Anarchy_Kanya's page

If you think you could enjoy writing a story then playing an AP by yourself might be enjoyable to you as well. It's kinda similar, but easier since a lot of the work is aleady done and the outcomes of events are semi-random due to being decided by rolling dice.
I've never done it myself, but I think it could be fun for me, because I enjoy the mechanical/combat aspect of TTRPGs. It could also double as playtesting/practicing APs or testing PC builds.

What would Darth Vader be as a Pathfinder character?
Overpowered.

No, I'm talking about Masked Personas.

I've read it just now so unless I missed it I didn't see anything about having multiple. So can you?

I mean. Animate Dead lets you control 4HD/caster level worth of zombies and/or skeletons, and 2HD/caster level in one casting. A lvl7 necromancer could have two frost giant skeletons at their command, assuming they had access to the bodies. And at a CR two higher than character level, it's probably not too unlikely that the necromancer and their party would be able to obtain them. And two buddies with 63hp, AC15 and +18/+13 (3d6+13) for attacks at lvl7 seems...potent?

I'm looking for options beyond just casting a spell. Is there really no way of, for example, enhancing the spell's power? A feat or archetype that increase the limits or buff the undead?

There are numerous threads about making Necromancers with hordes of undead, but in general I prefer quality over quantity. So my question is are there options (feats, traits, classes, etc.) specifically for controling more powerful undead over more undead?

we were decimated by a group of kobolds. Absolutely, without reservation decimated.

Losing 1/10 of yor party doesn't sound that bad.

I also decided to outfit her with full plate armor (not sexy).

Shame on you.

If PoW is on the table it might be worth it to dip a martial adept level, or even bite the bullet and take the feats, for a Riven Hourglass stance that gives a bonus move action (standard action on higher level).

That's cool.

Just because you (or I) don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist.

I've never really went looking, but I do understand the general concept of Gestalt as you get the best of proficiency/saves/BAB etc and the class features of both classes, but I've never played in a gestalt game.

Not sure what your point is. I linked the only rules that could be relevant. Never in all of my time playing PF or reading PF forums did "gestalt" mean something other than 3.5 ed gestalt rules. You can of course say the OP might mean some different rules, but I'm 99.99% sure you'd be wrong.

Anarchy_Kanya wrote:

Claxon wrote:

Anarchy_Kanya wrote:

Meirril wrote:

There are reasons the gestalt 'rules' say you can't use PRCs.

What rules are you looking at? Because last I checked (which was 10 seconds ago) they don't say such a thing. They simply warn about certain type of Prcs and potential issues with meeting prereqs faster/easier.

The problem with this is that there are no "official" rules for gestalt (as I understand it) so there are probably many sources for how to run gestalt.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

Those are lifted from 3.0/3.5 d+d so while technically compatible, aren't actually pathfinder rules.

Yes? But since there's no other gestalt rules (that I know of) these are the only rules that could possibly be relevant to this discussion?

Anarchy_Kanya wrote:

Meirril wrote:

There are reasons the gestalt 'rules' say you can't use PRCs.

What rules are you looking at? Because last I checked (which was 10 seconds ago) they don't say such a thing. They simply warn about certain type of Prcs and potential issues with meeting prereqs faster/easier.

The problem with this is that there are no "official" rules for gestalt (as I understand it) so there are probably many sources for how to run gestalt.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

There are reasons the gestalt 'rules' say you can't use PRCs.

What rules are you looking at? Because last I checked (which was 10 seconds ago) they don't say such a thing. They simply warn about certain type of Prcs and potential issues with meeting prereqs faster/easier.

A clarification because it seems in my hurry I was being unclear. I'm not talking about "expected time of maturity". I'm talking about this:

Reward: The pace at which characters gain experience varies widely from campaign to campaign. In one campaign, a character might gain multiple levels in a single month of in-game time, while in another a character might spend years at the same level. If adulthood were purely tied to the passage of time in a campaign, a young character might gain extensive adventuring experience but still be restricted to selecting only NPC classes.

A GM may grant a young character the option of passing into the adult age category early after achieving some noteworthy goal. Potential accomplishments include surpassing your instructor’s skill, defeating a powerful adult foe, overcoming a threat to your home, or completing a lengthy journey. The completion of a published module or adventure of similar length might warrant a youth advancing to adulthood, or perhaps attaining a certain level in an NPC class (perhaps at 3rd or 5th level). If your GM grants your young character the ability to advance into adulthood early, you may choose when to take advantage of that benefit. Your ability scores do not change to reflect your new age category until you retrain an NPC class level.

I'm looking for ideas on an event that young wild elves can go through to deliberately speed up the process of reaching adulthood, because in the wild you wont survive as a society if your young take a 100 years to become adults.

In rules about young characters there's a caveat that a character can become an adult (at least mechanically) by going through some life altering event. Well, I'd like to use that as part of my world building, so I'm looking for ideas on a replicable, relatively consistent event that wild elf society can have their young go through to reach adulthood faster.
One thing it could be is young elves going on an adventure as a tradition.

