Demonskunk's page

163 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

If you don't mind saying, who did you work with get your Pathfinder Pawns printed and cut?

James Jacobs wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:

I have 2 very important questions.

Can you get mummy rot from consensual intimate contact with a mummy, and if yes, can the mummy choose not to inflict mummy rot during this interaction?

Asking for a friend.

Yes. No.
Addendum: If you cast Remove Curse and Remove Disease on a mummy, does it no longer cause Mummy Rot?
The mummy is neither cursed nor diseased, and as such casting remove curse or remove disease wouldn't have an effect. Neither of these spells have that same sort of effect that neutralize poison does on venomous creatures—if they did, they'd specifically include that text in the spell descriptions, as is the case for neutralize poison.

*snap* Dang.

Thanks for answering my... friend's weird questions.

James Jacobs wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:

I have 2 very important questions.

Can you get mummy rot from consensual intimate contact with a mummy, and if yes, can the mummy choose not to inflict mummy rot during this interaction?

Asking for a friend.

Yes. No.

Addendum: If you cast Remove Curse and Remove Disease on a mummy, does it no longer cause Mummy Rot?

I have 2 very important questions.
Can you get mummy rot from consensual intimate contact with a mummy, and if yes, can the mummy choose not to inflict mummy rot during this interaction?

Asking for a friend.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

Also, aren't Goblins still supposed to be mostly psychopathic villains in Starfinder? So if they achieve partial redemption in Pathfinder 2 time, what happened to them after that -- Gap Reset, or something bad before that?

Maybe the goodboys splinter off into a small subrace and the main goblin population still stays evil.

Madame Endor wrote:
The races in the core rulebook are all classic fantasy and folklore races. That's what binds them together. Anything about ratfolk stats making them fit in stats wise doesn't change that they aren't common in classic fantasy or folklore. I like ratfolk. I like having them in the Golarion campaign world. I'd love to see them as a featured or standard race in a campaign or other rulebook, but their exclusion from the core rulebook makes more than a lot of sense in terms of theme.

That's largely why I want them in core. The "Classic fantasy races" thing is beyond stale to me. I love a bit of 'color'.

D&D permanently added Tieflings and Dragonborn to their core spread. I think Ratfolk are a perfect addition to Pathfinder's, thanks to how they've presented them in their lore.

graystone wrote:
gwynfrid wrote:
Very few pieces of adventuring gear are more than 1 Bulk.

Just don't pick up one of those 8 bulk sewing kits... :P

What's even MORE impressive, an entire chest is 100% taken up, with no room to spare, a snare kit or a sewing kit... :P It can also fit 2 10' ladders, 4 OTHER chests [must work like russian nesting dolls], 4000' or rope, 80 hooded lanterns and a non-vast number of vials of oil, 80 suits of padded armor or 80 light shields.

gwynfrid wrote:
Also, remember that L objects don't add to your encumbrance unless you have at least 10 of them: 6.999 Bulk counts as 6 Bulk.

Moral of the story: don't forget to cheese the system that allows 44 pounds of items to count as no weight or encumbrance:

Any item between 5 and "a few ounces" is L meaning a 4.9 pound item is L.
9 of those L items is 44.1 pounds and by the rules NOT a single bulk and hence 0 bulk for carry... So the key to making bulk work is to package everything into 4.9 pound bundles and you never have to worry about it again.

That was my bad. I read the number of hands instead of the bulk, I think.

But that adds another issue.

Why are 10 Short Swords as much bulk as a single Long Sword?

Steve Geddes wrote:

I don’t think it’s meant to be a measurement. Certainly not at the individual item level. It’s an abstract system that means as you hold lots of stuff you get encumbered.

We find it works fine at that “global” level. It’s poor at consistently answering questions about carrying ladders and armfuls of swords but that kind of thing doesn’t really matter at our table. We just want the wizard to slow down if they carry lots and the barbarian to not really care about how much equipment they have.

It seems to me that whether you like bulk or not depends on what you want to use it for.

It works terribly at a global level. The only thing it works well for is people who find it easier to grab a low, single digit number for items, instead of ball-parking a weight in pounds.

When a system allows me to carry either 10 short swords or 1 longsword in the same unit of measurement, it doesn't work. This is a text version of the Diablo item grid, but more nonsensical.

For my purposes it's far too restrictive and inconsistent.

I wrapped up the first part of the adventure the week before last, and I got ready to choose some magic items to give them, as the adventure suggests.

