Bruno Kristensen's page

@Mark: Bring a lot of water :D

Knowledge: History: 1d20 + 7 ⇒ (9) + 7 = 16

Knowledge: Geography: 1d20 + 3 ⇒ (13) + 3 = 16

Sense Motive: 1d20 + 0 ⇒ (13) + 0 = 13

Ooh ...

I'm in Copenhagen today and tomorrow - I'll finish my character and make a profile during the weekend.

So honored to be invited to this group adventure. I must say, it has been a long time since I've rolled the bones and swung the steel. What better time then now to shake off the mental rust, stretch these old limbs and take up my dice and blades once again. To that end, I can attempt playing Diorio, a Swashbuckling youth fleeing Absalom after being wrongly accused in the murder of his maestro, who declined imparting the secret of the unstoppable thrust to one of his wealthy, yet nefarious students. Homeless, without a patron and maestro, I must now seek the means to stay alive, learn the secrets of the blade, and one day avenge my maestro's death and restore my honor....something like that. Admittedly not too original, but now I can try playing virtually what I have played at in real life (minus the murderous intrigue).

I will definitely have to brush up on the PF1 rules again

That's exactly like my backup character!

Bruno: Indus sounds thematically perfect, nice call. Love the medallion.

Thanks! As a start I consider it a focus for my Archeologist's Luck - it was fate that made me notice it and pick it up.

I'm also considering the Rogue Talent that gives Psychic Sensitivity later, and the medallion could have something to do with that as well. But nothing is set in stone.

I briefly entertained the idea of a ranger or paladin based on the medjai from The Mummy as well. If Phrip feels very strongly about being a tomb rob... archeologist, I could go that route instead :)

Greetings one and all!

Looking forward to being a player after having been relegated to DM and father for the past six or so years!

I'm still working on my character, but the rough outline is as follows:

Indus Ionaeus, a young Taldan male, son of a scholar who came to Wati a few years ago to study Osirion's culture. Through his father's long obsession with the country and culture of Osirion, Ionaeus has developed a knack for architecture, traps and old languages. Shortly after landing in Wati, he found a simple medalion, and though it doesn't appear to be magical, he considers it a lucky charm of sorts. He carries a sword at his side as well as a whip, and to protect his eyes from the harsh sun he wears a broad-brimmed leather hat ... da da da daaaa, da da dah!

Human/Bard (Archeologist) heading towards the Whip Mastery feat chain.

Detect Magic isn't that great. First round, you sense if there's magic in the area of effect, second round the number and strength of each aura, and finally in the third round you can pinpoint each.

So the wizard using mislead can move away from the area of effect before you pinpoint him. Or use a powerful spell to kill you or something completely different. Remember that if Spellcraft allows him to determine the spell he casts it also allows him to identity what you are casting

I don't think anyone is in favor of a "nuke & start over" new edition, but I for sure would like a Pathfinder 1.5, where all the errata had been taken in, where some of the feats are dropped or amended, where there is perhaps not 40+ base classes with 10+ archetypes per class, etc.

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Uh... how is this Trans vs Not Trans?

Person T emphasizes her Transgenderism all the time, uses the group, most notably and formerly Person A, as her outlet for her frustrations. The trans issue is actually one of the reasons why the two are deteriorating.

She will complain about trans stuff, and he will retort with a remark suggesting that this isn't the time or the place to be talking about her issues.
This just makes her angry. She actually called him "cis scum" last game after a particularly cold exchange between the two.

I have been in a similar situation. A former friend of mine is gay (and/or transgender, not entirely sure), and everything she does and says is about being gay. She only watches TV shows with gay characters, she always plays gay characters in RPGs and all her posts are about being gay.

Now, I have no problem with gay people, plenty of my other friends are gay, but they are not "only" gay. They don't identify as solely being gay. They are gay AND academics, or gay AND nerds, or gay AND artists, etc.

In your situation, if Person T "only" brings her Trans issues to the table and nothing else, I can understand Person A saying something like "I don't want to hear about/deal with your trans issues all the time".

This would be the same if a friend was a big sports fan and all they brought to the gaming table was talking about sports, or if they were politically active and all they brought to the table was political stuff.

Of course, Person A may have been a bit rough in his way of saying this, but best suggestion is they have a chat away from the table and find out if this is what is happening.

I'd say two awakened animals (of the same species, obviously) might be able to produce awakened (or at least semi-awakened) offspring, but that the genetic strain would wash out in a few generations, resulting in ever more "stupid" generations, until it was back to normal animal intellect.

