Areteas's page

114 posts. Alias of Apethae.


1 to 50 of 114 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Scott Betts wrote:
Areteas wrote:
It seems as premature to make definitive statements like 'Hasbro won't be involved' as it is to assume that Hasbro's going to be all over this from top to bottom.

Not really. Everyone in the industry I've ever heard comment on the topic has said something along the lines of, "Yeah, Hasbro pretty much lets WotC run itself aside from some very high-level decisions." Incorporating tester feedback on individual rules is not a process Hasbro is going to bother inserting itself into.

The only people who imagine Hasbro to be some kind of evil corporate overlord puppetmaster intent on micromanaging a hobby they know nothing about are fans.

My post said nothing about tester feedback, though it was a reply to a reply to a post that did. I'm more curious about whether or not they'll make DDI a product worth what they want for it (usable VTT, better presentation, better content, less limitations) or stop charging as if it were, and/or whether they'll go back to offering PDFs.

Any pointers on where we can find these industry comments on the nature of Hasbro and WoTC's relationship? So far on this forum all I've run into is a bunch of 'I heard it from a guy' stuff, which isn't super helpful.

Liberty's Edge

Scott Betts wrote:
Kevin Andrew Murphy wrote:
The article does note that they'll be trying to get away from that this next time, but previously, yes, they did ignore all the feedback they got which doesn't inspire much confidence.
Sure, I'm not arguing that they were good at handling feedback. I'm just pointing out that it's sort of ridiculous on its face to imagine Hasbro having anything to do with direct decisions over which feedback gets listened to and which feedback doesn't. This is a WotC project. Hasbro is pretty hands-off.

What are you basing this off, exactly?

I grew up in the shadow of the Hasbro factory back in the '80s... they have kept up with the increasingly competitive market they live in by offshoring and putting profit first like most other American corporations. Which is no more a knock on them than any other company - US consumers have made the cheapness of goods a priority for decades, and increasingly shifted their spending to services (your cable bill didn't get to where it is overnight).

In the end, though, WoTC answers to Hasbro, and I'm not sure how they'll take it if WoTC goes to them trying to reverse some of the more divisive business decisions they made in the 4E days, like offering PDFs again or doing away with the expectation of a MMO-like monthly revenue stream represented by DDI.

It seems as premature to make definitive statements like 'Hasbro won't be involved' as it is to assume that Hasbro's going to be all over this from top to bottom.

I'm hopeful that they'll follow through on what they've implied, but right now things are so vague that the end result could be practically anything. Modular could mean just 4E's Red Box rehashed or a return to something resembling the OGL - no idea.

Cautiously optimistic, I guess. Hopefully they don't plan on charging for books in whatever form the playtest takes, so we can see how things will unfold without investing much in the meantime.

Liberty's Edge

Yes (Pathfinder, couple MMOs).

Depends largely on the terms of their NDA (if in the closed beta) and the reporting mechanism (forums or feedback forms or whatever). If it seems like they're just trying to ape their closest competitor and the reaper of their lost market share, without actually taking to heart the needs and wants of the community that built itself up around their acquired property, I don't see myself being a participant.

Then again, maybe they'll take it on in earnest. Trying not to pre-judge.

It's going to be difficult to bring my gaming friends back to the table with a WoTC product, though. Everybody feels burned. If they bring Dark Sun up to 5E or at least plan to do so, though, that might tip the scales. We all love that setting and were simultaneously glad and sad to see it brought to 4E (kind of like seeing a great game come to Mac when you own a PC or vice versa, I guess).

Liberty's Edge

Vic Wertz wrote:
If you'd like an idea of what armor will look like in Pathfinder Online, look at what armor looks like in any other Pathfinder product. PFO art direction will take its cues from what has come before.

Really glad to hear this... not necessarily with respect for recreating Amiri's badass sexy self, but when I heard Paizo was licensing an MMO my immediate fear was that they'd jettison the traditional art style for a WoW-like cartoonishness (which I guess technically is easier on low-end video cards, but leaves me dead cold).

In the same vein, I hope y'all are planning to inject the sort of stuff found in Carrion Crown into the MMO - I can't imagine Golarion without the doom and ruin you lot weave in so well.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
Bah, don't you like looking at contradictory coplaints about your creation?

