I would absolutely rule that you do not heal nonlethal damage while hustling, correct. I would also rule that any healing of nonlethal damage would not occur if the PC had participated in any other strenuous activity (like combat) during any given hour either. That is not RAW, but that's how I'd rule it.
Also, you lost me with all the +'s and -'s up there.... Agh, I though my post had too many numbers.
|
I would argue that, technically speaking, designing a spell is actually part and parcel of the RAW. Designing a new spell based off an existing version that is perhaps weaker and doesn't accomplish the same purpose is certainly something that PCs could approach their GM about. etc.
I think the only thing we disagree on here is the subtleties of the definition of the term "homebrew" with respect to the rules of Pathfinder, rule 0 in particular.
I would consider spells created using the spell research rules to be homebrew content, and I don't think that the fact that RAW makes an explicit allowance for such content to be added changes that fact. After all, rule 0 already allows the GM to add, change, or remove rules from the game, and I would have assumed that rule 0 would allow a player to propose a new spell and use it if the GM gave permission, even if the spell research rules weren't there. This would obviously allow the GM to do the same within his own head where NPCs are concerned.
If the term "homebrew" doesn't apply to content that is added to the game despite not appearing in any sourcebook, even if the rules allow for its addition, then the term doesn't apply to anything because of rule 0. This, of course, also means that rule 0 technically makes the spell research rules redundant, and that they are at best a clarification of that aspect of rule 0.
That's my thinking, anyway, and since you seemed to take exception to my use of the term, I wanted to explain what I meant by it (especially given my tendency to say things that are easy to misinterpret). I hope I didn't make things worse, as I also have a tendency to do without meaning to.
Illiam, I do love you. I took no offense at your use of the term homebrew. I mean, I've been homebrewing the H E double hockey sticks out of this module. :) I appreciate, very much, your clarification. The only reason I brought it up at all, was to point out that the rules do make allowance for creating new spells, and to be humorous.
Speaking of rules and allowances... Don't you find it funny that the rules themselves list a rule, in fact the preeminent rule, which is why it is numbered "0," that makes all of what follows irrelevant, because they give the GM the power to discount them? I've always found that paradoxical to the point of opening a hole in the time-space continuum. :D
Edit: Does the book actually use the term "Rule 0?" I can't remember if that's just a colloquialism that is oft quoted, or it actually says that in the CRB?
Edit #2: Nope just checked this is what it says:
Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their
thoughts when the rules are in doubt.
That's poop, it means I should get a consensus from the players before brewing my own rules tea... That seriously diminishes my cosmic power.
So then, I propose we all agree on this houserule: The GM can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, without getting a consensus from the players first.
Sound good? >:D XD
Just FYI it's currently the approximation of 9 AM in game, and you haven't actually left camp yet...
Edit: Just so I'm clear... You are suggesting one hour of hustle at the beginning, and then another hour of hustle right at the end, and not hustling at all in between?
Yes, but we are pi... leaving right now.
That just puts getting to the river back to around 2:30 all going well.
And that was the intention of my post yes. Because hustling for an hour does no harm and we don't expect combat after the monastery.
How long do we expect the boat journey on the river to take?
|
|
2) Commit to using consumables first:
I fail to see what sense it makes to use consumable items before using magic that regenerates the next day, especially when you're talking about using 5 potions (a 250gp value, plus, presumably one of Kairon's CLW on himself, and we're assuming Illiam doesn't need it because he's doing his best impression of Yoda) when one channel energy could do the job? It also probably makes sense to use the wand before the potions is possible, because a wand charge is cheaper than a potion.
I'd lean toward using channel energy when everybody needs it a little bit, and save CLW for when on character takes a bunch of damage (thinking of other games, it's funny what "a bunch of damage" means at level 1 :) ), unless I've missed something. Kairon will also have to consider (and I'm definitely not telling anyone what to do) whether he's likely to need his prepared spells, or if it makes sense to convert them to CLW before using consumables. I believe Ardan mentioned spiders specifically in reference to the monastery, and depending on the sizes, burning hands might be very important to have there, as I don't think really have anything else that can affect mindless swarms of diminutive or fine creatures, so that might not be a good one to convert.
