see above Zimu, they were sold
Whether goblins burned them or we sold them, we do not have them either way.
I have the potion of cure disease and the scroll of CLW.
oh great! My wife and I are going to that this weekend we think, to celebrate our anniversary...well as part of it. Since she was so kind as to let me perform in a play that previews on our anniversary
DMDM all i see is that when using the spell, there is a verbal component that helps you get located, but a summoner does not have that due to it being a SLA, so it appears that it does not, at least that is the consensus here on the boards.
It was Hotel Grand Budapest, and I heartily recommend it -- funny, sad, and beautifully acted and directed.
I loved it! Saw it in a preview last Tuesday. But I still like The Royal Tenenbaums a little better. I wish saw it on the big screen.
that is kind of Wes Anderson's thing, Moonrise Kingdom was a little bit of a departure, but that was fantastic
The good news for Ulp is that by the time we get to the BBEG of this book , DMDM will have all his vitriol saved up for our summoner friend! Yay for crits on the Judge LOL
|
I loved it! Saw it in a preview last Tuesday. But I still like The Royal Tenenbaums a little better. I wish saw it on the big screen.
In 2002 my group went as the cast of the Royal Tenenbaums.
- -
Hey DM and this group are really intelligent.
Do you want to take a crack at this Paizo mystery?
Test your wits and float your theories
Then James Jacobs thinks it may be PFS here.
Finally Jim Groves has his own theory
I love the alchemist class, just so much flavor and options. I am torn between those and bards as my favorite
I also like the oracle but the cheese all options are high
The cavalier is interesting to me, but sadly I just don't think it is effective since you almost never are able to be mounted
I go to work..and there's 40 posts in the Gameplay thread? Good god.
Phew okay. Looks like the plan is going through..which is good.
Jax isn't going to bother expending any resources on this fight except maybe a round of vanish. Its a single treant and the first fight of the day..seems kinda silly to spend multiple 2nd and 3rd level spells, numerous per day abilities and go all out crazy on it. That, or the rest of the party knows something about treants that Jax doesn't.
I like the witch. I keep trying to build an oracle, but just cannot get the feel for it. Cavalier looks interest to me as well, but being so strictly tied to a mount is also a problem in my mind. A halfling or gnome on a dog or wolf is an option though.
I really like Alchemists, but as with oracles, I just have never been able to get a feel for them.
Ulp is a bit of a diff idea for me I am really going to try to use poisons, I have some but next level when I take master alchemist, suddenly poison becomes a but more feasible, and at level 10 I can grab the poison boosting discovery
Aside, about the APG classes, I love most of them.
I feel Cavalier is..pretty bland and boring, but I feel that way about Rogues, Fighters and just about every non-casting class other than Barbarian (rage powers are pretty neat).
I feel inquisitor, alchemist and summoner are the best classes of that lot. They each have multiple abilities that allows them to do things in and out of combat while, IMO, not falling into the problem of most 9th level casting classes--being able to do practically everything. Eidolons are really nice, summons are useful and early spells are great. They might get a few too many spells early, but other than that..
I think it'd be fun to run a 3.5/PF game where only beguilers, healers, summoners, dread necromancers, magi, alchemists, inquisitors, rangers and paladins are allowed. Possibly witches.
Forgot about Inquisitors. I like them as well. I have not played a full one yet, but have one or two characters which are going to take mostly inquisitor levels after the initial build (monk and fighter levels for feats and abilities).
I would save it zimu.
See what comes next
Dren won't hit his real stride until about 8th level. Oracles seem to be a little underpowered at lower levels but once he gets some of his higher level spells he should be on par with most of the party.
Don't count your Great Old Ones form Beyond before they hatch.
:)
While arguably the Judge is ahead of the curve, I don't see Dren as behind the curve in any way.
We are probably still behind in magic items as a group and Dren makes up for some of that in the spells he can cast.
Insert witty comment here
I had one but by the time got to posting I lost it
Doug, you should check out 13th age. They have an SRD here and a system designed for entertaining/fast combat and narrative stories. They greatly limit magic without it feeling like the lack of utility in 4e that many complain about (personally, I adored the system but I loathed how long combats took). The only things I don't like about 13th age so far is the lack of content (its new, they only have a core book out atm, although more are on the way) and the mechanics of some of the classes--chiefly the fighter. What I do like is how it creates a game where the dice are important beyond just rolling for success/failure. Whether you got an odd/even or 16+ is important on the DM side and for many of the classes (fighter, wizard, sorcerer, ranger off the top of my head).