In this case contradictory means there's little to nothing that's universally disliked by all - so I guess that's actually a compliment to James. ;)

Liberty's Edge

TheWarriorPoet519 wrote:

Even Tolkien's work was considerably more low-fantasy than 90% of D20 settings. The magic in LOTR is very subtle and low on the flash-factor. High Fantasy has come to imply a category into which I'm not convinced LOTR actually fits very well anymore.

True enough - I guess I was referring more to his treatment of the various non-human races. The thing that bugged me about FR and the like is that I didn't find demihumans credible, in terms of their homogeneity. Others in this thread have said they felt demihumans were too 'stereotyped', but if you look at the various strains of elf in FR - any divergence from the central racial stereotype is in itself some kind of subrace (moon, sun, wild, drow, etc) in a way that seems more genetic and forced than human ethnicities. Human experience, though, continuously illustrates the vast cultural gulfs that develop in any large population of a sentient species as that species spreads its territory and develops its culture(s). The 'elf stereotype' or 'dwarf stereotype' doesn't strike me as feasible for a population of over a million or so - there would be schisms, local customs, and major differences arising within a given species, let alone between various subspecies of a parent race. The only way to really make it believable, at least for me, is to portray these races as a small, fairly cohesive population, which is largely the way they're presented on Golarion. I like The Forlorn a lot in this respect because they allow for the fact that not every elf is created with the elven stereotype burned into them from birth - it's a product of a credibly-crafted culture. I guess the difference is subtle - basically, you raise a human with Japanese parents in Brazil (with Brazilian parents), that person's probably going to have a Brazilian cultural identity. You raise a moon elf in a green elf village, you still seem stuck with a moon elf - their personality is genetic for some inexplicable reason.

Liberty's Edge

Evil Lincoln wrote:

I feel I must point out that some of the grievances others mention here are actually things I like about Golarion; especially the number and quality of gods, the humano-centricism, and absolutely the lack of other high-level personalities in the world.


I think a lot of the folks posting in this thread want/expect more of a 'high fantasy' setting... whereas Golarion strikes me as more 'sword & sorcery' in the R.E. Howard sense, from the way the gods interact (or don't) with each other, the minimal importance of demihumans, etc. They just add a little more magic and tech to the mix. Which is fine by me, as I vastly prefer that sort of thing over Tolkien-style stuff.

I am a little bugged by the Tian stuff, but I'll get over it. It seems just a touch weeabo. Maybe I'm just bitter the ninja got a ton of cool new toys that the rogue can't touch, though, so I have to beg my GM for leeway to make my dirty street fighter rogue effective. :)

Oh, and I wish there were more dead/forgotten gods fleshed out in the setting - coinciding with the various collapsed/lost empires that are strewn throughout the world's history. Gods portrayed as immortal but yet not invincible and utterly removed from threats from the material world appeal to me.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anyone know if Zaiobe's 'mute' oracle curse (JR1, pp 43) has made an appearance as a character option anywhere in Paizo's released material? I poked around the d20pfsrd site but couldn't find mention of it, nor did a search for Zaiobe turn up much on the boards here.

Liberty's Edge

Probably want to add the caveat that increasing the crit range of a weapon via keen or Improved Critical or other means doesn't suddenly add finesse-ability.

Liberty's Edge

Guy Humual wrote:
The black raven wrote:

Do you know the rules of Chess, Go, Tic-Tac-Toe ?

I have never heard of RAI while playing any of these games and a myriad others.

Obviously you haven't heard of variant chess games. This is where someone says "Hey, what would happen if we were playing on a 3-d Chess field and you could move up and down as well?"

These games were developed using the RAI. When they original designed chess they had a set board and set rules, but with variant rules you start with a different set up and because there are new options not already covered in the chess game, you must use the RAI.

You could do the same with any simplistic game really. But just because you add anther layer to the chess board doesn't mean that pawns can now go backwards.

The rules of chess specify you must set up your pieces in a certain fashion on your side of the board.

