After All, It Is Your Game, And You Could Play It Any Manner You Need To. It Is Been That Manner From The Beginning; Supposedly, Gygax Himself Didn't Glass Mosaic supplier Use Minis, However Arneson Did. Every Set Of Pawns Lists Exactly What Is Blanketed On The Lower Back Of The Box, So You Do Not Want To Wonder glass mosaic manufacturers What You're Going To Get. And Even Though The Pawns Can Also Undergo The “pathfinder” Call, There's No Reason You Cannot Use Them For D&d Or Some Other Fable Recreation.
wha...? was this some sort of stealth spam?
Send this 'Bot back to Numeria! D&*%! Technic League Spy'ware! (is Spy-were some sort of shape-shifting spy?)
Most GMs are looking for a player who'll be entertaining to them and the rest of the group (or at least not excessively boring / negative).
Which of the following people sounds like someone they'd want to commit to interacting with for the next eight months of gaming?
GM: "Tell me what it was like being a human in a mostly gnome village."
A: "I was constantly banging my head on doors. For several years I believed myself to be a giant."
GM: "Tell me what it was like being a human in a mostly gnome village."
B: "Hang on..." (googles 'Pathfinder gnome', picks up some details about gnome society). A few minutes later: "I switched between several gnome foster families. I had a deep-seated fear of rejection as a result, though I later came to understand that it's gnomish nature to take relationships lightly. I was also the butt of many practical jokes, which I pretended not to mind. The gnomes tended to think of me as just 'a non-gnome'. To them, elves and dwarves and humans are a pretty homogeneous group, less diverse than any collection of gnomes would be. As a consequence of this, I became desperate to stand out in any way possible. I'll often do dumb things just for the attention."
GM: "Tell me what it was like being a human in a mostly gnome village."
C: "I don't know. I've never been in such a situation. I don't care. What does it matter?"
A: went by the name of Head-Banger, and got into a Heavy Metal Band as a result.
B: heck, as the tallest person in town by the time he was in 5th grade, I'd think he would "stand out" in any crowd in town...
C: wait, they were all gnomes? Hump. Never notice that. Guess that explains my using Wisdom as a dump stat.
GM: "Tell me what it was like being a human in a mostly gnome village? Give me some details."
Player: "Wait, what Gnome village? I thought they were just short! You mean ... but... wow. I got to reassess my entire childhood. Maybe I don't actually HAVE a pituitary gland disorder...
GM: "Who was your PC's first love?"
Player: Peggy Sue.
GM: isn't that your wifes name?
Player: Yeah, childhood sweethearts. And after all, she gave me a kitchen pass to come play tonight...
GM: (Eye-roll)
GM: "How many siblings did you have and how did they get along with your parents?"
Player: 2. Brother and Sister. We don't talk to Kevin sense he joined Scientology, and Sis ran off with that Biker dude a couple years ago...
GM: "yeah, I had a crush on your sister... wait! those are your real siblings
Player: yeah, so? easier to keep track of them this way. If I wanted to invent a detailed clan history, I wouldn't be able to keep it strait without notes.
GM: "Give me details on his life before he became a magus."
Player: Married his childhood sweetheart Peggy Sue. Joined the Army for a 4 year trip to ... Germany?... to get access to the GI bill, and picked up a few ranks in Wargamer....Well he has a rank in profession fisherman. So I guess it is reasonable to assume he was a fisherman.
GM: wait - is this your personal background again?
Player: see answer above...
GM: "What other adventures and exploits has he accomplished?"
Player: ah... a lot of table top gaming, some other RPGs, but in the world setting? Zip. Nil. Zero experience, 1st level character. He hasn't yet slain any dragons or rescued/put any damsels in distress - yet.
GM: "What side is he taking on the moral conflict between Desna and Erastil?"
