Doki-Chan's page

Goblin Squad Member. 191 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 191 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Trying to be careful about this one as it's an in-game effect that affects the color of a character's skin, and don't want to reopen flamey threads about "no we can't have any"/"but that's racist/ableist" etc etc which is definitely not my intent... This question re Drow (also Tengu, Orc, Goblin etc) Aesthetics, it's not a ruling I'm after, just an extra font of wisdom focused on the following...

Shadowbound Oracles get the following blurb: "Your pigmentation is oddly colorless, and your eyes are highly sensitive to light."
So, how colorless is colorless, when referring to the Oracle Curse: Shadowbound, and how much would this affect different playable races?
(NB: not the full-blown Corruption from Horror Adventures)

Thoughts: this is why I'm a bit *hmmm had thoughts: is everyone OK with this?*:
I guess I want to get away from the thinking of a (why is pale pinkish the default) person looking chalk-white in an albino sense, and was thinking of how Shaun Ross, Yellowman or Connie Chiu are also albino and more diverse examples; given that Drow in Golarion seem to have this "midnight-indigo" trend, rather than D&D default "obsidian", could you end up with something more akin to either an "ice-blue" effect, or grey/something less pronounced due to the magical nature of the change from elf to drow to begin with...
... mainly to veer away from the Caligni goth aesthetic as well, and still be unnaturally pigmented...? Although this could also end up with apple-white/mint-green goblins...

Or, does "colorless" mean something slightly different in this case? I was looking into animal (mainly birds and tigers) pigmentation due to Tengu thoughts, and came across Leucistic, which may fit too; there's this lovely picture of a Leucistic American Robin...
A Leucistic Oracle/Shadow-Corrupted Rakshasa could be a cool thing as well, maybe?

Especially as as it's an Oracle Curse, it's getting in the realms of does a Divine Curse overwrite such a dominant racial effect (and I didn't want to get into this tense debate):
Lightbringer vs Shadowbound

(This is for a PC I was thinking of: my GM is cool with it, but I wanted to share the concept with you and see what you thought? I was intrigued by an outcast Drow (Tiefling) Oracle for the previous Q's Misraria reasons of "the heresy of the Redeemer Queen" and possibly playing in Return of the Runelords; all I'm waiting for now is Tyrant's Grasp 6 to hit Herolabs for the lovely new Obediences, thanks James :) ...)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Going off that, would a social/espionage focused Midnight Isles adventure dealing with the fallout of Nocticula's ascension be something that would interest you?
It would absolutely would interest me. Whether or not it'd interest anyone else is the thing that'd help get a plot like this into print.

Which could also tie into my thoughts on "What happens to House Misraria?"

I was thinking that since Sabriune (Council of Thieves redux) "left before the rush" (no mention of anyone who came with, or didn't make it out), then my question is: Would this be the just the first few cracks in House Misraria that precede something momentous happening in the Shadowlands (Drow Central in particular); would it end up being somewhere between"This is the New House, same as the Old House", or a full-on Schism/Destruction (given that if for a few days the cleric spells stop being doled out before they switch, there could be a whole cavern full of surprises in store...)?

i.e. this all depends on percentages of:
- those "escapees" that go off to do their own Nocticula Redeemed shenanigans,
- those who get siphoned off to which new/old Demon Lord {or other similar entity}, and/or
- those adopted by a.n.other House angling for a handy bunch of new followers, and
- those who get backstabbed by either their own, or other opportunistic Houses...

I have another aesthetic Q about Drow, but I'll wait a bit so it's not clogging up the system

I once had an elf that had to make do with a human's body that had been infected with lycanthropy, as it was the only spare lying around...

At least this conversation is (slightly) more civilised than the slanging match it became several years ago (fair enough on not wanting the mechanics or complication of drow PCs in your game - i.e. Second Darkness - {a Good GM could have handled that in my opinion} but the thread almost came to the equivalent of a PFS GM telling a theoretical black guy that rocked up to a PFS table they can't play a black elf because "it just isn't done" *flounce flounce* which was not handled well...)

... that said, some of those guys seem to have gone...

Drow or Half-Drow as playable in PFS

Nocticula's Boons: is anyone allowed to say how they have changed from her previous ones? (and which Character classes you think they synergise well with if you don't do Evangelist etc because of not wanting to lose a class capstone?)