Nothing, however, says I can't use magnetic pieces and set mine up on the underside of a two-sided (printwise) board, leaving my opponent and I two free and non-integrated planes with which to move about freely, never meeting one another, resulting in an unwinnable stalemate from the very start of the match.
But that's ridiculous and so obviously against the intent and spirit of the rules that only somebody deliberately trying to subvert the nature of the game would attempt it. They'd be laughed out of any kind of official or unofficial chess match at the mere suggestion. It sounds like a really lame plot for one of those 'I played the Grim Reaper in chess for my life' cliches.
As it pertains to Ultimate Magic: a small loophole was left in the rules that only someone attempting to purposefully exploit it in a patently obvious fashion could leverage, and couldn't succeed anyway when held up to the light of peer review (this is a communal game, after all) - why all the invective against the designers? Why go around telling other posters 'stop lying' if they express a differing interpretation than your own? This is a game, not the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. The stakes are pretty low for vitriol like that.
There are many reasons to criticize UM, to be honest (I would be lying if I said I didn't trash it in my review), but this particular one is so trivial I cannot fathom the level of nerd rage at play here. I gotta give credit to SKR for showing as much restraint as he did, if 'facepalm-worthy', 'deliberate', and 'dishonest' are the extent of his crimes.

Liberty's Edge

Starbuck_II wrote:
ElyasRavenwood wrote:

To me the gunslinger initiative seems like a contradiction to the core rules. I suspect it is ripe for abuse, but I am not yet sure how.

It means he can break normal rules and draw when you roll Init instead on his turn.

Not a big benefit, but decent.

They can't be caught flat-footed during an ambush if they have Quick Draw... which I think you can do with a feat anyway (actually better, since it stipulates you can never be caught flat-footed rather than if you have a weapon to draw and do so).

Can't think of any other mechanical benefit.

Liberty's Edge

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

With the latest FAQ update the Scar Hex has changed from the worst Hex in the game to a required hex after 10th level.

** spoiler omitted **

Add to that if you want to find/kill/hex the BBEG in a dungeon simply scar and release one of his minions. You can devastate him from the safety of the front door of their dungeon/castle/crypt/etc.

It should be noted that split hex doesn't work with major hexes or grand hexes, so 'devastate' may be overstating it a bit. Blight Hex is about the worst you could do to a BBEG via a scarred minion, and then only if s/he's an animal or plant creature. Or maybe misfortune hex or slumber hex them when they're at the top of a very long flight of stone steps.

Unnerve Beasts would be kind of a cool hex to employ via scar, though, particularly if the target of the scar/hex is a paladin, ranger, cavalier or druid. Really screw up their week.

Liberty's Edge

Awesome stuff. Hadn't realized just how numerous the iconics had become until seeing them all in one place like that. Love the detail you've managed to get in the expressions with so few pixels... Harsk looks proper angry and Valeros proper derp. The only one I can't tell is if Alain is making this face >_< or this >:| *grin*

Liberty's Edge

Belkar wrote:

Nightfall, stop fighting me on this and accept the rules written in the book or wait for an official errata to change this.

This is a great way to form a rapport with your GM at the start of a new campaign, lemme tell ya. :3

Dig the whole Pharasman tomb/graveyard purifiers idea - been wanting to take a psychopomp familiar for an arcanist idea I've been floating for a while. Take your nosoi on a tour of the world's most corrupt graveyards, recover some knowledge, burn some undead baddies, get Pharasma brownie points!

Liberty's Edge

Heh. Funny to see folks trot out LoTR and anything 'of Pern' as counterexamples to my 'bad fantasy tropes' remark, as those were specifically the ones I was thinking of (Bellephron I didn't foresee, but that's more classics than fantasy, ainnit? The Greeks at the time probably didn't classify it as 'fantastical' or even fictional). At the end of the day, though, it seems like Paizo, in the past, chose to play to its strengths - the APs, PFS modules, and the other serial-release adventure products that give it a steady revenue stream - and limit the availability of lots of flying PCs that break these adventures as they're designed.

More recently you see things like Gallowspire's 'ghost storm' which severely curtail the game-breaking-ness of flight (you can skip all the encounters on the climb up, but I sure hope you like eating x negative levels *every round* on the way) - so the options available in UC seem to be a little more free with the flight. That, and UC seems to be much more of a hodgepodge of internal and external (to Paizo) contributions (from freelancers and the like), so perhaps it's less in lockstep with the earlier tendency to limit flight. Or I could just be talking out my butt, but since nobody from the design team has bothered to chime in, I'm leaning towards the lack of flying mounts not being a huge worry for them.