I would agree, though, that it might make sense to save the first Channel for after battle starts, if it even does. It costs Kairon's first action, but it allows us to better conserve them. Of course, channel is likely to hit all of us AND our opponents, so if we do that, it would be a good idea for everyone to hold action until it happens, rather than doing damage that will be healed by channel energy. Of course, if what we're fighting is undead, it doesn't matter how much damage is done to it before the channel comes.
I would argue that, technically speaking, designing a spell is actually part and parcel of the RAW. Designing a new spell based off an existing version that is perhaps weaker and doesn't accomplish the same purpose is certainly something that PCs could approach their GM about. etc.I think the only thing we disagree on here is the subtleties of the definition of the term "homebrew" with respect to the rules of Pathfinder, rule 0 in particular.
I would consider spells created using the spell research rules to be homebrew content, and I don't think that the fact that RAW makes an explicit allowance for such content to be added changes that fact. After all, rule 0 already allows the GM to add, change, or remove rules from the game, and I would have assumed that rule 0 would allow a player to propose a new spell and use it if the GM gave permission, even if the spell research rules weren't there. This would obviously allow the GM to do the same within his own head where NPCs are concerned.
If the term "homebrew" doesn't apply to content that is added to the game despite not appearing in any sourcebook, even if the rules allow for its addition, then the term doesn't apply to anything because of rule 0. This, of course, also means that rule 0 technically makes the spell research rules redundant, and that they are at best a clarification of that aspect of rule 0.
That's my thinking, anyway, and since you seemed to take exception to my use of the term, I wanted to explain what I meant by it (especially given my tendency to say things that are easy to misinterpret). I hope I didn't make things worse, as I also have a tendency to do without meaning to.
Illiam , accepting your definition of homebrew for the moment, it does not follow from what you call rule 0 that their can be no such thing as homebrew.
However, instead of explaining why I am going to leave this as a logic puzzle.
Illiam, that was beautiful.
Mended, what's the duration of the fatigue from hustling?
|
|
Edit #2: Nope just checked this is what it says:Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their
thoughts when the rules are in doubt.That's poop, it means I should get a consensus from the players before brewing my own rules tea... That seriously diminishes my cosmic power.
So then, I propose we all agree on this houserule: The GM can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, without getting a consensus from the players first.
Sound good? >:D XD
The GM is the arbiter of the rules, and can use the first part of that sentence to negate the rest of it :P
There are many different ways to phrase rule 0, but whether spoken or not, it always includes a player's final recourse: to leave the game if they are not enjoying it.
So, yes, a game master can basically do whatever he wants with the game, BUT if he scares off all his players, there is no game left for him to be a master of. There's a zen koan in there somewhere, for sure. Anyway, in that sense, players must agree to the rules for the game to continue, at least in the sense of agreeing to rule 0.
I would say that, wherever possible, the GM and players should be working from the same rules, whatever those are. In most cases (and our homebrew/spell research spell would be a reasonable example of an exception), this means that the GM should tell the players ahead of time before applying a modified or homebrewed rule, as Mended has done several times, including at the top of this page. It's better to agree on them beforehand (or at least let the players know what to expect) rather than to fight about them after the fact. The whole reason that all those books of rules exist is to give a common starting point, so we're not all flying by the seat of rule 0 all the time.
|
|
Illiam , accepting your definition of homebrew for the moment, it does not follow from what you call rule 0 that their can be no such thing as homebrew.
I never mentioned what definition of rule 0 I was working from. It certainly isn't the version that actually appears in the text, which Mended quoted, which is listed under the heading "The Most Important Rule", but is not actually called "rule 0" in the text. For all you know, I could be working from a definition that contains the phase "there is no such thing as homebrew," in which case it most certainly would follow, unless a premise doesn't follow from itself.
Besides, the whole point of that post was that rule 0 (and therefore spell research, as a subset of rule 0) didn't negate the concept of homebrew, thereby justifying my use of the term, so I don't know what you're trying to argue.
