I was also kind of disappointed by this. I thought a couple more Archetypes would have shown off the system a little better. I am not really impressed by either Archetype considering what you have to give up.
Search Posts
Sex Tape.
I been looking at it and looking at it and not really feeling it at all. what exactly does the bard do that makes it amazing? sure he can sing and dance and then you make a roll and depending on that roll you can buff your party members. You shouldn't generally. Bards are OK at everything. Bards are the best 5th member, once all other roles are filled. Bards are a force multiplier which makes all of your other characters better at basically everything. They can fill in when another party member goes down, or help when that role becomes stretched to thin in a big fight. You can play a bard if your game is heavy on the RP and you don't have to worry about party balance. But if you're playing in any official Paizo content, it's generally assumed that your party is going to be somewhat strong and balanced.
Science = Magic = Science Job's done.
I say good riddance to a non-sensical holdover from the 1970s.No more nonsensical than any other magic mechanics system, and from a gameplay point of view, WAY easier to balance than things like spell points or just rolling to cast. I'm not sure which point-based systems you've played, but generally the issue with them is that you have a pool of points to cast your spells, which grows as you level. Eventually you can choose between casting 1 big high level spell or effectively indefinite low level spells. Which makes it very hard to balance. There are ways to balance them, but they all approach the "spell slots" solution from a different angle and to a different degree. I think the Arcanist is the "right" path to go down for a DnD type game. I personally enjoy it more than either of the other types.
I realized the other day that I've NEVER run an encounter with the infamous Hydra. Yes, that CR 4, 5 attacks per round, fast healing monster. Is it just me or is this thing really a CR 5 or 6 in disguise?
Looking for a good build/advice around this prestige class! Thanks!
Just that. Interpret these two words together as a viable class build! Anything goes.
I like the improvement to skills, especially the Expertise skill. I also like the improvement to "quarter casters".
Make a game that is WoW + UO + EQ. Profit. Why hasn't anyone done that yet? I cannot possibly imagine. The three most groundbreaking and popular MMOs(at least for their time) each had great things to pull from. It is relatively easy to see the things they did right.
I think they could be successful with a Kingdoms-of-Amalur-style conversion to a SP format. I also agree that an isometric view would be more suited to a Pathfinder cRPG.
I am VERY intrigued by this. I would actually allow most class abilities to continue to scale according to level. Feats would still be every 5000xp, perhaps with bonus feats at "regular" levels. So Wizards would still advanced their school powers, Clerics would still advanced Domain powers regularly. Rogues would still receive Rogue Talents at the appropriate levels. Basically, the only thing I would really do is limit Base Attack, Save Progression, Spell Progression, and HD. Everything else advances as normal. Some exceptions might have to be made, but I would do it on a per class or archetype basis.
We very nearly started our last campaign without full casters. But one dude really resisted and wanted to play a Cleric. Too bad. I think it would have been a very fun departure from Rocket Tag.
If the Rogue is just using Feint to get their own SA dice, they are overall better off just getting a decently tricked out weapon and going full-attack - or even better, TWF. The numbers break up pretty quickly when you consider the average base chance to succeed at any given Feint, probably around 50-60%. If you consider the additional to-hit chance for the party, Greater Feint is great in certain contexts. Probably not the best build for a Rogue or Sneak-Attacker to be. Probably worthwhile for someone in the party to have. I am playing a Snakebite Striker, and being able to Feint on the move adds a layer of utility to this feat line.
The title speaks for itself. Discuss.
Spring Attack: As a full-round action, you can move up to your speed and make a single melee attack without provoking any attacks of opportunity from the target of your attack. You can move both before and after the attack, but you must move at least 10 feet before the attack and the total distance that you move cannot be greater than your speed. You cannot use this ability to attack a foe that is adjacent to you at the start of your turn. Snake Feint (Ex): At 3rd level, a snakebite striker who uses a standard action to move can combine that move with a feint. If she is able to feint as a move action (such as from having the Improved Feint feat), she can combine a move action to move with her feint. At 11th level, once per round she can declare her square and one adjacent square as the origin of her attacks until her next turn (allowing her to use one or both squares to determine whether she or allies are flanking an opponent). At 15th level, she counts an additional adjacent square for this purpose. This ability replaces maneuver training gained at 3rd and 7th levels. Eh?
Burning Wheel. "Say yes."
Yah I just take a pebble, cast light, and put it in my hand. Bullseye Lantern.
A few things: 1. Everyone is not cut out to DM. Period. 2. Everyone is definitely not cut out to DM in every style. 3. A good DM plays to their strengths. If you're past the hurdle of 1, make sure you are careful about 2, and paying close attention to 3. Maybe big battles just aren't your style. I know that prepared adventures are not mine. So I don't. I prep my own way and wing most of it and I do well. Even when running large Con games, I take the prepared material, find out what's important - and what I can improvise - and throw away the rest. If big epic battles aren't your thing, find another way to create a satisfying conclusion. The final thing to consider is every game session is not going to be perfect. Sometimes the players are tired - or the DM is worn out. So everything could go perfect, and player engagement is low 'just because'. Because of 2, it is very difficult to have an intensive, one-size-fits-all approach to "DM Training". There is lots of fairly low level advice spread throughout the Paizo library to get someone who has what it takes to DM up to snuff. The larger Internet DM advice consortium covers literally every other issue a DM could ever have. The best DM advice usually comes across laterally, from other DMs - not from above.
