Sheyln (Symbol)

Dr A Gon's page

179 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 179 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Lucerious wrote:
You all may have just discovered the recipe for fantasy napalm.

It's just that, plus soap to make it sticky, isn't it?

It may even have had soap becuse the original reicpe is lost.

Haven't yet decided how it works. Recommend taking an action to roll a Recall Knowledge check if you see it.

You probvably don't want to throw fireballs if there's fine powder in the air. Air and flour is quite explosive.

This ooze is made of discarded flour thown by ancient adventures onto areas of magical dweomer ...

If you're seeing it, there's probably also an invisible stalker somewhere.

Some of those specialised shields would be overpowered if they could block hits, so I'd be careful with this. But I can see it working on some of them. By the way, note that the dwarf warden shield (whatever its name is) has errata not yet in Nethys or CRB 2.0 that increase its hardness/HP.

Divine Access (linkified)

Remind them oil is made from dead animals and is therefore necromancy, then ignore them when they give you "that look" and say "really?"

That's less weird than the fact that skeletons are walking around in the first place, so don't worry about it. :-)

However many skeletons are mindless (non-leader types etc) so do they know they can retch?

3 people marked this as a favorite.
4 degrees of succes for martials ... 1/2 damage on fail

It would take 10,000 hours to play out a combat.

Discussions on balance changes are missing the point, in my opinion. All fall under crushing tax of marking hit points every. single. swing.

You have dimension door (5th level) in Contigency (8th level).

What is your trigger for Contingency?

"I am attacked" probably keeps you safe, but is not useful for completing adventures.

You can change the spell held under Contingency if you want. I only picked Dimension Door as a 1 mile teleport should pull you out of most bad situations.

The way we play this spell, it is not optional and works autonomously.

The way it's written implies that you trigger it voluntarily so I don't see why "whenever I perceive anything" isn't a valid trigger.

There's an implication that the range is extended to the range of the heartbond (which seems unlimited) but this isn't explictly stated. I think it's regular range, and needs both line of sight and effect, but I'd like to collect opinions.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Asgetrion wrote:
Oh, wow! Will there be lair maps and/or hand-outs in this book? It would be great if it did include both. :)

I am sure they will handing out TPKs.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Understand that by asserting that spellguard is hands-down the best, you are asserting that shield block is functionally useless in the long-term, and thus that all feats that support shield block are likewise long-term useless. That's a pretty bold claim to make, given how well-tuned the game is in general, especially since that doesn't appear to be the general consensus on the matter from the people who *have* played at those levels.

I'm not saying that at all. I don't know where your statement comes from.

Spellguard is the best shield at high level (because it saves you from save-or-die), but the others are absolutely not useless.

What items you use probably has more to do with your party composition and what adventure you're running than its mechanical stats.

Am I the only one that has questions about the power levels of kaiju vs things like the whispering tyrant or servants of deities, and who's really strongest in the world?

If godzilla is godzilla it will be blatting "ultimate" divine champions like solar angels and starstone-capable mortals and the tarrasque like flies, and if it's level 15 it's going to be weirdly lame.

Actually, I can see some GMs saying you keep the hit points which solves collateral damage issues. It won't solve the troll dinner problem.

Ezekieru wrote:
Jason Tondro confirmed on Twitter (HERE) that he wrote up both Fafnheir and the Grogrisant for this book. So we can mark off another magical beast to the pile!

This tweet is no longer available.

This book is 128 pages? 6 per pages creature?

My assumption is the page count must be some multiple of 16 unless printing tech has changed and I didn't notice.

Sanityfaerie wrote:

At the higher levels you do start seeing appreciable levels of risk from solo casters, it's true, but you're still talking about a case where you're fighting a higher-level caster, they happen to have this spell or some close equivalent on their list, they decide it's worth spending the round to try to use it in this way, and then the player they decide to target with their fort save spell is the beefy dude in the full plate male, rather than... just about anyone else. I gotta wonder how many times this particular situation comes up over the course of a campaign. I mean, it's true. I *haven't* played in any particularly high-level PF2 campaigns as yet. Have you? Are you going off of theory or personal experience?

Three things that may been forgotten:

(a) Will saves vs Control spells such as Dominate, and the fighter's Will Save is a meme.

(b) Spells such as paralyse are AOE at high level and very much more efficient to cast.