You and I could argue set theory and what is and is not a true dichotomy (And yes, everything either is or is not a true dichotomy. Set theory joke.), but I don't think the others would appreciate it.
I fail to see what sense it makes to use consumable items before using magic that regenerates the next day
We've already seen one enemy type that does ability damage. Conserving my Blessed Surgeries against the possibility of ability damage or poison today is desirable. And banking on tomorrow discounts today's shortfalls. The less Kairon spends early, the more he can address later; you've noticed how he usually has one spell and one channel remaining after a night's rest, right?
I have no problem using the wand before the potions -- cool. I'm much less concerned with the financial aspect of the gear we've gained than I am with how readily we can survive the day's challenges. And since: 1) Kairon can't be everywhere at once, 2) channeling in combat is even more bad than CLWing (generally), and 3) having the healer make himself vulnerable during combat is even worse . . . .
Basically, this: tactical action economy clearly indicates that "do it yourself" is usually faster than "wait for help"; if you can't, then Kairon has to step in, anyway.
Kairon will also have to consider (and I'm definitely not telling anyone what to do) whether he's likely to need his prepared spells, or if it makes sense to convert them to CLW before using consumables.
Thus far, all of my prepped spells have been converted, because . . .
I believe Ardan mentioned spiders specifically in reference to the monastery, and depending on the sizes, burning hands might be very important to have there, as I don't think really have anything else that can affect mindless swarms of diminutive or fine creatures, so that might not be a good one to convert.
. . . domain spells can't be converted (without archetypes).
I would agree, though, that it might make sense to save the first Channel for after battle starts, if it even does. It costs Kairon's first action, but it allows us to better conserve them. Of course, channel is likely to hit all of us AND our opponents, so if we do that, it would be a good idea for everyone to hold action until it happens, rather than doing damage that will be healed by channel energy. Of course, if what we're fighting is undead, it doesn't matter how much damage is done to it before the channel comes.
Yes. The idea of going " . . .hameha!" after a round of "Kame . . ." I would just hope we make the most of our move actions in that first round.
Oh my goodness, look at all the numbers and such I summoned here by my little discussion!
I will try to read through all of this but I just woke up as well. I shall be slow.
|
|
Basically, this: tactical action economy clearly indicates that "do it yourself" is usually faster than "wait for help"; if you can't, then Kairon has to step in, anyway.
Oh, you were talking about individual healing in combat. In that case, we're in violent agreement.
Thus far, all of my prepped spells have been converted, because . . .
. . . domain spells can't be converted (without archetypes).
Right. I forgot that Burning Hands wasn't on the cleric spell list. You know, I can't recall ever playing with a cleric (at least not one built by someone other than me) in the party who didn't have access to it. Interesting. Now I'm going to have to go see whether there are several domains that give access to it, or if it's just that common to choose the fire domain...
It shouldn't come as any surprising that when I build a cleric, I gravitate more toward domains like chaos and trickery, and the deities that grant them.
"Violent agreement."
I dig it. :D
Fire domain -- IIRC, burning hands only comes with this domain. Of course, I think it's so desirable because clerics want to be able to drop some spell damage every now and again . . . . Specifically, fireball. Though wall of fire is super-cool. Oh, the memories. :D
EDIT 2: It may be good for me to kinda outline my perspective on how I run a (this) cleric's remedial abilities --
1) Channel is a strategic ability.
2) Consumables are tactical premiums.
3) Spell slots are the toughest part to spend -- the decision tree hypercritical.
4) Blessed Surgery is going to become even more valuable as we progress; its use is, frankly, life or death.
5) Heal skill checks are the best at-will Kairon has, especially at 1st.
(I know my name's not Mended, but...) My reading is that the fatigue lasts as long as the nonlethal damage does.Illiam, that was beautiful.
Mended, what's the duration of the fatigue from hustling?
This.
Also, scribe, make a note: Illiam and I have been in violent agreement all day.
How's this for a fun theoretical exercise. What if a GM promised never to invoke rule 0 unless the entire table agreed that to do so was a benefit to the game, wouldn't that negate the purpose and function of rule 0?