"The gloomy old 'mother may I; routine of pleading for genre emulation" song and dance seems to be, viewed from the outside, that Paizo just doesn't want to write for the particular genre trope you want to be encouraged/propagated, for whatever their own reasons. I for one think that's a good thing and love the shift towards Howard and Lovecraft over Tolkien, but you seem to disagree - I don't know what to tell ya. You've been playing for 30-odd years, I'm sure you can throw together rules for what you want to see in your particular campaign. Other than that... you might just have to stiff upper lip it and adapt. I'm sure there were fans of that bear-dog-robot thing from the original BSG series that were disappointed it never got a reprise in the remake, but sometimes them's the breaks, yannow? That's about the only apt analogy I can think of. As a franchise evolves, sometimes ideas get discarded.

Liberty's Edge

Laeknir wrote:

Having really different character concepts that really feel different in play, that's definitely important to me.

Having played 2E, 3-3.5E, 4E and Pathfinder, I gotta say Paizo does a *really* good job with this. Even within a given class, you can build characters that play completely differently with the various archetypes available to you. An Arcane Duelist bard is a very different animal than a Detective bard, a Thug rogue is completely unlike a Scout rogue, etc.

For just getting started, the Core RPG rulebook plus the Advanced Player's Guide should give you a ton of options to play with and both are available for less than $20 total in PDF form. For $30 you can get the Bestiary plus the previous two and you're pretty much ready to run a game if you want to test the waters without dropping a ton of money first. :)

Liberty's Edge

In the spirit of all the new siege weaponry stuff in UC, the centapult is just begging to spring into action to solve this problem. :D

Liberty's Edge

kheferen wrote:

I would like to create a table listing the countries of the Inner Sea and assign COMMON/UNCOMMON/RARE/VERY RARE to each of them for purposes of Character or Item History.

Does anyone have any ideas on this?

I don't understand... you want to make a table of Inner Sea countries sorted by population greatest to least? That's kind of what it sounds like from above.

Liberty's Edge

Looks good enough for the elven illusionist concept I've been wanting to do for a while, though it does make the creepy psychopomp familiar I wanted him to have on shaky ground (Skill Focus + Eldritch Heritage + Improved Familiar just to get it, plus GM has to be OK with shadow + familiar despite 'no bonded item + familiar' phrase in Arcane Bloodline Arcana). Eh well. Choices, choices. :3

Liberty's Edge

Weapon Focus is good for one thing you have omitted here... prereq for the feat tree (believe it's called snapshot; don't have UC in front of me and it's not up in d20pfsrd.com yet) that lets you threaten with ranged weapons at 5-10 feet, which is nice for a gunslinger (particularly with combat reflexes). Maybe more useful for a pistolero type that's consistently going to be at mid- to short-range for engagements (as s/he'll be closed with more).

Liberty's Edge

Which do you think is more in-character for the average Paizo thread? :3
Exasperated delusions-of-divinity, of course.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

All of this can be fixed with houserules. God.

Liberty's Edge

Pg. 54 - Magus Arcana - Pool Strike, Arcing
Those struck take the same energy damage as the primary target of the pool strike, including increased damage on a critical hit.

I don't think this was intended, but the wording here implies that if used in combination with a weapon with the icy, flaming, corrosive et al properties, those hit by the 'arc' would take this bonus damage granted by the weapon's properties in addition to that added by Pool Strike.

Liberty's Edge

Mok wrote:

It's a foundational trope that we have mounted flying knights. There is just way too much fantasy literature that dwells on this imagery and it ought to be something that is locked into the rules at this point.

Bad fantasy literature, sure.

If it's such a trope for your playgroup have your GM houserule it and move on.

Liberty's Edge

This is really great stuff; thanks Kyle! Lone Wolf should be paying you to bundle this along with Hero Lab. :) Still learning the full capabilities of the program, but I absolutely love it so far.

Liberty's Edge

Secane wrote:

So I ask YOU ALL, what do you think? Is the Invincible Rager Barbarian a bad ideal? (At least when compared to the Default Barbarian.

Diehard or Orc Ferocity (if a half-orc) aren't bad things to pick up to keep from losing Rage (and the subsequent extra HP) when knocked down into negs - there were a number of times my Invulnerable Rager had his arse saved that way. Stick close to your cleric. :)

Liberty's Edge

Scott Betts wrote:

I'm not talking about Paizo at all, here. I'm talking about the people who feel the need to create threads like this.

Understood, but that's somewhat akin to being disappointed that people who like the kind of flavor-full crunch-secondary product Paizo specializes in tend to congregate at Paizo's house.