Player: What conflict? Are those gods? He's a magus and has Nethys in the deity slot, mostly because Nethys doesn't care much. I have heard of no such conflict. He, as a character that worships a different deity, probably would give a rat's behind about these other deities. Nethys is kind of non-caring about this sort of thing. Heck, maybe I should listen to my brother Kevin and look into Razmaran or whatever his name is. Why would you assume I know about it and why would my character have to take a side?
It seems to me that this thread could easily just be addressing the question...
"Do you inform the players what the DC of a task is before they attempt it?"
Picture this...
The adventurers are investigating a murder and are presented with the task of locating where the town folk took the body.
Unknown DC, roll:
GM: "Ok, looks like it is a Gather Info check, so one of you needs to do a Diplomacy check..."
The Barbarian Player: "Guys! I totally got this!" rolls a Diplomacy Check of '2', "minus my negative 2 for the Skill gives a zero final, so... "I grab the first bystander from the sidewalk and shout into his face (Orc Voice On) "WHERE DO YOU TAKE YOUR DEAD!?" that should work for a zero final result"
Now let's replace the roll with a Take 10....
unknown DC, Take 10:
The Barbarian Player: "Guys! I totally got this! Take 10 Diplomacy, minus my negative 2 for the Skill gives an "8 final" so... "I grab the first bystander from the sidewalk and shout into his face (Orc Voice On) "WHERE DO YOU TAKE YOUR DEAD!?" that should work for an 8 final result"
NOW let's try it with the GM telling the players what the DC is...
Known DC, roll:
GM: "Ok, looks like it is a DC 10 Gather Info check, so one of you needs to do a Diplomacy check..."
The Barbarian Player: "Guys! I totally got this!" rolls a Diplomacy Check of '2', "minus my negative 2 for the Skill gives a Zero final, so... "I grab the first bystander from the sidewalk and shout into his face (Orc Voice On) "WHERE DO YOU TAKE YOUR DEAD!?" that should work for a Zero final result"
NOT let's try it with the GM telling the players what the DC is and them taking 10
Known DC, Take 10:
GM: "Ok, looks like it is a DC 10 Gather Info check, so one of you needs to do a Diplomacy check..."
The Barbarian Player: "Guys! I totally got this!" Take 10 Diplomacy, minus my negative 2 for the Skill gives an "8 final" so... "I grab the first bystander from the sidewalk and shout into his face (Orc Voice On) "WHERE DO YOU TAKE YOUR DEAD!?" that should work for a 8 final result:
The Other Barbarian Player: "Wait! I jump in and Aid on that check! Roll of 13, minus my negative 3 for the Skill gives a 10 final for the Aid another and ... +2 to your check! so... I grab the Barbarians fore arm and squeeze enough to loosen his grip on the townsfolk's collar so that the poor man can talk enough to tell us where the morgue is in town..."
long ago I was introducing a different game system
RuneQuest:
RuneQuest is a fantasy role-playing game created by Steve Perrin, set in Greg Stafford's mythical world of Glorantha, and first published in 1978 by Chaosium. RuneQuest is notable for its system, designed around percentile dice and with an early implementation of skill rules, which became the basis of numerous other games. There have been several editions of the game.
to a group of gamers who played D&D.
This was one of the points that just really brought the differences in the game systems home.
In the span of a weeks gaming time, in both games, an NPC levels a crossbow at someones PC and says... "Don't move or I'll shoot!"...
In the D&D setting, the player comments that "After he shoots me, I'll pull the bolt out and bite the head of it off..."
But in the RQ game, everyone froze... We had started calling guys with arbalest (heavy crossbows) "surgeons" because "they remove body parts". Kick the door down and there, 10 feet into the room, is a Dwarf with a loaded arbalest, pointed at the PCs thru the doorway.
Thus was born the Dwarvish Stand-off:
Player A: "You know dwarf, there's 4 of us."
Dwarf: "You know human, I got an 85% to hit with this, then there's likely to be three of you..."