Roll in the cost of a quicken rod and two CL-9 wands and you could have a magic item that fired 10 missiles. I believe there is a way to increase the maximum missiles fired but I don't remember the specific feat/archetype/spell combination that allows for that. Find that out, roll the cost of that into it, and probably add 50%. Missile launcher.
I don't understand the difference. They are both spell-like abilities, because they are abilities that are like spells. The entry says "Detect Evil (Sp)". (Sp) means it's a spell-like ability. I think your DM needs to learn the rules, because he is clueless. Bafflingly simple question.
Yes, this. Or have it filling with something very dangerous, like poisonous fog, or a negative energy cloud that drains levels. Or have it filling with a cloud of darkness that is filled with swarms of very hazardous creatures that only attack when you enter.
Give everything a Poison or Disease effect.
From the links you posted. Shade LA = +4. It is stated very clearly. The Drow Noble has 3 cleric levels, but Bulmahn noted Drow Noble characters should have one less level. That makes it, effectively, a total LA of +6.
CR 3 + LA 4 = LA 3? Math is hard, I guess. There is no way this is LA 5.
I am currently leading up the end of Act 1 of my campaign. In Act 2, I intend to have the players traveling the world to collect MacGuffins to stop a nasty ritual. However, I am having trouble deciding what exactly those things are. Any cool ideas?
20 Divination Wizard seems hard to beat...who has a party for it? 10 Beast Bonded Witches seems competitive. Rogar, can you give a rundown of their tactics? Who has a L20 to beat it?
Reskinned dragons or elementals would probably be best place to start. I don't think they have any giant earth creatures aside from that. Other than the Tarrasque.
I've never seen the point in investing in Fortification armor. I've found that usually a Jingasa is plenty enough crit protection.Then you have my Rise GM who crits on you with giants seemingly multiple times per combat or once per combat. This seems to happen with frequency. Whenever I make a character, I always factor in that my GM will pass every save, and crit me with a high degree of frequency. He uses my dice, and sits right next to me. He does not cheat, ever; he is incredibly lucky.
Post your most potent 10th level party. Subsequent posters: Beat said 10th level party with a single 20th level adventurer using standard WBL. OR post a different/better 10th level party for the throwdown. OR beat a posted 20th level adventurer with a 10th level party. Everything 1st party available on d20pfsrd.com is legal. THROWDOWN!
Geas has a casting time of 10 minutes. Good luck with that.
Who wins: A CR 40 fighter/Barbarian or a tier 10 level 20 Barbarian?Mythic Tiers raise the CR by 1/2 the number of mythic tiers I believe. A 20th Level Barbarian with 10 Mythic Tiers is CR25 I believe. I think that's a new thread :)
Yes, but if you go through all the trouble of describing the man as a wealthy, retired adventurer, shouldn't him being a wealthy, retired adventurer have a direct impact on the story? That's Chekov's gun. In this example, the gun isn't one of the guns, the gun is that the guy used to be a bad ass. And this is kind of the core of my predicament. Having immersive descriptions of everything, IMO, leads to a more interesting game, in a living, breathing world. At the same time, it can be misleading from a narrative perspective. D&D(and roleplaying games more generally), have multiple layers going on at the same time - story, the player characters, the actual game(rules, mechanics, etc), the world - which all interact, but have different needs as a DM. And while Chekhov's gun gives players some huge 'omg!' moments, it can also be a yoke around the neck of world depth.
You really should describe WHAT Chekhov's Gun actually IS in the opening post, for those not in the know. It would allow for more people to participate in the discussion. I was hoping for opinions from those well versed in the concept, not gut reactions from those just learning about it. I wanted experienced, tested opinions, not nascent ones. I am struggling with the idea, because I am a novelist and also a DM. In my books, I adhere very strictly to Chekhov's gun. In my games, however, I want to describe every room in great detail, but not everything is important. I want to add details that are interesting and give the world life, without them necessarily becoming plot points. But oftentimes the players will latch on to something and then drive the plot in that direction, and I would have to stumble to keep up. So if I adhere to Chekhov's gun in the first place, I won't have that issue, but I feel my game will suffer from a lack of detail. I think there is a line somewhere and I was hoping it was more well defined. However, it seems there is a number of different approaches, which have given me cause for thought. So, thank you! And continue, please :)
Just be honest about it: You want to run a Fullmetal Alchemist campaign.
Kill the Rogue. Take the flack. Use the moment to teach a lesson about PvP. If the Rogue wants to try and pull some frankly ludicrous actions such as this, he has to be willing to pay the piper. If that doesn't go well, find a new group. Try Meetup.com. That said, every group I have ever played with has had a strict no-pvp policy that includes theft. Unless you have a very specific type of group, it is, IMO, the best way to ensure that everyone stays happy.
