[Radiance House] Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls Backer Playtest Feedback


Product Discussion

701 to 750 of 1,105 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Orich wrote:
bookrat wrote:

It's not balance that's the issue. It's formatting.

The idea against having a secret that grants a feat and having a feat that grants a secret is that secrets and feats are formatted similarly; therefore, people will get confused between the two and think that feats and secrets are the same thing.

But that also applies to Rogue Talents and other similar class features--Binder Secrets are in a separate section than Feats and so any confusion should be minimal. You just need a binder secret formatted similarly to combat trick:

Quote:
Occult Secret: A binder that selects this secret gains a bonus occult feat (see Feats). This secret can be taken multiple times.

Do you remember a few weeks ago when I said, "Hey, binder secrets are formatted like feats and not rogue talents, i.e. they have big, bold titles and prerequisite lines and benefit lines, should I change them to use the same formatting as rogue talents?" And how everyone said, "No." This is a consequence of that. The reason there is no binder secret that grants a feat has nothing to do with the mechanics and everything to do with the formatting. Having an ability that is formatted similarly to a feat state, "You gain a bonus feat!" is confusing.

Again, it has NOTHING to do with the mechanics and EVERYTHING to do with the layout.

He's aware. His argument is: the formatting isn't a problem - it doesn't matter that they look similar, because it will not be confusing. Heck, they're in two different chapters. The fact that the formatting is similar doesn't follow that not having this secret is a consequence thereof. This is exactly like claiming that people will confuse rogue talents with barbarian rage powers - those have identical formatting as well and they're even in the same chapter. And yet, no one has ever been confused about those, so why would they be confused about this?


Alexander Augunas wrote:

Do you remember a few weeks ago when I said, "Hey, binder secrets are formatted like feats and not rogue talents, i.e. they have big, bold titles and prerequisite lines and benefit lines, should I change them to use the same formatting as rogue talents?" And how everyone said, "No." This is a consequence of that. The reason there is no binder secret that grants a feat has nothing to do with the mechanics and everything to do with the formatting. Having an ability that is formatted similarly to a feat state, "You gain a bonus feat!" is confusing.

Again, it has NOTHING to do with the mechanics and EVERYTHING to do with the layout.

I don't want to give up the nicer formatting as it makes it much easier to read/understand the various binder secrets.

If there is no issue with the idea mechanically, what if it was added to the general description under the Binder Secrets session?

Quote:
At the indicated levels, an occultist receives a binder secret, a bit of forgotten lore that allows her to use her occult powers in new and exciting ways. She can also choose to gain an occult feat in place of a binder secret. In addition to standard secrets...

Contributor

Quote:
If there is no issue with the idea mechanically, what if it was added to the general description under the Binder Secrets session?

Not enough space.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Not enough space.

Well, fudge. Maybe when the next version comes out we can see if we can squeeze it in there if any other revisions need to be made in that chapter.

It's always better to have too much awesome than not enough. :)


General question that just game up in game, and I'm not sure where to find the answer. If a spirit you have a Poor Pact with is suppressed (Reserve Spirit), do you still suffer it's influence while it's suppressed?

My gut say's yes.

Contributor

Dexion1619 wrote:

General question that just game up in game, and I'm not sure where to find the answer. If a spirit you have a Poor Pact with is suppressed (Reserve Spirit), do you still suffer it's influence while it's suppressed?

My gut say's yes.

Yes.


Dexion1619 wrote:

General question that just game up in game, and I'm not sure where to find the answer. If a spirit you have a Poor Pact with is suppressed (Reserve Spirit), do you still suffer it's influence while it's suppressed?

My gut say's yes.

In the Grimoire Reserve Spirit refers you to Performing a Pact Ritual in Chapter 3. The binding check for Reserve Spirit is treated as any other binding check, including the penalties of a poor pact, but its granted abilities are suppressed.

So, short answer, yes, you do suffer the influence. And for further evidence:

Pact Magic Unbound Volume 2's Reserve Spirit wrote:
This functions as a pact made with any other spirit, except after the conclusion of the pact you gain none of the spirit's benefits except its physical sign, which you can show or suppress normally, and its personality influence if you made a poor pact with it.

All binding checks have been summed up and refer to Chapter 3 rather than detailing the effects per secret/feat.


Thanks, that's about what I thought. Reserve Spirit is what made me think that was the case, but its good to know Chapter 3 is where I should have looked.

Contributor

ericthecleric wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

Question for eric, are we looking at the same version of Marat?

Yes, I was talking about that version. Not only do you not get proficiency with the armor, but you suffer the ACP penalty and slow movement too, thanks to the loss of Unimpeded.

My version also deals with the request that someone else said for using Marat while using the beast shape ability of Fey Baraddu.

Thinking about it, perhaps Unimpeded should also grant Medium and Heavy Armor Proficiency.

Unimpeded is gone, no questions asked. It was too powerful for what it did; it was a constant effortless armor effect, and there is no chance of bringing it back.

Honestly, I didn't like the mage armor model that I moved to in discussion of how to fix Marat. To me, Marat was always supposed to be the Pathfinder stand-in for Savnok, who had a similar ability that allowed you to summon armor. He was a Level 2 spirit, though, so downgrading what you summon from a lesser type of armor to a heavier type makes sense for adjusting the spirit's level. But going back to the mage armor model is out of the question. That said, allowing you to be proficient with whatever armor you summon is something that I can fix.

