Stavian III

Anglachel's page

140 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Dragonchess Player wrote:

Instead of rolling to confirm, a critical adds your BAB to damage, perhaps? That way you don't have to roll any extra dice (unless using a weapon with special properties) and it scales to fighting ability.

Quite boring for a rogue (wiz,cleric, ...) at first level to roll a crit, don't you think?


gnomewizard wrote:
I Just lost another PC at the hands of one of my own party members. I guess i should not have been the good guy in the bad party. So i need to come up with a new character. I was wondering; How do you guys do it? Me personally i need inspiration something to hit me. Otherwise if i just build something i hate playing it. Then on top of that i would just like to ask anybody got any opinions on the best class in Pathfinder?

I choose a mini & them choose a character class.


Kruelaid wrote:

The title says it all.

Me? I'm the father of Evie, 3 years old.

I haver also sired two wonderful creatures, although sometime they act as wandering monsters!


Harald wrote:


2 - Under d20 rules, how does this one shot hit the Queen in the temple, and how does she then pull it out and kill the certainly high-level Commandant with one strike?

D20 includes "the Death Attack" from the assassin entry, you could rule that the Commandant used an "hero/fate/action" point to use the class feature for one round.


SirUrza wrote:
So I got my first batch of Pathfinder minis and it's time to paint! But I've never seriously done minis before. I know I should get brushes of various sizes and such.. but what kind of paint should I get? I know walmart has a TON of paint.. is there a specific kind/type of paint I should use or any kind of paint is good?

First get a primer in spray, white if you want bright colors, black if you prefer grim tones to your minis. You need acrylic paints, small pots are better than tubes. You might consider buying a starter painting kit in your hobby store, they usually came with useful tones and brushes.


Crimson Jester wrote:
Please say that you are not going to have mushroom men. Please

I actually like them, with butter & garlic, of course!


Baquies wrote:
My house rule has been that if you have an Int of 11 or more you are literate in your starting languages. That solves the problem for the wizard (or should unless you have a really suboptimal build).

Knowing how to read has nothing to do with Intelligence.

It as to do with education.
A stat came out yesterday about people in the New Brunswick (Canada).
60% of the English speaking population can't read.


Sebastian wrote:

It's not something I necessarily would like in the core rules because it tends to be a fiddly little rule that requires reference whenever it pops up ("Can I read elven? I'm a half-elf, I was raised by elves, and I speak elven?" or "What do you mean I can't read common? My character is a wizard! He studied in the Acadamae for 10 years? He should get reading for free or you should have warned me so that I could've picked it up!") And then you end up with things like the Hero language chart and other minutae that add a tiny amount of realism for a substantial amount of text.

I think that only wizard & cleric should get literacy as a class feature. Other classes will find linguistic quite useful. Unless the Chelaxian empire had a complete free education system implemented "a la Charlemagne".


Endier1 wrote:

We have a House Rule about that.

No one knows read and write. Only those with ranks in linguistics and it's an use of Decipher....

DC 5 Very simple things [Price lists, etc]
DC 10 Usual scripts [Gazzetess, diaries, etc]
DC 15 Complex or very specific writings ["Scientific" books", etc]
DC 20+ Decipher...

All classes can buy a language by spending a 1 skill point in Speak Language (as separate skill of linguistics)

Good idea. I going to use it!


As far as I am concerned, the skill system could be replaced by simple professional skills (read profession). Everything else could be as simple as rolling a STR,DEx,Con... against a reasonable DC.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
That would certainly help soak up some of the extra feats that Pathfinder characters get, and put them back on even footing with 3.5 characters...

Good point, I like that, but it seems complicated, I thought the whole point of PRPG was to simplified the system, not to add a new layer of complexity.


Asgetrion wrote:


I've given them to NPCs, too, but in my experience players are not exactly fond of them, because that +2 bonus on two skills is hardly comparable to Cleave, Power Attack, Energy Substitution, Toughness (the new version), etc. In a campaign in which skills and "non-combat actions" play a more important role they might be worth burning a Feat or two, but I can't really recommend them to any players in a "typical" D&D campaign.

If it stay, It should be made somehow level dependent.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hello everybody,

Concerning Skills. I know there are a lot of folks who feel passionate about the variety of skill systems that have been floated out there. As of this moment, the skill system presented in release 2 is officially "firm".