I mean, when you look at the changes Pathfinder made from the 3.5 ruleset as a whole, it seems evident (at least to me) that there was more care taken to close optimization loopholes and reduce the level of mathematical analysis (i.e. changes to power attack) involved in play than there was to bring about the sort of system-wide balance that often comes up as a desired outcome in various optimization threads.
So yeah, based on the people who work at Paizo and the kind of work they produce, I'm not very surprised that the boards here tend to be more hostile to optimization discussion than, say, a pure D&D 3.5 board would be. Or maybe I'm just talking out my arse, dunno.

Liberty's Edge

Scott Betts wrote:


Another thread like this, where people can make it abundantly clear that the way other people enjoy the game annoys them?

I honestly thought one was probably enough.

In fact, it might be time for someone to make a thread about how much people talking about roleplaying and character interaction annoys them.

Any given RPG publisher is going to have an inherent bias towards a certain style of play - when I hear White Wolf I expect a certain amount of angsty drama, and I certainly delve into Eric Wujcik's work for Palladium Games with much different expectations than I do for his work under the Phage Press imprint.

Paizo seems to stand pretty firmly in the story/flavor before crunch/math camp, if I may say - and they're not all that shy about expressing it. There's bound to be a bit of static when one frequents the Paizo boards and tries to shift the focus of discussion away from their core concern.
That said, I don't think that bars outright discussion of optimization et al - just that it seems less likely that James, Erik, Vic etc will weigh in often on a topic that's not forefront among their numerous worries (I come to this simply by observation of the threads they tend to post in, not presuming to speak for them :D). *shrug*

Liberty's Edge

Bellona wrote:
I too would really love to see Aasimar and Tiefling as templates applicable to any PC race. Why should humans get all the fun? Plus, it would reduce the number of PC-race/hint-of-outsider-race combos which had turned up by late 3.x.

Hey hey hey... let's not go messing with humanity's real signature boon - the ability to get our freak on with just about anything that breathes (and some that don't).

I've never really found a problem with Aasimar being unbalanced from a rules perspective - they make decent paladins, but their bump in that area isn't really that OP. At least not half as much of some of the stuff you can do with Tiefling bards or sorcerers via the Bastards of Erebus rules (+4 CHA at first level, all my spells' save DCs bumped up by 2? Yes plz).
I had fun playing an Aasimar obsessive undead-hunting paladin of the Raven Queen (very similar to Pharasma) - he was constantly up to his elbows in rotting muck and zombie slime, stomping around in sewers and barrows and graveyards trying to look grim and serious and driven despite the whole cherubic/angelic vibe.

Liberty's Edge

Lathiira wrote:
Isn't there one of these in Gods and Magic, or am I just misremembering?

Either there or in the Cayden Cailean entry in Children of the Void... it mentions as an aside that clerics of Cayden often make a variant item that creates beer instead of water.

Liberty's Edge

Oh man. Looks deliiiicious. Looks like this book is going to be a fat, full meal of awesomeness... om nom nom. Especially excited for the brawler fighter and unarmed fighter - the monk being the only decent option for fisticuffs (and stuck being ever lawful) always nixed my Road House-esque dreams. :3

Liberty's Edge

Karui Kage wrote:
Not if Sean has anything to say about it! :D

Mongoose's treatment of armor-as-DR (with Finesse used to counteract the dagger-versus-plate scenario) in the Conan D20 system pokes a lot of holes in Sean's argument, at least as it's presented there. If you're looking for a solid basis for an armor-as-DR system, it's worth a read-throguh.

Liberty's Edge

Hey Sean, I just wanna say it's great having you guys really on top of these FAQ issues. :3 Thanks!

Liberty's Edge

Dragonsong wrote:
Foghammer wrote:

5. Honey Badger

Came for the honey badger leaving satisfied.

Honey Badger video goodness, for the three people who use the internet who haven't seen it.

What, honey badgers and no 'honey badger don't give a ...' (bad language) video? Best dub ever.

Liberty's Edge

Drakli wrote:

That is a good news bad news thing overall; I do keep my miniatures in tackle boxes, (and the huge ones in sealed storage tubs.) However, the whole humidity thing is tough to control short of

. I live in the underground apt of an apartment building, and my roommate and I need to run dehumidifiers constantly. It is interesting all my affected pieces are from the same set, though I have two carnage demons and only one has ever been affected, despite same storage.