Player B: "He's got a point..."
Player C - the one in the doorway: "yeah, I can see the light gleaming off it from here."
Player D: "You know we except ransom... maybe we can talk this over?".
I believe that if you are interrupted during rest you can spend some time in combat (maybe 1 min) without it affecting your resting time. Or might just increase you rest time by the amount you spent fighting.
If there is a two-minute battle, followed by a five-minute cleanup, can't the party just sleep in 7 minutes in the morning? Nothing in the rules say, "uninterrupted sleep" in order to avoid fatigue and regain spells.
Core Rulebook, Classes, Wizard wrote:
A wizard may know any number of spells. He must choose and prepare his spells ahead of time by getting 8 hours of sleep and spending 1 hour studying his spellbook. While studying, the wizard decides which spells to prepare.
Core Rulebook, Glossary wrote:
Fatigued: A fatigued character can neither run nor charge and takes a –2 penalty to Strength and Dexterity. Doing anything that would normally cause fatigue causes the fatigued character to become exhausted. After 8 hours of complete rest, fatigued characters are no longer fatigued.
.
bolding mine actually, this is not true.
From the CRB, PG 218. second paragraph under the heading Preparing Wizard Spells (so it likely applies to any spellcasters who prepare spells like a Wizard)...
Rest: To prepare his daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but he must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If his rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time he has to rest in order to clear his mind, and he must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing his spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, he still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells..
SO... Toss a javelin (fire an arrow, send a summoned animal, make loud noises near by, “Lights in the Sky” half a mile away to alert the guards to wake everyone up, etc.) into the camp every hour or so all night - or heck, just every hour for three hours - then take two and a half off and THEN start it up again semi random times. The Wizard cannot Prepare any spells - (esp. any he used up in middle of the night responding to the attacks) and the party likely starts the next day Fatigued. Yeah! Great stuff.
(I’ve even used this tac-tic as a PC having to fight enemy spellcasters.)
I know that several of my fellow local VOs would have a blast with this sort of opportunity to generate content. I think the QC problems are a little bit overblown...
My biggest concerns would be the possible departure from accepted Golarion canon and the temptation to fall into fanservice.
I'm playing in Minnesota and while the Minnesota crew is a great bunch of folks (love you guys!), if that leadership is responsible for the creation and oversight of our regional content, I fear those mission briefings from Venture-Captain THUNDERLIPS! and how "Lucious" Lucius Vizinni might repurpose Absolam's Grand Lodge.
And I think a lot of Secondary Success Conditions might involve drink and drinking.
** spoiler omitted **...
damn... I may need to drag out the GPS and see how far a road trip to Minnesota actually is... I wonder if the Chronicles will have pre-printed "beer-mug" water-marks or if we'll have to produce them during play...
"Throwing"? hmmm.
actually came into this thread expecting to see some changes to Alchemical Weapons, and maybe rules on Slings, Staffslings and pitching rocks at things...but I guess not.
I do not find the "tactic" of to be anything new. It is a play style I have seen many times in many campaigns all the way back to old D&D days (when PCs were MUCH easier to create). Some people play that way. I try to avoid them. In my current area there are some players who are VERY well know for it... "Hay, did you see who signed up for the 6th seat at our slot two game? Yeah - I think I'll switch out to a different table. What, you've never played with them before? Well, last time I sat at a them with them, they got three of us killed..." Yeah. Been there, done that, got the emotional scars to show for it. Doesn't need the excuse of "We'll all dying anyway..." to appear. I guess it might cause some increase... but I hope not. and I'll advise anyone I play with that seems to be developing this as a play style to stop it. Pointing out that they will "get that reputation", you know, like the players that do that now. Like the ones I mentioned above that we tend to switch games to avoid. "Yeah, you don't want to turn into THEM..."
The rules I cited suggest the wearer picks the linguistics skill rank granted languages but not the language tied to the increase in INT.