Lastly this: This group of roleplayers is so intent on making the most strategic choices that they refuse to leave camp until everyone agrees on what those choices are. I've said it before, but I'll say it again. If you ever find yourself witnessing, or worse, partaking in one of those pointless arguments about how real role players aren't optimizers, or vice versa, I hope you'll point people to this game. This is, by far, the best narrative game I've ever played in, and I do think the term "optimizer" could be applied to everyone in it.
Good on us!!!
Cheers,
MW
Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion of whether time is money, or money is money, or money is time, or wand charges equal a bucket of brownie piss.
Did anyone else notice that the GM just tried to surreptitiously hide a link to a CR 1 Fey creature that has an AC of 17, init bonus +8, both DR and SR, usually travels in gangs, and has the ability to give PCs the confused condition?
I've always hated the idea that you couldn't be optimized and still be a good roleplayer. Our characters want to succeed after all and they want to succeed in the best manner as possible. When half the choices are decided on the beloved unpredictability of dice, you got to stack your odds as best you can!
I am, personally, for whatever situation allows us to move but with the best amount of combat preparedness. I do agree with Kairon in that, in case of an ambush, we will need to fight very defensively. Luckily, Kanga has a faster movement speed then us so he will be less bothered than we will by the hustle.
With three of us wielding reach weapons, a badass Goruck and a badass Kanga, and our support line of magic casters, I feel that as long as initiative is kind to us then we should be able to persevere even if we stress a little.
I'm also fine with us being very cautious around the monastery. Abandoned structures in fey-haunted woods are not technically awful places...but they have a strong chance of being awful.
Or, the old pseudo-mathematical maxim:
Girl = Time X Money
Time = Money
----> Girl = Money^2
Biblical principle: the love of money is the root of all evil (this really only works with the King James Version)
----> Evil = Money^2
Therefore:
Girl = Evil
____________
Is it any wonder at all that I'm divorced? lol
_______________
RE: Hitting the Trail --
We're just waiting for Baradim to finish waking up, is all. The discussion is merely an exercise in formalities easily upended. :D
And, besides, Mended -- you did start it! >:D
I like Chillel's idea, hustle one hour on the way to the hut, then from the monastery to the river. It cuts two hours off the total travel time, but doesn't overly tax us.
|
|
Biblical principle: the love of money is the root of all evil (this really only works with the King James Version)
----> Evil = Money^2
You're assuming that "the root" means the square root, also known as the second root. A simpler interpretation is that, without a number, the implication is that it's the first root, and the first root of a number is itself, n^(1/1) = n. This would mean that, simply, money = evil. This would also imply, given your other postulates, that girl = evil^2, which might actually make your point better.
You could also interpret if as the 0th root, which is infinite, but that would imply that money = infinite, which is clearly false, and often painfully so when the monthly bills come in :P
Biblical principle: the love of money is the root of all evil (this really only works with the King James Version)
----> Evil = Money^2You're assuming that "the root" means the square root, also known as the second root. A simpler interpretation is that, without a number, the implication is that it's the first root, and the first root of a number is itself, n^(1/1) = n. This would mean that, simply, money = evil. This would also imply, given your other postulates, that girl = evil^2, which might actually make your point better.
You could also interpret if as the 0th root, which is infinite, but that would imply that money = infinite, which is clearly false, and often painfully so when the monthly bills come in :P
Yes, even I was aware of the logical leaps made in the progression. And, yet, the truth of the insight so derived inclines one to believe that it may, indeed, be accurate -- whether square root, or other!
How can money be evil??! This is Capitalist America!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, scribe, make a note: Illiam and I have been in violent agreement all day.
It's done sir. Also, the brownies wish to schedule an appointment to discuss the plan.
Thus far, all of my prepped spells have been converted, because . . .
. . . domain spells can't be converted (without archetypes).Right. I forgot that Burning Hands wasn't on the cleric spell list. You know, I can't recall ever playing with a cleric (at least not one built by someone other than me) in the party who didn't have access to it. Interesting. Now I'm going to have to go see whether there are several domains that give access to it, or if it's just that common to choose the fire domain...
It shouldn't come as any surprising that when I build a cleric, I gravitate more toward domains like chaos and trickery, and the deities that grant them.
