I hope that last instance taught you a very valuable lesson.
No Kender. Never. Not negotiable.
As for Sithiss... the reason you would care about that is that your corner of the gaming table is going to be a very lonely, boring place if you don't shape up and play nice. Srsly.
As a GM, I have -- before the game begins -- done everything in my power to set up a fun and engaging game. It is NOT the GM's job to spoon-feed interest into your special, snowflake, psychopathic-loner character's mouth.
[/rant... sorry, button pushed there]
Really, if someone refuses to engage in the game, I let them stew in the corner doing nothing, AND greet their complaints with "Sorry, running a game here, b$**! afterwards." Afterwards, I will listen to them complain for about five minutes, and then shut them up and point out that they could have been playing with everybody else...
If they pull up their big-adventurer pants and play nice the next session, I will go out of my way to give them some shiney moments as a reward.
From a secular, purely agnostic point of view: given the number of serious and committed relationships in which I've been... which turned out horribly wrong, and would have resulted in divorces if I'd been able to marry somebody... why on earth would I want to let the lawyers into my lovelife?
Evocation is my immediate, don't-have-to-think-it-over, dump school.
Damage is why I have minions >ahem< I mean adventuring companions. :)
While I LIKE many Enchantment spells, it's usually the school I dump after Evocation: too many immune targets, etc., as mentioned above.
And it's a slightly-weighted toss-up (in favor of the former) between Conjuration and Necromancy for my specialty school. If I'm not going to multiclass (which is rare for me) Necromancy gets more attractive.
But the typical wizard is Conjuror, with Enchantment and Evocation as opposition schools.
A note on what people are mistakenly calling "extremist alignments."
The Neutral-component alignments (N/E, L/N, N/G, C/N) are FAR MORE "extremist" than the two-axis-element alignments (L/G, L/E, C/G. C/E).
Disposing of a second-axis component means that a part-neutral alignment has, by comparison, much more dedication to their non-neutral component than does someone with a second-axis position taken.
Chaotic/Good and Chaotic/Evil (for example) are not dedicated to pure chaos; that is the purview of the Chaotic/Neutral character.
Similarly, Lawful/Evil and Chaotic/Evil are tangled up in ethical stances which subtract from their moral directive: the Neutral/Evil character is by far more a paragon of Evil than either of the L/E, C/E characters.
A Neutral-Component alignment means one is more-centered on the non-Neutral component than anyone "splitting" their alignment can be.
As long as we have the current alignment >ahem< "system" in place, the class alignment restrictions ought to stand, imo.
Do I think we should keep alignment as it stands?
No, not really.
Not because it's unworkable in itself, but on account of all the arguments spawned by it. (My group hasn't ever had a problem with the alignment stuff... largely because we're all in agreement about 'what's evil,' 'what's lawful,' etc. Half of us are old grognards from back in the 1E day, so we disposed of the debate years ago.)
But, however ridiculous we may think the alignment system is, it's what we currently have.
There was another alignment thread a while back, in which I offered a solution of sorts. Replace the twin-axis system with simple descriptives:
*Heroic
*Anti-heroic
*Villainous
*Autarchic
-- Paladins, obviously, must be heroic. Everybody else grabs whatever stance and sticks to it. Druids tend towards autarchic... and a lot of Rogues.
Requires some spell re-work (the whole "Protection vs." line as well as Detect [x alignment]) but has the advantage of simplicity in determining where individuals fall on the ethical scale.
Eh.
I agree that getting nifty powers from your discipline and practice (like a Monk) ought to have a Lawful alignment requirement. All the Barbarian PLAYERS I know are chaotic, and I think it plays well to have the class reflect that.
I'd be tempted to make Druids Neutral, period; people seem to think that being Neutral on on axis precludes zealotry on the other, which is a false-to-facts assumption. Having only one non-neutral alignment value means you have NOTHING in between you and absolute dedication to THAT value (be it good, chaotic, evil, lawful). There's nothing balanced about a single-axis placement, inherently. And Druids (imo) ought to be about a balanced existence and perspective...
Anyway... alignment is not an indispensable part of the game; but it's HERE, at least until PF 2.0 (long may it be delayed). The only forum in which that MATTERS is Organized Play: all others may houserule it gone, or changed, or whatever.
Anyway, should newly developed spells be higher level, a "creativity tax"? There are arguments to be made for it;
* A RAW spell represents potentially centuries of fine-tuning; any newly designed spell won't be quite as power-efficient. Maybe in a few centuries it'll drop a level?
* It's a way to ensure balance. If new spells are always higher level, the player can still add new ways of doing things, but they won't outshine the ordinary ways. So a wizard with an Iceball at level 4 won't shift the balance, because it's definitely weaker than an ordinary Fireball.
