In fact, I wish they had combined a few of the "Lesser X/X/Greater X" spells in the core rulebook into single multi-level spells.
Agreed on this, and for home games I will make it so if I don't find a convincing reason not to. i.e. Why do I need restoration and lesser restoration separately?
If this is because the player wants to change classes, just let them do it via the Retraining rules in Ultimate campaign, rationalized by their increasing affinity for _____ over time, and possibly including some big epiphany moment like described.
If this is because something about the character is unbalanced, take the player aside and talk to them about it. Let them make changes for free and work with them to rationalize in-game what happened.
If this is because you feel it would make an interesting story, just don't. People don't like when you force them to do things they didn't want to do. They wouldn't have made a druid if they didn't want to be one. If you force things like losing powers and class changes on your players, you'll quickly find that nobody wants to play with you as their GM. Most seasoned players have at least one horror story of a GM who was too heavy-handed, and you don't want to be remembered as "Jim, that GM who made lose my druid powers for no f***ing reason."
The only reason I've ever seen anybody look seriously at those tables is to get a good idea of comparative sizes. I.e. we're generally familiar with what the height and weight of a small, big, and average human are, but a dwarf, halfling, or half-orc are a little harder for us to get a full grasp of.
So it helps you see the reasonable limits of how big or small a race is, and let you modify for what makes sense to you--a high STR and CON character's probably gonna be a bit heavier for their size, and one with low STR high DEX will probably be lighter.
I think what they were probably going for was the idea that a full grapple involves grabbing and wrestling and restraints and such, which arguably takes a little bit longer than the second or so in your round at the end of a charge.
It may also require a bit more attention than you could manage while running headlong at someone--your momentum probably isn't as helpful as it would be for anything that involves a good swing at the end (the sunder, disarm, trip--and of course bull rush and Overrun are all about the momentum), so the bonus on your grapple attempt wouldn't make a huge amount of sense.
If you're thinking a charge and tackle someone to the floor, that could just as easily be a trip, where you attempt to grapple them the next round.
The grab 2 people with penalties I can see being a thing (although obviously you'll need someone who's insanely good at grappling to offset the penalties you'd rationally have) and banging their heads together could just be a flavorful way to describe an unarmed strike against two separate opponents (since generally you don't hold on to the people after banging them together).
That said, all of this is fairly logical and I'm certainly not saying that your argument isn't sound. In fact my primary gripe about grapple being standard action only is not being able to use it as an AoO--I feel you should be allowed to try to grab someone when they're doing something you don't want them to do. But devs decided it made more sense this way I guess.
Most of your questions are answered in the Magic Item Creation Section of the PRD but I'll help answer here too for your convenience (it can be alot to sort through for sure). Sorry in advance, this is a massive post.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
1) Would you recommend it? A feat for a crafting skill is kind of costly but half price magic items seems well worth to me.
This tends to be very campaign-dependent. Because of the whole "adventuring caster only puts in 2 hours of progress" thing that Brf mentioned, any big expensive stuff is going to take a long time to make if your campaign doesn't have much/any downtime. If it's the kind of adventure where you rush right from one thing to another, you might want to consider Brew Potion or Scribe Scroll, but you'll find for more expensive stuff in that kind of campaign the item you're making will be outdated by the time you finish making it (that 4k bracers of armor +2 will take 16 days to make, which in non-stop no-travel instances you could have gained two or three levels).
On the other hand if you're in a campaign where you travel for long periods of time or, even better, have days to weeks of straight-up downtime between adventures, making all your own magic items effectively doubles the amount of money your party has, which can arguably turn out to be a better feat investment than many combat feats.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
2) Whats the rule on upgrading things with craft? i have +1 bracers and i can make +2 for 2k from scrap so what if i just make my +1 into +2 do i still pay 2k or less?
As Band said, it's the difference between the current item and the item you're upgrading it into. In your specific instance, it would cost you 1.5k.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
3)What would you rule on if crafting was interrupted? like after 3 hours of crafting i get attacked and have to stop would i still lose half my mats as a failure or would it just count as 3/8 hours of work done?