Thanks A20: that's one of the other 2-3 Archetypes I was looking at, because I know I will have to pre-plan the spirit "set pieces" (due to all the extra accounting) in plenty of time by having separate sheets that I can sub in when I'm being guided by a particular one

And thanks d20pfsrd for looking in :)

Well it explains my wariness; if they'd stuck with the same wording as the initial "selects one spell from the..." i.e. "also selects" instead of "may choose", the intent would have been far more clear, (and for the same word-count). To clarify in the other direction needs more and different text I guess...

The thing with the Qinggong monk is definitely better phrased for each individual class ability...

Thanks :) I noticed this as I was messing about with different Oracle archetypes and was one of the "hmmm that's weird" list, and wanted to see if it really was possible or just strangely worded...

I've been a bit wary picking this to design my latest Oracle: because of the wording I was never sure on some stuff...

I'm not sure if this is correct or not, as I know sometimes RAW/RAI can get pretty fuzzy due to things missed in word-limit, but I'm surprised no -one else seems to have queried it yet (unless I have missed that...):

Oracle Ancient Lorekeeper Archetype states the following:

rules wrote:

Elven Arcana (Ex)

At 2nd level, an ancient lorekeeper’s mastery of elven legends and philosophy has allowed her to master one spell used by elven wizards. She selects one spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list that is at least one level lower than the highest-level oracle spell she can cast. The ancient lorekeeper gains this as a bonus spell known. The spell is treated as one level higher than its true level for all purposes.
The ancient lorekeeper *may choose* an additional spell at 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th levels.

This ability replaces the bonus spells she would normally gain at these levels from her chosen mystery."

(emphasis mine on bolded/italicized text)

The text from the rules above, seems to imply you only Must choose the cantrip (SL-1 spell) for your Level 2 bonus spell, and then you MAY sub in one of the SL-1 Sor/Wiz spells for an even level Mystery one if you so choose... (i.e. anything above the first bonus spell is optional...)

However, when I'm trying to design this in the Oracle Tab on "a certain electronic character sheet tool TM": when you choose this archetype, it states you MUST choose a spell for each bonus spell known above 2, and automatically wipes out any and all spells from your Mystery List.

I would have liked to have an Oracle be able to sub out only the spells they may choose to change (especially if you have the spell on the original mystery from another source - i.e. SLA - so you only wanted to "May Choose" bonus 2,6,12,16 for instance, and keep some of the original mystery spells); why would it give the option to choose a spell at each bonus level otherwise... or is this just poor semantics on RAW? They could have got one less word by saying "chooses" (or "selects" as before) if word-limit was a problem...

This is the only Oracle archetype I can see like this with "may choose". Usually on d20pfsrd you write an optional change like "(X)" {see Reincarnated Oracle Revelations where you have two revelations to select in three slots, and you choose which way round they go} so have they always got the interpretation wrong too?
I also know that if you had two other archetypes that didn't clash on level of bonus spells changed you could then select both... that's what "at these levels" is?

Now I'm not sure what would be the correct interpretation?

I am aware that this suddenly makes the AL archetype somewhat more powerful... I'm also aware that I probably won't get a ruling from the Powers That Be at this late a stage, and I know I can get house ruling from GM, but there should be support for PF1 players still, if we have enough material to run things for the next 10 years and want to design characters on electronic format for ease of play?

Is the OP still looking for ideas? As if you want to dip a level of Dreamthief you will get your rogue class bonuses and skill ranks to a bunch of non-oracle skills, without the Sneak that Claxon doesn't like (plus a free feat depending on which focus you pick {as the "spirit" i.e. Dreamshard is *always* in your head}, bonuses to attack once a round, and your rogue level in "free" skill points to 2 skills depending on focus).
You could even stack that with Nameless Shadow archetype , to get a "mundane" secret identity and bonuses to attack in the first round... (although you would lose the trap stuff however; if you are still planning mostly Oracle, trample a bunch of summoned shadow creatures through areas that will set most traps off)

I have a possible (not completely optimised) NamelessShadow+Dreamthief1/Shadow Oracle(Lorekeeper)9/Evangelist{PrC} coming up next year sometime if I can get it right, if you don't mind losing Oracle capstone (which I'm not bothered about, but not 100% locked into this combo yet), Prestigious Spellcaster is retroactive so you should be able to get the spellcasting level back but not the last two revelations.