Update:
With some tinkering, I adjusted Marat (yet again) to something that I think will work for everyone. This change should allow non-armor users to get some benefit from Marat while making it a rather suboptimal choice, in my opinion.

Minor Granted Abilities wrote:

Armor Training: While you are bound to Marat, you gain proficiency with medium and heavy armor. At 7th level, you gain armor training as though you were a 3rd-level fighter. At 14th level, you gain armor training 2 as though you were a 7th-level fighter.

Bodyguard: While you are bound to Marat, you gain the benefits of Bodyguardapg.

Marat’s Body: You can summon and equip Marat’s body as a full-round action, which offers you the same protection and restrictions as a masterwork breastplate. You cannot have more than one instance of Marat’s body active at a time. If this ability is used again or the armor is removed, any existing armor immediately vanishes. At 3rd level and every four levels thereafter, armor summoned by this ability gains a +1 enhancement bonus to its AC, to a maximum of +5 at 19th level. At 9th level, you can summon Marat’s body as a suit of full-plate instead of a breastplate.

Marat’s Precautions: While you are bound to Marat, you gain the ability to cast alarm and shield of fortificationACG as spell-like abilities a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.

Vestigial Bond wrote:
While you are bound to Marat, you gain a constant mage armor effect for the duration of your pact with Marat. This ability replaces Marat’s body and armor training.


Here's my personal take on the Rods.

Rods:

Rod of Instant Pact Not applicable any longer, since it no longer exists. So, I’ll focus on what I recall of the idea for its replacement. You essentially absorb X amount of written words in ink form from and can later put the words on other paper. Some interesting uses come to mind, and supposedly aimed towards occult heavy campaigns where pact magic is very taboo. That said, I think Wizards and Arcanists could get use of it (unless it doesn’t work on spells from a spell book for some reason, spying / information acquisition are made that much simpler, stealing the only written directions to a hidden location can also be handled easily. Plenty of uses. Not useful all the time, but useful enough.

Rod of the Muse …Useful for painting or at least things that require paint. I believe the intent was perhaps also to mark an enemy or item and find them later, unless they erase it via the spell of the same name. For those that intend to craft or profession paint, this can be quite good, +5 is very solid, not sure it’s worth 5,000gp, but you do get to mark things with paint. So there’s that. Overall, it seems very niche and I don’t think I’d bother crafting or purchasing it, but that’s because I don’t currently have plans to make a painter.

Torturer’s Implement This one flavorful and useful for bad guys or evil players. Really, the brand effect is the nicest part of it, but it could be useful for getting info from bad guys, in a bad way. The wisdom damage is a nice touch, and after numerous touches with the rod (and odds are you’ll get a decent amount of touching if the enemy is helpless). If you’re a bad guy… or even neutral guy and you want to play it out, this might be the rod for you. If you want to keep track of your captured enemies, this could be a good rod for you, otherwise it’s niche and you save your money for something that fits your tastes better.

Metamagic, Occult Infusion Now this here can be quite amazing for binders with access to spells (i.e. the archetypes for wizards and such). Granted you need to be bound to a spirit, but lets face it, odds are pretty solid that you’re going to be bound to a spirit. Auto-passing concentration is pretty good. Especially if you’re the type to do full round spells **cough** summon **cough**. The prices are very fair too. It’s very nice overall, but very dependant on the type of character who uses it, understandably so though.

Metamagic, Tailored Very dependent on if you intend to use the spells this metamagic is useful for. Essentially you get to choose the exact age, height and weight if you alter them with the spell. Not my personal cup of tea, but for those that have very specific tastes for what they want to turn people into, this is for them. I wouldn’t get it, but I’m not the “target audience”.

Pretty straight forward mechanically, although I admit I didn't look back in terms of the new Rod that was designed.


Alexander Augunas wrote:

Armor Training: While you are bound to Marat, you gain proficiency with medium and heavy armor. At 7th level, you gain armor training as though you were a 3rd-level fighter. At 14th level, you gain armor training 2 as though you were a 7th-level fighter.

Bodyguard: While you are bound to Marat, you gain the benefits of Bodyguardapg.
Marat’s Body: You can summon and equip Marat’s body as a full-round action, which offers you the same protection and restrictions as a masterwork breastplate. You cannot have more than one instance of Marat’s body active at a time. If this ability is used again or the armor is removed, any existing armor immediately vanishes. At 3rd level and every four levels thereafter, armor summoned by this ability gains a +1 enhancement bonus to its AC, to a maximum of +5 at 19th level. At 9th level, you can summon Marat’s body as a suit of full-plate instead of a breastplate.
Marat’s Precautions: While you are bound to Marat, you gain the ability to cast alarm and shield of fortificationACG as spell-like abilities a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.
Vestigial Bond wrote:
While you are bound to Marat, you gain a constant mage armor effect for the duration of your pact with Marat. This ability replaces Marat’s body and armor training.

Interesting. Flavor wise I think it's actually kind of funny that he both helps and hinders you at the same time. You get a good chunk of ACP and a solid loss of speed, but those can be mitigated in their own ways, albeit at a cost of a decent amount of resources. The loss of speed hurts the most, but this Marat + a spirit that gives you a constant plus to speed could mitigate it if it ends up being a problem for you. ACP lowers over time and there's a trait that lowers it by 1 again, plus the enhancement bonus lowers it again. So ACP isn't all that bad. It seems like Full Plate still gets the accrued enhancement bonuses you've gotten until then, so it would be pretty solid.