I have just dld alpha 2.

Nice work mister Bulmahn!

You had very good reasons to drop the 3.5 point system for skill.
It was my favorite aspect of the first alpha release.
I am sorry that you have decided take a step back.
The skill system developed in the Alpha 1 was elegant & compatible.
I hope you will include some alternate system (a la Alpha) as a side note
in the final product.


The sandpoint devil also created a Run for your lives interlude at some point...


The Faceless stalkers created memorables moments in chapter 2 posing as Aldern and his wife, then as Goralions throwing barrels of oil in the clockwork stairs (à la donkey kong), finally as hostages (half-naked) damsels in distress when the PCs finally confronted Xenasha in its lair. Each time the surprise was great when they revealed themselves!


Leozilio wrote:

But I really think that crossbows should not be simple (at least to respan) but that short bow (or hunting bow) should.

(Im also putting str bonus on crossbows - min 14)

I find crossbow quite "simple" to use - aim - pull the trigger.

I believe it is why it became so popular. It did not necessitate the low bow training and had similar result.


Claudio Pozas wrote:

So Wayne Reynolds' designs are great. So much so that I whipped up a quick (oaky, maybe not so quick) picture of Seoni and Marisiel (or is it Merisiel?). I plan on colouring it, and that's when I'll be adding Seoni's tattoos, so for now she goes tattooless.

Anyway, here it is.

Well done!


5. The local barber lost his precious heirloom, a magnificent +1 war razor.


According to the SDR, climbing a wall using with a rope should have a DC of 5. With help, it should not be so difficult for the bard character to succeed.


An elf character in RoRL had an affair (he is married) with Shalelu, it's a long story. The other players don't know yet. So in nine month the baby will be around when the giant attack.


Hunterofthedusk wrote:
What are your opinions on them? I've been thinking about adding them to my upcoming campaign because my players are always complaining about how slow the feat progression is, and I wanted to remedy that. What have been your experiences with them. Have they impacted your game positively or negatively?

Traits are good!

I hope Prpg will includes them in the form of cultural trait : Chelaxian's trait, Mierani elves traits, Sanos' gnommes traits, Varisian traits... They allow customization without reworking the basic feat/class/level rules.


Hunterofthedusk wrote:
In my group, we've always just taken the first roll as the crit and called is a crit without rolling a second time. It seems to raise the action level in combat, because rolling a 20 and then rolling a 1 can be very depressing. Of course, this house ruling also results in a decent amount of cleaved PCs, but that's a danger we've grown to accept.

After reading this thread, I have decided to eliminate the need for a confirmation roll. I became nostalgic of the second Ed.

Instead, I will have crimson colored D6s (blood dices) for the lucky 20 rollers to add to the dmg. Roll 20, add a d6 (Xmultiplier) to your dmg. Fast & plain.


Doug Bragg 172 wrote:


I don't see how giving the wizard the cushion of being able to survive 1 more hit is making the class over-powered.

Because they can cast "Phantasmal Killer".


Kirth Gersen wrote:
I just hate rolling d4's. Rolling d6's makes you feel like you're shooting craps; it's much cooler. As a guy who likes to play wizards, I can vouch for that. I play rogues sometimes, too, and I'd almost be willing to voluntarily drop the rogue's HD back to d6's so I could roll them instead of d8's.

Wizard are nothing cool, they are geeks you know.


Stereofm wrote:

Hello friends,

I feel this point is best.
Not just because it is tradition in D&D.

No, because, one of the goal of PFRPG is backward compatibility.

Remember of these posts about wizards being too powerful in years past ? Since the wizards player will still have access to his wonderful library of uber-destruction spells, PLUS the very nice IMHO new specialists rules ....

Let's not give them too much power shall we ?

That's only an opinion, of course.

D4 should be preserved.

They are magical, hard to read, also, they can be used as caltrop.


Shem wrote:
I hope that the skill system does not change or does not change much. I like it a lot more than the old 3.5 system. I may use it even though Pathfinder moves on from it.

I second. Mister B. came out with a list of good reasons why to drop the point system. I hope he will stick to his first idea.


Watcher wrote:


I draw inspirations from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, as well as the recent The Mummy movies- where you have religious orders shrouded in secrecy which make them seem villainous, but they're really just very careful. Because the people who oppose them are really terrible, powerful, and ruthlessly evil. So they have to be like holy spies willing to die for their cause.