I thought we were all, in some way, DM's kids.
Jax can you give a brief example of the 13th Age through narrative?
Use a game example we have all experienced, say like the combat between us and the commander perhaps?
Not brief..no.
When fighting the Commander, we had some time to prepare. So maybe the wizard would use his "ritual magic" ability and his "Utility spell" to create a barrier or trap of some sort. Say, something that blocks off and holds shut a door for X rounds or they use their acid arrow ability to make an acid pool trap that would, say, allow a Int+level v physical defense attack to deal ongoing acid damage to the enemy when they step into it.
During combat, the fighter would swing away but would get various effects on his rolls. He gets a 16+ so his crit goes up against the boss. He gets an even, so his defense goes up for a turn, etc.
The rogue could decide to use a narrative stunt. The rogue in our party has Swashbuckle which lets him auto-succeed at what is pretty much some "cool, spotlight-creating" effect he wants once per combat. Maybe against the commander, he runs up the ladder at the commander and somersaults over him to land behind him, getting an attack with a boost to damage and not provoking. Or instead, uses it to acrobatically run up the side of the tower from the outside and push the commander down the ladder or maybe run up the ladder and grab the commander's legs, dragging him down after himself.
The main difference is in out of combat narrative power. Skills are very open ended and called backgrounds instead. In the current game, for example, the cleric has "Ambassador of Five Kings Mountain" and..not sure what else. The ranger has "Skywatch Graduate" to represent his book learning at a premier noble academy as well as another skill that is some kind of woodland training, can't recall what he called it. Essentially, if I want them to make a perception check in the woods..the ranger would use his woodland background and wisdom while others might have no background that's relevant and only apply wisdom.
Backgrounds are also not tied to specific attributes. So, say, when wanting to make some scholars friendly to you, you could use your intelligence instead of charisma. When wanting to intimidate, you don't have to take a feat (seriously?) to use your strength modifier if you're using that in an intimidating manner.
Maybe while in a dungeon there's a massive, magical pentagram on the ground. If you step on the wrong lines, bad things happen. So while the rogue would use his "Former Acrobat of the Chalice Circus" background with his Dex bonus, the wizard could use his "Abjurer of the Ninth Circle" background with his Dex bonus.
There exists icon rolls which let a player leverage their influence with various groups in the game to change the storyline or add subplots. For example, one PC used his roll to have an emissary of the Winter Court (faeries) seal an agreement between him and a goblin he fought (Bref :P). The emissary will send a winter wolf to attack whichever one of them (if either ever do) breaks the pact.
The GM can also use a player's icon rolls for ideas and furthering/creating a sub plot. One player has a background where he spent a year and a day in the Summer Court. He rolled a 6 several times on his Summer Court die and, in collaboration with him, we decided the Summer Queen wants to tie him tightly to the court and make him a consort. Not known to him IC or OOC is that she wants to make him the next Summer Knight (yes, I'm stealing court hierarchy from the Dresden files for a Golarion game..sue me). Everytime he gets a 6, she offers him something helpful with no strings attached. For example, he knows there is a magical cloak in a nearby dungeon. He wouldn't know about the cloak (and frankly, it wouldn't exist), if he hadn't gotten the 6. I essentially added two rooms and an encounter with the cloak to an already existing area.
Next time he gets a 5..well..he's going to get a boon but with a price. The price will involve mild inter-party conflict as another player has a deep connection to the Winter Court and the Winter Queen.
Another time, they were hunting for ways to investigate an underground arena. A player used his 5 with the Pathfinder Society to get a map that would take them around the main patrols. Unfortunately, since it was a 5, someone leaked information that the PC's were looking into the crypt. So while they still avoided two encounters, the enemies were aware someone was looking for them.
On ease of DMing
My biggest problem with Pathfinder is balancing monster encounters. This monster is CR 3, but its really f%$+ing weak or really strong compared to these other CR 3 monsters. Technically, a level 6 ogre fighter and a higher level human wizard could be the same CR...but the wizard is going to have a lot more things the PC's have to 'plan' or deal with compared to just "Grog smash."
13th Age, like 4e, helps destroy this by creating a standard HP/attack b onus/damage/defenses chart by level. Creating a monster is as simple as glancing at the chart and picking the level you want it to be then maybe adding a few changes. Like a "Brute" may have +15% HP but -2 to all defenses or whatever the math is. I can easily make/convert 5 monsters in the time it takes me to put together half a level 3-5 classed enemy in Pathfinder with much less fear that it'll prove too weak or too strong to the PC's.
