No. Well, of course, but not what you meant.
It's relevant to the topic.
If that sort of thing floats your boat then cool beans for you.
And i have nothing against murder free components of gameplay, provided it exists to enhance to game and not grief the group. People are over eager to name call, and murderhobo is a term I think the rpg community is too comfortable with.
Most of the problem, that I can tell, stems from the thought process behind the term.
When you add things, like monster babies, in a simple good guys vs bad guys I gotta wonder if things are being added to game game to deliberately mess with players or make paladins fall.
Most of the discussions about it are based on instances where a dm has fabricated an encounter that seemingly exists solely to establish the players as "murderhobos." Most of the time these horribad players may simply not play along because they aren't interested that kind of pretentious drama.
The Indescribable wrote:
Because that can't be encouraged enough. :)
What happens if they both fall? Now that would be an interesting pair.
Also, i dont think sexual impulses trump druidic ethos. Nor would i consider a vampire inclusive towards necrophilia. Being seductive is a thing with them.
If it was done as a newborn its doubtful they would know. And in societies where gender mattered, you know this kind of thing would occur.
Trauma? Yeah, putting on a girdle of opposite gender and nothing happening would be quite a shock.
Edit: Actually, I'd be suprised if this sort of magic wasn't used a LOT in societies such as,say, dark elves.
How do you make it clear to players that an encounter is too strong to fight, and they have to be clever?
Love interests represents an aspect no one at my table have interest in as a dm or a player, so one npc would suffice. Gender and orientation represent no value of the individual, and can be ammended by the dm to the situation at will, so this isn't something I've considered worth too much of a writers time.
On the other hand, more APs that place a substantial focus on these things would be cool for the rest of you that do enjoy RPing romance.
Your seemingly rare point of view probably places you in the majority. On the other hand, try telling people they have to justify all that hotness with an ability score and let the wailing commence.
Additionally, no artist should have to justify bare ANYTHING on a barbarian.
And Paizo has some rocking artist. I think you guys do great work, as well as the rest of you.
Ceres Cato wrote:
What if it's an ENCHANTED chainmail bikini? If magic is involved, nearly EVERYTHING is possible. Even a thong that is as protective as plate mail.
I dont know about the thong, but you'd hard-pressed to get me to wear any metal armor in a world of magic, unless it was mithril and enchanted for comfort.
I don't have a problem with any of the artwork, but there cases to be made for being over-dressed as much as under. For example, Jirelle looks awesome but i doubt anyone would wear that outfit on a typical day in that part of the world. Especially at sea.
As much as you can say more clothing and armor is better try imagining taking a 40 mile hike (adventure) in that stuff. I'm pretty sure if i started in full plate I'd have tossed most of it on the first day. Metal would be the hottest thing to wear in the heat and coldest in the cold.
On the other hand,if I was preparing to defend a castle/town I'd deifinately be looking to get my hands on some steel protection.
And we haven't taken into consideration cultural influences, which can run from full body cover to only a loin-cloth regardless of gender.
Which makes most criticism, IMO, less objective and a lot more arbitrary.
Various species of arachnids do each of those.
Google gladiator spider, spitting spider for your webbing attacks.
Some parents wouldn't let their kids hang with you, churches used to have guest preachers cone and tell stories of the evils of dungeons and dragons. I've personally seen a guy misquote ozzy lyrics and say the greatful dead had no rhythm to a congregation of snickering people.
Been banned from camps after volunteering to go as a guide because of my open defense of the game.
Had one mother tell her son he couldnt be my friend because of an ozzy patch i had on the back of my jean jacket.
And ive been told i could not be a christian because i had long hair. By a preachers wife, in front of the rest of the youth group.
Good times. Really dislike baptists.
Sara Marie wrote:
Hence, the last sentence of my comment. I suspect the list of spells taught on a communal basis would be very small. Dancing lights would probably on the list though. Way too useful.
I would say, to the OP, no. Magic population is primarily based on the designers intent.
You could IMO easily justify a wider-spread use of cantrips anyway. One elder could teach generations of children through young adults enough basics of magic to have people coming of age with the ability to use the lowest level of magic, though, culturally, you have to look at a small number of spells that a community would teach everyone. Even then, id say a minority of people would have the ability and dedication to learn, depending on social pressure.
I have a world (non-golarion) where the population comes of age into a pc class and racial pressure to pursue a craft. After they "prove" themselves they don't have to pursue class levels but do to the hostile nature of the world they live in most have to fight for collective survival on multiple occasions.
Golarion just wasn't set up that way.
If you are motivated and inspired enough about it to feel bummed out, make a new world. That will give you an outlet. Instead of lamenting frequency focus on quality and depth.
Take the time to weave a web of adventure that snares the group tighter with each step they take without tripping them up.
Or make a true open world. The next time they play let them adventure to find adventure, or just enjoy the scenery. Make a secret cult that remains secret, with the players only catching on to suble manipulations, but not knowing who or why.
You could view the whole thing as an opportunity to put time into fleshing things out. Maybe, instead of running the game you can tell the story to your son and try to get him hooked, offer up only a little of the deepest and darkest at a time as he dms. He might change his mind about running games if you shift focus on 'running a game' to 'telling a cool story'.