It'd be awesome to play an awakened animal, I think. Maybe a raven rogue or something.

Back in 2nd Edition I ran a short campaign where everyone had to be a wizard (though multi-classing was allowed), representing an Arcane Academy and being sent out to deal with various arcane issues. Was quite fun.

Game Master wrote:

Grazing would count as foraging - you can't graze if you're spending 12 hours exploring every corner of a hex. If they want to go at half speed though, that's a good consideration - I'd allow any plains hexes to feed the horses as though they auto-succeeded on their survival checks to forage.

Even without half-speed, I'd probably allow your basic horses and mules to auto-succeed. Exploring a hex is probably not going to be about constant riding and movement. There will be plenty of stops for snacks, to scan the area (and maybe even jot down details) from a vantage point, and other elements of rest that a horse should be able to forage just fine.

I'd consider requiring anyone owning a warhorse (or pony) to buy feed, though. That should be a higher maintenance animal.

A warhorse will die or at least deteriorate pretty quickly, if it only gets grass, though.

Sounds interesting.

I'd be interested in playing. Current idea for character is some kind of forester/lumberjack with high strenght, constitution and some wilderness skills.

I know how CDGs work. I'm trying to find out how Invisibility affects a sleeping sentry's chances of waking up as the would-be coup de gracer is sneaking up to him.

As for the coup the grace question. Invisible or not, a sleeping creature is already subject to a coup de grace. Invisibility should grant them a +2 to hit in any non-coup de grace attack.

Thanks for the answers. The Coup De Grace question was in regards to them hearing the person approaching, thus waking up and no longer being subject to CdG :)

Hi ye mighty boards,

I have a question about a situation that is very likely to come up in my next game session, and I apologize if it has been asked a gazzillion times before.

Let us imagine a group of adventurers with invisibility spells running while infiltrating an enemy stronghold.

As per the spell, they get +20 to Stealth (or +40 if not moving), but the spell also says it doesn't silence them in any way.

How would that affect a sentry's chances of detecting them sneaking by on the other side of a door, or otherwise out of sight? My reading is, that since there's no visual detecting possible, invisibility does not benefit the party (though the door does give a good bonus).

How about if they try to sneak up on a sleeping guard and coup de grace him? He's also not using his eyes, as he is sleeping (and already taking a -10 penalty on Perception checks). My reading here is, that invisibility also doesn't provide any bonus to the party.

Thanks in advance :)

Core Rulebook 2nd Edition

I'm probably taking a break from Pathfinder to explore 5th edition, both because I want to give the new system a test run and a real chance, and because I'm momentarily fatigued by Pathfinder. Guess what, that happens in almost all genres, hobbies, etc. and is not a sign that X sucks, just that versatility is good. I also play more than one board game or computer game, and even my most favorite game gets momentarily boring, if I don't play anything else once in a while.

What I've seen of 5th so far, it is the best edition Wizards have published so far FOR ME. Does it make it better than PF? No. It makes it different.

But while we are at the topic of editions, I'm one of the (maybe few) people who wouldn't mind seeing a Pathfinder Second Edition in 2-3 years. Not necessarily a completely new version, but something where the many options have been tuned, combined and collected in fewer places. Without using the Internet (thanks pfsrd) or HeroLab, it is currently very difficult to have a perspective of all the many (and wonderful) options available to you.

Anyways, this isn't a critique of the people working at Paizo, who do an amazing job.

I've been toying with giving everybody the three following feats (whether they have to meet the preregs to use them I haven't decided yet):

Combat Expertise
Deadly Aim
Power Attack

Basically, these are just options that you can take on your turn, not special training. I am considering making a lower quality version available for free and then making them available as "Improved", but that doesn't remove the feat tax.

Have also been toying with the idea of folding Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization into one feat - sure, that'd give non-fighters access to a +2 bonus to damage, but I hardly think that is what makes or breaks the fighter.

Oh, them feels!

The amount of time spent playing the old games, while listening to my one "modern" musik cassette (yes, this was before CDs became mainstream) of Roxette...

We are officially old...

I'm fairly confident there will be a PF 2.0 at some point. I see Advanced Class Guide as a kind of test balloon, looking at alternative ways to make some of the old classes (especially Investigator, Slayer and War Priest). However, I don't think we'll actually get 2.0 for at least 4-5 years. And that's a good thing in my opinion.

