Interesting. There are a couple reasons I can see for a 4 player table being "standard." You hit on two, being time and turn count. But I think another factor is the number of locations. More players, more locations. More locations, more cards to get through in 30 turns. More cards, more blessings used on exploration and fewer in the tank for check assistance. Games are lost and players killed when you have to force exploration all the time. My guess is the developers feel like 6 locations is a good sweet spot to make the game difficult enough without being too overwhelming.
Or I thought it was? I'm just going to go by the authorization email saying everything is together in a single order and disregard there being two orders (3293691, character add-on, adventure deck #2, promos; 3264996, class decks, adventure path) showing up online. If it doesn't look right when everything starts shipping out, I'll let you know. Thanks again.
Just got my authorization email for the September subscription. Still have a pending order (3257810, pair of the class decks) that I put in on Friday and still haven't been billed for - probably because I *think* I set it to ship with my next subscription shipment...which would be this one.
Want to make sure this is still going to happen, especially if your warehouse is gearing up to ship as much as possible as soon as possible. The two orders have different shipping methods currently, which does worry me.
Anything you all can do?
John Compton wrote:
Oh good. This bit worried me most of all.
I'm noticing a couple of errors on these sheets, but I'm not sure if it's just me.
Rise of the Runelords Character Sheets:
Fighter Class Deck:
Ranger Class Deck:
Wizard Class Deck:
Concerning the Primalist Wizard archetype:
Inner Sea Magic pg. 38 wrote:
Inner Sea Magic pg. 38 wrote:
It's never possible to actually use the Enhance Primal Magic event if both it and Primal Magic require swift actions to use.
Nope. That's the RAW. Don't know how that made it past any design edits and playtests they did with the archetype though.
I have a player interested in playing a Primalist wizard, so I just found this issue today. He's already considering getting rid of the archetype because of the poor design shown.
I'm currently running a group through S&S, and I really enjoy the ship-to-ship combat. But taking the time to work on ship stats over and over takes too long.
I just finished a Google Sheet equivalent of the Ship Sheet (Link here) at the back of the Player's Guide, with a number of extras to help make changes and additions a breeze.
I set the link up so anyone can view (I'd rather not have just anyone edit the master sheet), but making a duplicate should give you full access.
I tied in the rules from the Naval Combat for the Whole Party thread, which really helps keep the naval combat from getting bogged down. It's easy to remove those parts (Crew Upgrades, Morale, etc.) without ruining anything else on the sheet.
Please let me know what you all think, how it can be improved, etc.
It really feels like this class needs to have its own specific bloodlines that are optimized for the Blood Focus ability. Like how the Shaman has specialized Spirits that take from the Oracle Mysteries. Or how the Warpriest has Blessings based off Cleric Domains. Or how the Bloodrager's Bloodlines are obviously based off Sorcerer Bloodlines, but have been changed for how the class works.
Actually, if you look at Bulmahn's post at the top, they've fixed the wording on the deed. Need to have panache to use, but you can spend panache to do double the damage. Leads me to believe you can do the regular precision damage all the time so long as you haven't expended all of your panache.
I don't think I've seen anyone mention this yet. But why does Precise Strike not have wording to keep the Signature Deed feat from applying to it yet? Spend one panache as a swift action to double the precise strike damage on your next attack, or take a feat at 3rd to instantly make it a swift action to double your damage as long as you still have panache.
Focusing in on Blood Focus and what you get from your bloodline here, this is what I've gathered so far:
- Bloodline Spells are added automatically to your spellbook at the levels they'd become known to the Sorcerer. Not an issue at all.
- Bloodline Feats...swept under the rug. Not able to take them as Arcanist Bonus Feats.
- Bloodline Arcana...also swept under the rug. Not mentioned at all, likely means they don't apply to the class.
- Bloodline Powers. This is the fun bit. Took me a while to understand how it really worked, but I think I get it now.
Regular standard action bloodline powers work normally, but likely will never be used as much as they're able due to the limited Blood Focus pool. (Djinni Electricity Ray - Standard action, 1 Blood Focus to use)
Permanent powers can be used as rounds/level powers with the use of one Blood Focus (You gain Djinni Elemental resistance for 3 rounds when you spend one use of Blood Focus).
If a power works for rounds per level already, then they work for rounds per level after spending a use of Blood Focus. (I'd say Draconic Bloodline Claws work like this: Each activation of Claws uses 1 Blood Focus, but you keep the claws out as long as you wish up to the limit)
That using Blood Focus to power Bloodline Powers is a standard action is really only a problem when you get to certain Bloodline Powers that are regularly activated as different type of action (move, swift, etc.), like the Rakshasa Bloodline's Silver Tongue power.
I just picked up GM duties for a group running CC, and our Maneuver Master Monk player just asked me a question I can't quite puzzle through with my limited knowledge of grappling rules.
The question is this: would she be able to use the Alchemist's Tentacle discovery in conjunction with her grappling? As in, would she be able to use her tentacle to maintain a grapple on someone while using her regular limbs to maintain/progress a grapple on another character?
I know this thread is long dead, but it applies to an alchemist build I thought of recently using vestigal arms, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents.
Vestigal arms is written to make sure players know they only get one standard action per round, regardless of the number of arms they have, but that their extra arms can be used for two-weapon fighting (or multiweapon fighting) in combat.
An Alchemist with 4 arms and a Strength of 22[+6] (mutagen buffed) can wield a longsword in one and a shortsword, dogslicer, and handaxe in the others to make a standard attack action at -2/-2/-2/-2 for 1d8+6/1d6+3/1d6+3/1d6+3.
If he happened to be wielding two greatswords and had the same Strength, he could make a standard attack at -4/-4, as his off-hand greatsword is obviously not a light weapon, for 2d6+9/2d6+5. The +5 on the off-hand greatsword comes from the 1/2 Strength bonus on off-hand weapons coupled with the 1-1/2 Strength bonus from wielding a weapon with two hands, bringing it to a 3/4 Strength bonus of 4.5, which would likely be rounded up.
Both could also use a full-attack action, making all their attacks at full BAB and continuing through the BAB with their primary weapon. A fully leveled Alchemist with the greatswords would then get the normal 4 attacks (3 primary, 1 secondary) with his weapons at +17/+17/+12/+7, whereas the light-weapon alchemist would have a total of 6 attacks in his full-attack action (3 longsword, shortsword, kukri, handaxe) at +17/+17/+17/+17/+12/+7.
The two-weapon build has the greater damage capacity, with a possible total of 8d6+32 (Max 80) damage against 3d8+18 + 3d6+9 (Max 60) damage, of the two, especially when you factor in the extra attack granted by Improved Two Weapon Fighting. I'm not sure if the Multiweapon Fighter could take Improved Two Weapon Fighting due to the prereq of Two-Weapon Fighting...but it could certainly be argued.