Among the items that I was looking forward to giving my parties was the Monkey Pin. Our Rogue had tried to climb up to inspect the dark corner in the goblin room of Part 1, and failed repeatedly, so I figured I would give him an item that would make climbing a bit easier for him. The Monkey Pin was a good fit, because it turns a regular success critical and a critical failure less bad.

But it requires Expert level in Acrobatics.


Magic Items were great for 2 things in 3.5/PF

1st thing, they're good at plugging up holes your character can't do. Helm of Mind Reading is great for someone who can't read minds, because now they can. Boots of Elvenkind are great for a beefy meat man fighter who can't sneak well.

2nd thing, they're good at enhancing someone's strengths. A rogue with those boots of elvenkind would be a pretty radical rogue in the wilderness. A wizard with a wand of fireballs can cast fireballs a lot more than a wizard who can't.

In PF2 you can only do the second thing, and it's really annoying.

There's also a 3rd level magic item that requires you to have Expert in a weapon, which apparently only Fighters get at first level.

Monks don't even start with Expert in Brawling, despite it being their main focus, and by end-game probably the only weapon they'll be using for damage output.

It also highlighted to me that the skill system feels really frustrating because your skills go up super slowly. you get a skill increase maybe every 3 levels, which means you can't easily spread out or get better at something you're lacking in. I don't want Pathfinder 1 levels of ridiculous numbers, but it feels frustrating. And you don't get an increase in weapon proficiency until level 13 for most classes, meaning that you stay at Trained for over half of your adventuring career.

This wouldn't be an issue if MAGIC ITEMS and SKILL FEATS weren't tied directly in to your skill proficiency level.

Doktor Weasel wrote:
As for the numbers not being reflected in city populations and such. I think that actually makes sense. I think most of that is that while they go into the cities a lot, they tend to live there as often. They're more nomadic or live in their own separate warrens where they can be themselves. So probably only a minority travel into the cities often, while the others are staying in the warren or traveling. And I think they're concentrated in a few areas like northern Garund, Numeria and Druma, but can conceivably be everywhere due to their nomadic and mercantile nature.

The writeup made it seem like they were very common in any kind of sizeable city, what with the line about them squeezed into slums. It's possible that the city doesnt' even realize they're there half the time, since they apparently also tend to live in sewers and stuff, but the % breakdowns should definitely include them.

I know the reason they probably don't in most places is because Golarion was largely written before the Ratfolk were a thing in any real capacity, so I hope they fix that going into PF2.

CaniestDog wrote:

I’d like to see wererats as a player race as they turn up in almost every city, but also as I’d like to see how they implement more powerful ancestry options into the game.

I’d like to see regional ancestries as an early source book.. Andorran Kobolds, Chelish Stryx, Belkzen Orc, etc..

I absolutely love were creatures, It's a shame there's rarely a way to play one as a hero.

ErichAD wrote:
Strength bonus with an intelligence penalty is an obvious choice if we're just rounding out the numbers. It's hard to say if that's the best motivation for including race options. That and with the state intelligence is in, it wouldn't be a good idea to include a race with a penalty to it.

Apparently there's only one int bonus.

Are you counting the Half Orc and Half Elf ancestry traits in your list?

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Ratfolk are pretty cool, and they do make natural alchemists in PF1.

Oh heck, I forgot to mention, they'd make a much better iconic Alchemist than a Goblin because they actually get INT.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gloom wrote:
I'd like to have them both personally. More small races are a good thing!

I explicitly left out any comments about them being a replacement to Goblins because I think Goblins are a fine Player race.

I think they should get +con instead of +cha, but that's a different argument.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

From what I'm seeing, they don't add carrying capacity. A backpack just allows you to drop 4 bulk off of your back as an action.

I hope they change it, because as it is, Backpacks aren't very useful.

16 people marked this as a favorite.

Ratfolk should be a core ancestry. Their race writeup makes them perfect as a core race.

They love collecting things, and actually prefer finding trinkets and treasures instead of gold, but in combat they're not afraid of using their collection of goodies to help themselves or others.

They're communal and form close bonds with their families, and will jump to protect their communities if something threatens them.

They are commonly found in cities. They love trade and commerce, and they get along well with humans, and it's implied that they either match or outnumber human population.

They have a stat block that isn't represented (+int, +dex, +free -Str), and they would create a bridge between Starfinder and Pathfinder, since Starfinder has the Y'soki as a core race.