There are various small-scale dehumidifying products on the market, typically for the storage of firearms or for RVs or boats. Goldenrod is a popular brand name. You could also try silica packets, though those need to be replaced periodically. Cost effectiveness depends on how much stuff you have to keep dry, I guess.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:

Cayden Cailean: monkey

Cayhounds is great and all, but monkey means that drunken poop throwing, peeing on yourself for lulz, coitus just because and all sorts of other fun are now religiously sanctioned behaviors for Caydenites. My barbarian is all aquiver with excitement.

Liberty's Edge

KrispyXIV wrote:

Definately seems to imply the exact opposite is true. Immediately after describing a secondary attack, it goes on to list the exceptional cases; Only having one natural attack (specific exception) and having only one type of attack but multiple...

Humanoid has 2x unarmed strikes... would these count as its primary natural attacks for this purpose? They can't be enhanced as natural weapons, I guess, but it seems to fly in the face of reason that these wouldn't be counted.

Liberty's Edge

noblejohn wrote:

Does anyone require the tracking and active use of rations in their game? Does anyone find tracking rations as part of the role play fun to do? If yes, can you describe how this works for your group?

I am trying to decide if I should mostly ignore rations or use them. I have never played in a game where they were really tracked or required by the GM.

I've never played in a game where the GM tracked them to the letter, but we generally made sure we had about a week in our pack - occasionally we'd be stuck on a long sea/desert voyage and he'd tell us our rations/water had run out and we'd have to make Survival checks or Fort saves to stay at top form. Made landfall or that next oasis that much sweeter.

So - not something to track to the very last meal, but appropriate adventurer gear and occasional plot device.

Liberty's Edge

hogarth wrote:
Areteas wrote:
You're misreading the Thug's Frightening power... he has the choice to convert 4 rounds of Shaken into 1 round of Frightened, not 4 pts of damage = frightened.
The Enforcer feat turns 4 points of damage into 4 rounds of being shaken, though.

Ah yeah, my bad.

I'm kind of glad I didn't take that combo then, my GM would have killed me.

Liberty's Edge

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

I USED to think Cornugan smash was the best option till I started looking at Enforcer. It lasts longer, easier to apply, stacks with itself for better fear effects (kinda), you get it earlier, and with a single level of rogue (Thug) your opponents will ALWAYS be frightened every round (since every 4 pts of damage becomes a frightened effect) and attempt to flee provoking an AoO.

Move into melee and take a non-lethal swing, hit with overhand chop and do damage then intimidate for damage -4 rounds of shaken and a round of frighten. They try to flee provoking an AoO for more damage and then moving the target out of range denying them a counter attack and preventing a full attack next round.

It's a quick way to get the bosses bodyguards out of the way for a round or two (1 round spent running and 1 coming back).

I like it.

You're misreading the Thug's Frightening power... he has the choice to convert 4 rounds of Shaken into 1 round of Frightened, not 4 pts of damage = frightened. You'd have to beat the Demoralize DC (10 + target's HD + target's WIS modifier) by at least 15 to manage to inflict frightened. So you wouldn't cause the Frightened condition unless you scored a crit (from the Enforcer feat) and succeeded your demoralize check or, on a normal hit, beat the DC by 15+ on that check and chose to use Frightening to convert it.

Still, with a weapon with a broad critical range (keen scimitar, for example) or a lot of focus on upping your Intimidate check, you could send your foes screaming and running fairly often. It's a combo I wish I'd thought of early on with my barbarian/rogue/chevalier character (who instead went scout rogue and had nasty charges, and later picked up Cornugon Smash).

Liberty's Edge

Uh... based on a common-sense approach, I'd say - a serpentine form with 2-4 legs can be tripped (because it is no longer using serpentine movement to get that extra speed, same as a quadruped with wings following different trip rules when it's airborne), can pounce (as it is now both a quadruped and a serpent), and can constrict (it maintains the body that allows it this attack). The behir has 12 legs, which I think accounts for its trip immunity more than it being serpent-like - you'd need to knock out at least 6 of them in one go to trip it, making it effectively impossible in the scope of the normal trip rules. Eidolons with 6+ legs may develop a trip CMD bonus or immunity at GM's discretion, I'd venture.

Seems like kind of a long way to go just for constrict, though. Can eidolons swallow whole?