Now, if you want to buff your stealth/sneaky powers a different way than Not taking shadow oracle, there's Dip 1 Oracle level just to get a handy few 1st level divine spells, Lore Mystery and the CHA to Know skills which will mean you can spend some skill points elsewhere (and extra revelation or a ring to get the CHA AC bonus), then take Umbral Scion or Shadow Sorcerer for your shadow work, and even if you did take Evangelist PrC there's a way of boosting your Sorcerer Level to get the Capstone if you want...

or there's always taking Eldritch/Exotic Heritage route:
Skill Focus (Stealth), Eldritch(Shadow) Sorcerer Bloodline powers (Shadowstrike {a bit meh but handy when you run out of other attacks and can buff non-lethal}, then the Shadow Well)
Exotic Heritage (which counts as a lesser skill focus to get the Wildblooded Heritages) Eldritch Heritage(Umbral) for Cloak of Shadows, then Shadow Well...

The above Heritage route could go well with several archetypes mentioned in above posts... and also you can build a stealthy Evangelist (Cleric not PrC)?

If you are needing those skills to be a Face, then there are a lot of ways to Face a party than Charisma alone

If you are after Divine spells with face skill buffs, possibly a Dandy Ranger (takes the bard spell list and uses CHA, but doesn't say it changes to Arcane) or Filidh Bard (which changes spells to Divine) or somesuch...

In that case I'd settle for the person who wrote it to give a guideline on how they intended it to be?

Thanks all :)

So, I forgot/missed the sentence "The effect resulting from this roll begins at the end of that enemy’s turn"
As that also gives the sentence after more weight, because an ally wouldn't rush you to AoO, agreed...

You could also abuse the "I keep casting orisons on myself" out of combat for the chance to make yourself smaller for a round to get through somewhere if no-one else had Reduce; I don't think that was the intent either...

Does this need FAQ then?

Also if you were a Dhampir and Enemy channeling went off, (or came up against a Channeler of the Unknown's Entropy channel) I guess that counts too...?

I've probably got a year to sort out a ruling, and was going to ask my GM about it when I saw them next anyway (I may end up taking another curse if this one is a pain for both of us to accountant.)

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

(First part is general musing, the rules Q is at the end)

I was wondering if anyone had used or come into contact with one of the newer curses from Heroes of Golarion in play yet: God-Meddled... and if it would work/tweak for an Oracle that follows Nocticula in Return of the Runelords (hoping to play next year after all the boons stuff comes out), as the rest of the gods are in two minds about this upstart cult claiming that Lady N is going to do what she does by the end... which affects the Divine flow of power from wherever it comes from to the PC.

Here's the gist from AoN writeup:

"God-Meddled (Heroes of Golarion pg. 14): The gods’ interference in your life has left you with strange, unpredictable powers dependent on divine whim. Bizarre side effects occur whenever you are affected by a spell from a divine caster—for better or for worse. Once per round, when *a creature* casts a divine spell including you as a target, roll 1d20 and consult the table below. The effect resulting from this roll begins at the end of that enemy’s turn. This effect targets only you, even if other creatures were included as targets of the triggering spell. At 5th level, etc etc...."

My question is: when it says "a creature", does that also include you casting spells on yourself?
Just so's I know to pick some spells that can cast before a fight, or on others. Self-healing's going to be interesting...
Also does this include wands or items that cast divine?

I apologise for Thread Necro (and I could see nowhere else this is mentioned), but I think the 1 level dip to get 2 skills with X extra ranks (with X = PC's total HD), as Alphavoltario suggests above isn't as it appears:

The Spiritualist proper gets these ranks via the Phantom's Hitdice, so, as the HD are tied to that of the Spiritualist, they get a rank per "HD", which is essentially the same as the Spiritualist level.

The Dreamthief description, it is mentioned you at least get the free ability/feat the phantom has all the time, BUT (emphasis mine):

d20pfsrd wrote:

"She gains the abilities granted by that emotional focus (with the exception of the focus determining her good saving throws—she retains the typical rogue saves). For each of the two skills associated with that emotional focus, a dreamthief gains ranks in that skill equal to her *rogue* level; this does not allow her ranks in these skills to exceed her Hit Dice."

Effectively this means:

you {spend your total HD - Rogue levels} in the skill, to get an effective total of max ranks (and if you spend max ranks with "real Skillpoints" anyway, the bonus DT ranks are ignored),
you take 1 level rogue dip to get max ranks w.o. spending other skill points in that skill (like using a headband of intellect +2 to get a skill you didn't have before)

To summarise, if you only dip one level of DT, you only get the one level's worth of ranks...