That unfortunately is not mentioned in the crafting rules and so would be up to GM interpretation. Realistically you could say that you either go with whatever progress you made and can continue later in the day, or that the time is wasted and you lose the materials you used for that time/day (anywhere between the 37.5 for that 3 hours in the field at half progress to 500 for a dedicated day of work in town).
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
4)Would I have to be in a town to craft or would I be able to carry the supplies to craft with me?
Brf's note is correct. You can carry supplies with you to craft but you only work for 4 hours a day, during random breaks in the action, and it only counts for half as much (for 2 hours and 250g worth of progress per day). Your GM could rule for realism's sake that you have to buy your materials in town before deciding on a project should you be heading out and working in the field, although other GMs simply don't care enough, similar to stocking up on expensive material components for spells such as Raise Dead.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
5)Do I need any special tools for crafting them? I saw craft alchemy had an alchemist table does craft Wondrous have something similar?
No special tools are needed nor exist by RAW, though if you happen to have a craft that'll help with that particular item, using the masterwork tools for that skill will give you a bonus on your final skill check.
Remember that Craft Wondrous Items is a feat, not a skill. The skill you use for crafting any magic item per the rules is Spellcraft, DC 5+item's CL, made at the end of the crafting time. You are also allowed to use another craft skill that your GM deems is appropriate to that item. While the other crafting feats are pretty easy to determine (craft: weaponsmith for magic weapons, alchemy for potions), wondrous items are far too varied to fall under any one skill--conceivably every listed craft could be used for a few of the wondrous items throughout all the published books, but none could be used for all of them. Just stick with Spellcraft and you'll be fine.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
6)Do I take any penalties while crafting? This is mostly Aimed towards perception as my character is ideally crafting while keeping watch.
This isn't mentioned specifically in the crafting rules, but it wouldn't be entirely out of line for your GM to say that crafting on your watch to count as "Creature making the check is distracted" in the perception rules, which increases the DC of perception checks by 5. There are ways to help yourself out in that regard (although less common since from your link looks like you're a magus) such as an Alarm spell or having a familiar to stand watch with you.
On a side note, if you do decide to get yourself a familiar and you want to go with the magic item creation route, I would highly suggest giving it the Valet familiar archetype. From the get go this lets it give you a +2 on your craft check at the end of item creation as well as doubling your progress every day. Arguably, because it gains all the item creation feats and skill ranks you do it could do a fair amount of your item creation for you (keeping in mind since its intelligence will be a negative modifier for awhile it won't be able to make very powerful items on its own).
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
7)Would I be able to craft while under the effects of the Keep Watch Spell or would the crafting cancel the spell?
The description of the spell is somewhat vague so it'll be up to GM interpretation. If I were GM'ing I would rule that you would be allowed to use it for crafting, thus being able to put in the total 8 hours but still having the half progress for crafting while being out adventuring (and remember regardless of how much free time you have you can only work on it for 8 hours per day). However, I do know I tend to be very generous with rulings as a GM, and I wouldn't argue if a GM ruled that crafting counted as too "strenuous" for the spell.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
8)Is taking 10 allowed, Would taking 20 waste half my mats?
Taking 10 is allowed, taking 20 is not. Reasoning: Taking 10 is allowable any time you are not in a particularly stressful situation (such as combat), and crafting *requires* you to be in a non-stressful environment. Taking 20 is not allowed any time there is a definite consequence for failure--in this case, failing to create the item (or creating a cursed item if you fail badly enough) and losing materials. Even if you could, remember that taking 20 means taking 20 times as long. If you're out adventuring during your crafting process, do you really want to take 320 days to create those +2 bracers of armor?
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
9)Do I need to take the craft feat and the craft skill? If not what would I level up to make higher dcs?
Guess I already covered that. You need the Craft Wondrous Item feat (or other magic item creation feat if you're going to make weapons, armor, etc) and the Spellcraft skill, DC5+item's CL--it mentions the item CL in its description. Also, each magic item generally requires one or more spells in its creation, listed in the Construction section at the bottom of each item's description. Note that you can make the item without having that spell prepared (yes, prepared not just known, unless you're a spontaneous caster) but it increases the DC by 5.