The lack of Scry, easy flying abilities, walking through walls, seeing in darkness being everywhere, long distance communication, long distance teleportation and hundreds of other little things in Pathfinder that make various non-combat "difficulties" trivial makes creating plots easier.
They also get rid of tons of little rules that aren't used 99% of the time or no one cares about. Carrying capacity, endurance, holding your breath, penalties for fighting underwater, penalties for a hundred and one things that seem cool to do in character but you can't even ATTEMPT without spending a serious amount of character resources. Want to trip someone? In 13th age, make it either a stunt (vs a DC based on character level) or a generic Str (or Dex) + level v enemy physical defense. In Pathfinder, provoke an opportunity attack and roll against CMD which scales so incredibly high at mid to high levels that you'll never succeed. Or get two feats (one of which requires a fighter to spend points to get a 13 Int..) to make yourself slightly competent at it, and still be unable to succeed in tripping anything with four legs (because its okay for the wizard to knock a monster off its feet into a pit, but not for the fighter to throw it around with his huge strength/skill/agility/knowledge of terrain).
Of course, there are less fiddly rules in your favor too. Atm, there's no class that can cast a spell and attack in melee at the same time. (Although I have a PC who has flavored a ton of melee bard spells in a way that pulls that off). Wizards don't have dozens of spells to choose from at a given level (atm, there's like..maybe 6 level 1 spells a wizard can learn). There's no druid class. There's no necromancy at all.
I like to hope most of this will be fixed in upcoming books. The next 13th age class book has druids, monks, multiclass rules, necromancers, captains (sort of like 4e warlords) and other options for the existing classes. I love the monk the most because of how they work. They move through various combat attacks. Start with Snake Style punch and then move into Snake Style whatever and then finish off the enemy with a big hitting move on round 3. The monk (and sorcerer, to an extent) was the only class to make my player-oriented mechanical side squee. I'm hoping they put out more stuff that makes me want to play as opposed to just run the game in the future.
Not brief..no.
** spoiler omitted **...
If I recall correctly, the guy who invented this game, and pretty much genre, Gary Gygax, in the AD&D DM Guide, the one with the Efreeti on the front, stuck somewhere in the middle that the rules are simply guidelines. If it is more fun to ignore or modify a rule, go ahead and do it.
My group hasn't played in over a year, we had been 1st edition hold outs for ever, we did not start 3rd edition until 2005. A few prefer the more intense rule sets manly for character customization. But a few wish we would switch back to ADnD for the frestyle type of play.
As he DM, I have been kicking around ideas of trying to incorporate both together. From E6 to dividing level advancement up and extending ex needed to actually advance. I have kicked around more ideas but I have came to a conclusion, the main reason some of my players have problems with Pathfinder is all of the options and length of combat. How many Combat Feats are out there? Heck if I know, and it grows every time a new book comes out. Pathfinder is becoming similar to 3.0 - 3.5 that way. It is better controlled but it still out of hand. "Back in my day we had 3 books! And we liked it!"
So how do we make both sides of the table happy? Who knows. But I have thought of doing away with the Face skills, and cutting the attacks per round back. If I do that will destroy the CR system, I understand that. But screw it, I guess it will make a bit more work to keep things interesting, but I did that with ADnD all the time.
As Judge pointed out, "Rules are simply guidelines." The 1 rule that is a real rule, to me, is, "This is a game we play to have fun."
Rules are guidelines, but I prefer a minimum amount of work with the rules system so I can focus attention on building NPC backgrounds, stories and tying in character concepts/ideas/backgrounds into the game.
DM modifies/makes many of his own NPC's for Pathfinder so I'm sure he knows how long that takes. I don't tend to have the attention focus to spend a long time making an enemy, creating an interesting combat scenario (terrain, etc. Which in PF just ends up getting avoided via invisibility, planning, retreating, scrying, messages and flying anyway) and building a good story.
I'm also a big fan of plenty of player rules/options, which is why I don't mind PF/3.5/any RPG adding more and more rules/subsystems/feats/etc as the game goes on. I love options. I hate options that pale significantly in comparison to what you can already do or are locked behind so many feat pre-reqs as to take a significant number of character resources to obtain and not be that good (re: spring attack, vital strike chain, maneuver chains, whirlwind attack, etc).
This.
