Concordia's page

Organized Play Member. 95 posts. 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

DISCLAIMER: read the playtest, but didn't play it. That being said, this is exactly what I feel when reading the manual: every character seems to be the same.

It's like that in Starfinder (everybody shoots the same guns, does the same things, and can pilot as good or even better as the Ace pilot...). It was also the thing with D&D 4.0, which lead us to PF in the first place.

It seems oversimplified. I don't want a game that is simple. I'll wait for the actual rules to come out. But so far, this seems dull and I'm sticking to my first opinion: this is simply for the share owners' shares to get a boost.

I don't even see any creativity in this. Seems only to be change for a change.

Sorry. To each his own, but this is not for me.

Edit: I *again* quoted the wrong post. So removed the quote. But point is the same.

Sorry about that.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
What if I like that 2nd Ed?
Wait... are you complaining because you might actually like what they are building???

No: complaining about the money-milking scheme that this is.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Erdrix wrote:
Concordia wrote:

I am not excited at all by this. I know I'll get thrashed by saying so, but I think the game is perfect as it is now.

This is purely and simply a consumering scam to get more of our money. I bought almost all of the hardcovers for "PF1", do you think I'll do it again? Sure as hell not!

I won't jump on that bandwagon.

Luckily your hardcovers won't turn to dust upon 2e's release and can still enjoy them.

Right, but won't be supported anymore (as of 2019, if I read correctly). What if I like that 2nd Ed? No way I'm buying a new Core Rulebook (70 Canadian $), another Campaign and GM guide, and 5 or 6 Monster manuals...

Skill system probably won't be the same, feats won't be the same, combat is already determined to not work the same way.

Sovereign Court

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not excited at all by this. I know I'll get thrashed by saying so, but I think the game is perfect as it is now.

This is purely and simply a consumering scam to get more of our money. I bought almost all of the hardcovers for "PF1", do you think I'll do it again? Sure as hell not!

I won't jump on that bandwagon.

Sovereign Court

I hope the guys that put on Yet Another Pathfinder Character Generator come up with something similar.

As much as good looking Hero Lab is, it is kind of expensive.

Fred

Sovereign Court

shaventalz wrote:
Torbyne wrote:

Berselius, shaventalz,

You are missing the rules interactions that make this a big deal for niche builds. a falchion in the polearm group lets you grab Shield Brace and get a shield on a two handed crit build. Any weapon added to the Monk group has a bunch of weird interactions with unchained monks, anything added to the close group becomes a brawler weapon. the book has barely hit the shelves and a bunch of weird corner cases are popping up, for instance: Someone has already figured out how to dual wield Butcher's axes as if the off hand was light and the main hand was one handed. Add in enlarge person or living monolith with impact weapons and this book will let you dual weild two 6D6 weapons.

I actually brought up the distinction between the monk weapon group and weapon quality in the product discussion thread.

I saw the bit about shield brace, too, but is that worth a couple more feats? I mean, Shield Brace, Shield Focus, and I think Modifier Weapon Proficiency (falchion). 3 feats to be able to use your shield with a specific modified weapon (and losing two-handed damage bonuses). Fairly neat, but too expensive and coming online too late for my tastes. Why not just use a Samurai with a katana?

You really want your players to wield two 6D6 weapons in your quest?

I don't.

Sovereign Court

Meh. I'll read the book, but to me, spending a feat to wield a weapon you already know how to wield is too much.

I'd rather wait a few treasures and spend the money on a magic item. Who knows: I might even find that magic weapon I'm looking for!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Thanks everyone!

He'll be happy to learn that!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Hi guys,

The rogue in our party had a question that we wanted to run by the Paizo community.

Halfling rogue. Fights with a small rapier. So far, no question.

What he would like to do though is wield his sling in his off-hand, thus being able to switch back and forth to the desired weapon.

GM thinks this is two-weapon fighting, thus needing the required feats or applying the -4/-8 (a sling is light) penalties.

Rogue argues that a fighter with a shield doesn't suffer two-weapon fighting penalties. This is right until he shield bashes, right?

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Bonjour !

A question arose during our last session:

Does a rogue with Uncanny Dodge is still flat-footed when failing an Acrobatic check to move through a threatened area or those the passage that says "using Acrobatics in this way, you are considered flat-footed and lose your Dexterity bonus to your AC (if any)" only applies to the moving on "narrow surfaces and uneven ground without falling" bit.