Didn't the Iconic Wizard start his adventuring (as a 1st level character) at an old age?

That's a question for your DM, not strangers on the internet.

Yes.

Anarchy_Kanya wrote:

Well, this is more about general ideas rather then a specific character.

In that case, the answer is simple: it varies. What kind of impact could it have? Any. Some people would crack. Some would quit. Some would flourish. Any and every result is possible.

What are you looking for, exactly?

Examples, ideas and suggestions for results that you think are likely or interesting.

@ Mark Hoover 330's tl;dr
Well, this is more about general ideas rather then a specific character.

Are they a child prodigy like Doogie Howser?

Specifically in wizardry or in general? They're very smart, like most successful adult wizards.

Is it because of overbearing parental expectations?

(...) Most kids aren't going to have the patience to actually buckle down and do real wizardry. Harry Potter is a sorcerer.

They might even grow to resent it. Rebel. Be a fighter or bard.

And if the child is interested and patient? A Lawful type with a knack for learning?

What kind of impact on a person's psychology/personality could learning wizardry at a very young age have, in your opinion? Would a wizard who begun studying at age 8-10 (with the assumption that they already mastered reading, writing, counting and other basic skills children need to learn) be any different than a wizard who started at age 15 or more, other than the age difference of course?

I'm wondering how strong are they compared to each other.

Adventurers have houses. I mean, they had to live somewhere before they started adventuring. But adventuring also often means that they move from place to place on a regular basis, so it's not cost effective to buy a house in every town they go through. It's cheaper and faster to rent a room in an inn, that's what they're there for. Now, when the campaign takes place in the same area, then it makes sense for them to establish a permanent base of operations, and I'd assume many adventurers do.

What are some low level ways to influence someone's dreams? By influence I mean making someone have a dream who's contents or theme are mostly determined by me.

Many abilities have limited uses per day which forces players to carefully consider when and for what to use them, or else they might risk not having them when they're really necessary. While that in itself isn't bad, it kinda makes games less fun then they could be. Think about the roleplay potential of being allowed to, for example, wild shape as a Druid, or cast an illusion, or teleport, just for fun, without wasting precious resources.
There are some options that kinda serve that purpose, for example some cantrips are much weaker but unlimited versions of some spells that you'd imagine casters using in their day-to-day life, but IMHO it's not enough. 5ed D&D had the idea of making some utility spells castable as rituals, which doesn't use spell slots but takes a lot of time.
The point of this thread is to come up with an effective houserule or way to allow casual use of per-day abilities that makes sense fluff-wise and hopefully doesn't leed to abuses.
To start this of I'll ask if there's any merit to the idea of separating the game into two areas, one of which would be the regular adventure stuff where you'd track your per-day abilities as usual, while the other would be more laid back, focusing more on roleplay.

Why not.

Nigh-Invulnerable

Search Eternal in the PFSRD. I believe it gave immortality. It's 3rd party, tho.

The only 3pp mention in here is the Mageknight, and aside from Stalwart at level 3 it's rather ehh.

Nerd Berserker's post also contains 3pp.

Anarchy_Kanya wrote:

Quixote wrote:

Having a demon in your family tree should be weird and detrimental, even if the demon was apparently hawt.

Tell it to the devs. They're making it out to be only benefits.

Where?

Various fiend related options (like templates or Sorcerer/Bloodrager bloodlines) are pretty much only beneficial, IME.

I feel like the child of a succubus would just be another succubus, since it's an all-female race. But I'm not sure how Golarion lore works for them.

There is a half-succubus template.

Having a demon in your family tree should be weird and detrimental, even if the demon was apparently hawt.

Tell it to the devs. They're making it out to be only benefits.

Have you looked in this thread?

Unfortunately I don't have the time to go through the 1000+ entries.

Pathfinder Player Companion: Bastards of Golarion

some good ideas in back of book, also the (iirc name) Demon Slayers guide has added info on Succubus, and may want to look up Alu Demon, the half-demon off-spring of a Succubus.
Not sure if it matters, but is there much difference in demonic and fiendish features? or just generally planar features?

I meant specifically succubi features.

I'm looking for ideas for appearance traits of tieflings that are descended specifically from succubi. What I have in mind is something that isn't obviously fiendish, but can identify them as tieflings if you know what they are or know what to look at.
My own idea was to make them incredibally attractive physically, to the point that they appear athletic, graceful and in perfect shape without necessarilly being so.

Yes, but then it would stop being a familiar.

I had a discussion with my table and we came to the conclusion that it's going to be easier to just adjust our approach to the game. Instead of making this houserule, we will increase the level of our campaign to fit better with the fluff. We will have to take a break from playing to adjust our character sheets/campaign material, but I guess it's less bothersome than trying to make the houserule work. I think that in the long run this decision will make our games more fun than before. And because we probably wouldn't have thought of this way if it weren't for people in this thread making good points, I am greatful to all of you for the help.