PFRPG made (IMO) a wrong turn when it made these things too easy. To some extent that dates back to 1e, but PF really pushed hard on the "convenience" aspects -- things like making two different light cantrips and giving everyone darkvision, so that turning out the lights was no longer an easy option. On one hand, it meant no more fiddling around with torches and bullseye lanterns, sure. But OTOH, it meant you could not longer put PCs in the dark. And half the emotional charge from being in a dungeon was that /it was dark down there/.
As a fun bit, my wife recently gave me a great idea for an enemy.
It's not fully fleshed out yet, but:At some point in the future, when the PC's go to enter one of the small mini-dungeons scattered about (we're doing Kingmaker using 13th age), they will find a skeletal corpse with a scrap of parchment clutched in one hand. It'll read something like: "Fear the Light! Embrace the Darkness! :::::::::!" Where the :'s are the name for whatever I call the monster.
The monster will be sort of like the Vashta Nerada in Dr. Who, but in reverse. For those not familiar, these were microbiological swarms that ate flesh and dwelt in darkness but fled the light. This monster will be a swarm-type thing attracted to light.
I'm not sure on the other details, may include hints here and there for them to find out about the creature and about a "blind hermit" living in the woods who can make a potion for them to peruse the area in the dark. Either way, I want them to be "afraid of the light" when in some dungeons from now on :)
Knock knock - where is everyone. Boards are incredibly quiet today.
Knock knock
Cуровую 'Who's there?'
Judge 'Smell Mop'
Cуровую 'Smell Mop who?
Judge hahahahahaha
. .
Cуровую casts Fireball on the Judge and stops answering the door.
Still here.
Waiting...in the darkness...
Cool idea -- I like it. Make them transparent and faintly luminescent, so that they're invisible in bright light but easy to spot in daylight, like the Hellcat. There should be some other cue that makes them active -- like, weather (cold, or hot and dry) or some such, so that the PCs aren't terrified of simply ever going outside.I'd suggest giving them SR and/or a crapload of immunities, and making them well stronger than the PCs APL -- otherwise, they'll just fight them and win. Make them slow, but have them do a lot of damage (and in some horrible way) once they catch up with a victim.
It's in 13th Age which does (mostly) away with straight up immunities, SR, etc. I'll likely have some way to beat them that the PC's will come across. The system encourages heroic, "We be the protoganist" type fantasy games in the vein of most heroic novels (Authors like Sanderson, Jordan, Rothfuss). While I don't want it to be a "monster shows up, PC's beat on it with swords" type encounter, it'll probably be more along the lines of: Pc's come across remains of creature, find old lore about the thing and go hunting for something like "Sap of the Darkwood Tree" to coat their weapons with and battle it out. We have a monster-hunter type vibe in a few encounters. I always loved that you wanted silver to fight werewolves, iron to fight fey, etc. So there are some monsters that are best damaged by weird things. Casting spells while your hands are bathed in the blood of 2 week old chicks will let your magic be more effective against monster X. Using wooden weapons crafted from Churlwood and carved with the any language's word for Vengeance will let your weapons easily pierce the tough hide of monster Y. And so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Write up of 13th Age
Wow that's a lot of explanation Jax thanks for your comments and insight.
Your suggesting that 13th Age is a better game as far as story telling is concerned and there is less preparation time?
In 13th Age the pc's get better as the combat goes on? What about the bad guys (well good guys in our case)?
How is an even roll different from an odd roll?
What do you like best in 13th Age? What is better in Pathfinder that could be brought into 13th Age?
In your example with the rouge against the Paladin, you say he can use his 'narrative stunt' to do certain things, isn't that similar to acrobatics skill and mobility in Pathfinder?
I very much like the backgrounds idea that help character development.
My questions with them is, do NPC or DMs characters get backgrounds as well and what keeps DMs and players form abusing it?
I don't think I followed your explanation of subplots. Would it not be a little difficult for the DM if say there were six strongly vocal PCs and each was trying to advance their own subplot?
There is a Bref in your campaign too? Wow, he's franchising!
I could use a little more examples for 'icon rolls'.
Your also saying that the game has a more old school feel I take it, but I am not entirely sure what is considered old school to most players save for I think games were less defined by the rules and DMs had more leeway back then.
Sickish kid
Is your child better DM?
You have the ability to cook dinner for yourselves.I thought we were all, in some way, DM's kids.
While drinking some serious sangria as we stir the saucepan.
In our group, I'm asking for the long term, besides the Judge, who has the ability to See Invisibility and use Glitterdust?
spending the morning in bed rereading The Lord of the Rings, and he looked distinctly Smaug
Edited
What is spare time? I am unfamiliar with this term.