians and Krojun came out. People were falling left and right, Barbarians mostly as the Assassins didn't fight fair. When the Cinderlander showed up, all combat sort of screeched to a halt as Krojun decided to fight him alone. Grendel decided now was the best time, and ganked a Red Mantis while Krojun and the Cinderlander fought, which restarted the battle.

I actually rolled all the damage and attacks Krojun and the Cinderlander dealt, and Krojun very nearly lost. It was shortly after when Cinnabar showed up. She tried persuading Krojun and the Shoanti to turn against the party, to no avail. She warned them there would be consequences for defying her, and the two Red Mantis that flanked her, threw down alchemist fire, and began igniting the whole camp. Each of the Red Mantis seemed immune to the flames (Resist Energy Potions) but the Barbarians cared not for them any longer. They worked quickly to get as many of the women and children out, and what supplies they could save, they did.

Caresir, the Arcane Archer, was devastating in this fight (he saw me min-max an archer once, and more or less copied the build). He had more kills to his name in the fight, than any two combatants combined. When the Red Mantis lit the camp, she cast a Darkness spell and vanished. She actually snuck out of sight, drank a Potion of Invisibility, and crept up on the Archer.

When we play, attacks made from Invisibility are all denied dex to AC. I've seen others argue that only the first attack is denied dex to AC, but we play otherwise.

Cinnabar landed some 5 attacks on Caresir (potion of haste plus two-weapon fighting with Sawtooth Sabers). At 1d8+3+4d6 on each attack, plus 2 crits... well, he didn't make it. I did intend to hurt him badly from the beginning for meta-gaming, but didn't intend to kill him.

Fortunately, his Wife called at about the same time and he had to go home, but he wasn't happy. He kept trying to argue that he got a reflex save to avoid the attacks, or something to that effect. I gave him a Perception check to spot Cinnabar, and he rolled a natural 20 (got 43). I rolled in front of him for Cinnabar's opposed Stealth check. Rolled a Natural 20 (got 60 something). He wasn't happy.

Anyway, shortly after this, the unnamed Barbarian died as well (he didn't bother to mention he was at low HP this time either). I let him play Krojun after this, and the party started to hunt her down. The Paladin pulled out a Decanter of Endless Water to fight the fire, so he was tending to that issue.

At this point, it was a Lucius, Trinia, the Oracle, Grendel, Krojun and Kratchet left standing. With the exception of Kratchet, the party began chase with Cinnabar.

I should mention, I enlarged Flameford Camp to be significantly larger than the map indicated. I just don't see how hundreds of Barbarians could live in some 12 yurts, in an area that was some 200 ft across.

Cinnabar took off into the night, taunting the party. I had each person roll an intelligence check, Lucius had Profession: Soldier and he rolled that instead. No one realized she was kiting.

She drew the party into the darkness, and began hit and running on the party. She led them back to the yurts, where she had a few Red Mantis left remaining. It was Cinnabar and Krojun hot on her heels when she rounded a yurt, and two Red Mantis were standing there. They both cast Hold Person on Krojun, who made the first save, and rolled a natural 1 on the second. Cinnabar's turn came up next, with Krojun adjacent. He was beheaded as the party pulled up closer.

Lucius cast one of the few useful spells he had prepared, Vampiric Touch, and finished her off (she had some 5 HP at this point). They were ecstatic. However, they now realized they had no one left who could really stand up against the Red Mantis is combat. No one except the half-drunk naked Dwarf who had been fighting this entire time, unarmored, wearing only his bone plate thing he got from the Shoanti women he wed.

He went toe-to-to with the Red Mantis, who kept Feinting for Sneak Attacks since he never let them get a Flank. Lucius and the Oracle used all their remaining spells (so did Trinia) to keep Grendel on his feet.

When the fight was finally over, Lucius, the Oracle, Grendel, and Trinia were the only ones left standing, and they all had under 20 hp left.

It was a very fun night, lots of laughs, nail biting, and worry on whether or not the party would actually survive. Twas a close call at the end, but the managed to get everyone but the Unnamed Barbarian raised (including Krojun). The rebuilt the camp, and purchased lots of supplies for their allies to survive the coming winter.

Even though only Trinia, Lucius and Grendel actually passed the trial, everyone was treated by family from then on.


Grimmy wrote:
I'm reading your blog it's great

I have to agree, definitely a good blog. I see a lot of things I agree with there. Kinda mad at myself for reading it all in one sitting.

Makes me think it might not be a bad place for you to post some of your tips and tricks there, like your tips for a new GM post I saw awhile back.


I read it all too. I'm an Ashiel groupie.

Andoran

wraithstrike wrote:

It should also be noted the the enchantment school is split into two sub-schools

Quote:


Charm: A charm spell changes how the subject views you, typically making it see you as a good friend.

Compulsion: A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way its mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject's actions or the effects on the subject, others allow you to determine the subject's actions when you cast the spell, and still others give you ongoing control over the subject.