(Uncanny Dodge says she can't be caught flat-footed.)

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

ShoulderPatch wrote:
No. Nothing in either Heroism or G.Heroism modifies the roll regarding spell resistance.

Thank you!

Sovereign Court

Hi there!

Are the bonuses granted by Heroism/Greater Heroism affect rolls to beat SR?

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Forthepie wrote:
I think his question is not what reader to use for pdf, but how to get the rules in a pdf format without buying them all over again (he has the books). Is that correct?

It's a bit of both, actually: somme I would rebuy in pdf format, especially for images. Some I might be happy with the PFR app.

Thanks all! Greatly appreciated! If you have other tips, keep 'em coming!

Fred

Sovereign Court

DISCLAIMER: I know it's been covered before, but there are 1387 topics with iPad, the ones I read didn't make it for me or were 3 years old! Sorry!

Hello everyone!

I just received an iPad and since I'm tired of bringing 12 books to the table, I was wondering what apps to use to read the Pathfinder pdf books.
I am more than willing to rebuy my whole collection in pdf, but I'm a complete noob with a tablet and don't know where to start/what to download.

So what is the best reader, how do you use your iPad, what are the steps I should follow? If someone would be so kind to take me by the hand and show me the way, I'd be really grateful!

Fred

Sovereign Court

There you go!

This is what happens when you don't read thoroughly your rules!

Sorry guys... :s

Sovereign Court

So no new save, even for intelligent Undead?

Sovereign Court

Hey everyone!

Do turned Undead resume attacking if they are the target of a hostile action?

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Is this sale over? I know I had the email, but lost the keyword...

Sorry!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Thank you!

We'll limit it to only once, then.

Fred

Sovereign Court

That is the way we played it: cannot take any action, hence, cannot stop raging.

So he got all his bonuses/maluses associated with it.

It happened after a critical miss and we use the critical misses cards, so he was Dazed for 1-4 rnds, iirc.

Thanks guys!

Fred

Sovereign Court

So I hope a "rule guru" can clarify this then!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Can you select the Opposition Research Arcane Discovery as a feat multiple times? We can't clearly find an answer to this.

Fred

Sovereign Court

It happened last time we sat down for our session: the raging Barbarian got dazed.

Does he stop raging and begin to suffer the aftereffects or he just counts rounds while he's dazed?

Fred

Sovereign Court

Thank you!

That is how I read it as well.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Do their bonuses stack?

I'd say no, my mage would like it to be yes!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Darkholme wrote:
Weables wrote:
Why would rolls of pure 20 help? Natural 20s are not auto successes on skill checks like climb
Most people don't realize you can't critical or fumble on skill checks, and even the people I know who are aware of that, houserule it so that skill checks work like all the other rolls.

Then they're even worse than I thought: these spells make it impossible for almost all the encounters in the book to escape...

Sovereign Court

Brotato wrote:

So a couple of pit spells can take a couple of non-fliers out of the fight.

Black Tentacles + Stinking Cloud/Sirocco can take a small army out of the fight.

2 Confusions can make a small army fight itself.

1 Wall of Force can neatly bisect an enemy party.

The pit spells are nice, but they're not overpowered.

But do any of thses spells require a roll of 30 or 35 to get hit by or evade it?

This is where I think they're overpowered. Not in regards to these other spells, but in themselves, requiring too high rolls to not be instantly killed. These are not level 9 spells, they're levels 4 and 5.

Fred

Sovereign Court

I agree that enervation is great, but you still need to succeed an attack. Heck, a +3 Frost Battleaxe is also great, but you have to succeed your roll first!

And I know Create Pit is ordinary. It's higher level versions I'm speaking of. Acid and Hungry, in particular.

It's OK that part of the encounter creatures fall into them. Eliminates them for a couple of turns while we take care of the others. But I think it's a way too steep climb to get back out from it. How many levels 7-10 creatures that don't fly can succeed Climb checks of 30 and 35 without rolling 20s??? I'd be curious to know!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Skorn wrote:

The pit spells being discussed are 4th and 5th level spells. Lets look at other spells at 4th level. I'll let the reader mentally compare power levels. As long as these other spells are in the game I have to conclude that Pits are not broken.

4th level Core Book Spells
Black Tentacles (no save)
Confusion (area save or suck)
Enervation (no save)
Resilient Sphere (also a reflex save and no chance to climb out)

This is a bit rough for a comparison.

