Azaelas's page

Ok here is an odd request... anyone got sheets for settlements using the Game Mastery Guide rules?

Please & Thank You

No comment... anyway these sheets are always nice to use.

I don't think the missing players should get the same amount as the rest but that they shouldn't be penalized to much. and i do say that threemilechild's solution would work well to.

Azaelas wrote:

On the fighter sheet why not just do make slots for weapon & Armour Training. and then a feat slots like the teamwork feat list on the Cavalier sheet or like the spell lists?

Because that wouldn't do anything to help with the big problem Fighters have: the maths. Compared to other characters, a single set of attack and damage roles by a Fighter can involve more dice, more numbers and more things to remember at once. Especially when combined with something like a Rogue with its sneak attacks, or teamwork feats granting flanking bonuses.

Still, the prototype I posted might be overkill - or rather, overly specific. It includes so much there's no room to add extra items of your own, which is bad.

I've played 4 fighters and really havent found much math that cant be tracked ad-hoc style. the hardest part is keeping track off the feats effects and what weapon trainings you have and what levels you gain said bonuses.

I find that level checkpoints and such are all well and good for APs and for linear stories. but for sandbox style adventures you can do what i do and still divide the XP by the number of players in attendance and then for the ones that missed give them about 75-90% of the amount of XP that the rest of the of the group got and maybe a bit of swag he brought from his previous "Dispatch" quest. and have dont plan out where every monster is in the dungeon make it to where there are encounter areas and have multiple encounters set up for each area.

encountered an interesting difficulty with the Sorceror, Wizard, Cleric sheets.

I have a lot of new players in my group in fact only one other person has played an P&P RPG before.

got any hints on how to work bloodline/school/domain power uses?

Nice! That bill is just going be another drain on the governments wallet... opps I mean the american peoples wallets

On the fighter sheet why not just do make slots for weapon & Armour Training. and then a feat slots like the teamwork feat list on the Cavalier sheet or like the spell lists?

And i really like the lycan sheets thank you so much

Elves are the best arcane archers.

Kidding aside, elves are the better witches, I had to decide between optimizing and fun when I chose human over elf.

p.s. I don't like elves, because every new female player I met wanted to play an elvish bard. Not one woman said : "argh, I take a beardy dwarf over those whimps anytime".

sorry for resurrecting this thread but I can now say I have seen a new female player say she wanted a Dwarven Cleric. oddly enough in real life she is very elfish.

maybe do a gestalted (Unearth Arcana Dnd 3.5) Rogue/Bard/Fighter/Ranger?

Hey if this is still up and running then I will gladly get in on it. My email is JTMC93@gmail.com.

Also I read on the rune blade. it seems good. Ioun Stones cost so much because they don't take up an item slot. and why not just make some of your magic item stuff just weapon enhancements?

Azaelas wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

carn wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

The Pathfinder Compatibility License contains a "no adult content" clause.

I always found it interesting (for a lack of a better word) that in RPGs there is no problem having evil guys murdering, torturing, dismembering, ... (long long list) their victims and display it all in a gruesome arrangement (e.g. jade regent 4 contains such a room, also a room with poor victims who have been tortured for months) and this is no problem.

But other things are off, although they are both legally and from a moral point of view less worse than what a normal BBEG des all day long.

Paizo is an American company.

In US gore=fine, sex=bad.

Not if it carries an indicator that it is meant for mature audiences.

Which is a killer for selling anything.

How so? You might just be surprised.

carn wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

The Pathfinder Compatibility License contains a "no adult content" clause.

I always found it interesting (for a lack of a better word) that in RPGs there is no problem having evil guys murdering, torturing, dismembering, ... (long long list) their victims and display it all in a gruesome arrangement (e.g. jade regent 4 contains such a room, also a room with poor victims who have been tortured for months) and this is no problem.

But other things are off, although they are both legally and from a moral point of view less worse than what a normal BBEG des all day long.

Paizo is an American company.

In US gore=fine, sex=bad.

Not if it carries an indicator that it is meant for mature audiences.

Gorbacz wrote:

The Pathfinder Compatibility License contains a "no adult content" clause.

I always found it interesting (for a lack of a better word) that in RPGs there is no problem having evil guys murdering, torturing, dismembering, ... (long long list) their victims and display it all in a gruesome arrangement (e.g. jade regent 4 contains such a room, also a room with poor victims who have been tortured for months) and this is no problem.

But other things are off, although they are both legally and from a moral point of view less worse than what a normal BBEG des all day long.