Prestige Class idea: Disciple of the Chalice

This secretive order of monks was born in Cheliax in the years following the death of Aroden. The members of this persecuted group travel secretly on an endless quest: finding a way to resurrect their God. They hope to bring back peace and order in Cheliax. Clerics and paladins of Aroden who had lost their spells but not their faith founded the order. They believed that every follower of Aroden channeled a shard of their dying God, that each one of them was a chalice of some sort, a receptacle of godly power. By training their minds & bodies they can access and use this of shard godly power (ki).


Watcher wrote:

His worship was centered in Cheliax and never migrated to Varisia (and maybe it would have, had his 'Golden Age of Man' actually taken place, but he died on the eve of it's beginning). That's kinda confusing because the Editors do explain this stuff in the background of an AP set in Varisia. However, the point they're trying to make is why Magnimar and Korvosa are the way they are (cut off from the old Empire)

Iomedae (called the Inheritor.. and that's because she's Aroden's Inheritor) has really only just gotten a foothold in Magnimar.

Hope this helps and is not incorrect either. ;)

Thanks Watcher, this help a lot.


Pete Apple wrote:


In a number of spots the Pathfinder materials mention the dead deity Aroden, who was the patron god of Cheliax and Taldor.

I've been unable to find much information about Aroden.

I founded that the that death of Aroden was a very strong idea for the new campaign setting.

Still, I can not found the Varisian's AP traces of its legacy. No abandoned temples, relics, powerless clerics (Monk?) of Aroden. Also, I do not understand also how its death affected the other races (elves,gnomes).

Finally, if some paladin without casting abilities are going to exist in Golarion, I suggest an order of Aroden's Paladins, knight with the impossible quest of raising their god back to life.

Anyway, thanks for this nice setting.


Anglachel wrote:

I like the new skill system but the alpha document did not fix the perform skill. (skill page 21)

According to the SRD, There is actually nine (9) perform skills

Under the Alpha skill system, I thought it would be nice for bard characters not to "loose" precious skill slot over various perform skills.

I have based my choice of folding all perform skill under 3 skill with character creation in mind :

You want to have a bard that can entertain the patron of a tavern, pick only Music (folk).

You want your Korvosa noble to be able to play lute at the balcony of a fair maiden, pick Music (academic).

You want your cleric to be able to compose "cantata" in the glory of its god, pick music (academic).

You want your rogue character to be part of a professional acting troupe or be a great storyteller, pick Comedy.

You want sexy your varisian rogue character to be able to dance while playing tambourine, pick music (folk).

That was the idea


Ross Byers wrote:

I'm sorry, but is there a difference between a fiddle and a violin? I was under the impression that the difference was in style of play, not the instrument itself.

You are right.

Thare are the same, but they do not share the same playing techniques.

Also, The violin was not invented during middle age. But there was a complete family of fiddle like instrument. But, It seems that violin and harpsichord are part of the Pathfinder world.

Still a Varisian Gypsies playing the violin (perform : folk) would not have the same technique, repertoire as a Korvosa noble (perform : academic) playing the "Tombeau ou Arvoden".


Dorje Sylas wrote:


You're also missing operatic singing and artistic dancing like ballet from Perform (Academic).

Well, it was part of every actor job (such has Shakespeare or Moliere) to be able to act, sing & play some instrument and dance.

The Idea of a "specialized" artist is very new even in our western culture. It is post-renaissance. There were no "Operatic singing" in the middle-age. In a fantasy setting, I assume that it would require an academic training as you proposed.


lynora wrote:


And as someone who practiced the frakkin' piano for an hour a day for over ten years to end up with the ability to be...almost adequate, yes, it is harder to learn to play an instrument than it is to speak a language.

Anyhow, I don't like the idea of oversimplifying the perform skill since that loses a lot of the flavor. To say that someone who knows how to play the flute can suddenly pick up a harp and play it expertly is ridiculous and vice versa. It should work like knowledge.

Well piano is "Modern" instrument. It is not complicated to play, you just have to press the right key! But the Music that was composed since its invention became intricate. That what happens when an instrument is easy to play! In a fantasy setting, we can assume such complexities does not exist. There is not wet even a system to write or publish music. There is no such thing as Harmony, counterpoint, sharp or flat.