I like PF, though I am beginning to feel a bit overloaded with material. Options are good, but when you sit down to make a character, you either must 1) have a ton of books, 2) use the SRD or 3) use HeroLab or similar. My hope is that the SRD and HeroLab (or similar) will be supported even more in the future, and I think it is logical to assume it will be. More and more people are using electronics (iPads, tablets, laptops) in their games, which makes it easier to look up feats, spells, classes, etc. I'm happy that Paizo allows most content to be available on the SRD, and one thing that would make me drop PF would be an abandonment of this policy. I'll happily shell out the money for the PFD, the HeroLab data pack and occasionally the physical book, it it really appeals to me, but not having an e-version of the information would be a deal breaker.

I did it back in 3.0, and it works ok, but as mentioned, you have to reinforce the gritty nature of the WHF setting for it to truly work. E6 or E8 would work towards this end.

Several of the classes fit exceptionally well into WHF: Alchemist, Inquisitor and Gunslinger

I think it would be a good idea, but yeah, requires either secret roll or other "fix"

Or start at PB10 but give them 1 point per level, until they are PB15...perhaps justify it by having them all be teenagers.

Thanks...that's the one!

Hi

Once upon a time, around the release of 3.0, there was a scenario in Dungeon Magazine that I'm trying to find.

The adventure had the players enter some goblin caves to find a sword, I think, only to have an earthquake hit the region just as the players were to make their way out...

If anyone can point me to the name of the scenario and/or the issue of Dungeon, I would be a happy camper...

Another important question, and someone may have mentioned it...but isn't the druid just paying a prostitute to let him/her indulge in some "light" sado-masochistic fun? Not that it does anything to me, sexually, but I'm pretty sure that most people who engage in SM/Bondage are not Chaotic Evil...

Note that "golden coins and jewels" will be basically worthless until you get a proper civilization going (unless of course they can be turned into tools or weapons somehow).

Color Spray creates light, unless the physics of the campaign setting varies greatly from our world (and yes, using the laws of physics in a world with magic can be dangerous), as different colors are different wave lenghts of light.

Paladin's are such a beacon of good, that just their Aura can convert men of lesser standing to lead better lives. And taking the winnings from gambling is something that is morally ambiguous. Ergo, a Paladin should be conflicted by it.

Why is taking the winnings from gambling any more morally ambiguous than taking the money from winning an arm wrestling competition or doing a job?

I'm really curious here. Poker (which is what he was playing) is a game of skill. Do you think that using skill to win is generally morally ambiguous, or is it just games of skill that is so?

I once ran an introduction game for 10 mildly to moderately mentally retarded kids age 10-12.

What I did was create fairly iconic but simple characters and give them some simplified character sheets with their options spelled out. E.g. a Fighter who could attack or attack hard (he had weapon focus, toughness and power attack), so the player should only decide between hitting or hitting hard, or a ranger with the ability to shoot twice (weapon focus and rapid shot - yes, I broke the prerequisites a little, but this was easier, as I handwaved position in combat).

All of them grasped it really well and had fun, and the kid who played the rogue quickly found out that being a rogue is all about stealing the treasure from the other players.

My point is, if these could do it, your kid with her good reading abilities and fair grasp of math should have no problems.

***And if the word mentally retarded offense anyone, I'm sorry, but that's the medical term according to my dictionary***

Because technically, the thug isn't surprised...he's maybe a little confused over the fact that the Kensai knew he was coming, but still...

If the Kensai can't see his opponent, he can't charge him (except by blindly picking a square, running up and attacking with at least 50% miss chance.

What the Kensai CAN do is ready an attack ("if I get attacked, I'll whack the fool"), which will happen after the thug charges, but before he rolls his attack roll.

Seems very Kensai-y to me...

Looks good, though I will probably be more true to Pathfinder Rules, as most of my players haven't played the original game :)

I have indeed, Fomsie. Played Blood Bowl for a while and loved it.

It could be fun to run a "League" as a PbP game. Players making teams and meeting other teams, scoring goals, etc. and gaining xp.

Not a bad idea, Haruhiko

I can find the list of skills, yes :)

I was also thinking of using the Performance Combat feats heavily, maybe even grant all players a bonus Performance Combat feat.

I'm thinking a field size of 15 x 20 squares...that means 100 feet from end to end.

For Passing I was thinking the ball is a thrown weapon with range increment 20' (technically should be more, but to actually have "range penalties" matter, I think that's good.

