Darigaaz the Igniter's page

Organized Play Member. 2,627 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.

1 to 50 of 450 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Yqatuba wrote:
Does anyone NOT use the "gp are weightless" rule? It seems to be a houserule everyone uses.
My groups don't. Encumbrance and weight are things you have to worry about.

And ammo. Track your ammo.

EDIT: I guess that would be my quirk, I ALWAYS track exactly how much money and ammo I have on me, including appropriate weight.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:

I think there are about three levels to this:

- FAQ: something is unclear and people keep asking about it, so explain it better in an FAQ entry.
- Errata: there's a mistake somewhere, such as a 20GP that should be 2GP. Or something is missing a trait. There was a plan, but what's actually printed isn't quite according to plan. Next printing, fix it. Meanwhile, have a list of "mistakes we found that will be fixed in the next printing" because it can take a while. This also covers fixing inconsistencies between things in different chapters seeming to contradict each other.
- Design changes: overhauling how something works because the original design is causing problems. This is basically Paizo saying "we changed our mind".

I would say that the first two categories are certainly desirable. The last category is sometimes needed, but preferably only if it really improves the game. I think it was this category that caused the most pain last edition when some option was found overpowered and nerfed hard in a next printing.

Oh that third category definitely caused the most pain in the latter years of PFRPG.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, NOW I will

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mainly because of this one sorcerer's apprentice mucking things up

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most of the guides have a bit of an overemphasis on using dexterity for everything, when a str based build will often perform just as well and use less resources.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Traps that are bypassed with channel energy instead of disable device.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Love: the evolutionary game design, archetypes, traits, the customizability, the fact that pcs npcs and monsters all run off the same basic rules, point buy stat generation, the old PRD only containing setting neutral core books and organizing the information by book

Hate: occult instead of psionics, the explosion of classes that started with the ACG, how badly they messed up the shifter, faqs/errata made in response to PFS problems that don't come up in non-PFS games, the increasingly-dismal-now-dropped faq schedule, the fact that PF2 is not another evolutionary step of the system

Will Miss: being excited over new releases, as I'll doggedly stick to Pathfinder and don't see myself enjoying PF2

1 person marked this as a favorite.
avr wrote:
It's not a development of PF1 or D&D 3.X, rather it is its own thing. For better or worse. A new version number - PF2 - is IMO the best description. Or a new name, but they didn't go there.

Yeah, pretty much that. If it was an evolutionary step then we could be messing with decimal version numbers, but it's an entirely different thing compared to its predecessor.

Insight wrote:
Well, as I’ve advocated in other threads and venues, D&D 4.5 is the *most* accurate (said with love).

Now that you mention it, I'd have to go with that one.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I tend to fill in the blanks as I play the character and get to know them.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think a hybrid method might work. Give out an array, then have each player roll to randomize where each number ends up.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think samurai are pretty underrated.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Plant a tower shield for total cover from one direction.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Getting back on topic, I can't believe we're wrapping up without a kineticist and/or alchemist option to mimic the old dragonfire shaman.

Sure, alch's have strafe bombs and breath weapon bombs, but those are limited to fire and you only have so many per day.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Illusion- it's really hard to find the correct balance between "illusions are super powerful" and "illusions are basically useless."

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seelah's look (aside from skin tone) seems to have not really changed at all. I like that her breast-plate is less pronounced.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me, new Amiri looks emaciated and sickly. Certainly not someone who likely has a 16-18 str and 14-16 con. Her skin's gone past pale into ashen, and the bags around her eyes look like she hasn't slept in 3 days.

Droogami looks less like a snow leopard and more like a tiny bandersnatch.

I'm not sure if I like Harsk's new tartan. The dwarves=scottish trope is dangerously close to played out to me.

I will say that overall I like that several of the new looks are a lot less busy, with fewer random bits and bobs.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ClanPsi wrote:
Lucas Yew wrote:
Even 5E has Medium playable dragons from the start (albeit without wings and breath severely limited), PF2 should have at least a Small one as soon as possible!
Dragonborn are the single worst thing in D&D. They're nothing but an appeasement of whiny nerds crying that they couldn't play a dragon PC without taking a 10-level prestige class. I don't want that sh*t anywhere near Pathfinder.

Dragonborn are indeed terrible. But it's because they're so bad at being dragons. Kobolds get closer to playing a dragon than dragonborn do.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm a little sad there haven't been any new crazy characters for so long.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Themetricsystem wrote:

I must say that no matter what, by RAW this is going to require your GM to make the call on if it's valid or reasonable.