Charm not should be able to do more than talk a good buddy into a bad idea.

Compulsion is what takes away free will to a large extent.

Exactly. And if a good friend starts to be a jerk, perhaps by locking in a magic circle and asking you to do evil things...well you may rethink your friendship.

Again, it is a first level spell.

To make this more clear, would you allow an enemy to be able to convince your character into acting completely against it's nature by simple dice roll?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Charm Person is not powerful enough to make an angel do something that goes against its very nature.

The rest of the binding rules I don't know enough about to speak on.

I think in the example all the mental stats had been drained very low before the creature broke.


As a side note, it's a little cruel, but I really love the way you used that Gaes spell, Ashiel.

And to ciretose (and the others!), I think the most important thing to make note of with this charm person debate, is that it's HAPPENING OFFSCREEN. My GM doesn't pay NEARLY as much mind to the rules when he's writing for my home game, and we don't really begrudge him for it. I think Ashiel's interpretations so far have held up pretty well, and all in all think it's awesome the way her BBEG is acting purely within the rules, but THIS IS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF A GOOD STORY.

If the charm rules as they're being interpreted were causing schenanigans at the table, it'd be a different story. But here? It's pure fluff, and noone is any worse off for it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I definitely prefer to accomplish the story/flavor without throwing the rules out the window.


Maybe. Maybe there is more to the planar binding rules that I don't know about, or maybe the scenario was just faulty. I never said Ashiel was perfect.

But charm person is not supposed to be able to make an angel go on a killing spree based on one charisma check.


Twigs wrote:

As a side note, it's a little cruel, but I really love the way you used that Gaes spell, Ashiel.

And to ciretose (and the others!), I think the most important thing to make note of with this charm person debate, is that it's HAPPENING OFFSCREEN. My GM doesn't pay NEARLY as much mind to the rules when he's writing for my home game, and we don't really begrudge him for it. I think Ashiel's interpretations so far have held up pretty well, and all in all think it's awesome the way her BBEG is acting purely within the rules, but THIS IS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF A GOOD STORY.

If the charm rules as they're being interpreted were causing schenanigans at the table, it'd be a different story. But here? It's pure fluff, and noone is any worse off for it.

I am not understanding this post.


Grimmy wrote:

Maybe. Maybe there is more to the planar binding rules that I don't know about, or maybe the scenario was just faulty. I never said Ashiel was perfect.

But charm person is not supposed to be able to make an angel go on a killing spree based on one charisma check.

Ignore my other reply to you. I completely misunderstood what you wrote. :)

Andoran

Twigs wrote:

As a side note, it's a little cruel, but I really love the way you used that Gaes spell, Ashiel.

And to ciretose (and the others!), I think the most important thing to make note of with this charm person debate, is that it's HAPPENING OFFSCREEN. My GM doesn't pay NEARLY as much mind to the rules when he's writing for my home game, and we don't really begrudge him for it. I think Ashiel's interpretations so far have held up pretty well, and all in all think it's awesome the way her BBEG is acting purely within the rules, but THIS IS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF A GOOD STORY.

If the charm rules as they're being interpreted were causing schenanigans at the table, it'd be a different story. But here? It's pure fluff, and noone is any worse off for it.

I am not completely opposed to fully admitted GM fiat for a story purpose (although it should be rare) but I am opposed to saying something is totally rules legal when it isn't.

If you just admit your fudging a bit as a GM to get a cool story to work under the "most times this would never work, but this one time it did" and I'll roll with ti.

Not what is happening here.


"An effected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders."

To a paragon of good, a being of pure good, mass murder is probably "obviously harmful".

With wisdom and intelligence reduced to 1 that may not be so obvious anymore, although I'm not sure how the Ghaele was still speaking at that point.

I think Ashiel probably was swept away with the prose at that point, and I definitely enjoyed reading it, I like Ashiel's writing style very much.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Grimmy wrote:

Maybe. Maybe there is more to the planar binding rules that I don't know about, or maybe the scenario was just faulty. I never said Ashiel was perfect.

But charm person is not supposed to be able to make an angel go on a killing spree based on one charisma check.

I think Twigs was blinded by the good writing.

Planar Binding-->"Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to. If you ever roll a natural 1 on the Charisma check, the creature breaks free of the spell's effect and can escape or attack you."

All Geas does is give penalties to ability scores. Neither one can make a creature do anything by the rules.

Charm Person relies on a very lenient interpretation of the word "anything" before it becomes as good as it is being made out to be.

Anything depending on context can mean "without limits" or "at a minimum".

edit:If the spell was that good I could just build a high charisma character around it, and own a lot of games.

Charm person+Extend spell=Trouble.

I am taking the BBEG's backup who is at least as powerful as 2 party members, and "convincing" him/her to help me take on the on the boss.

Yeah I know, not all BBEG's have right hand men, but you can still capture* the more powerful minions, and have them help you.

*capture=convert=charm=any other word you want to use.

451 to 500 of 951 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.