Despite Ratfolk being apparently really common, they're almost never listed in any of the population breakdowns, and are basically ignored. I find that really strange, given their race block.

Here's a link to the PRD ratfolk page

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Bulk is a weird, unpleasant system because I can hold either 1 Longsword or 10 Shortswords as 1 Bulk.

10 Shortswords would be both HEAVIER and MORE UNWIELDY than a single Longsword.

But either way, my main problem is that the limits are too strict. Literally every one of my players has only the bare necessities. No one in my party has an especially high strength.

My Fighter decided he was going to be a Dex fighter because he wanted to use a whip to trip and disarm people (tripping and disarming in PF2 is great, BTW), so he has an average strength and a high dex.

Mudfoot wrote:
I agree with pretty much everything except ball bearings. Unless you have a flat, hard floor, they're not going to roll anywhere. Might as well just chuck some gravel on the ground for all the good it'll do. And ball bearings should be incredibly expensive if they're anything like the modern things.

Could do marbles. I don't think they need to be perfectly round to do their job.

And there are a lot of pretty smooth stone or paved floors that are just asking to be covered in marbles or ball bearings.

DerNils wrote:

I do agree that it's placement is poor, especially so if you let Talga tell them there is nothing in there. I avoided that by having goblins flee into this room, prompting my Players to follow.

As for the "exposed again", note that the fungus is a complex Hazard. That means, he emits new Spores whenever it's his turn in initiative. I have ruled that as being the new exposure.

I personally feel that breathing it in again should count as a new exposure. I feel like the rules are trying to say that if you get stabbed with a poison dagger and you succeed on the save vs poison, that you don't need to make another save from the same dagger being left in your side.

So if they hit you twice you would make the save twice, but if they only hit you once, you only make it once, no matter if the poison 'stays on you' or not.

Zman0 wrote:

There is no standard surprise round anymore. But, the rules allow for something similar.

If the enemies in exploration mode were using stealth as their tactic you would need to know if any PC was searching. Any PC that was searching with their declared exploration activity would roll against the Stealth DC of the enemy. If they succeeded they would be aware of the the enemy and roll initiative. If they failed the enemy could reveal them self in some way or could trigger 331 "Initiative after Reaction" section, ie the unseen enemy readies and uses a reaction to spring their trap launching an arrow. Then you'd roll initiative.

Think of it like the enemy triggers encounter mode, as long as they succeed and remain unseen and no PC observes them only they are effectively in encounter mode. Then, once they ready and react with an attack, or fail a stealth roll and become sensed, seen, etc you roll initiative.

It would be possible for the monster to spring their surprise ambush, with their readied attack, win initiative, and then have a full round to act.

This part of what you said makes sense to me, that's how I think I'll run it from now on.

the part after "Alternatively" left me a bit confused, though.

This is especially bad if the party comes into a room and you ask them to roll initiative because there's a hidden creature. It instantly tells them that there's something in the room to be afraid of.

This room felt really stupid and just pissed my players off.

It's a small room with an interesting fungus in it. As soon as the creatures step into the room, the fungus emits a cloud of spores, forcing a Fortitude save to resist becoming confused or stupefied.

This is a great idea, but there is literally no point in coming in this room, so all it did was waste a lot of time, and cause us a lot of confusion thanks to the Affliction rules. There is no treasure, nothing of value to find, just a little bit of XP for burning down a defenseless fungus.

The wording on Afflictions states that "On a successful or critically successful saving throw, you are unaffected by that exposure to the affliction. You do not need to attempt further saving throws against it unless you are exposed to the affliction again."

As it's worded, it sounds like you could walk into the virulent spore cloud, succeed at the fortitude save and then just stand in the spore cloud for 10 minutes, breathing the cloud in, without making another fortitude save.

That sounds silly to me.

Regardless of how it works, this fungus should have been put in the Goblin room. the confusion effect would have made a good trap for if players try to sneak in or something, and it would have made for an interesting set piece, trying to avoid going near the fungus while the goblins deftly fight around it, or pushing them into the cloud to make them confused and useless in combat.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

19: Adventure backgrounds are irritating. You're required to take an Adventure Background, and you only get one background, meaning that you have little freedom when you're doing premade adventures.

It worked better in PF1 when you had traits, because you got 2 traits and then the 1 adventure trait on top of it.

My players were all pissed when we found out you were required to take an adventure background because it felt like it limited their options.