* It encourages players to only introduce new spells if they're really needed; to deal with some campaign-specific problem for example. But it makes it unattractive to start fiddling just because the player is itchy to create stuff. (Player creativity is good; unlimited player creativity isn't always good.)
It makes 9th level spells impossible; at some point, all spells were "new" spells. Using "it's new, so it's higher-level" means no 9th level spell would ever have been researched/created.
As for your second point, why shouldn't a creative, new spell outshine "the ordinary ways?" Once more, we have an argument favoring the punishment of creativity.
The limitation of player creativity is inherent in GM approval for spell research already. There is no good reason to push a spell above the level in which it would naturally (as determined by the GM) fall. If a proposed spell's proposed level is insufficient, of course the GM should raise it until the level is commensurate with its power.
But making it higher-level "just because?" Once more, this is a shoddy, lazy metric that shouldn't be encouraged.
If a GM doesn't want to deal with spell research, that's his/her decision. But they ought to be honest about that, and rule that way, rather than add discouragements to research.
However, there was NOT a direct, 1:1 correlation between Cleric spell levels and Magic-User spell levels, either. In 1E, Cleric spells, while limited in focus, tended to be more powerful than Magic-User spells of the "same" level.
If the caster need a divine intervention to raise a dead he is constrained by the need to work with that divine patron.
Right, because having divine magic isn't a matter of divine intervention at all.
You're not getting the Mystery; no, it isn't confined to the scope of a single deity. It draws its power from all deities which share in its ineffable aspect.
Finally, even if a Mystery is entirely god-forsaken, the god/dess of Death is going to have to be dealt with in a raising/resurrection: it is a direct interference with his/her domain.
I'm more referring to the earlier "GM can immediately adapt a side quest on the fly when someone dies and not throw off that nights game" argument, which would have to be part of implementing a side quest as the solution plan.
I missed that statement.
And I've been advocating a quest that comes up... sometime... in the nebulous future. [I.e., when it's convenient.]
Now, you have brought up points regarding the specific examples posted that might, arguably, justify being a higher level than was originally presented... but being a new spell is not a good reason, in my opinion, in and of itself to raise a spell above its peers' level.
^Edited for emphasis^
But a Negative Energy Fireball IS more powerful than the standard spell, even with the same damage, because practically nothing has resistance to it, and you're drawing directly from the energy planes as opposed to evoking an element.
I'm not arguing that a negative energy fireball is an improvement on the standard fireball. I was objecting to a blanket "it's a new spell, so (despite being essentially comparable to spells of [x] level) it has to be level [x+1]."
A general argument about spell research, not a specific argument about a particular researched spell. Hope that clarifies things.
"Not impossible" and "Standard" aren't the same thing.
Plug and play is great for one offs, not so great for long running games with the same group looking for more than tropes. More than tropes isn't best serves on the fly.
If it's a "long-running game with the same group looking for more than tropes," do you expect me to believe the GM incapable of adapting a quest that is meaningful and "more than tropes" from his/her experience with said group?
Eh, I'm not going to jump through teh Internetz and force you to use the idea. I think owing a favor makes more sense than material expenditures; it works well for me. I'm of the opinion that it isn't unreasonable as an idea for general use; obviously, folks disagree. Go figure.
@Alitan
Maybe you should look the rules about witches and oracles. They aren't constrained in any way by their patrons or mysteries.
There is nothing like a ex-witch or ex-oracle.
End of an adventure includes the end of an adventure path. Sure, you can be playing something that end within a few session, but we are speaking of rules that will work for all campaign. A lot of campaigns have a story with interlocking events where a side quest will break the story.
A AP is a good example of that so I use them, but you can have that situation in a homebrew too.
ciretose wrote:
I am not saying your idea is bad, I am saying I don't see how it could be implemented with any kind of standarization.
Exactly my point, but evidently for Alitan was simpler to avoid addressing it and instead diverting it to something different.
Who said anything about the caster being constrained? I'm talking about the recipient of the spell, not the one doing the casting.
I didn't address standardization mostly because it's a futile endeavor, given the swath of campaigning styles out there.
At some point during a campaign, there will be a break in the action that might otherwise be downtime, into which doing a service to the Power(s) which reversed your death can be fitted.
I will admit that this works best with a sandbox-style game, but it isn't impossible in any format.
If nothing else, oracles have Mysteries, Witches have Patrons: perhaps not as handily anthropomorphic as a god, but (obviously) on a similar scale of power. Or whatever god has Death in its portfolio, regardless of who/what the raising person worships.
As for items -- yeah, I have <0 problem with dishing out a favor owed to the deity of the crafter of the staff (or, again, to the god/dess of Death): you just got back from being dead, quit complaining. [humor there on the end]
And one further note: AM Grognard; end of "adventure"=/=end of "adventure path." Using old terminology, when an adventure was a single module (if purchased) or similar scope of event (if homebrewed).