Logos wrote:


Fix em by removing them, and if you really want stick on a range of music proficiencies like language proficiency. (Because it honestly takes a lot more skill points to play an instrument than speak a language?)

In a modern D20 setting, it would make sense to have separate skill for every instruments.

Middle-age folk music was VERY simple : a drone (such as from a bag pipe or hurdy gurdy) & a melody. Remember that music was not written and was solely transmitted from a bard to another bard as an oral tradition. During the middle-age, a musician was expected to be able to play, sing & tell stories, I was its job.


Pneumonica wrote:


Spend four weeks with a fiddle then repeat that statement. Or a lyre. Or a mandolin. Or a flute, even. Certainly a bagpipe.

Also, is a bagpipe folk or academic? It's a folk instrument, and commonly learned and played by the folk of the islands.

Well, that is because playing bagpipe is not part of YOUR culture, it is exotic. If every body in your family played the bagpipe every Saturday night, it would be different.

Bag pipe is a folk instrument, every region of Europe used to have variation of it. It became obsolete when the accordion was invented.


I like the new skill system but the alpha document did not fix the perform skill. (skill page 21)

According to the SRD, There is actually nine (9) perform skills:

Act (comedy, drama, mime)
Comedy (buffoonery, limericks, joke-telling)
Dance (ballet, waltz, jig)
Keyboard instruments (harpsichord, piano, pipe organ)
Oratory (epic, ode, storytelling)
Percussion instruments (bells, chimes, drums, gong)
String instruments (fiddle, harp, lute, mandolin)
Wind instruments (flute, pan pipes, recorder, shawm, trumpet)
Sing (ballad, chant, melody)

I think the list could be reformed & simplified. The PF’s perform skill could be reduced to three skill instead of nine :

- Music (folk) : You have learn by ear how to dance, play & sing the popular music of your culture. You can play simple folk melodies on various instruments such as fiddles, pipes, horns, plucked strings & percussions.
This skill can be used untrained.

- Music (academic) : You have learn how to read & write music. You can play polyphonic music on complex instruments such as harpsichord, violins, woodwinds, brass, organ & lute.
This is a class skill for bards, cleric, expert & noble.
This skill can’t be used untrained.

- Comedy : You can entertain & influence an audience with your comedy, drama, mime, Comedy buffoonery, limericks & joke-telling skills.
This skill can be used untrained.

Period instruments from middle age were easy to learn & to play, they did not support the kind of complexity expected from modern symphonic orchestral music.

Playing & singing was a common activity : Every body was expected to be able to sing, dance & play some musical instrument. There were no other ways to listen music or to make a good party!

I have assumed that the most complex music would be religious by nature, such as choral singing. Also, I have assumed that the Chelaxian Empire developed some kind of polyphonic (hence academic) music (the Foxglove have an harpsichord in their manor).


I like the new skill system but the alpha document did not fix the perform skill.

According to the SRD, There is actually nine (9) perform skills:

Act (comedy, drama, mime)
Comedy (buffoonery, limericks, joke-telling)
Dance (ballet, waltz, jig)
Keyboard instruments (harpsichord, piano, pipe organ)
Oratory (epic, ode, storytelling)
Percussion instruments (bells, chimes, drums, gong)
String instruments (fiddle, harp, lute, mandolin)
Wind instruments (flute, pan pipes, recorder, shawm, trumpet)
Sing (ballad, chant, melody)

I think the list could be reformed & simplified. The PF’s perform skill could be reduced to three skill instead of nine :

- Music (folk) : You have learn by ear how to dance, play & sing the popular music of your culture. You can play simple folk melodies on various instruments such as fiddles, pipes, horns, plucked strings & percussions.
This skill can be used untrained.

- Music (academic) : You have learn how to read & write music. You can play polyphonic music on complex instruments such as harpsichord, violins, woodwinds, brass, organ & lute.
This is a class skill for bards, cleric, expert & noble.
This skill can’t be used untrained.

- Comedy : You can entertain & influence an audience with your comedy, drama, mime, Comedy buffoonery, limericks & joke-telling skills.
This skill can be used untrained.

Period instruments from middle age were easy to learn & to play, they did not support the kind of complexity expected from modern symphonic orchestral music.

Playing & singing was a common activity : Every body was expected to be able to sing, dance & play some musical instrument. There were no other ways to listen music or to make a good party!