Do you feel that Chekhov's gun ought to apply to roleplaying games? Why or why not?
I believe Life Oracle has the largest potential pool of healing done per day.
I thought there were more than that! So the second part of my question is, are there any guidelines for performing maneuvers that are not on that list? Such as throwing one enemy into another, or using an enemy as a weapon?
I am currently GM'ing for a Monk that is specializing in Maneuvers, and would like to know not only what to expect, but cool suggestions for moves for him to pull off. What are the coolest actual rules-legal CMB moves that can be performed? And do you have any advice for determining CMB stuff that isn't in the book?
Magic Stone, Haste, Bull's Strength, Bless/Aid, Returning Weapon
There are multiple Oracle builds that would settle this - I would look there first.
Maybe in FATE fluff is 80% of the game, but have you seen all these rules in Pathfinder? Crunch is probably much more then 80% of the CRB. Full stop.I would say Fluff - the non-rules elements - comprise about 80% of the game. The story, the world, your characters, the NPCS - that's all fluff. The rules forge the underpinning of the world. They are the games' Physics, essentially.Fluff - Fluff is basically the entire game. Without Fluff this is a Tactical Board Game....And at the same time, without the rules this is magical story time and barely qualifies as a game at all. I generally agree with the rest of your post but this line of thinking tends to be problematic. The Core RULE Book. The book of rules. Of course it is filled with rules. Even then, I would bet word-for-word there are more descriptions of a thing that are Fluff than description of things that are mechanical in nature. 2-to-1 at least. Probably more like 10-to-1. But the Game is more than just the rulebook. Also you only use a small sliver of the rulebook at any give time in any given game. The Game can exist without the Rulebook - without Fluff the Rulebook is just a book of mechanical odds and ends that go nowhere.
Ramp up the difficulty. Kill a player. Make it good and meaningful. Should they be foolish enough to think you, as the DM, cannot kill them at any time, they will learn better. If they do not correct, then that's on them. Or, you could meet the player's expectations and just make all of the encounters straight up fights. Sometimes you have to compromise the kind of game you want to run with your group.
I think the metagame is a real person not being horrified by an undead creature and wanting to see it destroyed. I think metagame is investigating creatures that seem like obvious threats when you have the power to destroy them - saving your life and the lives of others.
Fluff - Fluff is basically the entire game. Without Fluff this is a Tactical Board Game....And at the same time, without the rules this is magical story time and barely qualifies as a game at all. I generally agree with the rest of your post but this line of thinking tends to be problematic. I would say Fluff - the non-rules elements - comprise about 80% of the game. The story, the world, your characters, the NPCS - that's all fluff. The rules forge the underpinning of the world. They are the games' Physics, essentially. When we eulogize a person, or write a book about them, we don't spend 80% of it talking about how that person accelerated towards Earth at 9.8 m/s^2 for 80 years, or the mass of their body, or any of that stuff. We talk about what they did, and who they were, and where they went. Maybe you don't DM, or maybe your games are very combat-oriented, and you have a different experience than your average player. I derive the concept of an average game from modules and adventure paths and how they are written - and the past majority of those words are Fluff, not Rules. ryric - I think you nailed it. When a player is just not making a character that will integrate with the game the GM will provide, that is where the Player's freedom of choice starts to blur.
DM Controlling PCs - No
Fluff - Fluff is basically the entire game. Without Fluff this is a Tactical Board Game. If you don't want fluff play PFS. Otherwise the DM is the arbiter of the rules - that is actually one of the rules; it's in the book. In the book, it states the DM is the judge and jury when it comes to rules decisions. However, the DM should apprise their group of all major rules changes BEFORE the game begins - and definitely before characters are created and finalized. The DM is not a mouse and keyboard with buttons for you to press so that your video game plays out the way you want it. The DM is the storyteller, rules-arbiter, world-builder, and plays all of the world's characters. You play a single character that you create - respecting the DM's rules choices - which exists in the DM's world. That is the reality of this game. If you don't like that, play a board game or a video game. P.S. Another rule of the game is 'fun'. All of that - the rules and whatever - is the backdrop which is essentially a contract between Player and DM to respect each other, and make the game fun. However, in order for that to happen, the rules must be respected so everyone is on a level playing field, so a simulation is created in which we can all exist and understand the imaginary world, and we can get down to just telling stories.
I would be careful about betraying your players' expectations. Once in a while is OK, but basically taking away 5k from them. They have probably been shopping for gear they want to buy, and planning what to do with it. This is not the way to go. Give the players more money and up the challenge level. By level 6 the players won't even notice the difference.
The LG Zombie thing is definitely a miss. I had a DM that would play these kinds of mind games with us all the time - present an obvious enemy that isn't an enemy at all, even going so far as to play the character as threatening, then suddenly turn on the players about how they killed a good guy, they're evil now, bla bla bla. Moral grey areas are one thing, but playing silly mind games is another. It's a poor way to try and create tension or a plot twist. IMO ditch the LG Zombie as quick as narratively possible and move on. Don't go into this territory again.
"WRONGBADFUN". It's like "ASAP" or "Been there, done that".
|