I was personally a fan of the shield version of Marat (i.e. v2) more so because shield stacked with other armor you could wear. Proficiency in the armor is good though and it seems like this armor has been made slightly more worth it. For full occultists, outside of the speed issue, I don't see why one would ever choose mage armor in terms of AC, but for archetype binders, this can be solid.

I'd have to do the math (and I don't feel like doing it now) but he seems like he'd be more useful now than v2, if just a bit (at 7th that'd be +8 AC with enhancement and -1 ACP after Armor Training and enhancements). 7th level seems to be his sweet spot, with 9th getting a bit sweeter if you don't mind moving slow. I'll probably not consider using him until 7th, but for a lv. 1, he's not bad. Not sure of the usefulness of the mage armor vestigial, but it is an option if you don't want to wear armor constantly and be slowed down.


Third Mind wrote:
For full occultists, outside of the speed issue, I don't see why one would ever choose mage armor in terms of AC, but for archetype binders, this can be solid.

You would pick the Mage Armor option if you are going to use a spirit like Fey Baraddu to shape change.


Staves:

Cyclopean Staff This particular staff isn’t too bad. That said, bolster binding, comprehend languages and daze are always useful to binders. Bind Spirit 1 is ok if you don’t mind dealing with poor pacts or a lv. 1 spirit and Dismiss Pact Spirit is one meant more for occult campaigns.

Staff of Occult Binding If you don’t mind being in a poor pact with spirits from lv. 1–3, then this staff will suit you fine. It even helps you in the binding process and for some, lessens an already used Major Ability recharge duration by 1. Not bad. I’m not a fan of bad pacts though, so I wouldn’t use it personally.

Time Twister Staff A fun staff overall. It will require DMs to make sure they understand the aging rules, but that’s easy enough to find. Haste and Slow are great either way and the other spells (that I can find) are pretty decent.

Statement: Under the Staff of Occult Binding, it doesn’t give a charge number for the bolster binding.

Statement / Question: Under the Time Twister Staff, it shows Siphon Age and Temporal Stasis, but I can’t seem to find them in the pdf. Any chance I can get a page number?... Do they exist?

Dexion wrote:
You would pick the Mage Armor option if you are going to use a spirit like Fey Baraddu to shape change.

Fair enough, good point.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Third Mind wrote:
Statement / Question: Under the Time Twister Staff, it shows Siphon Age and Temporal Stasis, but I can’t seem to find them in the pdf. Any chance I can get a page number?... Do they exist?

Temporal Stasis is from the Core Rulebook, I believe page 359. I think Siphon Age is probably supposed to be Siphon Sands, though.

Contributor

Third Mind wrote:
Interesting. Flavor wise I think it's actually kind of funny that he both helps and hinders you at the same time. You get a good chunk of ACP and a solid loss of speed, but those can be mitigated in their own ways, albeit at a cost of a decent amount of resources. The loss of speed hurts the most, but this Marat + a spirit that gives you a constant plus to speed could mitigate it if it ends up being a problem for you. ACP lowers over time and there's a trait that lowers it by 1 again, plus the enhancement bonus lowers it again. So ACP isn't all that bad. It seems like Full Plate still gets the accrued enhancement bonuses you've gotten until then, so it would be pretty solid.

It does. I wrote the enhancement bonus specifically to apply to "the armor" rather than "to the breastplate."

Contributor

Luthorne wrote:
Third Mind wrote:
Statement / Question: Under the Time Twister Staff, it shows Siphon Age and Temporal Stasis, but I can’t seem to find them in the pdf. Any chance I can get a page number?... Do they exist?
Temporal Stasis is from the Core Rulebook, I believe page 359. I think Siphon Age is probably supposed to be Siphon Sands, though.

Yes, its supposed to be siphon sands.

Contributor

pi4t wrote:

Missed the edit window, but I've spotted a couple of issues with the later spirits:

1) Mascareri: bolster insight doesn't specify a DC.
2) Undying Soul: Technically, the points aren't currently removed from the defiance pool when they're dealt as hit point damage. Also, it's currently not possible to use healing on points in the defiance pool. Is that intentional?
3) Ravage Binder: Seems to be missing an introduction, and prerequisites.

#1 I'm actually going to just drop bolster insight because I'm not entirely sure what I was trying to have it accomplish.

#2 Fixed the error about the points not specifically being removed. Yes, you can't heal the points out of the pool; you have to wait for them to be subtracted from your hit point total before they can be healed.

#3 isn't an error; I actually didn't mind to send out ANY of the Prestige Classes with v2 of the document. That one in particular wasn't finished.

Contributor

bookrat wrote:

I noticed that some spells have a dagger next to them: †

The first time the dagger is used is on Page 10; however, I cannot find where the dagger is defined. I'm assuming that it references spells introduced in this book, but a definition should accompany a symbol before the symbol is used.

The asterisk* is used three times for three different definitions not is defined all three times, but I feel that two of them are unnecessary.

The first is in constellations ( * ) where the asterisk appears with spaces around it in the parenthetical. This usage is the most useful and references multiple constellations throughout the chapter.

The second is the alchemist (*) where the asterisk appears without spaces. It references only a single discovery, so unless new discoveries are going to be included, I feel as if it could be taken out and the one discovery that it applies to can just mention the info. May help with saving space.

The third is the rogue (*) where the asterisk appears without spaces. It also references a single rogue talent, so unless more talents are going to be added, it can be removed and the information can be condensed into the one rogue talent that applies.