Liberty's Edge

I'd lean towards B, as long as the maps are called out in the bookmark titles (ie Map: Korvosa or similar). Easier than scrolling down to the end of the bookmark list, especially for longer publications.

Liberty's Edge

I always assumed Drow sign language involved a certain amount of ear semaphore. If you could speak volumes with nothing but a cold, hard stare and a flick of your ears, wouldn't you?

Liberty's Edge

Endoralis wrote:

Sigh... RAW said the exact same thing about the monk, would you Argue that it is any different? Also Key word there was Sythesists Total, You are not Just a synthesists, As I have said. Your Synthesist Bab is 0, it would replace that 0 and make it 1.

*shrug* I'm not arguing anything - I personally feel it's a silly reading of the rules and would disregard it in a GMing situation, but I see the point of those who interpret it the other way. There's so much 'up in the air' with that archetype (figuring BAB, applicability of worn armor the while fused, how certain evolutions apply to the synthesist, etc) that I wouldn't chance playing one without first talking to my GM to get him to house rule answers to all of the questions UM left broadly open to interpretation, though.

Liberty's Edge

Endoralis wrote:

They do, but remember you are not JUST a synthesist, your a Synthesist/Somethingorother Meaning everything on your Synthesist side would change then you would add your somethingorother on top of that

Here's the thing...

d20pfsrd wrote:
The synthesist uses the eidolon’s base attack bonus, and gains the eidolon’s armor and natural armor bonuses and modifiers to ability scores. The synthesist also gains access to the eidolon’s special abilities and the eidolon’s evolutions.

Whatever the intention of the writer of the archetype, it reads like the Eidolon's BAB replaces, not adds to, the synthesist's total. Since it explicitly separates BAB out with 'uses' but notes that armor and natural armor bonuses are 'gained', your Synthesist 1/Fighter 19 would have a BAB of 1 while fused, RAW. That whole archetype is a mess of poorly written contradictions.

Liberty's Edge

This power sort of begs the question why more wizards don't pursue this over lichdom, but I guess the rebuild via phylactery and undead powers hold their own appeal for the evil types.

Liberty's Edge

Scipion del Ferro wrote:
Want to make a viable dex based eidolon? Half-elf synthesist, with a flying, small, serpentine, fused eidolon form wielding two composite longbows (+4).

No go.

D20PFSRD wrote:
The eidolon must be at least the same size as the synthesist.

Unless you like... reduce yourself before fusing, but then you have all sorts of duration issues.

Liberty's Edge

LukeZ wrote:

1) A human paladin in Medium Armor cannot use Acrobatics to "Move through a threatened area"*

* Unless it's mithril medium armor or for some other reason doesn't reduce the wearer's speed.

Liberty's Edge

pres man wrote:

No offense, but long before I purchase miniature quality dinosaurs I'm first going to exhaust all of the normal toy versions.

$6.99 Dino set (some small T-Rex's can sub for Raptors)
Like I said, no offense, I'm sure that people that make dinos for roleplaying purposes specifically make great products. Yet if I am willing to settle for a little lower quality and do a little work of basing the creatures, I can get a lot more dinos for a lot less.

I like that these come with little plastic palm trees. :3

Iconics go on Barbados vacation! Amiri in beach duds, rrrwawr.

Liberty's Edge

Minor quibble:

Magus Guide wrote:
Spell Blending ***: Remember that limited spell selection? Remember how much you wanted to be able to cast more sorcerer and wizard spells? Welcome to spell blending. Every time you take this you can add one sorcerer/wizard spell of your highest spell level to your list of spells known OR you can add two of a lower level. There’s more than a dozen useful wizard spells to learn for you (False Life, Spectral Hand, etc.), but here’s two that I recommend: Heroism and Protection from Energy. The Heroism buff lasts hours per level, so practically all day, while the Protection from Energy is a great spell to cast in the heat of battle. If you pick spell blending after level 10 (when you gain access to 4th level spells) you can pick both at the same time. For the higher levels, this arcana is arguably a must have if you want access to some of the better spells (Contingency, Permanency).
PFSRD wrote:


School enchantment (compulsion) [mind-affecting]; Level alchemist 3, bard 2, inquisitor 3, sorcerer/wizard 3, summoner 3, witch 3

Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S

Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration 10 min./level
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)

1 to 50 of 114 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>