Black Tentacles, you get to oppose your CMD to a grapple check every round. Many a fighter would prefer that to a REF save;

Confusion, you get a save and if you fail it, you still have a 1 in 4 chance per round to act normally;

Enervation is a ray. The caster still have to succeed a range touch attack. Did he select Point blank shot and precise shot in order not to have a load of maluses in a melee? If so, great feats/spells choices. That's a well planned wizard you got.

Resilient Sphere does trap you, but it also protects you against the opposition. Agreed, your buddies might be dead when you get out and face the opposition, but at least, you'll have a chance to flee. You could even heal/protect/buff yourself while inside the sphere.

So sorry Skorn, these spells aren't merely as brutal as the pits.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Kieviel wrote:

Concordia-

I've played through that book and while the pits could be problematic for some encounters there are several big threats that just wouldn't fit into the pits.

A solution to the climb problem would be to just have the enemies carry rope and hooks. In a place with lots of ruins I don't see how it would be unbelievable at all for enemies to carry such equipment and it definitly wouldn't thro off the wealth levels of the party. Especially in that campaign.

That is something I planned to implement as soon as tonite, when we'll play our next session.

I admit I havent' read a lot of the 4th book, so the aforementionned problems could be overcome by then!

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

A couple of things:

We are also thinking of banning them, because:

a) I don't know which quests you guys are playing, but in Serpent skull book 3, there's absolutely nobody that can easily* avoid a DC 19 or 20 REF save, even the bosses. So imagine the other minions.

* (What we feel as an easy save situation is a modifier that gives you chances of succes of 50% or higher, which means in this cas, against that wizard, that you would need REF 10 or more. We don't see that a lot in this book.)

b) Once they're in the pit, nobody that doesn't fly IN THE WHOLE ADVENTURE can succeed Climb DCs of 30 and 35 on top of that. This requires four rolls of pure 20 in successive rounds. I'm not an odds maker, but isn't that a 1 in 160,000 chance to succeed?

c) Correct me if I'm wrong, but a large creature could fall in a 10X10 pit if a medium one can fall into a 5X5 trap, no? So it now takes a Huge or bigger creature to avoid this.

Finally, where's the rule regarding the impossibility of using dimension door or teleport in an extradimensional space? And, as I don't have the wording in front of me, does it say in the spell description that it is such a space that is created?

Many thanks for your inputs. It is, as always, enlightening.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Hy everyone!

We feel as a group that the various Pit spells are too strong. Anybody else find this?

We currently play a level 7-10 adventure (AP 3 of Serpent skulls), and we got a level 9 Wizard casting the pits.

The level 4 and 5 ones (Acid and Hungry Pits) are DC 19 and 20 respectively (Wizard INT = 20). Than, it's a Climb DC 30 to get out and you need 4 in a row ? That means that every encounter we play, once the creatures fail their initial rolls, I don't even bother playing them on their initiative, cause they all need 4 straight 20 climb rolls to get out.

(Then, by finishing their turn beside the pit, they would need to succeed another Ref save, right?)

With a Climb DC of 30, Acid Pit almost garantees that the creatures within it will be stuck at the bottom, for a free 2-12 acid damage at the end of their turn. So it's only a question of when they will die.

Hungry Pit, with its DC35, is quite frankly out of this world for a vast majority of creatures/PCs. So 4-24 damage every turn. Again: it's only a question of how many/how many potions they have.

If I reverse engineer this, and if I put a Level 9 wizard with the same spell list, I probably TPK them if they miss their original Ref save every time.

Now, PCs have way better saves and skill checks then encounters, I acknowledge that. But casting those spells unfairly tips the scale of the encounter.

Frankly, we find these spells rather dull and way too good. If you don't have access to flying device/spells or climbing device/spells, you're roasted.

Anybody else find them way too good and hard to save for their levels? Did you tweak them? Do we play them wrong?

Fred

Sovereign Court

They issued a newer version where this is fixed. Thanks guys!

Fred

Sovereign Court

@Abraham: yes, only a longbow, hence my question, since the character generator seems to apply my STR hindrance to the attack roll.

Sub question: I am using a buckler. It clearly states in the buckler description that you can use a buckler while wielding a bow without penalty. Have a missed an update on that rule or is it still the ruling?

Thanks guys, I really appreciate your inputs!

Fred

Sovereign Court

HI there!