20: You should be able to choose 1 or 2 skills to make Signature regardless of your class. It feels super restrictive not to be able to get Master or Legend in a skill just because of your class choice, and it feels like it limits player expression.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I've ran 2 sessions of Pathfinder 2nd Edition so far, and this is all of the feedback I've collected from my players and myself.

1: Goblins should not get a bonus to Charisma. They are hideous, unpleasant little bastards that society still doesn't like very much. I would give them Dexterity and Constitution because Goblins typically live in kind of gross environments out of necessity and would be hardier because they're used to wallowing in filth.

2: Strike, Stride, Seek and a lot of other things are awkward terminology. My players and I feel stupid saying them, and we frequently make fun of the weird new terminology at the table.

3: Wizards should cast spells like Arcanists. This isn't actually something mechanically wrong with the system, but I hate how they have to meticulously plan every single casting of their spells. I loved the freedom of being able to prepare a small pool and cast from that. I think it creates a smoother play session where the wizard can prepare a situational spell like Knock or something without completely freezing up a valuable, and limited, spell slot just to use that one spell, if they happen to come up against a locked door.

4: you should be able to drop items held in both hands as a single action. It doesn't make sense to have to use two separate free actions to drop the item in one hand and then the item in another. it's silly.

5: I feel that the duration on positive and negative effects should both last until the end of the turn. It feels pointless to make them resolve at different times, and it adds a small extra bit of confusion.

6: Why do creatures hiding in darkness treat creatures in lit areas they can see as 'Concealed'. that's weird. If I'm hiding in the shadows of the rafters, I don't have a hard time seeing the creatures in the well lit room below me.

7: I feel that you should be able to perform activities over multiple turns at the risk of being attacked and losing all of the spent actions. For instance, you could start an activity that takes 3 actions using the last action of your turn, then on your next turn finish it with the first 2 actions of that turn, but if you take damage you have to roll concentration or something to not get distracted and lose it.

8: You should put how far you fall in one turn. I know it's a long distance, but the question "How far do you fall in 6 seconds" is something I've asked a lot, and I feel like you could just put it in there really easly. It's nearly 600 feet or something.

9: You should bring back equipment kits. They're a great way of getting all of the equipment you need without having to meticulously comb through the lists. I don't know why you removed them.

10: Ball bearings. Add them to the game. They're like Caltrops that trip you instead.

11: the Sleep spell says "The target falls asleep" I feel like this should state more clearly that the target "Gains the Asleep condition" for clarity's sake.

12: HP recovery while resting, as it is currently written, would only heal a level 20 character with a 10 constitution by 1 HP.

It's current wording states that you heal a number of hit points equal to your Constitution Modifier x your level (Minimum 1), meaning that if you have a constitution modifier of 0 or less, you will only ever heal 1 HP, no matter how high your level is.

The minimum value you heal should be equal to your level, not 1.

13: I find it weird that you don't get a feat at first level.

14: My players feel that monsters being able to strike up to 3 times a round makes them too dangerous, and increases the chance that they'll hit (or critical hit) by sheer volume. Most low level monsters that I've run so far don't do anything other than attack, meaning that they would logically just attack as many times as they can manage, and the one fighter has to take most of those attacks because he's the first in to the fight.

This also means that a low AC, low HP character, like our Wizard is at extreme danger because a goblin has a much higher chance to hit him multiple times than the fighter, who has more HP and more AC. He could realistically die in one round of a goblin running up to him and hitting him twice.

15: Bulk is not a good system. It's far too abstract, and the number is far too low. Every one of my players, including the fighter, feel that they're being artificially limited by the Bulk system. They each can carry about 1 weapon, a piece of armor and a piece of adventuring gear. My fight has a Whip, a Rapier and his armor and he's at his weight limit. My cleric is much the same.

Also, a dagger should not weigh 5 - 10 pounds, so it shouldn't be a bulk. it should be L.

I would double the bulk limit, as it currently stands it feels far too low.

16: The wording on Afflictions is weird. It states that "On a successful or critically successful saving throw, you are unaffected by that exposure to the affliction. You do not need to attempt further saving throws against it unless you are exposed to the affliction again."

This came up in response to the Fungus room in the first adventure section. It leaves a lingering cloud of spores, and the wording of this paragraph implies that if you walk into the cloud, breathe the spores, and make your save that you shouldn't have to make the save again, no matter how long you spend in the cloud.

That sounds ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure that's not how it works, but the wording suggests that it is.