Pathfinder Zoey wrote:
Any tips or ideas about taking this would also be appreciated since I'm still figuring everything out, thanks.
My main suggestion is, if you do go with the item creation, pump up your Spellcraft skill like crazy. You should always be taking 10 instead of rolling to make sure that you don't waste thousands of gold on a single crappy dice roll, so it's easy enough to look at the CL and any requirements you don't have to figure out the DC and whether or not you'll make it at your current skill. If taking 10 will beat the DC by 5 or more, remember there is also the option to double your progress by increasing the DC by 5. If you combine this with my previous Valet familiar suggestion, this means you make 1k worth of progress per day while out adventuring or 4k worth per day during in-town downtime. Yes, by the wording of their descriptions, they do stack--technically one halves the time required while the other doubles your progress speed.
If you know ahead of time you're going to be making something you're a few points shy of making the skill check for, it may be worth it to grab a scroll of Crafter's Fortune or two (or better yet, ask your party wizard to cast it on you, should you have one). It costs you 25 gold for the first-level spell, but saves you thousands when compared to buying the item from a store. Of course, if you're making the DC already, you can always use this to do the speed-up option. Remember that the skill check only has to be made at the very end of the crafting process, so you can have the spell cast on you on the last day for it to take full effect (though the speeding-up +5 to DC option has to be picked at the beginning of the process).
Apparently whenever I'm asked a question I don't know the answer to I answer "hell if I know". One day, one of my players surprises me with a cleric named Hellih Feino--with the Knowledge and Travel domains, so that he always has the answer and will be anywhere an explanation is needed. Every time I say the line he plays it as me turning to him for an answer.
Generally how Cheat Death works in my games becomes one of two things, and both come down to action movies:
A: The other characters are aware there is a *chance* that the other player could be alive--and so try against all hope to save them ("Live, damn you!"). By some miracle, they are alive but will certainly need some help/healing. This is usually when the Death Cheating character's "body" is easy to access, though maybe not without taking a few rounds and maybe a couple of skill checks. See: the dramas you were talking about before
B: The other characters believe there is no way the Death Cheating character could have survived that fall/cave-in/explosion/etc, and so gloomily continue on without them. After a certain period of time (preferably during a time the party is in a pinch or some other dramatic moment), the "dead" character reappears, battered and bruised, with a shocking tale of how they survived. If the player is able to come up with a particularly compelling/exciting story of how they survived, they get one of their Hero Points back (which hugely boosts creativity!). See: Gandalf falling into the pit and fighting the Balrog, Aragorn being pushed off the cliff and being saved by his horse, millions of other fantasy/action movie near-death fake-outs.
It sounds like you prefer your games to be more of the edge-of-your-seat action movies where the hero defies all odds and always wins in the end (like me!) whereas your GM prefers their games to be the darker action(/horror?) movies filled with gritty realism. Neither is the "wrong" way to play, but it will cause some frustrations at your table if there's a split on what genre your games are. It's a discussion that should include your GM and all your players at the table that basically boils down to "how realistic do I want my fantasy?"
Outside of my PFS games I've actually never been in a campaign that was hard and fast XP. When I was a kid and my dad ran games he used a general "you level up after each adventure" (we didn't play often so that was fine).
I've been running S&S for the last year and we'll be finishing in this Tuesday. From what I've seen...
To get the bad stuff out of the way, I would like to first say the naval combat system isn't very exciting or engaging, or realistic. For the most part it's your ship's captain making skill checks against the enemy's captain, and the rest of the group can...make assists, or fire seige engines that for the most part are useless--if you do enough damage to have any effect, it means the enemy ship is worth significantly less, or you sink it and miss out on a literal boatload of treasure. I would suggest using the homebrew ship combat here http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p54b?Naval-Combat-For-a-Whole-Party#1 or get the Fire as she Bears book, which I hear has a great ship combat system, and a better system for ships in general.