Fire domain is definitely excellent. It gives you burning hands and fireball. Which are excellent damage dealing spells you don't normally get.
A friend who is a Pathfinder sage loves travel domain.
Coulda gone Desna, Luck and Travel, and had a "better" reach cleric going, but I was shooting for empowered heals at 6th since we looked to be light on the restorative end of things.
|
|
Lastly this: This group of roleplayers is so intent on making the most strategic choices that they refuse to leave camp until everyone agrees on what those choices are. I've said it before, but I'll say it again. If you ever find yourself witnessing, or worse, partaking in one of those pointless arguments about how real role players aren't optimizers, or vice versa, I hope you'll point people to this game. This is, by far, the best narrative game I've ever played in, and I do think the term "optimizer" could be applied to everyone in it.
I think a character should be somewhat optimized, not to be more effective in combat, but to have both strengths and weaknesses that fuel the RP. I think there is such a thing as over-optimization, but it's defined less by how much optimization you do than by whether you sacrifice having an interesting and consistent character concept to squeeze every bit of bonus out of one thing.
For instance, I could have had a 20 in INT instead of an 18 if I had chosen a race with an INT bonus. Elf, ratfolk, sylph, and tiefling all would have been good choices (I've even played with the idea of a halfling-born tiefling to get small size), and it took a significant investment in other things that would have made a lot more sense for a rogue than for a wizard to realize the character concept I had in mind. This all means that the character isn't nearly as optimized as he could be, but he's a hell of a lot more fun to play.
One thing I really hate is GMs who tell players not to powergame. Then they do nothing to enforce it. I was silly enough to listen to this a few times and wound up with a severely underpowered character. Compared to those with the wisdom to ignore the GM.
I am not at all surprised you were not min maxing Illiam. You know the rules far to well to think a Halfling Wizard is the best power option.
My characters almost always start with game mechanics. I have an idea [or rip off someone else's idea as in the case of Chillel] of a character that is built to be effective in a given way and construct the character. I like designing effective characters.
The personality evolves organically when I start playing the character. If it was purely up to me I would leave writing a backstory and even alignment until I had played the character a while. Chillel may well have been Chaotic Good, or a good alignment, it is the way she turned out.
I am not at all surprised you were not min maxing Illiam. You know the rules far to well to think a Halfling Wizard is the best power option.
Okay, I hear you, but let's look back at all the combats where Illiam had his spells... His choices have made him VERY effective. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Illiam has been the linchpin of success in every combat where he had his magic available. Heck, even his little ready action teleport against the Tatzlwyrms tipped the scales at the front end of that battle, because it caused the wyrm to jump down through several people's threatened squares, and then land prone. Not a bad little trick. So, I guess what I'm saying is, Illiam has proven himself to be this group's power option.
G'morning all, and happy Friday! I'll have a gameplay post up in just a titch. I have a bit of research I need to do.
Bah, more mysteries and strangeness. I will wait for the moment to post since I don't have any of those neat, magical abilities to detect things and stuff and have some cereal as I ponder.
EDIT: I lied. I like posting too much.
and have some cereal as I ponder.
Why this is considered so sinister I have no idea. But cereal killers certainly have a very bad reputation.
I should have realised my pun would have repercussions.
I should have realised my pun would have repercussions.
-table flips- Nope. Get out. Go. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where's Tableflip McRagequit when you need him!? LOL
I just thought of a name for the group, Illiamagicians. Or "Hold Stilliam So the Stabbing can Start." Which would just be Hssss, for short.
That's Illiam up front with the sweet mustache. Be wary if he mustache you a question.
Illiam and the Taal Guys?
Beautiful!
Well, certainly would make it easy to get lost. If we stepped between those trees, we'd be in a different part of the forest, and we might have to go the long way to get back. I suggest we go around. Then, turning to Chillel, We should keep an eye out for magical auras. There could be more of these.
Keeping Detect Magic active would require casting it every minute, right? Cause it only lasts for a minute? I don't have a problem with that, now that you're not hustling anymore. Which makes it VERY clear that you all made the right decision abandoning the all day hustle... Cause if you hadn't you'd probably have chosen to abandon it anyway, right here. :) You're so smaaaarrtt.