Wouldn't allow your players to play Gestalt characters but only with martial classes accomplish the same thing with a much simpler execution?

We are already doing that.

Upgrade the martial capstone.

You mean instead of this houserule?

As someone who likes playing casters, please share with me your thoughts. In your opinion are full caster capstones (or really any other abilities other than casting) about the same power as martial/partial caster capstones? Because truth be told, I said I'd exclude full casters more as a knee-jerk reaction. If I'm not speeding up spellcasting then I guess other full caster abilities might be okay to give them faster.

Or keep casters full power, massively boost high-level martials

Trying this path right now.

and maybe slow level progression if you don't want things getting too crazy too soon.

Waiting longer would be boring, tho.

A1: They won't get more than they would get at 20th level. After taking 10 levels in a class you are expected to multiclass into another class.
A2: Yes. At least IMO martial capstones aren't great and I don't see them being unbalanced if gained at 10th level.
A3: I see no reason why prcs should deny classes their spellcasting. IMO it won't make a difference for full casters but will help partial casters. I've never seen a prc that was worth the hit to spellcasting progression (and those that were worth it had full progression either way [Incantatrix...]).
A4: Depends on the ability. Would have to be tweaked/removed.
A5: Using Swashbuckler's Precise Strike as an example, I would rule that yes, you get that twice as fast (basing it at the "effective swash level") but only up to your character level. That way you still get the full benefit at 20th character level (assuming you go Swash 10) and it makes the ability multiclassing friendly. Any other classes/abilities you had in mind?
A6: I don't see why not. Plus it's moot for my own games because we use a houseruled version of Wild Shape either way.
@ Melkiador
Obviously the characters will be more powerful due to getting more and better abilities earlier, but I don't mind adjusting challenges. DMs do it even without using houserules.
What issues do you see with the Inquisitor or Kineticist (other than them being more powerful for their character level, of course)?
@ Meirril
Feats are a separate issue that will be adressed on a different occasion.
At 1st class level you gain features from your class's 1st and 2nd level, at 2nd class level you gain features from your class's 3rd and 4th level, etc.. It's fairly simple.
I'm not worried about challenges.
@ avr
I won't get into how my brain works, I'll just say that this is how I do things and if it's frustrating then I'm sorry, but I can't help how I am.
No, that's not the intended goal.
Before I go into that, let me say first that I'm hesistant to even state my reason for the houserule, because I really don't like to argue about it's validity or invite people to post different houserules they think are better. I simply want to discuss THIS houserule and potentially tweak it or give up on it. I apreaciate the effort, but I'm NOT seeking alternatives.
Now, onto the reason for this houserule:
Bringing martials/partial casters closer to full casters in terms of power/versatility is a welcome side effect, but not the goal. I'm simply dissapointed at how underwhelming martial abilities are.
@ Agénor
Twice is simple. Not too much, not too little. Just right.
@ Senko
I guess they have to make do with having dozens of powerful powers at their disposal, which they get at every level BTW, before they reach that 20th level. I know, horrible.
@ MrCharisma
This houserule has very little to do with 9th level casters. It's first and foremost about making other classes better.

For now I'd like to discuss the more obvious problems. Things that are debatable or obscure will come later.

I'm on my phone on the way to work, so this will be short, but I'd like to start the discussion now.
Martials (probably partial casters too) will gain their class abilities (except spellcasting) faster, two levels per one class hd. Hp, bab, saves and skills would still increase normally, only class features would be progressed faster. T1s would most probably have to be excluded from this houserule. Some abilities would also need some clarifications (ACs, familiars and eidolons, for example).
Please, be gentle. I'm just brainstorming.

There's a 3pp feat called Deadly Finesse in the Path of War book that does this. Check it on pfsrd.com.

You mean Deadly Agility.

We allow dumping stats down to 6 (for 2 additional pb points). Still, we rarely see stats below 8 (after racials).

When they ask for it.

If it JUST said "gains benefits 2 levels later than usual" then that would be clear, 2 levels later than 4th is 6th afterall, but it doesn't. It explicitly moves WS to 6th and delays the features by 2 levels. I'm allowed to be confused when there's at least two ways to write the rule in a much clearer and simpler way.
You have a point with the word "usual", though. I can see that it can mean what you say it means.

Except that's not what it says. There's no "substracting" going on. The text is different than, say, something like Bear Shaman archetype's text.
My guess is they wanted to delay the whole Wild Shape ability by two levels, but frazed it in a wierd way, making it read as if you gained WS at 6th AND then gained its benefits two levels later, thus by RAW giving you WS at 8th.
Nevermind. I'll just make a ruling on my own. I apologize for wasting your time.

The problem here is that it doesn't specify what "gains the wild shape ability at 6th level" and "gains all benefits related to wild shape 2 druid levels later than usual" actually means. Or if "gains all benefits related to wild shape 2 druid levels later than usual" includes Wild Shape uses.

Yes, I read that? It doesn't answer my question?