Parts of the adventure path, particularly in the beginning, can be quite deadly. This creates a problem in the first module, as for your first level and a half you're on a ship with a clearly defined number of people all with names and (for the most part) stats already given, so it's nearly impossible to explain introducing a new character. After that however, a little flexibility can make introducing a new character fluid and easy--but you'll need to give them a backstory for why they hate the rest of the party's previous captain (though his tendency to have mutinous crews doesn't make that too difficult--we know of at least two successful mutinies against him).
There are also a few parts that feel railroaded, especially the first module which seems to drag on forever in an effort to drive into your players a hatred for their evil captain. Unfortunately what it really does (as written) is to develop a hatred of the first mate, which is important, but the captain himself is mostly absent for the module--literally three lines of dialogue and he hands it over to the first mate. I would highly suggest including him some more with some cruel behaviors (look in installment 5 for inspiration, he is a sick, evil bastard). There are a few other parts (part 4 particularly) that feel somewhat railroaded if the GM doesn't take some steps to make it feel more natural.
It is not all like this however--part 2 (except the very beginning that gets you on your ship) is a wonderful sandbox is run correctly, filled with opportunities for some gool ol' piracy. Use the "random encounters" here to create some higher level opportunities at higher level and you can eliminate some of the railroad feeling later on. I personally upgraded the pirate hunter and ghost ship battles and put them in modules 4 and 5 respectively.
This AP also has many wonderful RP opportunities and great benefits for making skilled and/or clever characters as opposed to standard "bash door, kill monster, take treasure" types. It's filled with colorful NPCs that feel real and relatable, enough so that one of my players' characters started a relationship with one and they're planning to get married at the end of the AP. Another character is already married somewhat against her will, but that's another story altogether (though also shows the advantages of not straight-up murder style).
All in all my players loved this AP without too much need for modification on my part, but you do have to make sure to read ahead--I would suggest skimming through the entire adventure path before running the first module. It'll let you set up alot of hooks for later that your players will love, or love to hate.
I've been avoiding saying this because I felt it would be taken as over-sensitive or over-PC but...
Transgender and transsexual are not the same thing, because gender and sex are not the same thing. Sex is your biological male or femaleness--whether you have man parts or lady parts. Gender is more mental--do you personally identify as male or female, regardless of sex or sexuality. People who are transsexual have taken steps to change their sex. People who are transgender simply identify as the opposite gender as their sex (so a transsexual is also considered transgendered, but not the other way around), although the term is also used as a general blanket term for non-"standard" gender/sex roles. In a very liberal interpretation of the term, tomboys are transgender because they don't fit the "standard" sex role for females, though most psychologists would not consider them as such because females in "traditionally" male jobs/hobbies/etc are generally accepted as normal in today's society.
With that out of the way, from what I've read here my vote is for the alchemist as transgender, either as also transsexual or attempting to make the change. Harsk is possible, since he already breaks so many traditional roles for his people, but I wouldn't throw my vote all the way for him. This whole discussion makes me want to read the comics...they sound like a fun read!
It really depends on your definition of broken. A Human sorcerer with 20 chr, the Fey bloodline and using their two first level feat in spell focus (enchantment) and greater spell focus (enchantment) now has a DC20 for their Sleep spell at first level. Some people would consider that broken, others would look at them and say "yeah, but it's really all they can do."
For any "broken" combination, the solution for the GM is almost always: look up how it works, and just make sure it isn't a god power in every situation, while also making sure they still get a chance to shine. Throw some mindless undead or vermin at that fey sorcerer, but don't make it more than half the encounters or the player will rightly conclude that you're intentionally blocking them from doing the only thing their character is designed for, which makes them completely useless. They'll get frustrated and either a: seek a way to just make a new character because you've decided this one isn't allowed, or b: just leave and never play another game you're GMing.
Straight out banning characters is generally worse than this--going too far with the banning because something could be overpowered idea starts to stink of the GM who says "you can't play that because it's not in this part of the world" for monks, druids, clerics of all but one or two deities, and everything but humans. Rarely do players stick around for a full campaign with those GMs.