(I'll also be asking this at Hero Labs as it seems to have been applied incorrectly there too... I would have loved to spend less Skill Points on two useful skills but I can't in all conscience do so...)

Garak "I'm just a humble tailor" from Star Trek DS9 might pull off a Nameless Shadow Rogue... (or even just a dip, for the merchant guise and bonus to stab up unwitting rubes on the first attack)

(for added fun, if you don't want sneak attack on a rogue as you asked on the prev page, you can play Dreamthief archetype, and it would stack with the above, and get Iron Will from Dedication if you needed that for a build...)

Entomophobe drawback: might be worth it if you are not doing Mummy's Mask, or other swarm-heavy scenarios. RAI description seems to only imply invertebrates, although Monkey or dead cat (Ubashki) swarm and their Distraction ability might still have an effect if your DM is RAW-minded...

(this is not an excuse to go screaming the place down like Willie from Temple of Doom... or maybe it is...?)

Nameless Shadow: could be +1 as a dip only for the ability to instantly change to your vigilante identity after targeting a foe for -2AC.

This could work very well if you were thinking of a Vigilante style Arcane Trickster build (The Stalker strike ability in Vigilante doesn't count for the +2d6 requisite), as you still get the +1d6 Sneak Attack (and Evasion if 2 levels), as well as a Seamless “humble merchant” disguise at +20.

Unfortunately doesn't stack with Knife Master for Kukri/Startoss build :(

Hi again :)

Following the Nocticula theme: will her sacred animal still be a bat? Or will there be two animals for a time?

Asking for anyone wanting a Redeemed style familiar/animal companion, or Bard Duettist, etc...

Also those wanting Improved familiars to fit the theme also, (say, how a CG character might angle for a lyriaken), what do you deem an appropriate match?

Hi James,
Since Nocticula is doing the upwards shuffle, what about the trajectory of her immortal servants (probably not including those who are almost settled in their position barring more celestial/demonic shenanigans i.e. a certain current Midnight Isles caretaker manager, or the majority of some types of demon, such as Shadow, who are more of a lip-service kind of deal...)?

In various published material about other gods and their servants, underlings, Empyreal Lords etc, it usually mentions what type of outsiders (hosts of unnamed demons, azata, etc.) serve them, but has any decision been written yet (I may have missed it) on what types will serve "O She of the Pointy Hairdo" in the future?

Or is it very fluid and/or up to individual outsiders at this point... ... leading to, are any Lesser outsiders deserting or joining from other demon lords or deities?

And if individual "diet cola beverage of evil" succubi and other demons follow her, do they change into anything else (or are they covered by the "one alignment step away clause")?

So... basically, Ventriloquism (for editing or whatever reason) is missing the "and (then) makes a save (in the usual way)" rather than the "and" it has in the description?

This is the point I was trying to make on the other thread: If an unknown assailant casts their voice behind me, I have to turn round and figure out if there is actually anything (or an invisible thing) behind me before either proceeding or guessing (which is the "interaction")...

This becomes slightly more important when using Threatening Illusion (see other thread) as this gives flanking as False Flanker if not saved for on top of the other effects...

Interesting argument and one I am not sure on: one argument is the last line of: If *hearing* counts, then should just *seeing* count as extrapolation...? - the common sense ruling probably comes into play: i.e. if you are expecting an invisible foe, etc., should you at least check the area the effect is coming from to make sure it is not real?

If I "hear" a noise right behind me, I do not know if it is real or not until I turn around and check the area out...

Does this need FAQ ruling, because does it have an effect on how the feat Threatening Illusion works...?

Let them find out it only does that damage to evil creatures (just a masterwork or +1 dagger against everything else...?)

And/or fling a bunch of creatures that don't bleed (if there are any, otherwise fast heal 1) against the party.. The fighters will catch up eventually, if you give them a "situational weapon" too, and let them shine in a different encounter.

Then hold the WBL a bit (or give a bunch of one-off items) till they all settle back to it...

(think Butterknife of Balduran: really useful against lycanthropes and a couple of other things, but it's still a rubbish butterknife otherwise...)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you haven't seen them, the TV Tropes entries may give a few more ideas:

Swamps are Evil


Thirsty Desert

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Swamp: water water everywhere and newts have taken a dump in it.