17: 3 action Heal doesn't increase with your level. 1 and 2 action heal recovers HP equal to 1d8 plus spellcasting modifier, and that increases to 2d8 when heightened. 3 action heal does not gain a benefit from being hightened.

This is a problem given how much damage enemies can deal because of how many attacks they can do in a turn, and also makes 3 action healing a waste of time when you're higher level.

18: The layout of the book isn't great. Spells should be at the back of the book, where they always have been. It makes it easier to find the spell section when you're looking, and it prevents Spells from taking up almost 100 pages in the middle of the book.

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Every single one of my party members and I hate bulk.

Everyone in my party can hold about 1 weapon, 1 piece of armor and maybe a shield and then they're at the limit of their bulk.

Back in PF1 you could easily carry a couple of weapons, armor and some adventuring tools without hitting encumbrance if you have a 12 strength.

The carrying capacity needs to be at least doubled.

I don't know how to handle surprise in combats.

I understand that Initiative is usually Perception, and that if the characters are sneaking before combat, it can be Stealth.

But how do I handle surprise? If 3 characters sneak into a room full of goblins and intend on attacking them, do I roll initiative for everyone, and then just ignore the initiative values of the Goblins until the PCs go?

Do the Goblins get to make Perception checks against the sneaking party when combat starts? is that what Initiative means?

I'm just not sure, and it's driving me crazy.

That's fair, yeah.

But now there's no such thing as a move action, it's just an action, so that removes the issue... doesn't it?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm only a few pages in, and I think one of the biggest potential problems is Strike and Stride.

they're only one letter apart, meaning that an accent can muddle which word they're going for.

My suggestion would be to change Stride to Move, Walk, Run, anything other than Stride.

Strike is fine, but "Ranged Strike" sounds really weird. Honestly I don't see the point in changing them from Attack and Move.

Sedoriku wrote:
Battle drones start with it a first level. Like flying drones start with two flying mods and the stealth with their stealth mod. And instead of making the mods specific they just give early access.

Ah, ok.

I just noticed that the engineer drone upgrade Reductive Armor makes no sense.
It starts at DR1 then gets DR2 at 7th level, then finally DR3 at 13th level... But it's an advanced mod, so you can't even get it until 11th level.

Was this tested?

Zwordsman wrote:

Another big note is the fact that Serum of healings heal hit points. Not stamina points.

Meaning the only time you're using this is when the guy is down to HP damage (cause you're not gonna needle shoot them after the battle. Just hand them the serum).
So... that means you're gonna ave to damage their HP more to heal HP. WHen they're already pretty close to death depending on the Hp amount.
Granted much less of an issue with Mark 2 or 3 serums I guess.
So really I guess only ever use the needler technique with Mark 2 or higher for emergency

That's a good point.

a -4 penalty seems like a waste of a lot of healing serums for a 1st level character with a not-great Dex.

Hopefully a writer sees this and clarifies.

It's kinda silly because they specifically point out that it's used by medics.


making my first character, a very social Vesk that will piss off every optimizer in existence.

I need something to do in combat, because my combat stats are crap, and I noticed the Needler pistol.

I want to use it for healing, but it deals 1d4 damage, meaning it has a potential to deal more damage than the healing serum heals.

Is there any way to make it *not* deal damage? without house ruling or whatever, of course.

I'm really frustrated with this adventure. there are a number of encounters that seem like they were written by people with no knowledge of encounter design.

Vague Encounter Complaints:
There's a part early on where you have to go through some small caves and deal with a number of weak enemies, but the encounters are all so trivial that it feels like a waste of time to include them.

Same with the wandering encounters in the habitat zone.

But I'm commenting here because there's a map dealing with a warehouse that's supposed to have 2 'indicated doors' and 1 'indicated crate' on the map, and the map doesn't have anything of the like.

Obviously as the GM I can deal with small omissions like that, but it's still frustrating.

Not happy with this adventure path so far, I hope the quality goes up with book 2 :T

The Golux wrote:
The difference between hardness and DR is that hardness also applies to energy damage, whether magic or not.

I just read DR and it reads stupidly too.

It explicitly cites DR/Magic as an example, saying that if it's DR/- then any type of damage is reduced, unless it explicitly states that it ignores DR.

Then goes on to say that Spells, Spell like abilities and Energy attacks (even non magical) ignore DR.


swoosh wrote:

Hardness on creatures is always weird, but the text about energy damage always references objects. Objects take half damage from energy damage barring specific exceptions. The rules only really reference that with hardness insofar as telling you which to apply first.

