DMingNicholas's page

I am running Kingmaker in Montana in the year 1871. The whole thing has a claim the west vibe with gunslingers, card cheats and ladies of ill repute.

The big changes are the inclusion of guns everywhere from Ultimate Combat and setting changes to the races. Elves have become Native Americans. Humans are Western Europeans. Dwarves are Slavic. Halflings are Africans. Gnomes are Asians.

Did not read any other responses to avoid being influenced.

1. B

2. A

3. C

4. A

5. A

SHORT ANSWER:

If this was a movie about actual Norse gods I would have had an objection to it, but the characters were aliens who the Norse simply confused with gods. I was waiting for an explanation of why they look human at all. There are two possibilities: through convergent evolution they came out to look like humans, which means they could easily have some of the same variances, or they somehow change their looks to mimic humans, in which case Heimdall simply likes the look. In either case it did not detract from the movie for me and the actor did a good job at the role.

The Beast Bonded Witch archetype in UM caught my eye, particularly the transfer feats ability they get. But for the life of my I can't figure out what feats I would rather give my familiar than take for myself.

Any suggestions please?

I'm not sure that needs a save, since it requires you to hit the target with the bomb.

Needing to succeed at a ranged touch attack, particularly at higher levels, is no substitute for a saving throw.

James Smith 870 wrote:

Its in common lore that it is dishonarble to use a bow against a knight or worthy oponent.

Says who?

That's a dumb restriction.

He's right that there is a historical precedent for archers as cowardly. Going as far back as the Iliad, Paris fights with a bow because he lacks the honor to fight in the fray. Of course the archers as dishonorable stereotype at that time is aided by their common use of poison.

That said, I don't think is should be outright banned for Paladins. You can fight honorably with a bow just like you can fight dishonorably with a sword.

I literally cheered at the mention of an Extra Evolution feat for Summoners. That class is seriously lacking in good feats and playing one now has made me twice as eager for this book.

Why? The Shadow would be LG. It shares your alignment.

It is still an undead creature, I can see the argument that having an undead servant is inherently naughty. In fact, from the SRD description of Shadows: this wisp of shadow is vaguely humanoid in outline and writhes with unholy life.

Still, if it came up in my game I would have no problem reflavoring the Shadow as something less outright evil. I think it being just an animate shadow fits the class better anyway.

I'm not aware of an explicit rule, but I would say they don't get any extra proficiency. They do get the advantage of a bit more flexibility in their domain choices.

Letting the player choose any weapon would be a major advantage, particularly considering the sub-optimal favored weapons of most of the deities.

EDIT: and seekerofshadowlight raises the excellent point that some deity choices carry no extra proficiency at all.

Not a dedicated character sheet program, but I use PDF Expert for all my sheets. It is a PDF program that lets you draw and type notes onto the document. It syncs to Dropbox to transfer sheets without needing to plug in the iPad.

Here I come, swooping in to revive this thread again. Has the position been filled yet? I noticed that it is still up on the job opportunities page.

I am trying to stay on the good side of the line between persistence and pestering, but that can be hard to measure sometimes.

Now, how do you feel that the GMs buddy get's the exact same experience you do for no effort?

I don't view experience as a wage I receive for showing up to the game. The game play itself is the reward for showing up and by putting more into it than that lax player, I am getting more out. I get drawn into the story more. My character gets spotlight time and the ability to shape the plot. I get to witness and share the party's triumphs and failures. That is the experience I want and what someone who doesn't buy in isn't getting.

Has there been any movement on filling this position?

I understand that the hiring process at Paizo is a very cautious one. I just want to know if I should be pushing and follow up further or if I am already out of the running.

They may just be reading off the full description. If it is not a spell they cast often they may need a refresher on the details. Doesn't mean the player didn't chose the spell in advance.

My iPad is a multipurpose tool at my gaming table. It is my character sheet, initiative tracker and quick reference device.