That's why I said Wracking Ray as Fort save, still does 1/2 damage to Dex and Str on a failed save (takes char to min of 1); one or two points of STR weakening....

Oh, plus you could put monsters in that don't take crits and he won't even get that Panache back...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

He also only has 4 Panache points. Make sure you keep a tally of when he spends and gets them back, which is different for Inspired Blade.

Inspired Blade wrote:
Unlike other swashbucklers, an inspired blade gains no panache from a killing blow. She gains panache only from scoring a critical hit with a rapier.

He will also only be able to do a lot of other tricks if he has one Panache left... (either to spend or in bank: see Kip Up and Initiative)

Flank him with minions and they will still get an AoO on him even if he "dodgy" Panaches...

Have a look at spells that have an effect even if the PC passes the save, or have no save...

This is only one site: I'm sure others can recommend some more of these type of spells...

Debuffing Spells that either No Save, fatigue, stagger etc...

Also one of my personal faves: Wracking Ray

An encounter at level 10 and the bad guy may only have one of these spells, but being fatigued or staggered for a round, or a couple of points of attribute loss will bring those saves and ACs down to more manageable levels...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The closest real life example I can find of climbing an ice waterfall and narrow escapes is this:

Narrow Escape From Ice Waterfall Collapse

A rogue would probably be better than these guys maybe?

Basically the other closest example I can map this situation to an effect of "suddenly no ground" going off to the area right next/under you to (un)certain doom is:

The Deathfall Pit Trap: the hardest trap I could find (at short notice)

Or the spell that you can target directly under the feet of Create Pit... :

Both these allow reflex saves to jump clear of the effect; or you just take it that a rogue character should know what a player won't: how to climb stuff that is brittle and would have the sense to not just use the ice alone?

(Just as we let wizards have poetic license for knowing impossible stuff their characters never would as pretty much no-one IRL is that smart...)

YMMV, I guess, but if what you and they think a frozen waterfall look like are completely different (some do have rocks poking out), then mayhap a description of what the ice waterfall looked like would clarify...?

Duration: Instantaneous, "The item cools to its previous temperature almost instantly." So it's not for 5 seconds, it's an instant superheat and then back to normal temperature.

The most important words are "may make a save" to Reflexively drop it. The Savvy Fire Immune/Resistant creature can go pah, I don't have to roll, I hold on and take no damage...

EDIT: goshdarnit I took too long to write that :)

Hi GM! *waves...*

Adding Goodberry to the list it affects? (assuming you can't cram all the berries into your mouth at once as that counts as being super full?)

Azothath wrote:

the ioun stone only heals damage that was taken while worn, see ring of regeneration. No harsh rulings required.

Thanks, I'm just clarifying for myself really, in case the question comes up in play I will have better answers than when I started :)

So, Just probably Infernal/Celestial Healing that won't work (unless on a Wand)

Had not thought about Fast Healing effects {the specific words being "when you receive healing" in the drawback : Infernal/Celestial Healing are all Conjuration (Healing) spells still...} so I'm unsure myself.

Thanks :)

Thanks Jeraa, I realized that and edited the original bit to make it Channeling instead, as low level clerics would do 1d6...

The biggest flaw would be using a friend's Pearly White Spindle Ioun stone that healed 1hp per time period I think, depending on a DM ruling harshly...

Hi, I've been looking at the Bitter Drawback (link)... (from the Antihero's Handbook)

It's more of a low level question (as at high levels, 1hp is neither here nor there, {except that one time when it is}), but:

I wondered if your allies made potions, wands, (or even items/iouns/armor that healed you as its power x/day etc), would this also count as their "class feature" (especially if the feat to create stuff was a class bonus feat for them, such as Brew Potions, Wondrous Items etc.)?

By extrapolation, would the drawback also apply when you buy (or find/loot) an item of healing? From a fluff point of view is it the not trusting your mates on the spot versus not trusting the healing in all sources...?

Just want to clear this up before possibly selecting it for a character; I am pushing the question to (il)logical extremes to see where the line is... if you could buy the same wand of healing from a shop instead of using one your mate made, if you get 1 point extra healing from the one in the shop compared to your mate's wand that seems odd... (i.e. what's to stop your mate selling a bunch to the shop and then you buying one that you don't know was made by them)?

Coming back to class spell/feature vs. item (fluff), is it because "all magic wands are the same, and do the same xDn each time" that you would trust a wand rather than an ally and their "personal motives"?