Finally... and Ciretose, this is food for your thoughts, too: we've been discussing how death ought to have a penalty, and how gold/gems are a bad practice of standard, and how people tend (sorry) to whine about negative levels, constitution drain, etc.
Look at the level of resistance to owing a debt to the Power responsible for one's resurrection. It seems on par with the resistance to these other penalties... which seems (to me) to indicate it's on par with them, as a penalty.
Obviously, YMMV; if you are doing AP instead of homebrew, you may not have time to repay the favor -- dunno, never used an AP.
Anyhow... I still think no deity (or other Power) is going to let a mortal revived from death get off as lightly as a chunk of change.
Oh i'm definitely not surprised by any reaction on these forums... Overreaction is the modus operandi around here.
Tirade first, rationalise second. Like any good paladin.
So sorry, but "you're punishing people for being creative" is neither a tirade nor an overreaction to a flat "must be level+1 to comparable spells" for spell research.
As stated in your initial post on the subject, that's a shoddy, lazy standard; sans any discussion of the thought behind it, if applied its primary effect -- intended or not -- would be to discourage spell research at all.
Being drunk in a dress onstage doesn't make anybody entertaining... it just makes them drunk in a dress onstage...
As for the side quest thing, it doesn't have to happen immediately (go ahead, finish your current adventure) but I really don't figure gods to allow the raising of mortals from the Vasty Halls of Death without exacting a price... no, not a silly diamond, but an act of some kind in the mortal realm which furthers the goals of the god in question. Eventually.
I dont punish people for being creative. I say you have to have a foundation off of which to develop new and unusual magics, so the foundation is the spell of the preceding level. Thank you for isolating my motives to the one that you find most offensive though.
The foundation from which to develop new and unusual magic would be a library, a lab, and as many ranks in Knowledge/Arcana for which you qualify, plus time and money spent in research.
It's arbitrary and ridiculous to bump a new spell up a level from comparable magics: was the first Fireball a 4th level spell?
Now, you have brought up points regarding the specific examples posted that might, arguably, justify being a higher level than was originally presented... but being a new spell is not a good reason, in my opinion, in and of itself to raise a spell above its peers' level.
All it does is continually relegate researched spells to be less-effective than their inherent design.
And if you fail to specify your motives, as you did in the post to which I originally replied, don't be surprised when people react to the effect of your policy rather than the intent.
Iterative attacks: when your Base Attack Bonus rises, you start getting multiple attacks in a round when you use the Full Attack Action; these are, generally, referred to as 'iterative attacks.' [Example, at 6th level, a Fighter's BAB is "+6/+1," meaning with a Full Attack, you get one attack at +6 on the die and one attack at +1.]
In order to utilize all of your attacks for a high BAB, with thrown weapons, you need the Quick Draw Feat. Or some (magical) method of getting weapons in-hand quickly enough.
I'd let people use Knw/Local with circumstance mods based on how far out of their "known locations" they are, for areas which they haven't explicitly covered by "tagging" a place with a rank. Plus, I'm pretty flexible about city/village/duchy/dungeon/"generic region" allocations.
I've always been a firm proponent of custom content going one level higher than anything it could be compared to... If this is doing fireball levels of damage but using a damage descriptor other than fire/lightning/cold/acid/sonic then it's something I'd put more at level 4.
If we're comparing it to acid arrow then level 3 bare minimum...
That's (imo) more than a little ridiculous.
If it balances against a 3rd level spell, it's a 3rd level spell. The ONLY reason to bump it is to punish people for being creative, which sucks.
Just a note: once you hit iterative attacks (at least, once you get a third iterative attack) Quick Draw is a must-have for thrown weapons.
I have to admit I haven't really looked at the archetypes... because the bits I did look at were unappealing: typically, you lose too much with them, imo.
You might find Throw Anything to be useful (for when you run out of weapons, or if you decide to use splash weaponry much).
So, this presumes that 20th level is, in fact, a hard cap.
Every time you get raised from the dead/resurrected, you lose the top level you can attain in a single class.
So, the first death loses you the capstone of your class (assuming you were planning a single-classed hero) and requires you to multiclass in order to reach 20th level.
Subsequent deaths continue shaving off the TOP of your single-class level limit, and eventually you do reach a point of diminishing returns, where you cannot usefully gain XP.
I'd say that you can keep the level you're at, if a death would bring your soft cap lower than current level, but no further advancement...
A Wish or a Miracle could lift this penalty...
Eh, I know nobody's gonna like this, but it occurred to me while (Gods alone know why) I continued browsing this thread.