But there's no reason to believe a creature would take half damage from energy just because they have hardness. All hardness essentially is is DR/- that applies to all damage rather than just weapon damage.

If hardness is basically DR/- then why hardness at all? I checked on Golems, which are basically fantasyrobots, and they just have DR/Adamantine, so I don't understand why someone thought it was a good idea to introduce a completely new creature mechanic on this.

I assumed that since it had hardness it was some kind of weird object/creature hybrid, so I interpreted it to the best of my ability after reading hardness from multiple sources.

They should have left it as DR because using terminology normally reserved for objects on a creature and not explaining it is BAD.

Why would DR only apply to weapon damage? As I understand it, any source of damage that isn't explicitly listed as the thing that overcomes DR should be reduced by DR.


What kind of sword is he wielding? Even with a vanilla longsword, power attacking with it in two hands should break hardness on an average roll.

The character is using a Falcata, and the party as a whole managed to do something like 6 damage to it in 3 turns, meanwhile the character using the sword got rekt because he was the first one to engage it, so the robot deemed him the primary threat and beat the s+*$ out of him, then with his grab threw the dog out of the room at the Summoner.

I mostly had him thrown to encourage the party to leave the room, since they were clearly not ready for this threat, but the thing did enough damage consistently to destroy him without any real trouble, and no one else in the group could do enough damage to actually be a threat to it.

I admittedly don't understand how hardness is supposed to apply to creatures and not objects, since it's VERY RARE that creatures have hardness, and not DR, so I've been using the Hardness rules right out of the book, since I've not been given anything else to work with, even after searching through the PRD and PFSRD

Where is the height of the rooms mentioned? I scoured the adventure back and forth looking for some mention of room height and I couldn't find it. I expected it to be in the information panel on walls, cielings and floors, but it wasn't.

My party only has one fighter type - it's a battle oracle with power attack and the tengu trait of being able to wield any "sword". He has a 16 strength and has power attack, and he can just barely chip the paint on a good roll.

The rest of the group is a Vigilante, a Slayer and a Summoner. The Summoner's eidolon is broken OP and I hate it, but it does 3 separate attacks, so it rarely even penetrates the hardness, and on the off chance that it does, I think it can do 1 or 2 damage max?

The thing stands in one room, where the main objective of part 3 is, and stands guard. It will only leave the room if harassed from outside of the room by ranged attacks, and it likely shouldn't stray far from the room because it's guarding something that it considers very important and worth protecting.

The issue is that most of the players can't even chip the paint, much less penetrate the armor. Only the Battle Oracle and MAYBE the summoner's Eidolon can deal the kind of damage that they need to regularly do a couple points of damage, meanwhile it can hit them pretty hard.

I'll give them kudos, this is the first enemy encounter that's managed to actually be a real threat. All of the other 'boss' encounters (that consisted of a single tough enemy that they mobbed on top of like a hoard of angry bees) only lasted 2 rounds at most.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azten wrote:

Hardness usually does take half from elemental damage(before the reduction from hardness) but it's up to you if that hardness even applies.

Maybe drop a +1 Shocking weapon somewhere?

I'm always wary of giving the players something extra. I subtly pushed one of my players to grab a wand of technomancy, and it ended up making one of the NPCs that's supposed to be important completely pointless.

I'm running Iron Gods for my players, and we just hit the Collector Robot.

I'm not going to lie, I think the encounters in this book are written pretty badly, and I'm seriously concerned for the later books, but this collector robot really takes the cake.

What Level 2 (maybe 3) adventuring party can fight something that can deal up to 14 damage per turn, fly to keep out of melee range, and has 10 HARDNESS!?

The robot can not only wreck my party, but they can barely hurt it. Only the Battle Oracle in the group can really damage it - only dealing 2 damage max on a near perfect roll.

Yes, it's weak against electricity and crits, but critical hits aren't exactly something you can rely on, and even if you *DO* get a critical hit, it's still shaving off 10 points of damage. it's possible to crit this thing and have it shrug off all of the damage. And electricity isn't something every group is going to have ready availability to - my group's only caster is a summoner.

Most adventures will have something that you can find to soften up a tough encounter like this, but there's nothing of real use in the dungeon so far, and all of the useful magic items (specifically the adamantine ones) are FAR too expensive for my group to buy.

Me and my players are both super frustrated with this adventure.

Its Electricity weakness doesn't even seem to make much of a difference, because hardness only takes half damage from elemental damage, as far as I understand?