Also, if a villain heals you for whatever reason (sloppy use of channeling, not realising a usually harmful effect heals you, or you are a prisoner and they want to keep you alive), what does that count as?

Final bit, if an ally heals you with (edited, realized Cure Light is 1d8+1 minimum) Channeling for 1d6 at 1st-2nd level, if a 1 is rolled does that mean 0 healing (also if that were the case, would it still Stabilize you)?

In an up-and-coming Zeitgeist game I'm planning on using Channeler of the Unknown to ostensibly "worship" a Dead Goddess (but unbeknown to her, something else has hijacked that...)

James Jacobs wrote:

It might just be because I'm deep in vacation mode but I'm not really able to see a question in there...

Please re-post your question in a short and clear way.

Hi James sorry for that: I think I found what I was looking for here... (basically the Other Other reason for an Ur-Priest, nicking some ideas from FR...)

Antihero Handbook and using CotU to mimic the absence of a God, Not the (ex-)cleric's faith

Enjoy the holiday and don't stress about me mangling my thoughts...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nighttree wrote:
Descriptive text aside...Channeler of the unknown is perfect for the Ur Priest idea I have been wanting to do for some time :P

AHA! This is what I was looking for... I probably wasted a post or two trying to explain the concept I was after in the JJ thread ...

My really rambly enquiry as to whether a CotU could be used to simulate worshipping a Dead God...

So apparently the Fluff I was after is in the following place...Ur-Priest link
"Atypical Ur-Priests
This article is mainly about the ur-priest that seeks to gain earthly power by siphoning off the power of the gods. But there is another type: the ex-cleric of a dead god. In this case their deity died, disappeared, or faded from lack of worship; the ur-priest siphons power to keep his divine powers working while he tries to resurrect his god, or elevate a new deity to replace it."

James Jacobs wrote:
Doki-Chan wrote:

Instead of becoming an ex-cleric due to failing obligations/alignment, when a cleric loses (how careless ;P ) their deity due to the said deity either dying, getting destroyed, annulled, MIA etc. could you use the Archetype "Channeler of the Unknown" for that (to keep spells etc...)?

i.e. Everyone knows that Aroden died, and Iomedae stepped in, but could this somehow cover a transition period where clerics of Aroden were backed by someone/thing... BUT still going through the "Aroden Bless Me Please?" motions, depending on how long Iomedae took to don the mantle, so to speak (or was it a case of "it was her as the unknown power all along...")

Also some other power could have stepped in, in the meantime so Iomedae didn't scoop up everyone (and also those clerics who like throwing that ol' entropy around for a while longer...)

(and any other dead gods that are {not} kicking around...)

This may give an answer to the old post of Dead Gods? maybe?

A deity's death is such a rare event that it's best, in game, to handle things individually and not try to standardize what happens.

Thanks for the answer :) I don't think I'm very good at phrasing questions though... sorry if this is the wrong place to ask so if anyone else thinks the below is feasible (or at least an interesting idea) let me know and help me move the question elsewhere - I came looking for info on CotU and didn't find much info on the boards on the archetype... so just raised the question

Mainly, say someone wanted to set a game around the time of a certain dead god's death, or just woke up after a long sleep etc... (or another setting with a different dead goddess, similar reasons: I just used the example of Aroden as it's the go-to in this setting...)

I was more thinking of along cool background ideas for a character or NPC that doesn't believe their god has totally gone, so: what if someone still followed the (possibly distorted) teachings of a dead god but didn't like the new CEO (or there wasn't a CEO for a while)?
Could you "theoretically" use CotU to represent that (for fluff purposes), rather than have all clerics of {dead god} be useless until they switch/die? What if they don't want to switch?

Mad Priest of {DeadGoddimus}:"I still say my prayers every day, I still believe in {DeadGoddimus}, what's the problem if I get rewarded for doing the same stuff as before?"

Anyhoo, have a Cool Yule...

Instead of becoming an ex-cleric due to failing obligations/alignment, when a cleric loses (how careless ;P ) their deity due to the said deity either dying, getting destroyed, annulled, MIA etc. could you use the Archetype "Channeler of the Unknown" for that (to keep spells etc...)?

i.e. Everyone knows that Aroden died, and Iomedae stepped in, but could this somehow cover a transition period where clerics of Aroden were backed by someone/thing... BUT still going through the "Aroden Bless Me Please?" motions, depending on how long Iomedae took to don the mantle, so to speak (or was it a case of "it was her as the unknown power all along...")