Issue 1) does the headband (with linguistics ranks) grant the same languages if you remove it, then put it back on. Or can you switch out to different languages each time?
Issue 2) If the PC has ranks in Linguistics BEFORE they put on the Headband (with linguistics ranks) - are the Languages gained from those ranks suppressed while the PC has the Headband-w-L-R on? Or is he "locked" into those Languages for each rank?
Already answered above.
Also people are going way off again. The FAQ is quite clear the language granted from the bonus to intelligence on the headband is a language selected from languages available from a skill rank in linguistics and is then tied to the item.
PC has three ranks in Linguistics for which she knows (Halfling, Halit, Draconic). Puts on a Headband that gives her skill points (3 again) in Linguistics... and the languages (Azlanti, Osirion, Goblin)... can she now still speak (Halfling, Halit, Draconic)? or would the Headband give her only the same languages she picked for her natural points in Linguistics? (that would be: Halfling, Halit, Draconic).
NOW she levels and picks up another Headband skill point in Linguistics, for which she would get an additional language - say Elvish. But she also puts another skill point/rank in Linguistics herself, adding Gnoll (she's going to the Mana Wastes and might need to talk to Gnolls when her Headband doesn't work)... Is she allowed to do this? can she speak Gnoll when the Headband is "on"? Would this mean she speaks 9 languages? (4 from her headband, 4 from non Headband skill points, and Common)? Or only 5? and if 5, which ones?
The rules I cited suggest the wearer picks the linguistics skill rank granted languages but not the language tied to the increase in INT.
Issue 1) does the headband (with linguistics ranks) grant the same languages if you remove it, then put it back on. Or can you switch out to different languages each time?
Issue 2) If the PC has ranks in Linguistics BEFORE they put on the Headband (with linguistics ranks) - are the Languages gained from those ranks suppressed while the PC has the Headband-w-L-R on? Or is he "locked" into those Languages for each rank?
this Headband of INT (+2) gives ranks in Linguistics... and I'm 5th level, so does that mean I get 5 languages learned? would my buddy (also 5th level) also get 5 new languages? are they the same ones that I get when I put the headband on? What if she knows some of those already - does she get different ones or just "knows that language twice as good"? If she gives it back and I put it back on - do I get the SAME 5 languages I got the first time... so many issues with this magic item. It's making my head hurt.
Confusion spell...
This spell causes confusion in the targets, making them unable to determine their actions. Roll on the following table at the start of each subject's turn each round to see what it does in that round.
(table of actions)
A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused character. Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).
what indicates that it continues to attack for more than one round? If the confused creature was not attacked on it's last turn, why would it not roll for a new action again? (a roll of 76-100 would be "Attack nearest creature..." again...
I have encountered a judge who tried to say that if you got a rolled result of "51–75 = Deal 1d8 points of damage + Str modifier to self with item in hand" that you would then "automatically attack" yourself - as you had attacked yourself last turn (and damaged yourself)...
Heck, just play down a lot.
you get out of tier gold - which would be MORE than everyone else at the table.
Be sure to play it up (in fun - drop the subject if it is bothering the other players) - each encounter the other players get XX.XX gp and you get MORE PAY! LOL!
After all - you deserve it right? Clearly, you're better than the rest of them anyway... and the Powers That Be know this, so they pay you more.
when you are 3rd level, be sure to play low Tier in 1-5 scenarios. When you are 5th, do the same in Tier 3-7. When 7th, play 5-9s, when 9th play in Tier 7-11. And ALWAYS play down, always play with PCs of lower level than you are. In the long run this will mean you are have a little less gold than average - but then you'll face easier (for you anyway) challenges...
Rogue: I free slaves in the hope I'll one day find my enslaved family!
Fighter: I'm in this for the money!
Sorcerer: I seek the man that killed my mother!