(c) You probably don't "just undo polymorph" because "cat in body and mind" means it ran away and got eaten by the troll next door, or got fireballed to death on accident because it has 6 hit points.

High level spells are not "automatic death" but they're practically about the only way you can instantly lose unless your GM is exceptionally mean.

I don't htink most AP have solo bosses but I admit I haven't counted the numbers for all of them.

Sanityfaerie wrote:

If you're not using the block reaction, and no one's attacking your shield directly, then sturdy is meaningless. If you just use them for their AC and special power, then Sturdy isn't really a thing.

A level 19 sturdy shield strips 20 HP damage off of each hit it blocks. Lay on Hands is healing for 60 at that point (hero's defiance is 45), so every three shield blocks is effectively a free lay on hands. I can't speak to how well that compares to +2 to saves at that level, having never adventured at that level, but I find your assertion that "spellguard is just straight out the best shield" to be pretty dubious

Once you have both sturdy and spellguard on the same shield there's little in choice in which one you take anymore.

Would you rather get hit and maybe your backline can heal that - or fail a save vs paralyse, or even worse crit fail vs baleful polymorph, and then have them beating on your backline?

Seriously how bad it is to be a harmless animal (mind and body) for the rest of your life because you botched 1 spell save? Basically a single monster melee at high level probably won't 1 shot you, but single spell can.

James Case wrote:
It is possible I started writing this when I was back home and was like "Huh I haven't had manapua in forever, I should fix that"

Now I want to try these. If anyone knows where I can get these in Singapore or recommend a recipe they know is authentic and works?

Forge Warden has been errated (it's in the errata file), but that did not make it into core 2nd printing.

I believe Nethys mirrors the rulebook not the errata document, so we'll probably have to wait until 3rd printing of core for Nethys to get the errata. I must state that this staement about Nethys is speculation.

I'm very dubious about adding sturdy to other shields, it would make them well broken. Not all shields are intended for the block reaction, and for some of them, they would be used just for the AC and their special power (such as adding their bonus to your saves v spells, for the spellguard shield)

I still think spellguard is the best shield beyond low levels. At mid to high level, hit points become less important than resisting all the nasty spells, so spellguard is just straight out the best shield.

Perpdepog wrote:
Part of me hopes so, but another part is worried if that is the case, since it would make getting those as full classes later on less likely.

I feel that with second editon's flexilbity, the idea of "class" isn't really the same as it was before, and so long as it does what it did before, all we're really discussing is the name.

I feel 2E is too crunchy to do what FAGE did (have only 4 core classes, and everything is built with archetypes on top of one of those 4) but I feel that it's very close to being possible.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Retheme an animal companion?

I strongly disagree that sturdy shield is the only good shield. There is also the spellguard shield.

Odds don't depend just on the outcome, but on how much they have to pay out based on how many people are betting.

Dancing lights has combat use. It's how you signal the dragon where to (not?) drop the air strike.

It doesn't.

I was just commenting that I treat that creature as uncommon when I GM, because Change of Luck isn't level limited. It shouldn't be possible for a 5th level idiot to affect an "end-game" encounter so easily.

Everflame / Frozen Flame

Could be the same thing. A frozen flame is burning for ever. They could finally get that published without "conflicting" the previous streams.

If it's PF I bet on that.

But I watched the stream now and it was a SF stream.

EDIT: So my logic is this. 1) they had everflame stream. 2) covid made them stop. 3) they want to finish it but restarting now would be weird. 4) they make something else to stream their new stuff soon. 5) they rename everflame as frozen flame, finish it, and get it into an AP.

1 person marked this as a favorite.


I expect bone croupier to made uncommon in future errata.

Its ability is broken.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I made a spell to teleport an item to a friend over scrying-level distance. How broken is it?

I used scrying and teleport as the base effects. Should it have lower range, increasing with level as teleport? Should it be a ritual? Should it even exist? Can I remove some of the restrictions?


Send Item - Spell 7 or 8
Uncommon Conjuration Divination Teleportation
Traditions arcane occult
Cast 10 minutes (material, somatic, verbal)
Range planetary; Targets 1 creature

You teleport an item to a friendly creature, which you must know by name and have touched before. The creature is aware of you and the item being sent, and must agree to the sending. If it refuses, or is unconscious or otherwise unable to consent, the spell automatically fails.