I just built a ranger. She got STR 9 (I know...). BUT, she's got DEX 19! So, she's shooting a bow!

At level 1 (Base attack bonus +1) and Weapon focus: Longbow, shouldn't she have a +6 attack bonus? I didn't think the STR affected the attack rolls, only the damage ones. Am I right in thinking so?

We use sCoreForge for our character sheets, and it gives me a +5 only.

Who's right? Me or the Excel Character Generator? And if the answer is +5, can you pinpoint to the rule?

Thanks!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Thank you!

Fred

Sovereign Court

Can't find it in my downloads. Does it mean there's none yet?

Fred

Sovereign Court

Patrick McDade wrote:

BQ,

Finally, you're going to need A LOT of maps. I can't believe how little maps are given for what should have been a very, very cartography rich module. I bought the map-pack hoping that it would help and was sorely disappointed. That is the first product I bought from Paizo that I genuinely wanted my money back.

Definitely agree with this point. The mappack was a real flop for me. This is not what I thought I was buying and will thus no longer buy the map packs for the APs.

Fred

Sovereign Court

As a side note: is there a way to get notification when your posts are being replied to? Can't find it (hence, answering back 12 days later...).

Fred

Sovereign Court

Thank you all for your comments.

Again, I'm not saying it's not a good adventure path. I'm saying there's way too much work to do to make it enjoyable FOR ME.

I don't know how much time you got to prepare for running your adventures and I really wish I had as much as you do. But this is exactly why I went the "published" adventure road: I didn't have time to write my own like I used to do.

So that's all I'm saying: for someone who wants a "plug-and-play" adventure, this is surely not the one to buy.

Call it bad luck that I started my subscription with this one. I'll run Carrion Crown if I can, but for what I was looking for, this is a total failure. I want to know what the other factions are achieving, not play it!

Same things with the camps. This is a waste of time for me. They need supplies, they go buy some. They don't get there to see it's been run down by random encounters. No time for that.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Fraust wrote:
I would be careful with Jade Regeant too. Granted, I haven't read through it completely, but from the glances I've given it, looks like there are a lot of undefined areas durring the travel sections. You might have the same issues. Personally, I think you're overreacting and need to understand that a published adventure isn't going to give you every little single thing detailed and packaged...but as has been stated, some of the APs are more fill in the blank than others. From my understanding, Kingmaker, Serpent's Skull, and Jade Regeant are probably not going to be what you're looking for, and Second Darkness might cause problems too.

Well, I've run many adventures before, and never have I encountered one where I have that amount of work to do. Been DMing for roughly 20 years, bought many adventures during that time for 2nd Ed., 3rd Ed, 3.5 and even 4th Ed., this one is by far the least "complete".

So I don't know where you saw me overreact, but the way this feels for me, is that it maybe should have been a "campaign setting" instead of an adventure. Way too open to my taste.

@Tacticslion: the caravan is railroady, but you do have to roll for hundreds of RE or, otherwise, it becomes a useless series of "Four days later, you get to that point...". Anyway, it did become a boring series of rolls for us.

Thanks for the AP suggestions, I got Jade Reagent and Carrion Crown. Will look for Crimson Throne: many times I heard it was good.

Fred

Sovereign Court

@Big Bucket: I know all this. I just didn't want it. I wanted the adventure to be ready to run. I don't mind a few finishing touches, but that is way too much.

It's one thing to offer a few more options. It's a whole different thing to let the GM decide 50% of the adventure. For me, this is incomplete material.

@Dudemaster: Glad to hear it. I got both the CC and JR adventure path. Will see how it goes.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Hi guys!

We are soon beginning the third book of this adventure, and quite frankly, I'm disapointed.

I decided to subscribe to APs because I wanted to run already made adventures, but the thing is with this AP, I feel it's incomplete. I feel I must "do" several parts, not just read it and make sure I'm ready.

AS an example, in the second book, thw whole traveling part was a complete nightmare. Why impose on the GM to roll countless RE rolls? Why not just say on day X this happens, on day y this happens ?

The only choice I had was to roll all of them while preparing the adventure (what a boring series of rolls!), or have my players roll Morning-Midday-Evening-Night RE rolls, and then again for the next day. We just couldn't wait to get there!

And lastly, (I admit I haven't read books 4-6 yet), do you really feel there's a race? I surely don't. This is one huge part of this adventure (I think), and I really wish it would have been more detailed. "While your group does this, opposing factions discover this,this and that. If your group decides to explore there instead, then opposing factions discover this and that."