Paladin:...Um, well...I'm wanted for murder.
after a moment of thought the Paladin adds: In 4 countries and 2 un-incorporated regions.
ah... I think I am just being Trolled at this point.
I'm going to just go away and wash my face and quit this thread.
Please mark it with an FAQ.
I really hope I don't get players at my table doing this in the future - it is bad enough getting players fighting swarms with butterfly nets now "the last judge said it works like that!"...
And as a player I am going to buy more Oil of air bubble and smoke creating items...just in cast...
The fact that it gives a save, is easily avoidable, and takes at least a full round (move action to draw, spark cantrip to ignite) to initiate?
Smoke Pellet
Price 25 gp; Weight —
This small clay sphere contains two alchemical substances separated by a thin barrier. When you break the sphere, the substances mingle and fill a 5-foot square with a cloud of foul but harmless yellow smoke. The smoke pellet acts as a smokestick, except the smoke only lasts for 1 round before dispersing. You may throw a smoke pellet as a ranged touch attack with a range increment of 10 feet.
and
Smokestick
Price 20 gp; Weight 1/2 lb.
This alchemically treated wooden stick instantly creates thick, opaque smoke when burned. The smoke fills a 10-foot cube (treat the effect as a fog cloud spell, except that a moderate or stronger wind dissipates the smoke in 1 round). The stick is consumed after 1 round, and the smoke dissipates naturally after 1 minute.
so... I am confused... smoke pellets at your table can cause choking and coughing in an enemy? ("Fortitude save each round DC 15")
do you also use the part from pyrotechnics that the condition lasts for a 1d4+1 round after they leave the smoke cloud?
So at your table I can cause choking and coughing in an enemy by dropping a smoke stick on them? Really? Wow... nah, I can't be understanding that correctly... what's the catch? what's the "Gotcha"?
edit: Wait, which post was this "yes" in reference to?
was this "yes" in answer to "If we change the rules we should at least tell the players the change right?" or "do you also give this "choking and coughing" condition to the smoke created by Smoke Sticks?"
From a PFS perspective, using this item falls into the "don't be a jerk" category. Just like obscuring mist, deeper darkness, and other effects that really mess with the battlefield you shouldn't use it if it is going to create an environment that is going to hamper the other players as much as the enemies. That's not fun for anyone but you.
From a "what does it do?" perspective the only thing you can do is look to see what smoke does in Pathfinder. 20% concealment and chance of choking. That's not "what does the item say it does?" (creates smoke) that's "what does smoke do?"
ah... where did you get "20% concealment and chance of choking."? It doesn't say it does that. It says:
Description
This metal urn is identical in appearance to an efreeti bottle, except that it does nothing but smoke. The amount of smoke is great if the stopper is pulled out, pouring from the bottle and totally obscuring vision across a 50-foot spread in 1 round. If the bottle is left unstoppered, the smoke billows out another 10 feet per round until it has covered a 100-foot radius. This area remains smoke-filled until the eversmoking bottle is stoppered.
The bottle must be resealed by a command word, after which the smoke dissipates normally. a moderate wind (11+ mph) disperses the smoke in 4 rounds; a strong wind (21+ mph) disperses the smoke in 1 round.
I got it from the Core Rulebook. (Follow the link.) "What happens in smoke?" is in the same section as "what happens when you fall?" or "what happens when you touch lava?"
A character who breathes heavy smoke must make a Fortitude save each round (DC 15, +1 per previous check) or spend that round choking and coughing. A character who chokes for 2 consecutive rounds takes 1d6 points of nonlethal damage.
...
darn it, auto trimmed the part I need to reference...
"I got it from the Core Rulebook. (Follow the link.) "What happens in smoke?" is in the same section as "what happens when you fall?" or "what happens when you touch lava?" "
do you also give this "choking and coughing" condition to the smoke created by Smoke Sticks? or the other alchemical items normally used to obscure vision? do they also cause "choking and coughing" condition?