You make a spell attack roll against the standard DC of the item's level. If you succeed, the item appears in the creature's hand, or at its feet if it has no free hands. On a failure, the item is not sent and the target creature becomes immune to this spell for 1 hour.

The item must be of 2 bulk or less, but can be a container with contents. Sending a living ceature or extradimensional item will cause an automatic spell failure.

EDIT: Closing an exploit - you must touch the item thoughout the casting of this spell.

EDIT: Closing exploit 2 - the item must be free to move.


thewastedwalrus wrote:

As far as I know, innate spells are simply spells in 2E. So they are subject to the same limitations and otherwise that every other spell is unless otherwise mentioned in the innate spells listing (like 'at will' or 'self only').

I'm a huge fan of that change between editions, SLAs in PF1 were a pain to remember the differences and explain them to a party/GM.

This leads the question of how a beast carries components around. A coatl can cast plane shift. They don't flap around with bags (how do they even put the bag on a snake?) so I just dunno. :-)

Castilliano wrote:
That could also lead to enemy's striking PCs while down if they have to kill the PC to unlock their own spells. :O

That's completely normal for soldiers, who are trained to do that, and it would be truely exceptional if they didn't. But, I can see how some players might find that very upsetting, so it's something a GM has to consider carefully before doing.

In other editions you could cast without verbal at a negative. In 2E you cannot, and (from a quick look) wizard is the only class that can take Silent Spell.

This is going to affect a lot of spells. Almost all spells with casting time [two-actions] or longer, and some others like Power Words.

Silence 2nd needs to be placed on a willing creature and only silences that creature, but Silence 4th creates an emanation from said creature.

My assumpion is that innate spells on monsters do not use the V, S, M requirements but I don't know if that's supported by RAW.

In a situation like this you can probably also use your unarmed attack bonus as your athletics score. I was recently reminded of the fact that rule existed in another post. I wouldn't allow that for high jumping bu charging down a door seems OK. Anyway I'm not criticsing the GM's actions (they obviously did the right thing for their group), just discussing the issue in general.

The writer of this module clearly knew this creature could be problematic, hence the paragraph in the adventure on specifically how to prevent this one monster from TPKing.

I was building some monsters with poison and got stuck on what sort of damage rating to assign the poisons. Initially I thought they must have reduced the monsters' attack damages to give the poison, but it appears that this only happens in some cases. So it looks like Paizo think's it's OK to just slap poison on. I could do this but I was just wondering if people had any thoughts. Especially about non-damaging poisons, or poisons that only do persistent damage?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Weakness to mental 10, and he has an ability to do himself (persistent) mental damage. Mr Zhang won't be with us long! :-)

The adventure notes say that this monster can be negotiated with in certain ways; for example it might only take people hostage if it wins, allowing a rescue.

SuperBidi wrote:
My players encountered the Voidglutton and it hasn't been an issue at all. Due to the configuration of the rooms, they just moved to the next room and closed the door, with the paladin holding it closed. With the +0 in Athletics of the Voidglutton, it hasn't been able to open it while the party was recovering. So, it took a lot of time, but there was no real danger.

It could attack the door. But obviously what you've done seems to have been the right thing for your players :-)

EDIT: Checking the adventure I see the doors on this level are iron-banded wood, which I assume is "reinforced door" so hardness 10, 40 hit points.

It has 100 attacks of opportunity, I don't see a note saying that it can only use one attack of opportunity against each triggering event.

It isn't in the definition of monster AOO either

If are using a VTT and you set your VTT to show an approximate bar instead of the exact number of HP, you don't have to adjust the hit points.

James Jacobs wrote:
The main reason we avoid putting names into our spell names or magic items is to make it easier for folks to use those spells and items in home campaigns or 3rd-party publications, since those names are not open content. By avoiding this, we avoid having to curate lists of alternate spell and item names, and it helps keep our product identification elements of the OGL less complicated and confusing.

Aww thanks. I am happy that homebrew is supported. Sounds weird to say, but a different rpg company who aren't coastal wizards doesn't approve of it.

Kelseus wrote:
I would run it that Blackaxe "winks" in and out as Treerazer strikes into the AMF. My point was that while his weapon attacks are effected by the AMF, HE isn't. Meaning he can still use all his powers. true seeing, time stop, corruption aura, regeneration, healing etc.