Pregen Fighter: "...an evening of hard drinking and a night of soft company."

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

racism (both human on non-human and human on human)

You think human-on-human racism is realistic in a world like Golarion?

As i read long ago in Shadowrun 2.0:
"What should it worry you that the skin of the guy next to you in the subway is slightly more tanned, when that thing over there" (a troll) " has fists as large as you head?"

I could see it when it comes to nationality and such besides she said it was a world she was making didn't she

I believe this is where the OGC comes into play... and if you want to publish it just so long as you don't mention any game by name you can list it being compatible with OGL/OGC and go through a different publisher. At least if you are in the US. I found that out reading copyright laws for my group's work.

Jiggy wrote:

On the whole greatsword/dagger TWF thing:

Keep in mind that the GM is - even outside of "Rule 0" - the final arbiter of how many free actions you can take in a turn. Release, quickdraw, grab, release, quickdraw and grab is a lot of free actions in a turn.

So although any given part of it is legal, the whole package is getting big enough that the GM would be well within the rules to put the brakes on.

We do know you can use Quick Draw to draw as many weapons as you have attacks because it mentions using it with thrown weapons.

Other than that, my ruling is definitely a house rule since there isn't a specific rule that disallows the attacks. So long as something isn't game breaking, I'm all for supporting coolness.

I say you could as long as it was different BAB levels. though I dont remember where exactly I read you can only take 1 or 2 free actions in a row.

If it is 1 then the draw-&-throw attack is viable but not the situation stated. If it is 2 then the situation is viable as the attack, release(F), draw(F), attack, grab(F), attack, etc.

Yeah I just downloaded all the errata and found it. Wow, what a perfectly fitting end to an absolutely s*&*ty f!%&ing week. Glad there's a Rogue talent for this now. >.>

Rogue Talent?... what one is that?

Azaelas wrote:

Im just gonna say Rule 0 this and leave the FAQ to the RAW rule-lawyers.

so have fun everybody

You go ahead and Rule 0 out several interesting possible characters. I prefer being as lenient as I can be without increasing power. And trust me, this ruling does not allow any note-worthy power increase.

In fact, in my mind, it's just as much as "keep it simple" rule as anything. You have two styles: Normal and TWFing. Declare which you use, then use its rules. Done. No need to determine what does and doesn't count as two-weapon fighting mid-full-round with that.

ok 1st: I didnt say whether or not i was gonna rule with or against it. I was actually gonna let my players give arguments to what they believed it should be and see they can give good arguements.

2nd: if i do go the way i said how am I ruling out several possible characters?

3rd: Before I posted that I talked to my group and they read this forum and a lot agreed with me especially the 3 that will at some point make TWF characters. In fact they like it my way as it makes it more challenging.

EDIT: It is a Wand of Evocation(or what ever school Magic Missile belongs to) that has 100 charges that can be used to cast any level 1+ spell from that school at a cost of charges equal to the spells level.

Im just gonna say Rule 0 this and leave the FAQ to the RAW rule-lawyers.

so have fun everybody

nategar05 wrote:

Doesn't that interfere with somatic spells because you have to wield it with two hands?

arcane bond wrote:

If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a concentration check or lose the spell.

I would say they can cast it freely just so long as the spell doesn't say they need both hands. as the bow is still wielded just not ready in the traditional sense.

Ok I would like to say thank you as well.

also the whole fantasy-realism thing. I love the fantasy stories and such. but i also like my fantasy to be realistic. as even when fireballs are being tossed around if you mess up with your off-handed short sword you will still cut yourself just as it would if fireballs weren't flying around you like flies.

Azaelas wrote:

And all of this is kinda pointless as it is the GM's call.

Luckily, one of the Paizo developers has weighed in with an offically licensed opinion, so it's not ambigious anymore.

But you cant forget Rule 0... and no offense meant but I honestly don't understand how some of the rules are meant to reflect true combat. It is like everything they know about swordplay and such comes from Hollywood movies.

Ok so from what I can tell you are saying fighting with a actual weapon made to deal damage is as easy as fighting with a shield made to defend with...

I can honestly tell you that it is not as easy using a weapon in your off-hand as you have to be careful not injure yourself on the weapons.

I would also say wielding a weapon is holding it in your hand at the ready to be used as soon as needed. There for I say you would incur the penalties for having a weapon in your off-hand. I wouldn't classify a shield in that as a shield is meant for defense and should rarely if ever be used to attack with.

And all of this is kinda pointless as it is the GM's call.