As a player this House Rule doesn't really matter that much to me. It gives me another weapon to use on the bad guys. (Once we get past the "gotcha" part of the change I mean. Once the Player knows that the Judge has added to the effects of the item.)
As a judge I am not so happy with it. Reminds me of the KOTDT episode where the "Orcish Throwing Turnip" was invented. And the players started weaponizing vegetables.
Please do not give it abilities that it does not state it has, that it has never had.
If we start giving it a "a choking cloud" (something that it has NOT ever had sense it's creation in 1st Ed. days)
So we should ignore changes Pathfinder made to the rules, because the item was different in past rule sets?
no. But we don't want to add in changes that are House Rules either do we? If the rule was changed, it's was changed.
For example, Ring of Invisibility used to make you invisible when you put it on. Now? you have to activate it with a command word and it only lasts 3 minutes.
Potions of Healing used to heal 2d4 points of damage. Now they are "Spells in a Bottle" because the rules on how potions work were changed.
If we change the rules we should at least tell the players the change right?
For the people wanting it to have the effects of Pyrotechnics - because that's the spell used to create it...
Pyrotechnics was heavily nerfed when we made the shift to Pathfinder. One of the limiting nerfs was to change the duration of the smoke effect to 1 round per level. Like many other spells - we cut it's duration as a means of limiting it's power.
The Eversmoking Bottle... is Ever smoking, right? so, no duration. Unless we decide to limit the duration like we have for the Ring of Invisibility. Eversmoking Bottle has a caster level of 3rd. So... the Pyrotechnics smoke cloud it creates has a duration of 3 rounds? Nah. A better answer is, it just doesn't crate a Pyrotechnics smoke cloud. It doesn't create effects it doesn't say it creates. No choking cloud.
from pyrotechnics:Smoke Cloud: A stream of smoke billows out from the fire, forming a choking cloud that spreads 20 feet in all directions and lasts for 1 round per caster level. All sight, even darkvision, is ineffective in or through the cloud. All within the cloud take –4 penalties to Strength and Dexterity (Fortitude negates). These effects last for 1d4+1 rounds after the cloud dissipates or after the creature leaves the area of the cloud. Spell resistance does not apply.
From a PFS perspective, using this item falls into the "don't be a jerk" category. Just like obscuring mist, deeper darkness, and other effects that really mess with the battlefield you shouldn't use it if it is going to create an environment that is going to hamper the other players as much as the enemies. That's not fun for anyone but you.
From a "what does it do?" perspective the only thing you can do is look to see what smoke does in Pathfinder. 20% concealment and chance of choking. That's not "what does the item say it does?" (creates smoke) that's "what does smoke do?"
ah... where did you get "20% concealment and chance of choking."? It doesn't say it does that. It says:
Description
This metal urn is identical in appearance to an efreeti bottle, except that it does nothing but smoke. The amount of smoke is great if the stopper is pulled out, pouring from the bottle and totally obscuring vision across a 50-foot spread in 1 round. If the bottle is left unstoppered, the smoke billows out another 10 feet per round until it has covered a 100-foot radius. This area remains smoke-filled until the eversmoking bottle is stoppered.
The bottle must be resealed by a command word, after which the smoke dissipates normally. a moderate wind (11+ mph) disperses the smoke in 4 rounds; a strong wind (21+ mph) disperses the smoke in 1 round.
it says: "...totally obscuring vision across a 50-foot spread in 1 round."
it does NOT say: " ... creating concealment and a choking cloud across a 50-foot spread in 1 round."
It totally obscures vision in it's area. That's all it says it does. Anything else is just House Rules.
This item has been around sense the early days (pre 1st edition days) and it was a cursed item then. Why are we changing it's abilities now?
Again, if we start giving it a "a choking cloud"/Portable "Stinking Cloud generator" (something that it has NOT ever had sense it's creation in 1st Ed. days) then we are going to start seeing players using air bubble and other gimmicks to create something even worse then it already is. I know I will. It'll be to good NOT to use.
just because the spell is used in it's creation does not mean it "casts" the spell when it is triggered.