It's entirely an arcane and rather high level: Paladin's don't have knowledge (arcana), and thus wouldn't likely know about such spell. Thus, it's not likely for them to know they shouldn't smite in-character, unless they've got a wizard that they trust explaining in simple terms why they might not be able to tell (in which case, why isn't the Wizard detecting magic - which can succeed with a will save). And they can make a will save to succeed anyway.
[snipped]
So what I'm saying is: GMs talk to your players, and players talk to your GMs, before hand.
Uh, since when does a 2nd level spell qualify as "high level?"
I do agree that a clear setting-out of campaign style ans expectations beforehand can save a lot of grief.
Yes, to the 115 y/o man in Japan, everyone is 'newer'.
But it really has no bearing on the overall conversation. Also the implied condescension is just that. I know you're trying not to be, but it still is.
If it has no bearing, your citation of your gaming history is just as pointless.
As for "implied condescension..."
I can't control your inference of anything from my statements. I, however, implied nothing; it was a statement of facts.
Since I wasn't implying any condescension, I wasn't trying not to be condescending. I was trying to avoid irritating you, which is pointless, since you're as prickly as a hedgehog. If you're going to take offense at value-neutral statements of fact because you dislike the facts as they stand, you're going to be offended a lot.
...and, to add to the corner-cases of why Detect Evil is not a Smite-License:
Misdirection. [The spell, not the concept.]
It is improbable but well within the realm of the possible that the shifty-looking guy pinging on Sir Hypothetical's Detect Evil scan is the unfortunate subject of a Misdirection cast by some soaked-in-the-blood-of-innocents malefactor who is hoping for the exact reaction of "Evil=Smite" from Sir Hypothetical, knowing that even without the excess Smite damage that poor Expert 2 merchant will be cut down... putting our Paladinic hero on the bench until he atones, and granting our villain some Paladin-free time to put his Evil Plan into action.
Is this LIKELY? No. But it COULD HAPPEN, and is worth thinking of in the case of Detect Evil NOT being the end-all, be-all of tactical scans...
I've been playing since 1992, which is roughly 60% of my life. I am not a newer player.
Nor am I arguing for the removal of all serious consequences, or even the removal of death from all games. I think the base game should give better tools for setting the dial of what death means to a campaign.
Not to be argumentative (really not)... but, uh, to folks playing since the 80's (or the 70's), you kinda are. A newer player. I'm explicitly NOT saying that because you're newer, you think [x] about the game. But you are a decade newer to playing than me, and I've been playing for 80% of my life.
Do these statistics mean anything?
While I'll grant you that getting lumped into a category of THOUGHT by virtue of your time-in-grade can be irritating, in a value-neutral definition of terms, to many folks you are a newer player.
Finally, I just like being able to Use Magic Device with Fabrication scrolls to furnish a house or stock a library, etc.
Keep in mind that you do need the raw materials that are going into the final product(s). The spell is fabricate, not conjure furniture from the air. Craft checks also come into play as well. Some of the worse houses ever made are the result of mages using fabricate. :)
Uh, do go back and read the rest of the post you quoted... y'know, where I'm talking about usually having multiple Craft skills?
There are plenty of roleplaying games that has nothing such as raise dead. I think it's a bad idea to enter a random RPG campaign with the attitude that "this is the only character I can play and if it dies then I can't play something else", because in most RPGs, death isn't uncommon and is more or less unfixable.
If you want to play in a game where you won't lose your character, it's a better idea to speak to the DM beforehand.
It's got nothing to do with being videogamey though.
I agree with most of the above... but, yeah, it does have SOMETHING to do with being videogamey. Because of the way that "oops I'm dead... gotta respawn and redo this screen" happens in many (most) video games.
Now, I'm not arguing for/against making it easier to recover from PC death; but skewing it towards "easier" DOES make the game RESEMBLE that video-game functionality.
I tend -- usually playing a Rogue, so skill points to burn -- to have ranks in a Profession (Sailor in seagoing campaigns, Scribe in landbound ones) and at least one Craft, often more than one.
Mind you, I DON'T max ranks in the Profession -- stop at five, which is plenty for verisimilitude -- and Craft/Alchemy is usually the only Craft I max out, barring some oddity (I have an Alchemist with Craft/Weaver, and I'm planning on taking Master Craftsman in order to make some Wondrous Items later on in the campaign, for instance).
Not only does the Craft/Profession thing (a) represent some non-Adventurer training in my Life Before I Became a Murderhobo, but (b) means I have some skills I CAN use to support myself when not adventuring and (c) a disguise as [fill-in-the-profession skill] is REALLY more believable when you have the skill to back it.
Finally, I just like being able to Use Magic Device with Fabrication scrolls to furnish a house or stock a library, etc.