The dagger notes any option that comes from Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls. The fact that the book never mentions what it means is an error and has been added to the Introduction.

An asterisk used by an alchemist discovery or a rogue talent has very specific meanings; for an alchemist discovery it means that the discovery modifies a bomb. For a rogue, it means the talent modifies sneak attack. I'm going to see if I can find the space to define those terms in the book, but honestly I don't recall if every subsequent book after the Core Rulebook redefined the asterisk or not. That would be a useful thing to look up.

Contributor

Orich wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Comments about Ubro's channel energy ability.

I hope I'm not too late to weigh-in here, but what if we tried a middle-ground between "half max spirit level" and "3+Cha"?

Healing Surge wrote:
You channel a rush of positive energy as a standard action, functioning as a cleric’s channel energy. Use your binder level as your cleric level when determining the effects of your channel energy. You can only use healing surge to heal and creatures can benefit from your healing surge a number of times per day equal to 3 + half your maximum spirit level (round up). After using this ability, it becomes expended for 5 rounds.

This will increase the base number of uses to 4/day at level 1, compared to a cleric's 6/day (with 16 Cha). At level 20, the binder will have 8/day (occultists) or 6/day (non-occultists) while a true cleric will have 9/day (22 Cha).

This will help a binder's channel energy to be used to the benefit of a party more often (how the ability will normally be used) while also providing a steady increase of uses rather than the 3+Cha/day "lump sum."

The worry that I have with Ubro's channel has nothing to do with how many times an individual creature can benefit from the ability and everything to do with how often the ability can be used. In my 1,000 townsfolk example, the concern wasn't that you'd cram a thousand people into your 30-foot burst to heal them; it was that you could effectively go door-to-door delivering house calls, healing every person in down 3 + Cha times per day. A cleric cannot do anything even remotely close to that, and its why I'm apprehensive about leaving channel energy as the major granted ability for Ubro.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
It does. I wrote the enhancement bonus specifically to apply to "the armor" rather than "to the breastplate."

Cool cool. Definitely a spirit I'll be bringing back into my repertoire at 7th, and a very solid one for non-vampires for sure.

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Yes, its supposed to be siphon sands.

Gotcha. Good to know about the siphon sands. Not sure why I got confused about Temporal Stasis... oops.

I'll try to get on to the wondrous items look over tonight... not that it's done much good really. But I guess, if I did that, then go back through my own posts and suggest ways to tweak things, some good might come out of it.

Contributor

Quote:
Question: Does this allow one to use Exorcise Pact Spirits (the secret) upon hitting the enemy in question? If not, this is notably less useful for actual occultists.

I'm not sure if you can store a spell-like ability inside of a spell storing weapon or not. If you can, yes. If you can't, no. This was designed more for binder hunters rather than occultists, so I'm okay with it being worse for actual occultists.

Contributor

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Third Mind wrote:
Interesting. Flavor wise I think it's actually kind of funny that he both helps and hinders you at the same time. You get a good chunk of ACP and a solid loss of speed, but those can be mitigated in their own ways, albeit at a cost of a decent amount of resources. The loss of speed hurts the most, but this Marat + a spirit that gives you a constant plus to speed could mitigate it if it ends up being a problem for you. ACP lowers over time and there's a trait that lowers it by 1 again, plus the enhancement bonus lowers it again. So ACP isn't all that bad. It seems like Full Plate still gets the accrued enhancement bonuses you've gotten until then, so it would be pretty solid.
It does. I wrote the enhancement bonus specifically to apply to "the armor" rather than "to the breastplate."

Also, new Marat gives you armor training, as a fighter. A 7th-level fighter (which is were Marat's ability would cap off at) can move at his normal speed in heavy armor. So eventually you CAN get back what Vol 2 Marat had, but not until a much later level. In short, Marat has more abilities that scale as you level up.

Contributor

Third Mind wrote:
Question regarding the Rings of Forced Requisition. Does the devoted know that something is happening to them when they make their will save? I mean, they're making a will save each round they wear it, but do they know that something's attacking their will when this happens?

That's the eternal question of Will saves. In my game, I'd probably say, "Yes," but ultimately that depends on your GM. If I were to write a rule that officially said yes or no, I'd be writing a precedent for every other Will save effect in the game, which I want to avoid doing. Let Paizo make that call, lol.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
The worry that I have with Ubro's channel has nothing to do with how many times an individual creature can benefit from the ability and everything to do with how often the ability can be used. In my 1,000 townsfolk example, the concern wasn't that you'd cram a thousand people into your 30-foot burst to heal them; it was that you could effectively go door-to-door delivering house calls, healing every person in down 3 + Cha times per day. A cleric cannot do anything even remotely close to that, and its why I'm apprehensive about leaving channel energy as the major granted ability for Ubro.

I understand--the one time it came up in the game I was playing in no one in town needed healing.

I think changing the major would address that issue as well as the major ability becoming "useless" regarding your party after a few times.

Contributor

Orich wrote:
I think changing the major would address that issue as well as the major ability becoming "useless" regarding your party after a few times.

That's the other concern I had. No other major effectively "stops working" after X uses per day. There are a couple of capstones that do that, but no majors.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Also, new Marat gives you armor training, as a fighter. A 7th-level fighter (which is were Marat's ability would cap off at) can move at his normal speed in heavy armor. So eventually you CAN get back what Vol 2 Marat had, but not until a much later level. In short, Marat has more abilities that scale as you level up.