The section on Free Actions even states:

Free Actions wrote:
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
To me this says that anybody can take 1 free action per turn but EVERY free action beyond the first 100% requires the GM to sign off on it.

So, you're saying every archer with more than one attack per round has to ask their GM for permission to draw additional arrows?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am a firm believer in the combo of quick draw and quickdraw light wooden/steel shield plus one-handed weapon. On your turn you can stow the shield as a free action, two hand your weapon, then redraw the shield as another free action.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

shrink item (spell) -> turn gold into small cloth patch
homing pigeon (nonmagical) -> carries patch and note explaining how to dispel shrink object

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Tim Emrick wrote:

My home group currently alternates sessions between a homebrew PFS campaign (run by me) and PFS scenarios (run by other players). For the latter, someone suggested creating an all-cleric party, using a variety of domains to help cover some of the missing party roles. We also decided to make these our first Core characters, partly because nobody ever runs Core at our FLGS, partly to make things a bit easier on the GM for those PCs' first session (who had GMed very little PF at the time of that session, and owned almost nothing but the CRB).

Among the 6 PCs, we ended up with clerics of 5 different gods (Erastil, Callistia, Gorum, Norgorber, and *2* Shelyn), and members of 6 different factions. And very little if any of that diversity was coordinated. [One of the Shelyn priests has since been rebuilt as an Abadar cleric so they don't accidentally steal each other's thunder.]

As a bunch of non-martial 1st-levels, there was quite a bit of flailing about in combat, but we also had a ton of healing ability to make up for it. A couple PCs had decent social skills, my Callistian had Disable Device, and everyone had good Perception even if not trained, but we did end up rather short on Knowledge skills due to the class's precious few skill ranks. The Norgorber priest even found a moment for his negative channeling to shine: he was the only one of us who could hurt a swarm.

We've only played a couple scenarios with these characters so far, due to us all having several others PFS PCs we want to play, so our clerics are still 1st level. But we already have a few adventures picked out that we want to replay as Core with this group once they are high enough level for them (like the whole Gloomspires series).

You should call that team "the A-Men".

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pretty sure taking down structures falls under profession: engineer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

mundane solution: stab it for more than its fast healing value every turn

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Cones I would narrow from 90 degrees to 60 to make it easier to plot on the hex.

EDIT: also make sure you know how you want larger creatures to take up space. Personally, I go:
Large: 3 hex triangle
Huge: 7 hex hexagon (one center hex, plus every hex next to it; 2 hexes on a side)
Gargantuan: 19 hex hexagon (basically the huge space plus another layer around it, 3 hexes on a side)
Colossal: 36 hex hexagon (gargantuan plus one more layer, 4 hexes on a side)

EDIT2: Now with visual

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Remove that bloodstain/poison coating
Help make a fake document seem more legit by soiling it to appear aged
Make the food not taste horrible

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's a good one.
Personally I have to go with Mad Monkeys. Just, suddenly monkeys. They're all over you, stealing your things, being a nuisance. The mental imagery is hilarious. Helps that it's pretty effective too.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Tier 1: not having a tier list

Tier 12: having a tier list

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Depends on what definition you're attributing to the term "Min-Maxing"
-If you mean optimizing your character to be good at what they're supposed to be doing, then frankly I expect you to do that.
-If you mean overspecializing in your chosen area to be better than an optimized character even if it means having several penalties and/or glaring weaknesses elsewhere, then I will be skeptical and try to offer pointers to where you can round out your build.
-If you mean munchkining and trying to use dubious interpretations of rules and/or blatant cheating to try to go beyond even the level of the overspecializers, then either expect some vetos or to be no longer invited to that game.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't even get one of my characters killed, let alone the whole party.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
deuxhero wrote:

Body Double. Being able to have a creature adopt a willing person's identity should allow for all kinds of fun stuff.

The problem? Duration is 1 round per level. WHY?!

There are SO many cool spells that are rendered almost useless because of that.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

A spell that's lower level than disintegrate for quickly disposing of corpses. Because let's be fair, most adventurers leave a LOT of corpses in their wake.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dave Justus wrote:
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Offer them a 6 pack of beer.
Better yet, offer the GM a 6 pack of beer.

Why not both?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Offer them a 6 pack of beer.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
You think ...

FWIW, I think the following things:

1) PF1e is a big old mess. It's got lots and lots of cool stuff, but it's got almost as many problems. I'm not a huge defender of it in its current form, and I agree that something needs to be done.

2) However, I do not think that PF2e as it appears to be shaping up is the answer. For one thing, I don't think it will really fix the "system mastery" problem as that is a function of Paizo's business model of putting out lots and lots of supplemental material, and there's no evidence that this will change. In a few years, PF2e with its likely large additional number of splatbooks, etc. will require a "M.A. in system mastery," similar to the current PF1e.