I have always felt the kill it if it pings evil is a GM problem. They way we always played it is detect evil is asking your deity's opinion. Pinging evil is your god directly telling you that, yes the person you are detecting is better off dead. If your don't want that well as the GM now is the time to speak up (as the paladins God) or forever hold your peace.
Just because your house ruling on Detect Evil works that way doesn't mean that's the way it actually works for the rest of us. Speaking of holding your peace.
I'm one of those folks (as player and as GM) who thinks the whole WBL idea is a wonky, relatively useless piece of the game. Particularly given the way people seem to be taking a tool for building characters starting at higher-than-first-level and turning it into some kind of holy writ about how much treasure "should" be available to a group.
But that's a different thread, nevermind...
Anyhow, to deal with your questions.
All of these issues depend upon your game, your judgment. Given that you describe the campaign as "high-magic," it isn't beyond the pale that any or all of the above items might end up available.
It sounds to me like you're WANTING to give them some extra, portable storage space... so why not do it, regardless of their level? I mean... OMG, now they're above WBL! Teh Gamez Broked!
Not really, I promise; the game will be just fine. If you're really concerned about what it will do to WBL, just start handing out a little less treasure, and over time the party will fall back into WBL compliance.
In the meantime, letting them have some extradimensional space for their stuff isn't a hideously-game-changing choice. At worst, they'll make fewer trips back to town, and will be able to haul big treasures out of dungeons without multiple trips and/or needing wagon and oxen.
I submit that the earliest level to grant stuff like this to a party is "when you feel like it."
Not convinced Gamer Talk is really the place for RPG Superstar discussion, but what do I know?
The overall topic seemed to need a bigger home than just the RPG Superstar forums.
Nevertheless, it's very confusing for those of us who weren't perusing the Superstar forums to come into a dislocated thread: several of the above posts make >no sense without the context.
If Joe Paladin walking down the street and sees that cleric buying a loaf of bread and goes "Pings evil! Slashy time!" and cleaves the cleric in twain, he's just committed murder, not to mention adding himself to the "List of Examples of Lawful Stupid Play".
No, murder is unlawful killing. There is nothing evil or unevil about it.
Paladins smiting aren't fallen unless they stop being lawful alignent because they broke a city's law.
Wow... just... wow.
First, HOW is the above situation NOT a case of unlawful killing?
Second (once more for the cheap seats), go read the alignment section in the CRB; you will find "murder" under the description of "evil" acts.
I will say that in this instance, the problem isn't the Paladin, it's the evil characters, as the basic premise (yes, I'm sure I'm old school and naive) of D&D/Pathfinder and other games in the genre is supposed to be a bunch of good guys running around defeating evil, not a bunch of evil guys running around burning libraries and stealing lunch money.
Wow, exactly wrong: the problem here is NOT the evil characters. It's the player of the deceased Rogue making a freaking PALADIN in a pre-existing party comprised of evil characters... how no-brainer can you get? KNOWING the other party members are evil, you make a character that CANNOT work with the party on anything other than an extremely short-term basis, and will have to be getting Atonements for doing so?
Evil people that are members of a society:
Killing them would be good, but unlawful, as they deserve a trial, etc. Ok, don't kill.
Evil wererat living as a single monster somewhere outside society's boundaries:
Killing it would be good, and no laws apply. Kill it.
Uh, you might have not noticed, but the evil humans were also "outside society's boundaries;" their supposed membership in society is a nonissue.
Likewise, if their location doesn't commute their membership in society, how are you getting to "no laws apply" to the wererat?
It isn't monstering 24/7; MOST of its time will be spent in human form, doing human things: hunting, foraging, cooking, etc. All those day-to-day survival things that PEOPLE DO.
EVEN IF there is no law enforcement in the region, a paladin doesn't "go wild" in a lawless region: they behave AS IF the law were in force. Meaning trials preceeding JUST PUNISHMENT for all. Not, "OK get out of here" for humans and "No, your begging for mercy doesn't matter, you're dead" for a "monster" which is human 90% of the time. Talk about chaotic behavior...
This whole mess is beginning to smell of table variation/house rule territory... I mean, aside from PFSOP, it really doesn't matter that there is a 5k diamond material component. If you dislike it, change it. Problem solved.
I know, this doesn't address the underlying issue of spell balance within a level.
I prefer the formerly-deceased person to owe either (or both!) the deity whose priest cast the Raise Dead or the God/dess of Death a favor... but that's just me. I suppose it could be argued that the gods trust their servants' judgment when it comes to deciding who stays dead and who gets up, and the diamond is just a fiat cost of doing business. I don't find that particularly satisfying.
YMMV, yet again...
[PS: LOVE Jhereg novels... and they are a model for "raising the dead just takes work," rather than being inherently expensive. Everybody in the thread who hasn't, go read them.]