Ah yeah. Well. Seems like the best new Marat to date. When I hit 7th, he'll probably start to see me using him again every so often.

Alexander Augunas wrote:
That's the eternal question of Will saves. In my game, I'd probably say, "Yes," but ultimately that depends on your GM. If I were to write a rule that officially said yes or no, I'd be writing a precedent for every other Will save effect in the game, which I want to avoid doing. Let Paizo make that call, lol.

Fair enough, but now I have a semi-official Rule as intended by the developer quote! HA!

So, with Forash, was allowing standard action summoning (something Arcanists, Wizards with a feat and Summoners do already) too imbalanced, even with only being able to do it one summon at a time and only once every 5 rounds? I realize it's been full-action for a little while now, but I was just curious.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
That's the other concern I had. No other major effectively "stops working" after X uses per day. There are a couple of capstones that do that, but no majors.

I've been mulling over Ubro's abilities and have some suggestions.

Ubro Suggestions:
Quote:

Major

Vitality Surge: You channel a rush of energy as a standard action, granting all creatures within 30 ft. 1d10 + binder level temporary hit points. At 7th level increase the temporary hit points granted by 1d10. These temporary hit points last for one hour and do not stack with themselves. After using this ability, it becomes expended for 5 rounds.
Capstone Empowerment: Creatures affected by your vitality surge gain DR 1/- for 2 rounds. This DR increases by 1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.

Minors
Healing Surge: You can channel positive energy to heal as a cleric. Use your binder level as your effective cleric level when using this ability. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier.
Healer's Hands: While you are bound to Ubro, you gain a bonus on Heal checks equal to half your binder level and the time it takes you to treat disease, poison, and all types of wounds using the Heal skill is reduced by half. In addition, you can discern all of a target's aches and pains as a standard action to learn the target's exact condition, as status.

The other two minors are unchanged.

Vestigial Bond(Boon)
This can remain unchanged and still apply to healing surge.


Orich wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
That's the other concern I had. No other major effectively "stops working" after X uses per day. There are a couple of capstones that do that, but no majors.

I've been mulling over Ubro's abilities and have some suggestions.

** spoiler omitted **

The only thing I'd change to that is to specify that hearing surge cannot be used to harm others (even undead).


bookrat wrote:
The only thing I'd change to that is to specify that hearing surge cannot be used to harm others (even undead).

I missed the edit window, but good point. Thanks, bookrat.


Orich wrote:
bookrat wrote:
The only thing I'd change to that is to specify that hearing surge cannot be used to harm others (even undead).
I missed the edit window, but good point. Thanks, bookrat.

So, the healing surge is positive energy, right? So why can't it harm undead? Undead are harmed by positive energy (excepting mummies, of course - wait, is this true in pathfinder? Huh. I guess not). I would say this is because of Ubro's personality. So why not make it part of his personality influence? Stating that you can't harm anyone might be too strong of a restriction, so maybe "you cannot harm any creature (including undead) with Ubro's granted abilities."


Thanks, Alex (re New Marat). That's a lot better!

Contributor

bookrat wrote:
Orich wrote:
bookrat wrote:
The only thing I'd change to that is to specify that hearing surge cannot be used to harm others (even undead).
I missed the edit window, but good point. Thanks, bookrat.
So, the healing surge is positive energy, right? So why can't it harm undead? Undead are harmed by positive energy (excepting mummies, of course - wait, is this true in pathfinder? Huh. I guess not). I would say this is because of Ubro's personality. So why not make it part of his personality influence? Stating that you can't harm anyone might be too strong of a restriction, so maybe "you cannot harm any creature (including undead) with Ubro's granted abilities."

Ubro's always had the no-harming restriction. Its part of his niche and his legend. After all, the ability to channel energy isn't your own; its being loaned to you by an entity that abhors violence. Even against the undead.


I looked through the third and fourth level spirits last night, in preparation for making a character, and noticed a couple of potential issues:

Crystal lady, vestigial boon: is it intentional that I can use this ability to "grant" my curse of crystal ability to some npc ally who's not adventuring with me, and thereby get rid of it? Also, can I have as many abilities as I like transferred at a time?

N'alyia has favoured enemy: anyone who can channel energy (or use lay on hands or turn undead). Should this be anyone who can channel positive energy (use lay on hands, turn undead)?

Anajira's capstone lets you modify the "attack granted by skirmisher's pounce" with feats like Vital Strike, but skirmisher's pounce grants a standard action, which allows you to use these feats anyway (or indeed do something other than attacking, like use most granted abilities).

Prime Ravager's vestigial bond allows you to send him into another character, functioning as Magic Jar. Magic Jar's text says "You keep your Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, level, class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, alignment, and mental abilities." Does the possessed creature gain your scores in these things? Do they keep their own? Do they get Prime Ravager's!? If they get yours, do they get the benefits of the spirits you have bound, and/or get to bind new spirits?

Can Swan Elashni's Step of the Silver Dragon be maintained as a free action, like bardic music? The text says it's treated like bardic music, but also specifies the action needed to activate it and is conspicuously missing that bit of text.

Also, I might have missed it, but I didn't see a response to what happens if a 10th level binder uses marat's capstone in response to an attack on himself.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Third Mind wrote:
Question regarding the Rings of Forced Requisition. Does the devoted know that something is happening to them when they make their will save? I mean, they're making a will save each round they wear it, but do they know that something's attacking their will when this happens?
That's the eternal question of Will saves. In my game, I'd probably say, "Yes," but ultimately that depends on your GM. If I were to write a rule that officially said yes or no, I'd be writing a precedent for every other Will save effect in the game, which I want to avoid doing. Let Paizo make that call, lol.