Ring of Chameleon Power has Requirements Forge Ring, disguise self, invisibility; yet it does NOT make someone invisible.
Ring of Counterspells has Requirements Forge Ring, imbue with spell ability; but does not allow the casting of spells...
Belt of Dwarvenkind? Craft Wondrous Item, tongues, creator must be a dwarf; yet I can't speak Kellish when I wear it...
Bottle of Air? water breathing; ... Nope, it creates air, it doesn't give someone the ability to breath water. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to use it in "Airless Space" (going to be important for Starfinder?).
Bracelet of Friends? refuge; ... not even sure why that one is required.
etc. etc.
Again, just because the spell is used in it's creation does not mean it "casts" the spell when it is triggered. Magic items only do what they say they do - anything else is just House Rules.
Please do not give it abilities that it does not state it has, that it has never had.
If we start giving it a "a choking cloud" (something that it has NOT ever had sense it's creation in 1st Ed. days) then we are going to start seeing players using air bubble and other gimmicks to create something even worse. A portable, long lasting, gas cloud that the players can haul around with them and use over and over again? Please no...
This is why my NPCs surrender to the paladin or the cleric of abadar. And get a receipt.
bah - been in games where the pally didn't except surrenders from "Evil Creatures"...
"Does he ping as evil? Then I hit it again, until it stops pinging as evil..." yeah, with the change in pronoun. "he" before checking, "it" after evil was detected
Well, with that many potions you've got plenty of duplicates, and some of my characters use the wand lines for potions as is. (My monk buys both Mage Armor and Enlarge Person in lots of 20). So you can make that way shorter (especially if you use the alternate form that is all wand lines).
except that, unlike for wand charges, you need to note on the ITS both when the potion was "got" and when it was "used". So you can't just check off the potions when used - you need to note the Chronicle number they were used during. "Potion of CLW, cost 50 gp...Got it CR14... Used it CR15."
I do get around this with several of my Alchemist PCs by using the top row of check boxes for the "Got" AR number and the bottom row for the "Used" AR number. But then I craft (and use) a lot of Alchemical items... This let's me track 25 of the same item (Vermin Repellent for example).
To fit that in a 1"x1"x2" outside dimension rectangular container, we need to make the walls 0.02 inches thick, giving us inside dimensions of 0.96x0.96x1.96 for a total volume of 1.8064 cubic inches.
Extra credit:
How many potions can you fit in a handy haversack?
a standard issue ITS has 16 blanks for items (not counting lines for wands...), so this gives us 648 pages... perhaps hole punched and put into three ring binders? The standard 2" three ring binder (the "big" binders) lists as having a Page Capacity of 350, so that would give us 2 three ring binders. SO... drink a potion of Cure Light Wounds? that means we need to note it's use on page 65, volume #2 of the ITS...
Casting time is one minute. So you aren't likely to be using it in combat. It gives information on a "creature type" rather than a "creature", so (to use an example from a poster above), a caster "...who casts it and reflects on the slime mold (DC-12) she encountered earlier in the day" would get information on Oozes - on the "creature type", but not on "slime molds". Correct?
The BBEG has a bona fide 100% natural lookalike. Or even several who pretend in turn to be him while he stays invisible
Else have the BBEG go down under the first lethal attack whatever its damage. And he stays 100% dead. That should make the PCs properly paranoid for the whole campaign
You're running a rebel insurgency campaign, and every player approaches you outside of the game and tells you they want to secretly play a double agent working for the big evil empire.
I'd love to watch this blow up in their faces as, since they do not know the others work for the same empire they do, they sabatoge all the plans to backstab and inadvertently win the war for the rebellion!
Sometimes heroism is in what you do, not the reasons you did them. Four men defend a family from bandits.