3) Paizo has a window of opportunity here to produce a rationalized, reorganized, and reimplemented PF1e, which they can call PF2e for branding reasons. Such a PF1.5 reimplementation could then be followed with a more disciplined and methodical process/schedule of releasing supplemental material so that the problems we see in PF1e (and are likely to see in what looks likely as PF2e) will not reappear.

4) I think such an approach has the potential to appeal to fans of PF1e, folks who liked PF1e in the abstract but have been alienated by its increasing system mastery demands, and non-PF folks with an interest in RPG gaming who get a game based on 10 years of playtesting and problem identification.

5) Finally, I think PF2e as it currently stands could be shaping up as a perfect storm for Paizo. There are large number of folks such as myself who have been turned off by the playtest process and the game we saw there. Amongst the people who liked the playtest games, there appear to be a significant number who don't like what they read in the "Top 5 things to expect for the final edition. Paizo Stream 21/12/18." With neither of these groups on board, I don't see how such a PF2e is successful with RPG gamers not familiar with PF and with RPG neophytes.

Anyhows, this is what I (one old gaming person) think. Take it or leave it.

Agreed on all counts. Though RE:1 I'd say PF1 has a lot more good in it than bad.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

In regards to hp, personally I like to steal a bit from RWBY and say that hp above your Con score is 'aura', which is basically a self-projected field of positive energy that wards off serious blows and heals minor wounds taken, but can be depleted under a heavy assault.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Luis Loza wrote:
The worm that walks gives me both heebies and jeebies.

Thanks, I had forgotten about those. If you need me I'll be running for the hills, screaming.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
pjrogers wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:
And Built from the Ground Up is the third PF2 design principle. The designers rewrote the rules to be rigorous and complete. PF1 suffers from many rules being added in later hardcover books, squeezed into design gaps between the core rules from the Core Rulebook. And the PF1 Core Rulebook itself had some of its systems piggybacking on other systems, such as magic items requiring knowing spells to construct, and frequently shoehorning a spell in as a requirement that had little to do with the magic items. PF1 is juryrigged and PF2 is designed. The rules are clear, except for the odd organization of the rulebook.
PF1e is "juryrigged" because Paizo chose not to ever attempt a "rigorous and complete" rewrite of the CRB. At any time over the past 10 years, Paizo could have cleaned up the PF1e rules, but it didn't do so. Even now, Paizo could apply this "Build from the Ground Up" principle to create a more evolutionary PF1.5e that I would certainly welcome in place of the PF2e mess that currently exists, and I which I suspect many others would similarly welcome.

I'd welcome that in a heartbeat.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

dotting this thread so I have a good example of the difference between a munchkin and an optimizer for the future.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rust monsters, vargouilles, and [copyrighted floating ball with eye stalks]

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe they just cough up the refuse like owl pellets.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Use the original printing for Scarred Witch Doctor, Crane Wing, and Crane Riposte.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

They should scale at similar levels of power, just in different ways. A fight vs a crX rogue should be just as difficult as against a crX cleric.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1d12+6 three times, then take each of those scores and subtract them from 25 to generate the other 3 scores. Gives 6 scores with a range of 7-18 and every low roll guarantees a high result as well (and vice versa).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Every time I see someone whining about "I don't like anime in my medieval fantasy" I can almost always find a european myth that goes even more over the top with it, while also finding plenty of examples about how far most campaign setting diverge from "medieval" without even taking the existence of magic into account.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Warped Savant wrote:
27: "My character sits down with everyone at the inn, pulls out a bag of dice and hands each character a piece of parchment. 'okay,' she says, 'let's play a game where we pretend to be other people." and go on to create an RPG with an RPG.

GM: Hey! No recursing!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a certain appreciation for carnivorous crystals.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Whenever I try to go for a dramatic moment I end up rolling a critical fail immediately, so I'm rather more likely to just LEROY JENKINS it these days.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The main issue I have with ABP is that it doesn't let you keep your AC as high as I would like (~15+Lv). And a minor nitpick is that you have to pick a mental attribute earlier than a physical one, but that's an easy houserule (let them pick any attribute to boost, then next level has to be mental if they picked a physical and vise versa).

1 person marked this as a favorite.
breithauptclan wrote:

Another from my kids.

To go with the Phantasmal Miller you are going to need some high level ingredients, such as some Displacer Yeast.

The problem with displacer yeast is that the darn bag always appears two feet away from where you set it.

1 to 50 of 450 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>