Well I'm fairly certain there is ruling to the effect that a target knows it made a saving throw. They might not now what it was they saved against, but they know something happened regardless of the end result. Given that, it would just be a matter of rounds before someone realizes that they started making saves when they put on an item. Or is there something in the ring that would muddy that? I haven't read the ring as of yet.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
bookrat wrote:
Orich wrote:
bookrat wrote:
The only thing I'd change to that is to specify that hearing surge cannot be used to harm others (even undead).
I missed the edit window, but good point. Thanks, bookrat.
So, the healing surge is positive energy, right? So why can't it harm undead? Undead are harmed by positive energy (excepting mummies, of course - wait, is this true in pathfinder? Huh. I guess not). I would say this is because of Ubro's personality. So why not make it part of his personality influence? Stating that you can't harm anyone might be too strong of a restriction, so maybe "you cannot harm any creature (including undead) with Ubro's granted abilities."
Ubro's always had the no-harming restriction. Its part of his niche and his legend. After all, the ability to channel energy isn't your own; its being loaned to you by an entity that abhors violence. Even against the undead.

Yeah; and I really like that. I was just toying with the idea of making it a personality influence so you could overcome the spirirt's wishes of no violence if you had the will power (aka had a good pact).

Edit: I also noticed that Ubro's current personality influence says dot instead of dote.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Third Mind wrote:
Question regarding the Rings of Forced Requisition. Does the devoted know that something is happening to them when they make their will save? I mean, they're making a will save each round they wear it, but do they know that something's attacking their will when this happens?
That's the eternal question of Will saves. In my game, I'd probably say, "Yes," but ultimately that depends on your GM. If I were to write a rule that officially said yes or no, I'd be writing a precedent for every other Will save effect in the game, which I want to avoid doing. Let Paizo make that call, lol.
Well I'm fairly certain there is ruling to the effect that a target knows it made a saving throw. They might not now what it was they saved against, but they know something happened regardless of the end result. Given that, it would just be a matter of rounds before someone realizes that they started making saves when they put on an item. Or is there something in the ring that would muddy that? I haven't read the ring as of yet.

At my table, we've ruled that the person has to have either enough intelligence or wisdom to recognize that they're making a will save. At least an 11 in one of them or make a DC 11 will or int check. For fort saves, something has to physically happen to you to recognize it (subtle things like disease is not something anyone notices until they develop symptoms); and you always know when you're making a reflex save.


bookrat wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Third Mind wrote:
Question regarding the Rings of Forced Requisition. Does the devoted know that something is happening to them when they make their will save? I mean, they're making a will save each round they wear it, but do they know that something's attacking their will when this happens?
That's the eternal question of Will saves. In my game, I'd probably say, "Yes," but ultimately that depends on your GM. If I were to write a rule that officially said yes or no, I'd be writing a precedent for every other Will save effect in the game, which I want to avoid doing. Let Paizo make that call, lol.
Well I'm fairly certain there is ruling to the effect that a target knows it made a saving throw. They might not now what it was they saved against, but they know something happened regardless of the end result. Given that, it would just be a matter of rounds before someone realizes that they started making saves when they put on an item. Or is there something in the ring that would muddy that? I haven't read the ring as of yet.
At my table, we've ruled that the person has to have either enough intelligence or wisdom to recognize that they're making a will save. At least an 11 in one of them or make a DC 11 will or int check. For fort saves, something has to physically happen to you to recognize it (subtle things like disease is not something anyone notices until they develop symptoms); and you always know when you're making a reflex save.

So... Most martial builds are going to not have a clue they are under attack? I believe the rule on knowing you are being assaulted (you made your save) is there to prevent that exact issue. An unseen assailant just spamming save to negate spells until one of them takes effect. By stating everyone knows they were targeted when they made a successful save even with no effect, they know something isn't right and are not completely oblivious to the fact they are in peril.

If you fail your save... Well, you take the effects which are often obvious enough, even if you are helpless to do anything about it (Unless the spell or effect say you don't realize it obviously). Like charm person for example, you act accordingly while under the influence, you might even question it during the effect, but until it ends you do what it entails. After the effect is over, you can then have your "WTH" moments as you recall what you just did under the effects of the spell.

Seeing as the rules state you know you made a successful save, your house rule seems to be putting people at a disadvantage when they already are disadvantaged. Which, no offense, makes it a horrible house rule.

Edit: When talking about making a save in my first post it was intended as a successful save (ie you didn't fail the save) and "regardless of the result" due to the fact some spells have no effect if saved against, for clarity.


Found it:

PRD Magic wrote:
Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

So you put the ring on, roll your save. You make your save, you know something just happened, which incidentally also just so happened to occur when you put the ring on. You wouldn't need to be a rocket scientist (or paranoid megalomaniac wizard) to realize what caused it.

@Alex, no need to worry about setting a precedent, the rule has been around since 3.x (at least, I'd have to look to see if it was there in 2e), is part of the core rule book and doesn't care what type of save was made. It's old news ;)


Skylancer4 wrote:

Found it:

PRD Magic wrote:
Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

So you put the ring on, roll your save. You make your save, you know something just happened, which incidentally also just so happened to occur when you put the ring on. You wouldn't need to be a rocket scientist (or paranoid megalomaniac wizard) to realize what caused it.