Also some other power could have stepped in, in the meantime so Iomedae didn't scoop up everyone (and also those clerics who like throwing that ol' entropy around for a while longer...)

(and any other dead gods that are {not} kicking around...)

This may give an answer to the old post of Dead Gods? maybe?

ryric wrote:

Back in early 3.0 days, a game store near my grad school had a D&D "league" where you could play a character with multiple DMs on a variable schedule. Basically proto-OP with no real campaign oversight. There were no rules against playing evil characters or PvP, and no tiers like in PFS so any level characters could mix. I made a 1st level bard and showed up to a session, where in an early fight the evil 9th level wizard in the group decided to fireball the group, hitting 4 PCs and one enemy. The DM told me to make a save and my response was along the lines of "why bother?" as even half damage would put me at dead.

That league...had its ups and downs. I had a cleric get killed so early in a session (maybe 10 minutes in?) that I literally pulled the "His identical brother walks out of the woods" cliché. I went through about 5 characters until I landed on a dwarf paladin/dwarven defender who survived up to 14th level and then retired.

I had a similar experience to this: I rocked up as a first level Elf Fighter/Thief in my very first AD&D game, and everyone else was at least 4th-6th level in a long running campaign. We proceeded to wander through a place that looked like landscaped gardens and rather docile fauna, until...

... I was overkilled by not being able to save the Dex roll for a Red Dragon's breath weapon... (and even saving I would have been dead anyway)
The Wizard who owned the theme park was quite contrite as "they were only supposed to be Polymorphed Ants" as *fake fabulous beasts* attractions; only a REAL Red Dragon had snuck in for Sh1ts and Giggles....

He gave my character a "spare body he had lying around" (as mine was now a pile of ash)... so ended up an Elf in a Human body that just happened to have lycanthropy... -.-

Turn this on its head and have the NPC offer an impenetrable Dimension instead, by way of a ***Harrow Bloodline***: have a look at the 15th level Bloodline Power, which effectively acts as a personal dimension that is in Stasis when you are not in it, and only you have a portal to it...

(useful for storing out of season perishables, or hiring out as storage locker for PCs without Gentle Repose, or the money to afford Raise Dead...)

(I'm still more fond of the Impossible Sorcerer angle, as that way you also have Know: Engineering as a Class Skill, and can make the whole darn dungeon to keep your safe, well, er... safe... :) )

Take the feat Craft Construct and the Impossible Sorcerer Bloodline.

Instead of casting the spell and using permanency, an ISB can treat all constructs as Creatures for the purposes of casting spells ({still not most spells on golems due to the immunities}), and therefore cast Simulacrum on the "creature" either with known spells to create the object, (or higher DC without).
(bonus of this bloodline is getting a bye on one spell needed for bonus feat Craft Wondrous Item as well)

As even if you were able to cast Sim on a "Spell makes Permanent" Animated Object, the moment someone Dispels the permanency, you would definitely have repercussions... (as soon as people found out you had a Master Safe, they'd come gunning for it...)

see Link to using CC for AO: link

However, you may be better building in the Nondetection effect to the CC'ed safe, just cost up the effect like you would a wondrous item as a custom job?
Amulet of proof against detection and location

Seems like their mind will only be changed when they see a different class lay down more "fight" than they are doing...

Ravingdork wrote:
Gilarius wrote:

In Rise of the Runelords, we had a PC synthesist summoner (class subsequently banned...) with a cohort Paladin riding him into combat.

Synthesist casts buff spells, if required, Paladin casts Saddle Surge (I think). The the Synthesist pounced into melee, while the Paladin did humungous damage via Smite + Lance + charge + Saddle Surge...

GM decided this was too OP to allow again. :)

So the two characters and eidolon all work together to get one extremely powerful attack off under very specific circumstances. Is that really all that more powerful than two or three characters simply attacking with more traditional methods? Sounds to me like the GM may have made a knee-jerk reaction.

God only knows I wish my players cooperated more like that!

Your GM should account for the lost action economy for that one big hit; is it really doing more damage than two or three smaller hits would have?

A simple fighter/archer and a druid with a tiger would probably do the same by attacking individually. What's more, if one of them took down an enemy, the others could change targets. Not so with your eidolon-mounted paladin! If he does 400 damage on an enemy with only 200 hit points, he's wasting resources! Contrast that to the archer, tiger, and druid who each do 100 damage to multiple 200 hp enemies. They take down two foes, rather than one in that round, and have dramatically reduced the ability of the enemy forces to hurt the party over the ediolon-mounted paladin.