The first does so simply because the family is in trouble. To him there is no greater goal then the protection of innocents.
The second does so because the bandits also killed his family. His rage demands vengeance, the family he protects is incidental to him.
The third does so because he wishes for death, but only against a worthy foe. He hopes one of these bandits proves to be skilled enough to end his life.
The fourth has been paid by another to safeguard the family. He thinks of nothing more then earning his gold.
Which of these four would the family thus protected consider a hero? Or would they all be heroes? For reasons both selfish and noble all four stepped in to save the family. But the fact remains that regardless of why they did so, they did protect the family.
Or consider the caravan guard. Is there fending off danger any less self sacrificing for the fact they were paid to do so?
Or the fifth defender, who does it because he's polishing his combat skills, perfecting his technique, and currently needs to work on "fighting multiple enemies". There is no other available fights in the area...
You kidding Jason? The merc would be going along cause they got paid to go along. As for the faction zelots, well, obviously there is thought to be something to gain.
Other than loot, we never seem to get PAID though - I mean other than in the First Steps thingy - but even then, if we hadn't "liberated" the meds from the orphanage/sick house we might not have even broken even. (Ever notice the scroll of remove disease on that chronicle? Wonder where it came from? Yep, the PCs "acquire" it from the orphanage)
Well - I guess there was that Warehouse of stuff too... But that hardly counts. Most of that stuff was rotting and falling into the bay!
And the silver dagger - but hay she gave it to us!
Oh...And the stuff from those bodies in that ally. They clearly didn't need all that stuff anymore - and it WAS just laying there to be picked up... And anyway, they jumped us, so it was fair pickings.
But in that one we did get paid by the Paladin Lady - for checking out the old witch in the orphanage.
Glad you brought this up - on the pregen side it was one of the problems that was solved when "you can assign it to a new character #" was originally allowed. Hadn't thought of this consequence with playing the actual PC. I guess since you have your group doing this, they'll just have to share resources for a raise.
Regardless, it's unlikely enough to happen that you need to plan/worry about it.
four players of 2nd level PCs look down at 4 dead PCs...
Player A: "Well - if we all chip in, maybe we can bring Jo back - she had a couple 7th level CRs on her Barbarian." Player B:"Heck, the gold for this one is only a fraction over 400 - so even if she sells all our stuff she's not going to have enough for a Raise Dead, let alone the Restorations..." Player C: "Who was it suggested we play this Evergreen anyway? Player D: "On the bright note - you can only play this with a 2nd level PC once. So this will never happen to us again."
You know what, I give up. If you want to work in vague irrational terms and then say I'm not understanding you, arguing with you is just going to waste my time. I already explained to you in detail how the material in UI doesn't change how it was already supposed to work. Apparently you're just terrified of table variation, and think we should avoid anything that could maybe possibly eventually sorta lead to it.
This post reminds me of a series about potion sponge. One poster would say "... but this item is changing how we are doing it now!" and the other would say "It doesn't change how it works! You were just doing it wrong before!"....
yeah - the two of you don't see each others view point at all.
and I know it's a real bad idea to post this... now both sides are likely to be targeting me...
Zyphus! Accidental Death, mildly suicidal Cultists, and a Heavy Pick!
No Oblivion Inquisition, unfortunately. But their chief weapon is surprise!
Surprise and fear!
ok, before someone else drops in with it... or the world implodes and sucks us all into the void..
"No one expects the Oblivion Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise, fear and surprise; two chief weapons, fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency! Er, among our chief weapons are: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, and near fanatical devotion to House Thrune!... eeer, or was that the Grim Harvestman? "
Did OP ever get a source for Golarion naming conventions? I must've missed it in this wall, no...bastion of text.
I'm actually not sure there should be one that covers all names. Or even a majority for that matter. If the real world is any indication (and in it we only have one race of creatures giving things names - that we know of), any "source" we point at will be wrong.