I also agree with Ascalaphus. If you're going to ban books from use, it should only be because you don't have the time to read through them and aren't familiar with what's in it. I did have a player join in halfway through a game and make a summoner, and he seemed greatly overpowered. At some point, I asked to see his character sheet over the weekend, checked over the rules and found that he had made some understandable, honest mistakes (this was also the second PF game he had ever played) with how the rules worked that happened to be highly in favor of his character. While he was frustrated to find that he wasn't nearly as good as he thought, he accepted it and continued play with his corrected character.
Difficult question. By RAW it would seem that identifying the spell in any way would let you automatically succeed on the will saving throw--you do have proof it's not real, after all.
I personally would houserule that it gives a +4 on the save, like when it's been communicated to the person that it's not real. Otherwise you could almost never cast any illusion spell with a disbelief save on another mage. But then, a smart mage targets those who wouldn't be able to see through it.
I would suggest everyone who's been arguing this to hit the "FAQ" button on the OP. Even if you're absolutely certain you're right, as every poster here seems to have said a different take on it, there is enough confusion that everyone else needs it cleared up.
Here's my (very long) take, as I also view it slightly differently than everyone else. Feel free to disagree or argue it, I will admit to a degree of uncertainty, due to wording that could be a bit more precise.
It is a base DC20 to get a feeling that something's nearby if you didn't already know that. A "Hunch" that you are not alone, that some may wave off as a case of bad nerves. Anything on the table for Invisible does modify that--someone slow-walking by you at less than half speed 5 feet from you is DC20 perception to be alerted that something's up.
Ignore distance for the rest of these examples.
Someone walking between half and full speed, while not making a major attempt to be stealthy is DC15, something most people with any sort of perceptive skills could do with a reasonable chance of success, as they probably hear footsteps. Someone standing perfectly still is a DC40 to notice--as reasonably, the only thing you could be picking up on is their breathing, body heat given off, or the occasional tiny rustle of clothes as their body rocks back and forth.
Whenever stealth comes into play, you use the person's stealth check +20 as the Hunch DC (the invis table's "stealth +20"). Ignore everything else on the invisibility table and use Stealth modifiers instead (note that it makes a special mention that using stealth while invisible is +20 normally or +40 if staying still, don't stack those). So an invisible rogue with a +10 stealth moving between half and full speed (-5 stealth), rolling a 10 has an effective stealth of 35 to notice him. He can't attempt to use stealth as the DC if he's running, charging, talking or attacking, and in those cases the DC to know someone's there is 0, 20 to pinpoint his exact location.
You need to beat any of these DCs by 20 to know exactly where that person is. For the most part, you're highly unlikely to be able to tell exactly where an invisible person is (unless the invisible person is in combat), but someone in the party will probably know there IS an invisible person somewhere around here in order to do something about it. If you're up against invisible rogues, the situation is such that it would be very difficult in the first place.
I would also say that the +20 is a bit too steep, because although humans (and I assume most humanoids) are visually focused, our hearing isn't quite THAT useless, especially if the person already knows there's something around that they will need to listen to find. I.e. in the martial arts classes I took when I was a teenager, we did take classes on how to fight someone you couldn't see (more meant for "in the dark" than "your opponent is invisible") where one person closed our eyes and fought an opponent who was told to stay quiet, try to sneak behind the person and tap their back to signify they failed. If the other person was running around we could find them no problem. If they weren't moving, or moving *very* slowly (only 5-foot steps?), it would maybe 10 seconds to notice them to make an attack. Only the least perceptive people regularly failed completely, although the attacks were still relatively innacurate (50% miss chance?).
So as a houserule, assuming the perceiver already knew there was an invisible person there who was sneaking, and was actively searching for them (a move action) with their non-visual senses, I would make the DC to pinpoint Stealth +5 or +10 with normal distraction penalties applying (so your goblin example would be DC21-26 to pinpoint, with normal 50% miss chance applying). But that's the RAW rules as I understand them.
EDIT: I would also houserule that any size or armor check modifiers to stealth apply to the perception DCs, even if you're not using stealth as the DC.
I DM about 3/4 of the time, primarily in our college RPG club. While I find that usually I like DM'ing a little bit more than playing because you get to create fun situations for the whole group, preparing for your campaign can get a bit tiring and sometimes you just want to relax and be the player once in a while. I'm starting to get into a 50/50 ratio this semester and am finding it works great.