So, even it's weaknesses don't make it any better to deal with.

I'm running Iron Gods, and I'm not sure what the intended advancement speed for the module is?

I have a 4 man group, and I don't want them to end up over or under leveled.

Thanks c:

What is the point of these? I got them hoping I could use the maps instead of having to hand draw all of the awkwardly shaped caves, and then I find out that the maps are all tiny and completely useless.

Liz Courts wrote:

Oh dear. This is a question with a complicated set of answers. Fortunately, I can help out, but the thing you need to remember is that the Pathfinder Compatibility License is a legal document. If you do not understand it, or the Open Gaming License, you really really should consult a lawyer.

I did put together an unofficial guide to the Pathfinder Compatibility License that does explain some of what's going on.

Now, the first thing you need to decide: Are you doing this for personal enjoyment, and not for profit? If so, look at the Community Use Policy. The Community Use Policy allows you to reference our intellectual property and product identity (our setting and many many many other things).

If you're looking to publish and distribute your supplement, then you would be considered a third-party publisher. (And the thing you need to ask yourself there is: do I want to write, or do I want to deal with the *business* of being a publisher and everything that entails? If the former, seek a partnership with a preexisting publisher who can handle all the day-to-day stuff of publishing).

Agreeing to the Pathfinder Compatibility License requires you to fully understand what you're agreeing to, and being liable for your mistakes. I suggest you read the Compatibility License and the Open Gaming License thoroughly before proceeding any further.

Either way, I look forward to hearing more from you. :)

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly!

I'd certainly like to publish and distribute it for profit, but primarily I want to raise awareness for my development company, and one of my settings.

Here's a link to our site, if you're curious:

I'll have to make some time to read through the Compatibility License, I'm pretty well familiar with the OGL already (Wayfarer is likely going to be published under the OGL once I get back to working on that), but in the meantime are there any glaring things that you could tell me about it (the Compatability License), maybe some frequent mistakes, or anything of that nature?

I've been seriously considering writing a pathfinder supplement based on a setting I've been working on - adding some races, some magic items, some monsters and a town, maybe a short adventure too - but I don't want to get deep into writing the supplement before I know the rules of making a Pathfinder Supplement.

Am I allowed to reference Pathfinder and it's setting specifically? or is it like D&D, where you can only mention it as "the worlds most popular RPG system" and other vague references?

Does anyone know if there's just a convenient list I could reference? or perhaps a Paizo representative that could walk me through it?


Hey, Paizo Community,

I've been working on a pen and paper RPG that's currently going by the name "Wayfarer Project", which is a d20 OGL RPG based on PFRPG's version of the OGL, and I've run into a bit of a snag that I'm hoping some of you may have a solution to.

I've more or less completely gutted the combat system out and replaced it with something of my own design. To put things simply, AC is out the door, as is Base Attack Bonus.

In place of AC, you have Dodge and Defense. Dodge acts as what AC once was - it's the score that enemies have to roll to hit you. Defense, on the other hand, is more like damage reduction. Armor has 3 defense values, some armor has 4.
Blunt, Slashing, Piercing and Magic defense. Blunt damage is reduced by the "Blunt" Defense score, Slashing damage is reduced by the "Slashing" defense score, so on, and so forth.

Armor is protective, but also heavy, so armor check penalty applies to your dodge - meaning it's easier for enemies to hit you, but harder for them to hurt you while you're wearing armor.

My main problem is that Dodge isn't high enough to justify NOT wearing armor, because it's still calculated similarly to touch AC:
10 + Dexterity Modifier + Shield + Misc things.

I'm still in the middle of rewriting/removing/changing things, so you can assume that things that raise AC would instead raise Dodge (like the Dodge feat, for example).

The other problem is directly related to the system I've put in place to change attack bonuses and proficiencies. Your attack bonus comes from something called "Weapon skills". There are currently 8 weapon skills, and every weapon falls into a certain skill category. Longswords would fall into Light Blades, Maces fall into Blunt, etc.
When you attack with a weapon, you add the weapon skill of the category it fits in.

Every level you gain a 3 Training Points. Training points can be used to buy proficiencies with weapons, but also used to increase your weapon skill ranks to a maximum (Currently) of your Level + 4.

At first level, you could have a minmaxed fighter swinging with an attack bonus of +10 (+5 from 20 strength, +5 from weapon skill) which means that you'd have a near guarantee of hitting anyone without a particularly high dodge, and as you get higher level, your dodge would start to become less and less adequate...