I've adopted a modification to Knw/Local: each rank grants applicable awareness for a particular locale. It does work better in a campaign with a lot of travel, rather than one that is centered around one area (though in a case like that, the out-of-the-box Knw/Local would work fine, anyway).
So, by 5th level (assuming you're maxing ranks) you could know
*the port town in which the campaign started
*the nearby Dwarven fortress
*the free port (read "smugglers' haven) on a nearby island
*the capitol city of the duchy (or whatever)
*the mage-school-run university
... and if you have Knw/Local, but are in a strange place, you do better on DCs than somebody with no Knw/Local (highly subjective, yeah, but it's been working OK).
Provided there isn't a particularly odd campaign setting (i.e., one type of monster dominant/consistently appearing -- undead, I'm looking at you) most character types aren't difficult to make some contribution to a group. In my experience.
What is FAR more frustrating to me than a suboptimal build are suboptimal PLAYERS. You know, the ones who can't seem to remember their characters' basic abilities? Or the ones who, for whatever reason, can't seem to get the idea of cooperation with a group, are disruptive, won't pay attention, etc., ad. infin.
Yes, it is possible to build a character that (to my mind) isn't especially playable. But you kind of have to WORK at it; one of the things I've enjoyed about Pathfinder since I started playing it is that the system's basic structure gives relative competence mostly built-in.
A great deal of "optimal" really depends on an individual campaign; a character well-suited to one may not be in another. The best way (imo) to avoid problematic builds is to have clear set-up discussions/guidelines/whathaveyou at the start of a game. And -- if you're the type of player who moans about other people "not pulling their weight" -- maybe at the start of things would be a great time to share your system mastery with less-adept players.
Core Races: Most often a Human, all that versatility and it's rare a human isn't suited for any particular region. Next out of the core races it'd be a tie between Half-Elf and Half-Orc, Truely enjoy them both. In 3rd place would be Dwarves. I tend to fall into a select few personalities when playing dwarves and it can get a bit samey-samey.
I don't ever play Elves, Halflings or Gnomes.
Featured Races in the ARG: Ratfolk, of which so far I seem to be their only fan. Sylphs and Tieflings. Ratfolk are infact the only small race I'd consider for PC and both the race archetypes for them seem interesting to me and worth trying.
Before using Golarion as a campaign setting I was fond of Half-Drow as well.
Scroll back, read carefully. >Hint< Look for my little icon pic. I liked the Ratfolk way back in the thread...
I didn't think you didn't mean what you said, Gauss; but when what you're saying is not in line with the description of the spell under discussion, there's some room for inference about the underpinnings of why you're saying it.
In any case, I do apologize; wasn't meant as more than a nudge-in-the-ribs kind of way, certainly not to give offense.
Likewise, though, I did go on to say that I wouldn't grief you (or anybody) about dragging stuff into the rope trick rather than limiting stuff to the gear-out of creatures heading into it.
Finally, "responding to [a bad habit] in kind" isn't particularly productive. Hairsplitting RAW vs. RAI arguments get tedious quickly. As I'm sure you're aware. Using a ridiculous read of a rule in a debate (no offense meant here -- but I do find heat source (for metalwork, as a particular)=candle a rather ridiculous read) doesn't further the discussion.
Hel Blackfist is a short, moderately attractive young woman of apparently eighteen years. Her moderately-breasted athletic body is compactly lithe, which she keeps in ready stillness that can explode into sudden motion. Her eyes are ashen grey, her hair a deep black which she keeps tidily clipped in a jaw-length bob cut. Though she favors little makeup, she does have a tendency to heavily kohl around her eyes, perhaps to draw attention there instead of to the blackened-to-the-elbow left hand and arm, her eponymous 'Blackfist'.
Hel typically wears clothing that keeps her cool, preferring to the point of irrationality clothing out of which she can get in a heartbeat or two, a psychological artifact of the fire she escaped.
Background, Motivation, and Personality:
The woman now known as Hel Blackfist has been through fire and hell already. At one time, she was a calm, quiet, courteous mouse of a girl in the Andoran town of Alvis. Following her parents in their roles as librarians, she dressed primly, kept her head down, and was almost overwhelmingly socially maladroit and shy. Her father taught her other languages; her mother showed her the art of the bow, such as is fashionable for young ladies. One of the best things of her upbringing, though, was her chance to read fantastic, obscure, and even forbidden tracts, for though her parents were devout Iomedaeans, they weren't close-minded; in their librarians' minds, knowledge, even evil knowledge, must be preserved, for without the knowledge of evil, what is good?