When you've been DM'ing for awhile though, sometimes it can be hard to step out of that role and actually let the session's DM do the work. This is a problem right now for me because I'm helping someone DM their first campaign (my group sees me as the "veteran" DM, even though there is another player that has been both playing and DMing longer than me), and it can be hard to distinguish when you're helping and when you're taking over until after the session.
I certainly do have friends who never DM at all, usually for one of two reasons:
So far we've got:
(no intro figured out)
Blame Harrigan! Blame Harrigan!
Send him down with Mr Plugg
Blame Harrigan! Blame Harrigan!
He isn't even a real pirate anyway!
(I need to listen to the song again to remember exactly how the beat goes.)
My party has decided that they want to break into song every now and then. The gathered consensus is this:
"Blame Canada" from the South Park movie modified to be "Blame Harrigan", to be sung nearly every time something goes wrong for the party.
Any ideas for lyrics? Something to incorporate, the party has decided (whether it's true or not) that Harrigan is gay and Mr. Plugg was his first mate in more ways than one.
They bargained with it that she would be released the next year. They rolled extremely well on diplomacy and gave proof that they would be there to do it.
None of this helps me with the question I asked >.>
situation #1: Kobold is facing off against a human. there is a torch on the wall, they are both in normal light. kobold backs up, into the shadowy light part of the torch. he may then hide, since he has concealment, even though the human is looking at him.
Incorrect. You cannot hide while being observed until line of sight is broken. If the same kobold in the same area had not been noticed by the human yet, he could make a stealth check.
Situation #2: same as one, except the whole room is normal light, but there is a couch. kobold moves behind the couch, getting cover, and may now hide.
I believe this is technically correct. But keep in mind that logically, the human watched where the kobold went. He knows that where the kobold hid, and as soon as the human peeks around the couch, if the kobold is still hiding there the human will automatically see it. You could still use stealth while moving around to avoid being found (say, as the human goes around the couch, keep moving to be on the opposite side).
Situation #3: Kobold is in a bare room that is well-lit, facing off against the same human. Kobold moves, makes a bluff check to create a distraction and succeeding, hides with a -10 penalty. he is now stealthed.
As long as there is something to hide behind nearby to give cover/concealment (the distraction itself doesn't give concealment, only the opportunity to get there). The description doesn't say if it is a move, standard, swift, or free action to distract someone with Bluff, however keep in mind the penalties for using stealth while moving--none for half or less, -5 for between half and full move, impossible while "running, charging, or attacking".
so when you use bluff to create a distraction to hide, how long do you stay stealthed? do you have to find cover or concealment before your turn is over?
As answered in situation 3, yes.
or is it only useful for hiding as your move, then attacking someone as your standard that same turn to get sneak attack?
While it is difficult to do, stealth can also be used for Sniping, so that they will be flat-footed for multiple attacks.
Core Rulebook wrote:
Sniping: If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.
As my interpretation of this, aid another shouldn't be allowed for knowledge checks that don't involve a library or other long-term research.
My reasoning: for the previous issue of "should they be able to make the DC on their own to aid another" they don't have to because, in the right circumstances they are physically capable of achieving it (say, masterwork tools, a team of helpers, competence and morale bonuses, etc) even if they need a bonus of +50 in order to achieve it.
However, on checks that require training to use that they are not trained in, they simply lack the skills required to even have that tiny chance. In identifying a type of demon and their traits/weaknesses with knowledge (planes) for example, someone who honestly doesn't know anything about demons other than "they're evil" has absolutely no way they could help in that situation. In a library, as stated before, they could help by retrieving books and looking at chapter names and such.
Going back to the example of House and the other doctors assisting him: the other doctors can assist in a diagnosis because they are doctors and have this kind of knowledge. Were they to grab a bum off the street whose medical knowledge was no more than "booze makes the pain go away," (an extreme example I know, but still relevant) his suggestions would be unhelpful and distracting.
While some players will always argue to get the most bonuses to their rolls (and without something directly in the rulebook some of these will never accept it), if it makes sense, let it fly, if not, let the game move on so you can keep having fun.