@Alex, no need to worry about setting a precedent, the rule has been around since 3.x (at least, I'd have to look to see if it was there in 2e), is part of the core rule book and doesn't care what type of save was made. It's old news ;)

That's fair for making the save for a spell. If you fail the save for a spell, then my house rule would still allow you to know. And if the will save isn't from a spell, you'll be able to know as well.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
For Death Howl's Ether Sight...the ability seems confusingly worded to me. Is the intent that you activate the ability as a standard action and that it lasts for a minute by default? Or do you have to maintain it by spending a standard action every round the see invisibility effect lasts? Or can it be initiated as a standard action, but maintained indefinitely without requiring actions until you reach the 1 minute/level limit? If it wasn't for the "as a standard action" part, I would presume either the first or third, and if it wasn't for the specifications for being used for one minute/level, I would assume it would last the normal duration for see invisibility when activated, but as it is...I'm still guessing it's supposed to be one or three, but I suppose I could see two if it was a balance issue...
I have no idea what you're trying to ask me here.

Sorry for being slow to respond to this, lacked internet over the weekend and haven't had much time to do a longer post. I'll try and explain myself more clearly.

"You see that which cannot be seen as a standard action, functioning as see invisibility." As a standard action, you gain access to see invisibility. Thus, it presumably works as see invisibility except where otherwise specified. "You can use this ability for a number of minutes per day equal to your binder level." However, the duration is one of those alterations, clearly, since see invisibility normally lasts for ten minutes per level. "These minutes do not need to be consecutive, but they must be spent in 1-minute increments." Furthermore, it can be spent in increments of time less than a minute, which seems to imply that you do not simply activate it and it runs automatically for a minute of time.

So, given the first sentence, saying that you see what cannot be seen as a standard action, along with the fact that it does not have a specified time it lasts by default, seems to imply that you must spend a standard action every round you wish the see invisibility effect to last, and that if you don't spend at least ten rounds doing so, you waste some of your ability for the day. If this is the intent, it seems rather strict; if you're forced to spend a standard action every round, I would think making it at-will would be fine, but perhaps it is a balance issue.

If that is not the intent, then I am still confused as to whether you spend a standard action and then gain the effects of see invisibility for a minute (with, perhaps, the ability to end the ability early as a standard action), or if you spend a standard action and gain the effects of see invisibility for one minute per level, but with the ability to end it early (as a standard or free action?) to save the use of some of your ability for later, or if you begin it as a standard action, and maintain it round-by-round as a free action...or what.

I hope this clearly explains why I find the wording of this ability confusing.

Contributor

Luthorne wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Luthorne wrote:
For Death Howl's Ether Sight...the ability seems confusingly worded to me. Is the intent that you activate the ability as a standard action and that it lasts for a minute by default? Or do you have to maintain it by spending a standard action every round the see invisibility effect lasts? Or can it be initiated as a standard action, but maintained indefinitely without requiring actions until you reach the 1 minute/level limit? If it wasn't for the "as a standard action" part, I would presume either the first or third, and if it wasn't for the specifications for being used for one minute/level, I would assume it would last the normal duration for see invisibility when activated, but as it is...I'm still guessing it's supposed to be one or three, but I suppose I could see two if it was a balance issue...
I have no idea what you're trying to ask me here.

Sorry for being slow to respond to this, lacked internet over the weekend and haven't had much time to do a longer post. I'll try and explain myself more clearly.

"You see that which cannot be seen as a standard action, functioning as see invisibility." As a standard action, you gain access to see invisibility. Thus, it presumably works as see invisibility except where otherwise specified. "You can use this ability for a number of minutes per day equal to your binder level." However, the duration is one of those alterations, clearly, since see invisibility normally lasts for ten minutes per level. "These minutes do not need to be consecutive, but they must be spent in 1-minute increments." Furthermore, it can be spent in increments of time less than a minute, which seems to imply that you do not simply activate it and it runs automatically for a minute of time.

So, given the first sentence, saying that you see what cannot be seen as a standard action, along with the fact that it does not have a specified time it lasts by default, seems to imply that you must...

I actually JUST added a universal rule yesterday under granted abilities that states that maintaining a granted ability that you've already activated is a free action. This isn't always stated in 99% of abilities in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (see, for example the 8th level power of the Protection cleric domain), but at least now its plainly spelled-out somewhere.

Does that alleviate your concerns?


Skylancer wrote:
So you put the ring on, roll your save. You make your save, you know something just happened, which incidentally also just so happened to occur when you put the ring on. You wouldn't need to be a rocket scientist (or paranoid megalomaniac wizard) to realize what caused it.

While that'd definitely fair, reasonable and understandable, that being the case, I feel it lowers the items usefulness quite a bit. One good save and they essentially just take the ring off and chuck it into the nearest ditch / ocean / mote, losing the buyer 56k until they fish it out. On the other hand, one bad save and they themselves don't want to take the ring off. Others around them though i'm sure would be willing to help with that. That said, I'm going to assume this was made more as a plot device for BBEGs then (good aligned) players, in which case it works fine, since the players could sell it and split the coin.


Alex said: "I actually JUST added a universal rule yesterday under granted abilities that states that maintaining a granted ability that you've already activated is a free action."