All this changed in her fifteenth year when a witch-hunter of Iomedae with more zeal than compassion discovered their well-tended section of 'evil' books - discussions on the worship of Asmodeus, diabolism, and other similar themes. Without benefit of a trial, the witch hunter declared the 'evil tomes' evidence of the small family's evil, and brutally battered the three into submission - or at least helplessness. Lashing them to their own bookshelves, the fanatic spread oil about before torching the library, intending that the books would be the timber necessary for the purification of their souls.
The library was, however, a haven of light and knowledge, with windows high up so that the light of the gods could bring light to the people; all sorts of religious symbolism of enlightenment and goodness. As a result, the typical fate of those burned at the stake (death by smoke inhalation) was not theirs; though the girl managed to first work one hand out of the binding rope (shredding the skin off her left hand and forearm in the process) and then free herself completely, she experienced second-degree burns from where her clothes blazed up, both at that time and once she finally dashed through the inferno and out the front doors.
More damaging, though, was her failed attempts to free her blazing parents, her emotional agony at witnessing their own terrible deaths as the fire claimed their screaming selves.
She would in time heal physically, even without any real scarring; only the skin color on her left hand and forearm would come back in with a massive pigmentation change - black black black, ending only near the elbow in streakiness as it changed back to her normal pale coloration.
However, escaping the flames didn't end her torment. Though the witch hunter didn't get the chance to put a blade through her heart when she escaped the fire (too many witnesses), the compassion of the locals wasn't much better - and in many ways was much worse. The fifteen-year-old was placed by the locals in watchful foster-care with a good but childless couple - a strict harridan of a woman who felt that to spare the rod was to spoil the child, giving lessons to the girl by day and lashing her for nearly any fault. The husband was, in his way, much worse; intimidated and deprived by his wife, he began to 'woo' his new charge, advances that eventually became outright sexual assaults which taught her everything she never wanted to know about the hatred that lies in men.
The only thing that prevented her from running away was the knowledge that the witch-hunter was still near, for every now and then she would discover indications left by him - a heat-shattered piece of ceramic sculpture, a half-burned page, various other prizes from the library.
So for almost three years she suffered under the care of the couple, praying for someone, anyone to deliver her. For nearly three years, her strength of will, strength of body, speed of hand, and durability were unwittingly heightened by the cruel woman and the fornicating man. The wife made her perform menial tasks, then do them again if they didn't meet the woman's impossible expectations. And all too often, when the husband visited her bed late at night, she bruised her hands on that sturdy frame, or upon the stone of the wall, an apparently futile expression of pain and terror which would bear vengeful fruit.
She did her best to mouth the praises and platitudes of Iomedae, to return to being the submissive mouse she'd been before the library pyre, but the subtle torments of witch hunter and the couple, hidden in the middle of 'free Andoran', only stoked the hatred and rage within her. For three years, she kept them hidden, stoking their fire, turning burning coal into blazing diamond and honing that diamond into a razor edge.
Came the day of her eighteenth birthday; before the town council, the pair proclaimed her a righteous woman, and she was officially given her majority. That night, as the man relaxed in his den after his wife went to their chill wedding bed, the girl came submissively to him in a diaphanous gown. Straddling him and taking him inside her was the perfect way to get close enough and distract him enough for the first blows of her stone-calloused fists to take him by surprise. His useless seed on her thigh and the blood from his smashed skull on her hands, she left him dead behind her.
Taking up the man's hunting bow, with blood still on her hands she walked upstairs and, from point-blank range, pinned the woman to the bed with her mother's arrows. The moment of shock gave her just enough time to stuff a stocking into the woman's mouth to muffle her screams before taking her time to kill the harpy - legs, arms, chest, mouth, and finally heart.
After pulling and cleaning the arrows, she calmly dragged the husband's body up to the bedroom, then cleaned herself up, put together what small portable valueables there was to take from the place, and got some sleep. Very early the next morning, she then set fires in her own room, the great room, and the couple's room, ensuring that the house would go up in flames, and locked the house up behind her. Enough of the evidence vanished in the subsequent blaze for it to be clear that the three members of the 'family' died due to the early-morning fire - the woman and herself in their sleep (though supposedly the fire in her little room was hot enough to shatter bones to fragments - in truth, splinters of beef, pork, and chicken bones), while the father having woken up smashed his head in against the corner of a chest.
The facts being obvious, no further investigation was performed; a tragedy for certain, but of such things is life made.
Before the fire had even truly blazed up, Hel Blackhand was already on her way out of town, heading west to Cheliax. She'd heard of the Glorious Reclamation, and has become determined to destroy it to a man if she can - destroy it, and move on to the entire religion of Iomedae.