That is not how that works. Treerazer's true seeing comes from a spell, and it is level 8, which means it will not function in an antimagic field of 8th level (the minmium).

Time Stop is also a spell and would function if it exceeds the level of the AMF. (Which it does if the AMF is not heightened).

Regeneration is unaffected.

EDIT: Wait your are right, the parts of true seeing outside the field will still work. It will just fail within 10 feet of Treerazer. But work in its eyes. I AM VERY CONFUSED NOW. Does its emanation include itself?

Wait, yes it must or you could still shoot spells at TR. So TR's AMF must cover itself, So no it could use true seeing.

I think people are going to use search engines anyway to get extra arts, so it's already "mormalized behavior". As long as they're buying the PDF or book I don't see how it matters.

Then again, it's probably like freemium games - a lot play for free to make up the community numbers, and a few buy everything to keep the company profitable. I'd be interested to see sales figures for that, but that won't happen.

I have every rulebook (not setting/Golarion) as a GM and some of my players don't even have CRB (but most do).

EDIT: I don't know if this is normal or not but I don't usually buy scenarios or APs. Usually the players buy it and lend it to me to run it. I would have thought GMs were the ones buying adventures, we're probably weird! I'm currently GMing Abomination Vaults; my Tuesday group wanted to play it so I said if they bought it, I'd GM it, and that happened.

If you want art for bestiary creatures it's in Nethys. The images in the books are higher resolution but they're often cropped to fit.

The easiest way to script getting art for monster manual books is to scrape google image search or use the bing api. I've done that myself. Those engines' algorithms are good enough that almost always grabbing the first 10 will get you what you were after. (EDIT: And of course, in publishing the script you aren't distributing anyone else's content).

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Beware the names of the great old ones lest ye be visited by serpentfolk guardians of the ancient ... err I mean attorneys.

There's a few names like that now in the new books. Perseis's Precautions, etc.

Personally I prefer to have the generic names. Players can invent their own names for spells if they want, and I'm not keen on having lore and setting mixed.

I'm researching the mythology behind the Tathlum. As far as I can tell it's a magic sling bullet from Celtic myth. When was the association with exploding heads made? I see that in D&D as early as Deities & Demigods and it's spread to Pathfinder one of the APs. While the Celts were into limed head trophies, I never heard of them being weapons. Is this something D&D invented?

In 2E rules as written, artifact rules say "artifacts and other magic items" so we know they're magic items. Antimagic field says it shuts down magic items. So, 2e antimagic appears to suppress an artifact. 1E specifically said it doesn't.

Now I have a problem with this.

Certain artifacts by design are supposed to have huge drawbacks - example the deck of many things. If we can turn them off with anti-magic, this gives us a way to exploit an artifact.

I'm imagining an item, maybe a box you put the item to be suppressed in, to assist with maintaining or sustaining antimagic fields. And now I'm wondering how a magic item makes an anti-magic field without turning itself off.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would rule that if any part of a magic item is inside an antimagic field, the whole item is suppresed. If you usie a 15' reach magic weapon through a 10' antimagic field, it's just a normal weapon. It's undefined in 2E but it removes the need to have to deal with difficult corner cases and decide which part of the thing the magic is in.

I've noticed the wording for antimagic field is different in 2E. 1E anti magic field specifically stated it did not affect artifacts. 2E seems to imply that it does, as it doesn't list an exception, and considers artifacts to be magic items. That seems very weird as it gives you a way to loophole some of their disadvantages. So you could open an apocalypse boxx or deck of many things and shove it in an antimagic box if you don't like the result. That's not right, and I'm now of the mind that artifacts ignore antimagic fields.

Wouldn't antimagic field will stop spellstrike arrow shenanigans?

Your average party is highly dependent on magic items (more than a monster which has better stats but fewer powers and fewer toys) and I think antimagic helps treerazer. It will depend on the party build, however; godless healign and alchemy could still heal inside of antimagic. TR can still escape by flying at 60. Unless you're like a strix monk or something, wthout magic flight items, I don't see how you chase it.

I need to ask if artifacts are affected by antimagic field? (Are they magic items?) They are certainly not affected by disjunction.

The outsider tag is gone. What's the new one for creatures like Vendenopterix?

Do I have to invent a new tag for this one?

I don't think it's a protean or aesir, but what else is from the CN planes?