Sounds like the lawful/chaotic aspect of alignment.
Klaus van der Kroft wrote:
It will work itself out quick enough, tbo.
No Xenomorphs from the Alien movies?
Cenobites a la Hellraiser HOWEVER, there's the plane of agony guys that I think were inspired by cenobites. Still, worth looking into some that the movie came up with, and searching around for some of the art Clive had to inspire him. Very different from book & movies.
C(k?)rites from Critters. Awesome swarm ability. Great one liners.
Man, sometimes I wish palladium would update their Nightbreed game to a lvl of Heroes Unlimited. Might check that one out for some inspiration.
Godzilla, cause he's more bad-ass than the Tarreque.
Bud the C.H.U.D., watch it when you are young and you will keep a respectful distance away from manhole covers.
One of my groups started an adventure traveling cross country, the group pooled money for rations.
Those with survival made daily checks, DC 10, as listed in the CRB, and supplemented rations to make up the difference. For your situation I'd still have them make a standard DC 10 check.
However, you said there's "limited food and water," but didn't mention a terrain. I'm just wondering how much of that assessment is fair to the situation. Are they in a desolate wasteland or desert? If not, the horses shouldn't be included as food dependent members of the party. There should be enough to graze regardless of season. Just look at the herds of caribou that get plenty to eat while traveling in huge groups.
Your reasoning never takes into account why she was there and what she was doing in the first place. She isn't arbitrarily going to kill the good guys, and their sitting around while a killer roams free make for more consideration for Samara than what i feel you are giving her.
Also, their reason for detaining her in the first place is more political than lawful or good.
Remember, Justicars don't kill innocent people casually. Samara allowed herself to be detained for 24 hours, but warned that if she isn't released by then, she'll have to kill anyone that stands in her way.
At the point where evil is allowed to succeed by the idle hands of the good, you have a hard time convincing me of their 'innocence.' I'm still pushing that Lawful Good be kept on the table, though, LN makes since to. Justicar law does seem more focused on righting wrongs, and protecting innocent then simple law for the sake of law.
And the person Samara was after was a sociopath who had murdered countless people.
I'm not buying evil as a quality of Samara. Gotta be twisting the situation.
Honestly, the only problem I see for you is finding a deity that would fit with the concept. Obviously, Asmodeus is the best fit, and he is LE. I can see Erastil as a strict god, supporting such a code, but it's focus would be shifted to nature, and there's loads of precedent in nature where animals back-down or die. Survival for the fittest. Still not LG.
From my experience in Mass effect I don't think Paladin would fit. For instance, the scene where the justicar threatens to kill the officer for interfering with her investigation isn't something I see a paladin doing. On a law level its a good match but the justicar doesn't seem to fit the good bit of being a paladin.
I could see it. Justicars are strictly lawful, but don't let things like politics, red-tape, etc. interfere in tracking down criminals, which she was. Justicar law, in the eyes of Justicars, supersede local law. In a sense, the officers was giving the criminal time to get away, thus, the Justicar, by her code, was justified in killing the officer, if that is what was necessary to continue pursuit.
It's a severe code, but it is definitely bent towards good, imo.
The other side of the coin is, if your DM allows this, keeping with the code is going to be just as severe in adherence, so do your character justice and take time to wrap your head around the concept.
Cool idea, Sir Dante.
Skills & Powers had a workable system that divided each attribute into two sub-scores. From the base score a player could personalize the sub-scores by lowering one of them to raise the other, up to two points for a four point spread.
That would be the best way to do it, imo. Simply adding a seventh "looks" attribute just gives cheese-heads another stat to dump.
*sigh* When did attributes get changed to abilites, anyway?
Considering that you are starting at lvl 3, I recommend that you check out the feat: Accursed Hex. That will let you grab cackle at lvl 2 without having to play through lvl 1 with out it.
Personally, I like misfortune over evil eye. Accursed hex helps it land, and if it lands, following hexes take four successes to resist.
Either way, Accursed Hex is my top recommendation.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
if physical looks and cosmetic attractiveness were based on Charisma; how do you explain the transition from Mammy Graul to a Nymph to Cthulhu? how do you explain the many quite unattractive historical dictators with a great aura of authority? how do you explain the concept of the cute but shy wallflower? it's not that were expecting to be so pretty as to make other people do stuff for us, an unrealistic perk of appearance. it's that we want more control over our appearance instead of "you must have X charisma score to have Y Physical Build."
It's not a matter of "if." Appearance is under Charisma. It's listed in the CRB under Charisma. I already stated in my first post there's no limit on how your character looks. I already stated high scores do not mean beauty or likeability. It doesn't matter if you are an ugly dictator or cute wallflower, your charisma mod is what it is; nymph or Graul.
You can go on all day providing examples of how charisma, and any other ability score, doesn't perfectly take into account the individual qualities it represents. Of course, it wouldn't, but it's been simplified down to one ability, charisma. You can homebrew/houserule it down all you like. Pathfinder doesn't make the distinction, though. If you dump charisma and have a negative mod, then anything your do regarding the qualities that charisma encompasses, you take that penalty.