Never rich, she is willing to turn her hand to whatever she must, and has actually found that she has a head for gambling - mostly card-type games, ones where reading your opponent is more important than luck or tactical skill. Though she cannot bluff worth a damn, she has a knack for reading others' bluffs, and for unnerving opponents at the table. Having travelled from Alvis to Ostenso, Ostenso to Laekastel, thence to Remesiana, Hel decided to take the 'northern route' to Egorian (where she figured she'd find allies for her cause). As she is working her way across Cheliax, in each city she has to pause to renew her money supply, and so she has fallen in (through a few dozen card games) with the ambitious Cimri Staelish.
Technicals:
Hel Blackfist 2
Female human (pyure) zen archer monk (unchained) 2 (Advanced Player's Guide, Pathfinder Unchained 14)
LE Medium humanoid (human)
Init +4; Senses see in darkness; Perception +9
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 18, touch 18, flat-footed 14 (+3 Dex, +1 dodge, +4 Wis)
hp 23 (2d10+4)
Fort 16, Ref 17, Will 15
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 50 ft.
Melee knife +4 (1d3+2) or
. . sansetsukon +4 (1d10+3/19-20) or
. . unarmed strike +4 (1d6+2)
Ranged shortbow +6/+6 (1d6/×3)
Special Attacks flurry of blows (unchained)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 19, Cha 7
Base Atk +2; CMB +4; CMD 22
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Deadly Aim -1/+2 Trade a penalty to ranged attacks for a bonus to ranged damage.
Ex-Iomedaean Gain a +1 trait bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls against followers of Iomedae, including many (but not all) archons and angels.
Flurry of Blows (Unchained) (Ex) As full-round action, gain extra attacks with some weapons.
Improved Unarmed Strike Unarmed strikes don't cause attacks of opportunity, and can be lethal.
Perfect Strike (2d20, 1/day) When wielding a monk weapon, your attacks can be extremely precise.
Point-Blank Shot +1 to attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at up to 30 feet.
Precise Shot You don't get -4 to hit when shooting or throwing into melee.
See in Darkness See perfectly in darkness of any kind, including magical and supernatural darkness.
--------------------
Human Variant: 'Pyure' Azlanti
--------------------
As Azlant crumbled, a group of Azlanti interested more in things beyond this world somewhat withdrew from the empire. Semi-isolated in relation to the rest, when Azlant went off its weird merry way, fell, and all that, they managed to survive relatively unscathed. However, their survival came more as a result of peculiar relationships, and while their bloodlines may have been diluted less than most, these 'pure Azlanti' - their pronunciation of which has since led to the few who have interacted with them as calling them simply 'the Pyure' - tend towards being physically fit and extremely fast on their feet.
While their intellects have perhaps been reduced overall from their Azlanti forebears, and their self-imposed isolation has made them detached from the rest of the world, this has not come without benefits. Instead of delving into politics and conquering other 'lesser' people, the Pyure instead sought to understand the so-called 'long view', leading them to extensive interaction with natural and planar beings: demons, devils, and all sorts of celestials, as well as the First Folk (fae) and the Eastern kami spirits; this latter has dovetailed into an extensive study of dragon-kind, and an examination of the long-lived elves as a 'feasability study' (as it were) of the consequences of extended lifespans. Dealing with such beings has had something of a 'survival of the fleetest' effect on them, improving their mobility to almost double that of the standard human.
Such interaction leads, also, to interbreeding, though the Pyure have always been careful to 'blend' the bloodlines of such children back into their genome; they have, as a result, gained both an extended lifespan (using the half-elf line on the age charts for both starting age and aging effects), as well as developed a capacity to see in all sorts of darkness. In addition, they so frequently interact with extraplanar entities in different environments, they tend to train their children from early on how to be familiar with magic items that will aid their survival, as well as in aerial agility (i.e. the Fly and Use Magic Device skills become racial class skills).
-------------------
Type: Humanoid (Human; 0 RP)
Size: Medium (0 RP)
Base Speed: Normal (0 RP)
Ability Score Modifiers: Advanced (+2 to Physical, +4 to Wisdom, -2 to Charisma; 4 RP)
Languages: Standard (Azlanti native; Abyssal, Celestial, Draconic, Elven, Infernal, First Worlder, Sylvan)
Racial Traits:
. Feat and Skills: Flexible Bonus Feat (4 RP), Skill Training (Fly, Use Magic Device; 1 RP), Skilled (4 RP)
. Movement: Fast (x2, +20 to base movement, 3 RP)
. Senses: See in Darkness (4 RP)
-------------------
In actuality, Hel's parents were a couple who decided to start investigating the 'outside world' (i.e. the mundane one), taking on the personas of librarians to both collect information and gain access to people interested in gaining information, people they themselves would be able to subtly question. The witch-hunter's fanaticism perhaps becomes cued when he realizes that their daughter is not aging as fast as she should, and so the problems began.. His actions, however, would not be approved of, and so though the town's officials believe her to have been eighteen (which is what her appearance suggests), she is actually twenty-five years old.