I have assumed that the most complex music would be religious by nature, such as choral singing. Also, I have assumed that the Chelaxian Empire developed some kind of polyphonic (hence academic) music (the Foxglove have an harpsichord in their manor).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Weylin Stormcrowe 798 wrote:


On a good day. We call them the Dark Ages for a reason.

I was thinking modern time actually. Could use some Paladin around.


Respectable Hobbit wrote:
...the Pathfinder Campaign Setting seems to be a place where evil often rampages unchecked. Tyrants routinely oppress the weak and create misery, people openly worship devils and evil powers, and cruelty seems common.

Sounds like historical earth to me...


Owen Stephens wrote:


The point is, this makes these classes more flexible, minimizes rewriting existing characters (they can just take the spellcasting option if it's critical to their character), but give a balanced, uniform option for players and GMs who prefer to not deal with hybrid spellcasters, or remove the spell option entirely in their own campaigns.

Good idea, Cook did that with the champion & witch classes in UA, my players enjoyed it a lot!


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Simple not looking to debate plenty of threads for that. just give a simple yes keep skill points,keep but they need work,keep alpha, or keep it but it needs or, or something new. that simple think of it as a poll.

Keep Alpha


Bleach wrote:


Why is that a wizard gets better at dodging Fireballs et al as reflected in his REF save, yet his balance remains the same? How long has your fighter been travelling on horseback and is still only as good as a 1st level peasant? You mean to say I can't intimidate a peasant even though I just kicked the butt of Orcus since I didn't even assign points to it? How come the wizard gets to increase his attack bonus even though he hasn't wielded a weapon since 1st level?

Then there's the issue about the inherent levelling...

I share this point of view on the matter. Skills are mundane [non-adventuring] and should have more to do with the PC's background than day-to-day adventuring.


lordzack wrote:
Why? It really makes no sense.

It make sense if you want the PCs to depends on each other. It was Gagax idea when he created the class system.


alcore wrote:


The on/off skill system of Pathfinder (and 4e) is a *very* bad fit for games where there really are lots of Expert classed merchants running around rubbing shoulders with PCs. It's a bad fit for simulating that the 5th level commoner blacksmith really is a better blacksmith (because of his intense focus on it) than the 15th level Fighter that took 2 ranks in it over his entire career (because he was otherwise focused on adventuring and warfare).

I second that thought. Git rid of the + / level. Skill check of "trained" Skill should be mainly based on the Ability [Str.Dex..]. Untrained should get a minus something to reflect their incompetence.


Skeld wrote:

I know Paladins haven't shown up in the Alpha yet, but I wanted to pitch a couple ideas out there to get everyone primed.

-Skeld

Maybe Pathfinder's Paladin are an old chivalric order of Aroden. That is why they no longer cast any spell! just a thought.


Stephen Klauk wrote:


A thought has hit me. Several of the skills are being folded together, such as Perception, Stealth and the like. What if we keep the subskills, and have it that if you have one of at least one of the subskills as a class skill, you are treated as being cross-class in all the others?

It seems to me that the whole point of removing the points system was for the sake of simplicity.

On the other hand, it will be quite simple to convert NPC to the new system, just forget the pluses.


Archade wrote:
I might not be in the majority here, but I don't believe that characters *need* more hit points at starting levels. That's why levelling up is so exciting for 2nd and 3rd level.

I second the idea, surviving the first level is a kind of rite of passage in D&D. Fewer hit points also favor cooperation and team work, the essence of D&D.


Lord Welkerfan wrote:
I do believe that this game should include a way for the players to alter die rolls, whether that be action points, spendable tokens, or something else. The game is more fun when the players can somewhat control outcomes both before and after the die is cast.

The Harrow deck could do the trick. It is true that it is fun.


Darkbridger wrote:

After reading a few of the threads pertaining to this AP, I've decided I'll have to wait for a few more of the modules to come out before I approve the characters my players are setting up for it.

There is no problem playing the adventure with good characters. The whole event described is outside the PCs comprehension at this point.


Grimcleaver wrote:
It reminds me of when I used to flip through the Rules Cyclopedia and laugh that "Elf" and "Dwarf" and "Halfling" were classes. Now it seems like we're going BACK there! Weird.

I remember that actually, playing an "Elf", it worked, it was fun & simple. It was along time ago!

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>