Are all APs built that way? Cause sincerely, if it is, I'll just stop spending that money.

I'm sad to write this, cause we were (and still are) really excited about the ruleset used by PFRPG, but this adventure, for us (and me as the GM particularly) is a huge disapointment.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Scott Betts wrote:


What makes you think that a single player RPG would see more financial success than an MMORPG?

I'm not an expert in the business, but can you name a MMO that made money recently?

DDO? Don't think so.
Warhammer? Don't think so.
Age of Conan? Don't think so.
DC Universe?...

Star Wars might fare well because of the fan base. I may be wrong: as stated, I'm no expert.

The thing I know though, is that in my "extended entourage" (a small sample of roughly a 100 friends and acquaintances), people are deserting MMOs and reminesce about the good old times playing Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Neverwinter Nights.

personnaly, I'd be more excited if it was a game à la Dungeon Hack than a MMO.

But as it's been said numeroulsy here: to each his own.

Fred

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Sutter wrote:
Berselius wrote:
Wait, your asking US to invest in this IDEA of yours? Isn't that a bit pretentious? I mean, asking the consumer to invest in an idea that they'll ultimately have to purchase anyways in order to play? It's like saying we want you to fund the production of OUR PRODUCT so that you can eventually spend even MORE MONEY to BUY the product we're having you FUND. Am I wrong on this? I sure as hell hope I am.
I think you misunderstood the post. The call for investors isn't a "hey, give us money so we can build this," or even a Kickstarter-style "donate and when it's done we'll give you something neat." This is a straight-up investment, like buying stock in any company. No altruism required.

If it was a single player game, à la Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale, as others stated, I'd be pinching in right away.

For a MMO, no thank you.

Fred

Sovereign Court

Lisa Stevens wrote:
Oguleth wrote:

Oh, I don't know why I didn't ask in my last post...

Any particular reason you wanted to do an MMO and not a single player game?

As I have said numerous times in the past, when it comes to the video and computer game markets, it all comes down to who comes to us with an idea. Ryan came asking about doing an MMO. If he would have came asking about a single player game, we probably would be announcing that instead today. Doing an MMO doesn't rule out doing a single player game also. It is just that nobody has come knocking on our door asking to do one.

-Lisa

I'm knocking!

Sorry to rain on your parade, but MMOs don't cut it for me. I would have by far prefered a great single player game instead of a game that will, inevitably, be compared to WoW.

Every MMO I've played since Wow are either a pale copy or unplayable, since the company issuing them wanted so much to be different from it.

Sorry, but I'll pass on this one.

Fred Daigle

Sovereign Court

Hi guys!

If I have Dex12 and buy myself nice Gauntlets of Dexterity +2, can I choose Dodge as a feat (Min. req. Dex13) ?

Fred

Sovereign Court

@Jenner: Very good point, I'll try transforming some of them into Barbarians, or even archery rangers.

Fred

Sovereign Court

As I feared, even against a party of 4, the 3-member parties of Charau-Kas proved highly ineffective.

I tried adding a fourth one to no avail. Only real challenge cam when I added a Chemosit to the Charau-kas.

I admit the bosses look good, but I'll definitely add a second Girallon.

As I said, I don't know where I missed something, but this is just not enough.

Do you guys allowed your players to better equip themselves with their money or did you limit them to what they found in the books?

Fred

Sovereign Court

The Girallon is good, I like it and is quite challenging. We encountered a couple in random encounters and it was a fun fight.

But for the Charau-kas, I don't agree. Through a combination of feats, equipment and ability scores, most of the party is AC23 to 25. That means the Charau-Kas will hit only 15% of the time (18+), for 1-4+2 damage? +1-6 of fire damage near the tar pits? My tanks have over 70 HP (the lucky Barbarian, who is level 7 and CON 18, is nearing 100). Even with the ambushes, I give them 2 rnds max, with little risks for the party.

I'll give them a chance tonite though: we are entering Tazion. So I'll see how it goes with the traps, but I'll but 4 per patrol. There's no way 3 of them can do the trick!

As a sidenote: the end battles usually are challenging so far, so I don't tweek them too much. I also always max out encounters HP, I don't know if I mentionned this before.

Thanks for the input guys, I'll let you know how it goes.

Fred

1 to 50 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>