Point that out to the GM, and maybe the combo will be permitted again.

This was for the cohort paladin (nicknamed Zeetha Killsteal) to attack. With Pounce, The Eidolon PC got all his attacks too...

Pounce (Ex)
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).

There's some free scenarios on the downloads site; I like the look of The Granny Drake for level 0 characters... also Check out "Hero Kids"

You can run the starter box set without killing (m)any goblins if you play the "lost item" for laughs with We Be Goblins voices etc...

Rysky wrote:
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

I still have fond memories of the dwarf who wore red dragon armor, with white dragon trim, and black dragon boots.

Eventually, a trio of ancients all three breeds took him down.

Worship Dahak, any chance?

I had a Katapeshin who skinned pretty much everything.

Troll overcoat (never frayed!)
Turned a young black dragon into boots and gloves.
Turned a bigger white dragon into coats.
Was sad when the werewolves kept turning back into humans when thy died since he wasn't interested in wearing human.

Now the things to make out of humans are books and belts... *evil grin* (also the famous wallet joke)

It's So Soft!

A "post-lupine" skin would be great to make some sort of animated lycanthropic biting book out of...

Both Seeker Archetypes could have this attached as part of either Seeker Lore or Tinkering, i.e. an SLA once a day or even added to cantrips/orisons: Sift Spell (level 0) ?

It's sort of in their idiom...

I understand a player being frustrated with how another player is directing their character but try not to carry grudges over into the game as all you'll get is tit-for-tat feuding if you are not careful.

However, it seems to stand that the GM is the one who let him roll Know:Arcana on no information, as he shouldn't have even known to eavesdrop on you as you were at the other end of the bazaar, or made him roll a perception check first to say "Hey, what's the healer up to?" In short, the player used player info to put the character in striking distance, and the GM let him...

You should also not be the one to shoulder the whole cost of healing; if a PC had to get healing from an NPC, they would/should have to stump up cost for it (Or you could get the others to buy the ingredients/materials for potions/spells then don't charge for the mixing/casting). The same should go for food, inns, enchantments, crafted items if non-PFS, etc; there should be a party kitty for minor maintenance stuff, and rough Personal Wealth By Level tracked for each PC.

In games I'm in, usually we club together for wands of CLW, for example... it seems that the GM is not keeping track of personal wealth either; that armor you sold to get new stuff for the party is all well and good (and if you are charitable religion it can work on a roleplaying front) but that's more of your own PWBL going onto other PCs sheets... they will keep taking advantage of you if you keep being nice.

"These are all the ingredients I could afford; if you want me to cook something you like for a change, then buy me ingredients and a recipe on how to cook it."

If you really want to get him back monetarily and without stabbing him, try find a merchant with a cursed item they want to get shut of and attempt to "buy" it with a certain someone in earshot (or maybe put the "detects as magic but not actually magical" thing on it. The wizard swoops in, buys it and gets cursed...)

Plus it would let you know once and for all if the GM was biased or lax...

Suggest everyone carries their own funds (split equally) later on. Why is this guy carrying them anyway? (although you did say you had some money as you were "counting out the gold to close the deal"); if this is the case the wizard gazumped you as you already had a deal with the merchant, and the merchant (GM) backed out of their side of the deal too.
When you say "Deal!" is when the deal is struck, not when you are counting your pennies out afterwards...

Actually what would be more interesting is to spread about loudly in town that the merchant does not stick to his deals and watch his business suffer as a result. In full view of the wizard. This will indicate your displeasure in an indirect way, and would be better to sow discontent amongst the other PCs later when the wizard does it again.

Just... don't tick off the other Players while/if you do that...

Oh, you also never mention what character class or alignment you all are, or other PC/Player reactions... (unless I skim-missed that...)

On my own shenanigans though:
A PC of mine did want to "get rid" of a Paladin in the party; he was our best meat-shield though, and imperative for getting through the scenario to the unique true names of demons my boss wanted so I just simmered in silence so as not to break my cover... (I had to fight really hard to not zap him in a throne trap I was trying to suss out using UMD and pretending to be Iggwilv)

Different approach: use a Glove of Storing...?

Then making it "appear/disappear" is a free action.

1 to 50 of 191 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>