I've considered lowering the weapon skill max to Level + 2, but that only helps so much. What I'm saying, basically, is that Dodge isn't as viable as I want it to be, and I need help making it moreso without making armor also useless.

Here are links to the current system docs for my game, If you could take a look and give me your thoughts, I'd be most appreciative.


P.S. If you like the idea, I have a facebook page made for it at

lantzkev wrote:
my own advice, become a dual cursed oracle so you can force re-rolls for every opponent you face 1/day and then at lvl 10 pick up divine interference so you can do it twice a day!

Being an oracle doesn't fit what I want with this character, and being an oracle doesn't give the utility that a wizard/cleric mix gives.

Cap. Darling wrote:
Spell penetration and grater is needed you plan to cast spells that dosent ignore SR. Consider taking magic knack to boost wizard caster level also(pegasus with extra trait feat). Some meta magic; extend, and reach pehaps. You Will still want spell mastery at level 15. Also consider spell specialisation to get 2 more caster levels on the attack spell og your dreams.

Thanks for the advice, I'll take a look at those. I don't really want to get Magic Knack because I don't really see a lot of value in a +2 caster level bonus to most spells, I was really hoping that it'd give me the spells-per-day from being 2 caster levels higher too.

is Meta-magic really worth the extra slots? it's always seemed like so big of a tradeoff.

Mojorat wrote:

If this is for a PC I would suggest avoiding offense and focus on stuff that does not require saving throws. As a full support character mystic theurges can be okay and have lots of options. But offensivly they are behind a wall they can never jump over.

If it is for an NPC it makes for a very poor BBEG the lost caster levels are painful.

Basically, for offense just geting fireball when everyone else has hit their stride with SOD or SOS spells is painful and if for a PC can lead to frustration.

As an asside though i like the mystic theurge as a support prc alot but not as an offensive caster.

She's my PC, and her main purpose is a support caster, but I'd like to have some offensive spells to back up my main group if a dangerous combat situation rises.

My main issue is feats, actually, since I never know what to choose for those... there are so many.

Bugbear (Custom, using ARG)
Monstrous Humanoid (3RP)
Medium size (0RP)
Normal Speed (0RP)
Specialized Ability Scores (1RP)
+2 STR, +2 DEX, -2 CHA
Standard Language (0RP)
Common, Goblin
Fearless (1RP)
+2 Racial Bonus against Fear
Stalker (1RP)
Stealth and Perception are always class skills.
Gatecrasher (2RP)
+2 bonus to strength checks to break down barriers, +2 to CMB to Sunder
Skill Bonus (2RP)
+2 Intimidate Skill

She's currently level 9, Cleric(3) Wizard(3) Mystic Theurge(3)

STR: 14
DEX: 14
CON: 12
INT: 17
WIS: 16
CHA: 8

BAB: +4

I'm not going to go into her skills in detail, but she has at least 1 point in all of her trained skills, and she has most of her skills focused in knowledge, spellcraft and sense motive.

She's a Universal Wizard, I'm leaning towards an Arcane Bond instead of a familiar

She's a cleric of Nethys, and her Cleric domains are Magic and Knowledge.

Her talents are Self-taught scholar and Bruising intellect.

So, now that I have character stats down - I'm looking for feats that would be applicable for a mystic theurge. Her whole theme is knowledge and support, but given that she's got two classes that prepare spells, I want her to be capable of both support and offense.

Also any other advice would be appreciated, but keep it civil, please, I've had some bad experiences with extreme judgements on character builds.

Thanks :3

The Golux wrote:
Demonskunk wrote:

Hey, James Jacobs. I'm playing a cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 3, and I've run into a little problem with the Cleric portion.

My character is a cleric of Nethys, whose only domain is Magic.
I'm also supposed to take a domain for my alignment... which is Neutral (Nethys' alignment is TN)
There is no domain for Neutral, so my domains are Magic and _______.

What should I do about this?

Where did you get the idea that you're supposed to/have to take an alignment domain?

Because my deity only has one domain, so the only other domain I can take is an alignment domain.

And, ah, ok, thanks James.

Hey, James Jacobs. I'm playing a cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 3, and I've run into a little problem with the Cleric portion.

My character is a cleric of Nethys, whose only domain is Magic.
I'm also supposed to take a domain for my alignment... which is Neutral (Nethys' alignment is TN)
There is no domain for Neutral, so my domains are Magic and _______.

What should I do about this?

1 to 50 of 163 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>