That'll be handy for the Elysium Choir and Swan Elashni bardic performance-type abilities. :)


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alexander Augunas wrote:

I actually JUST added a universal rule yesterday under granted abilities that states that maintaining a granted ability that you've already activated is a free action. This isn't always stated in 99% of abilities in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (see, for example the 8th level power of the Protection cleric domain), but at least now its plainly spelled-out somewhere.

Does that alleviate your concerns?

Hmm, I always assumed since an action wasn't listed for the Protection domain, it was a free action, but then again I'm not a huge cleric fan...

But yeah, now I understand how the ability is supposed to function, which is good. I still think it's a bit oddly phrased with the first sentence, but that might just be me...


So, I re-checked the early portions of the thread, but I don't think it was ever answered;

For the Unbound Occultist Archetype, do the monstrous aspects replace constellation aspects (or anything else)? Or are they a free addition? I assume they replace the constellation aspects, as otherwise this archetype becomes almost a straight upgrade (The weaker capstone doesn't really come into play, and I feel like Innate Occultism is a pretty even trade for Spirit Mastery).

Contributor

Stalchild wrote:

So, I re-checked the early portions of the thread, but I don't think it was ever answered;

For the Unbound Occultist Archetype, do the monstrous aspects replace constellation aspects (or anything else)? Or are they a free addition? I assume they replace the constellation aspects, as otherwise this archetype becomes almost a straight upgrade (The weaker capstone doesn't really come into play, and I feel like Innate Occultism is a pretty even trade for Spirit Mastery).

Sorry I missed you!

They're supposed to replace constellation aspects, yes. Its still a VERY good trade, mind you, but losing spirit mastery gives this archetype a bit more of a downside at high levels.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Stalchild wrote:

So, I re-checked the early portions of the thread, but I don't think it was ever answered;

For the Unbound Occultist Archetype, do the monstrous aspects replace constellation aspects (or anything else)? Or are they a free addition? I assume they replace the constellation aspects, as otherwise this archetype becomes almost a straight upgrade (The weaker capstone doesn't really come into play, and I feel like Innate Occultism is a pretty even trade for Spirit Mastery).

Sorry I missed you!

They're supposed to replace constellation aspects, yes. Its still a VERY good trade, mind you, but losing spirit mastery gives this archetype a bit more of a downside at high levels.

Thanks! I wasn't actually the one who asked it originally, but as I was looking into building a bbeg for my campaign, I realized that line was missing from the text. (Orich asked about it back on page 1, and then a whole bunch of other questions happened at once, lol).

Contributor

pi4t wrote:
Crystal lady, vestigial boon: is it intentional that I can use this ability to "grant" my curse of crystal ability to some npc ally who's not adventuring with me, and thereby get rid of it? Also, can I have as many abilities as I like transferred at a time?

Yup. You lose the benefit of having an oracle's curse, however. Also, the ability clearly states: "You can transfer any number of granted abilities in this manner, but you you may only transfer one ability each time you use this ability."

Quote:
N'alyia has favoured enemy: anyone who can channel energy (or use lay on hands or turn undead). Should this be anyone who can channel positive energy (use lay on hands, turn undead)?

No, because N'alyia also hates anyone who would try to control her via Command Undead.

Quote:
Anajira's capstone lets you modify the "attack granted by skirmisher's pounce" with feats like Vital Strike, but skirmisher's pounce grants a standard action, which allows you to use these feats anyway (or indeed do something other than attacking, like use most granted abilities).

That is a known issue that is being corrected.

Quote:
Prime Ravager's vestigial bond allows you to send him into another character, functioning as Magic Jar. Magic Jar's text says "You keep your Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, level, class, base attack bonus, base save bonuses, alignment, and mental abilities." Does the possessed creature gain your scores in these things? Do they keep their own? Do they get Prime Ravager's!? If they get yours, do they get the benefits of the spirits you have bound, and/or get to bind new spirits?

Prime Ravager's ability says, "You use your host's statistics."

Quote:
Can Swan Elashni's Step of the Silver Dragon be maintained as a free action, like bardic music? The text says it's treated like bardic music, but also specifies the action needed to activate it and is conspicuously missing that bit of text.

Yes. There's a new universal rule that says, "All minor granted abilities can be maintained as a free action."

Quote:
Also, I might have missed it, but I didn't see a response to what happens if a 10th level binder uses marat's capstone in response to an attack on himself.

She cannot use Marat's capstone in response to an attack on herself, and the wording has been cleaned up to make sure that this is clear.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Minor one I noticed while browsing the Spirits by Level table; Noble Marius is listed as having the read psychic resident ability, instead of read psychic residue.

Contributor

Luthorne wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:

I actually JUST added a universal rule yesterday under granted abilities that states that maintaining a granted ability that you've already activated is a free action. This isn't always stated in 99% of abilities in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (see, for example the 8th level power of the Protection cleric domain), but at least now its plainly spelled-out somewhere.

Does that alleviate your concerns?

Hmm, I always assumed since an action wasn't listed for the Protection domain, it was a free action, but then again I'm not a huge cleric fan...

But yeah, now I understand how the ability is supposed to function, which is good. I still think it's a bit oddly phrased with the first sentence, but that might just be me...

It probably is and it probably should be assumed as such. That's the typical rule, I'm just spelling it out so a particularly mean-spirited, militant GM doesn't try to tell you that you need to pay another standard action to use the ability.

701 to 750 of 1,105 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / [Radiance House] Pact Magic Unbound: Grimoire of Lost Souls Backer Playtest Feedback All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.