Remember though once the nasty weather hits, maintaining a vigil of Detect Magic will require regular concentration checks...
Oh right, right, cantrip. Of course.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
I just figure that if these things are designed to keep people away from one place, they probably deposit you further away than you started, and likely on the other side. that's the kind of thing we should be able to use to our advantage, at least with a good skill check (maybe survival looking through, or spellcraft examining the magic itself) to determine the exit location. Maybe save us an hour or two of walking. If that's not cool with you, that's ok, too. Maybe it's impossible to determine the exit point, or maybe they all go the wrong direction.
Oh, I knew exactly what you meant, and boy is it genius. I mean, in all reality there probably should be one that moves you closer to the monastery. The problem is I didn't actually do the "leg work" of mapping out the location of each entrance and exit. I can certainly do that if you want. But it will take me a while, and then we still have the problem of, if there is one, are you going to take the time to look for it? I mean, what if the portal that leads to the side of the forest by the monastery (assuming one exists) is in the far north of the forest? I guess what I'm saying is, brilliant idea, wish I'd thought of it, but in order to keep things moving, I think we'll just have to assume there isn't one that's going to be easily found that exits where you want it. It'd be a slim percentage chance anyway. Maybe something a fly by the seat of his pants GM would roll a percentage chance for in a spoiler or something, I don't know.
Thank Sarenrae! Illiam, you brilliant little wizard you...Btw, Illiam doesn't call himself a wizard. He prefers the term "conjurer."
But he doesn't take offense when others call him that, does he? Wizard is a much more widespread term, I would think. Something along the lines of the difference between a Native American, and their specific tribe, right?
|
|
But he doesn't take offense when others call him that, does he? Wizard is a much more widespread term, I would think. Something along the lines of the difference between a Native American, and their specific tribe, right?Thank Sarenrae! Illiam, you brilliant little wizard you...Btw, Illiam doesn't call himself a wizard. He prefers the term "conjurer."
It's more a question of whether you would know to call him that. He introduced himself as a conjurer, and he doesn't carry around anything that is obviously a spell book, he doesn't wear wizard's robes or have a long white beard, he doesn't have a familiar, etc. So when he says that he's a conjurer, do you know that that means he's a wizard?
Good point. I guess that was a lot more metagame than I originally thought. I'll adjust future posts.
|
|
Oh, I knew exactly what you meant, and boy is it genius. I mean, in all reality there probably should be one that moves you closer to the monastery. The problem is I didn't actually do the "leg work" of mapping out the location of each entrance and exit. I can certainly do that if you want. But it will take me a while, and then we still have the problem of, if there is one, are you going to take the time to look for it? I mean, what if the portal that leads to the side of the forest by the monastery (assuming one exists) is in the far north of the forest? I guess what I'm saying is, brilliant idea, wish I'd thought of it, but in order to keep things moving, I think we'll just have to assume there isn't one that's going to be easily found that exits where you want it. It'd be a slim percentage chance anyway. Maybe something a fly by the seat of his pants GM would roll a percentage chance for in a spoiler or something, I don't know.
I didn't really mean that we would go searching, just check this one and any others that we encounter on our way, to see if we safe is any time. I wouldn't expect to find one taking us directly to the monastery.
In my head there were probably only five or six, arranged in a sort of circle around the hut. Imagine putting a pie with six slices on the map, the center of all the slices is Uliz' hut (yes your assertion that it is some sort of a protection for her hut was right on. This of course divulges some probably rather specific things about her character build, I'll let you worry about that). Somewhere between the center of the pie slice and the outer edge of the pie slice, there's a trail that crosses into her territory, and she places a one-way dimension door with permanency there. I didn't actually map them out, nor did I even give a thought to where the exit points might be. Might be that walking into one makes you walk out of another, pointed away from her hut. Might be that walking into one just deposits you in a completely different part of the forest.
Like I said though, it's just faster and easier to operate under the assumption that now that you know how to avoid them, you'll do so, and keep plodding along. :)