Passing while threatened will obviously provoke, unless you have a feat that allows ranged attacks without provoking. If you Pass to a player who is threatened, you take -4 (firing into melee) and possibly cover penalties.

I like the idea of catching being Sleight of Hands - DC should probably be something like 10 or 15 + 4 if threatened + range penalty on the Pass (to reflect whether the Pass was accurate or not) + cover

I've long toyed with an idea for a Pathfinder campaign.

The essential idea is that a game similar to Blood Bowl exists, e.g. American Football with a lot of beating your opponents to a pulp.

The PCs will be part of a team of "BB"-players, traveling around from match to match, having encounters both on and off the field.

Ideally about 50% of the "combat" encounters will be matches, while the rest will be a variety of bar brawls, being ambushed by fans of opposing teams, etc.

But I'm a bit stuck on some rules.

Tackling is Trip or Grapple.

Taking the ball from an opponent is Disarm and/or Steal.

Throwing is probably just a ranged attack, but what about catching said ball?

All ideas are welcome...

I think that greatly depends on setting/mood of the campaign.

In my games, I tend to go for 3)

Anyone with PC class levels is a cut above the mold...even a 1st level fighter is something more than the 5th level warrior, for instance...less experienced, but with greater potential.

While Metric is much better for the real world, leagues, furlongs, inches, pounds and yards are the stuff of Tolkien, Lewis, Robert and the rest, and belongs in Fantasy RPGs, IMHO.

Does the Pathfinder Society guidelines specifically allow dice apps? If not, I guess any DM would be allowed to say "Sorry, we use physical dice. If you didn't bring any, I have a spare set you can use."

Haven't read the AP, so can't comment specifically, but that sounds really awesome and I'd run with it. Make things difficult in Sandpoint, so the players had to work to regain the favor of the town and turn Ameiko over to their side again.

Thanks, so just to be sure, the cleric won't be able to know there's an invisible creature somewhere in the area just based on Deathwatch?

Hi,

A Question arose in our CC game tonight, where the Cleric used Deathwatch while encountering an invisible undead.

Deathwatch states:

"Using the powers of necromancy, you can determine the condition of creatures near death within the spell's range. You instantly know whether each creature within the area is dead, fragile (alive and wounded, with 3 or fewer hit points left), fighting off death (alive with 4 or more hit points), healthy, undead, or neither alive nor dead (such as a construct). Deathwatch sees through any spell or ability that allows creatures to feign death."

It doesn't say that you must be able to actually "see" the creatures, thus suggesting that you would know where the invisible undead creature was and therefore at least know which square to attack (with a 50% miss chance).

Is that a reasonable reading? Or how would they interact?

Hehe, thanks Gorbacz...I enjoyed that read...I think I fall in somewhere between the two...both age wise and otherwise...

I'm playing an archeologist with a heavy repeating crossbow and the vital strike feat looking at one +24 to hit, 2d10+13 attack every round, more or less all day long (27 rounds of archeologist's luck, in 3-round increments) should be enough for most situations.

Would I be able to do more damage with a ranged combattant? Sure. But it is decent and it is one of those instance where VS is not, IMO a trap. And before someone says I'd be able to do better average damage using rapid shot, etc., no, not likely. I'm using two other feats that preclude more than one attack per round (Focused Shot and Bullseye Shot), which contribute +4 to hit and currently +5 to damage)...

His damage will improve immensely on my next level (where I get Deadly Aim for another +6 damage), and by level 15 I'll be looking at +30 to hit and 3d10+26 damage, with crits on 17-20 for another 1d10+26 damage...

I must say, I've never experienced rangers being "weaker fighters".

Why wouldn't they?

Spell Combat:

"At 1st level, a magus learns to cast spells and wield his weapons at the same time. This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast. To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand. As a full-round action, he can make all of his attacks with his melee weapon at a –2 penalty and can also cast any spell from the magus spell list with a casting time of 1 standard action (any attack roll made as part of this spell also takes this penalty)."

Haste:

"When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon."

While the second bolded part might indicate that it isn't possible, the first says it works much like two-weapon fighting, and Haste works fine with TWF.

Option 3 for the reasons stated above

Channel Energy heals more targets, including enemies, unless you invest in the proper feats. They take a Standard action.

Paladins can heal one target with Lay on Hands, either as a Standard or Swift action, depending on target (ally or himself, respectively).

I've learned one thing from this thread:

Geno is not welcome in any game I run or play in...

Ok, two things:

I should stop being surprised by the Internet...