Even so, when I'm reading new information from an RPG book I would rather have a physical copy without question. For one thing, while novels tend to have their text sized blow up by going to digital (or even better, changeable size and font) the large format of RPG books actually gets squished down on the screen. I also find it much more intiutive to be able to read a class, flip to a referenced feat while keeping my finger in the class and then easily return to where I was.

Tactile sensations and the whole of literary history are hard forces to overcome. As much as I love my iPad, it would take serious changes in how the PDF are done to get me to switch.

Depends on if you are into 4th ed or not, but I do like the D&D podcast on wizards.com.

There are plenty of other actual play podcasts floating around out there. RPGMP3.com has a community of folks podcasting their campaigns and one-off games. There are recordings there of World's Largest Dungeon, Rolemaster, 4e, Warlords of the Accordlands and lately the site has been struck by Pathfinder fever.

I run a Kingmaker game on that site under the name Strand Gamers.

Summoning a Satyr (they are CN by the way) requires a 7th level druid (4th level spell) or the Animal Domain for a Cleric.

The Summon Nature's Ally granted by the animal domain is limited to animals only. Satyrs are fey so a cleric still couldn't summon one.

I'm trying to figure out how he was able to summon a satyr at all. Unless I am very mistaken, that's only on the Summon Nature's Ally list which is only for druids or rangers. Even if he house ruled that the cleric had the animal domain (which is not on Lamashtu's list) he is still limited to using it to summon animals.

A summoner could pull it off as a standard action with his SLA, but again, no Summon Nature's Ally, no satyr.

How does he feel about fey? Melianse the nixie has a rocking charisma. My group made her the ruler, but didn't quite anticipate how stubborn and manipulative she would be in the role.

I think it would be cool to enter a sort of spell state. Perhaps something like a number of rounds equal to int mod a day where your spells are quickened and empowered while channeling them through a weapon.

I struggle to understand why are you being so arrogant and dismissive. The designer himself stated that it is something he considered and is still considering.

And your arguement to "name the other class" makes no sense. It is like saying bards should not changed to allow them to sustain songs as a free action because name the other class that provides bonuses by singing. Casting in melee is what magus do. I can understand why you think free Combat Casting might be overpowered, but not why you find the idea to be pure madness.

So does the fighter get weapon focus at first level? That's pivotal to hitting stuff and is a requirement to specialization at 4th. Also does the wizard get Combat casting because all he does is cast?

A wizard can go his whole career without casting in melee if he is careful. A fighter might switch between melee and ranged frequently or use a variety of weapons against different foes. Casting in close combat is the primary focus of the magus, so it is not a crazy idea that it would get Combat Casting.

I like the Magus thus far, but I think the first part of the True Magus is basically mechanically pointless.

"Whenever he uses his spell combat ability, he does not need to make a concentration check to cast the spell defensively."

Since this is a level 20 ability there is no need to worry about multi-classing or those kinds of interactions.

The Magus maxes out at 6th level spells and no longer takes a penalty on his concentration when using spell combat. Therefore his maximum concentration DC is 27 (15+6x2). For concentration checks at level 20 when he gets this power he is already adding caster level (+20)and the lowest ability score mod required to cast the spell (+3 for level 6 spells, +2 for level 5 and 4, and so on).

Assuming he was the worst Magus in the world and had only the minimum int required to cast level 6 spells and took no feats, traits or class abilities to boost his concentration he would still only fail his hardest concentration checks on a roll of 3 or lower.

Even a worse Magus who lacked the int to cast 6th level spells, only 5th would need a 2 or 1 to fail his hardest concentration checks.

I can understand it flavor-wise, but mechanically it really provides no boost to anyone playing a decent Mangus

If the GM had a problem with that character's backstory (which I can understand why he would), he should have dealt with it at character creation. At that point the player would be obliged to work with the GM to alter the character or make a new one. Letting the character into play for a long time and then springing the changes on the player seems like a power trip to me.

Giving the player that magic axe seems perfectly reasonable, but if my character felt the axe was a curse he would do his best to get it removed. If the GM completely blocks that effort then I would tell him politely that it is not something I picture as part of my character, give me a chance to get rid of it. If he refuses that I would leave the group.