You died and friends who care about you try to bring you back. And for whoom you would have done exactly the same.
You remember the thing about the ghosts in Casper, where they only stick around because they had unfinished business, and once they accomplish it, they move on? The same is true for our characters. They are content with having lived their lives, ended up dead, and they see no reason to come back.
"Thanks guys, I appreciate it, I would've done the same. My job here is done and it's time for me to rest. Its been an honor."
Sorry guys but you have to go without me. I nailed it with the coolest sacrifice ever!
Was it really a sacrifice if you can come back, though?
It is not supposed to be a movie.
No, but its still a story, and every story has to end. Some ride off into the sunset, some enter Valhalla, and some end up in the gutter, bitter and alone.
Poignant, bitter-sweet, romantic, heroic, defeated or victorious, chapters need to end, the book needs to close. Why not go out in a blaze of glory, a shining star of epic tale that will be told and retold for decades?
Take this Shadowrun story, take the time to read at least a little of it, Jim was a fantastic person to play with (both GM and player, see prior post), and put our sessions down on paper in exquisite fashion. This was also the SR game where the group accepted a job to assassinate themselves (and got paid, too). So many amazing things happened (including the GM--Nate--setting Jim's character on fire, which I think was the third time in a long running sequence of Jim and Nate setting each other's characters on fire, mostly through sheer coincidence).
But I'll just quote this section. The narrator is Jim's character Stray, I played Jack.
I never quite figured out why Jack did that. The least I can figure, Jack knew his time was coming soon, so he wanted to shout out with his dying breath, so the whole world could hear, that he truly existed in this world. And everyone did. The Matrix was abuzz despite MCT’s immediate damage control. Most people believe MCT, but a few, like me, know the truth, and that’s the way it always was, is, and will be.
Shadowrun might not have Resurrection, so there was no coming back from what happened to me, but I wouldn't have done anything differently. Jack probably would have died regardless of what I did, but the choices I made were my own, the consequences...are also my own. They may have been narrated by the GM, but the ending is mine. Even if resurrection was on the table somehow I would still have turned it down. In fact, even if resurrection was on the table, I don't think anyone would have been able to bring themselves to cast it.
In terms of my own experiences, I think I've only had one character that accepted a resurrection (and the way in which it happened made things more awesome, though we figured that it probably really wouldn't have worked like that, rules-wise).
Never turned any down that I can think of. Though there was a game* where I told the GM that I wanted to leave the party because my character and one of the other PCs were sorta stepping on each other's toes in terms of niche. We were different classes, but both brought the same toolkit to the table. When the GM narrated it, one of the other players (who had been sitting far enough down the table to not catch the discussion I'd been having about changing characters) fought really really hard to keep my character around, it was pretty awesome. I eventually had to say, "Jim, its fine, I want to switch characters."
I had a friend who turned resurrection down once, though. Less dramatic than Weregeek's sequence, just table-talk. But he'd gone out in a pretty epic way and he was all, "Yeah, I'm going to make a new character." It was an X-Crawl game, so resurrection was already pretty rare, but it felt so...inappropriate to try and seek it after that fight.
*I always find conversation returning to that game, its weird. I think its just because Keith (as a person) was so unique and that the game he ran was so interesting on so many levels that any conversation of "what was the most X in a game you ever experienced?" just demands to be mentioned.Its a shame that he--
though a comedic series of events involving his own medical issues around "being able to talk," medical leave re-such, and a stint as Silent Pete the Repo-Man, among other things--meant that the game never had another session after about that point.
(I swear that character concept is cursed; as much fun as I know it would be to play, every time I've statted it out, the game has died)
I will point out the following definition
Merriam Webster wrote:
1. ಠ_ಠ Have you even heard of a GM doing this, or is this a straw-man intended to illustrate a clearly "unacceptable" breach of RAW in a PFS game?
The latter, I believe. Things where the GM in question has stated some ruling with the qualifier "...at my table" when whatever it was that they said is in clear contradiction with what's actually written.
The example could just as easily have been "Battle Medic doesn't exist."
Let's examine however a different example. Halfling Luck ability triggers when you fail a skill check or saving throw, this one would be a problem because failing a will save could likely be a secret check. And if you don't know you failed, you couldn't use the ability.
That's nothing new. If you're unware that you are the target of a spell and fail a save (say, some form of divination) it doesn't matter who rolls. If the player does, they could say "I'd like to halfling luck and reroll" and the GM might respond with, "you're not aware of anything untoward, so you can't choose to do that."
For abilities that fall into the second camp rather than the first there probably should be an official way of resolving that contention, though I don't know what it would be.
Declaring the desire to utilize your luck before hand. It gets spent, the GM rolls two dice, and computes based on the better roll.
Matthew Downie wrote:
You're not be taking away their character's agency, but you are taking away their actual real-life human agency, the freedom to do something they want to do: roll a dice while playing a game.
That's not the definition of "player agency."
Agency is defined thus:
The player has control over their own character's decisions.
"Phsyically picking up and rolling some plastic bits" does not fall into any of those definitions. If it was, may I introduce you to a wonderful game called Candy Land where you can pick up and roll all the plastic bits you want! Have fun!
The 4th level version effectively let's you skip all the math, and moving around for the highest level item.
Then why does the spell not say that you can "spend 10 minutes" (or however long) and get the same effect?
You're just adding restrictions that aren't there.
You're adding abilities that aren't there.
You are also adding things that weren't said.
Obviously if its a blank, empty room with only a sword in it, the sword is probably magical. Cast Read Aura on it.
(But don't be surprised if the sword is mundane and there's an illusion in the corner hiding something once in a while)
The point is about what happens when you find a room full of swords, most of which aren't magical. Backing off 15 feet isn't going to give you any more information than "there's something magical in that pile of swords (thanks, we already knew that)." Its not the spell lying to you, its the world and the GM saying, "this is not how you perform the Search Activity."
Yes, I do.
And I'm saying that because the pinpoint is a feature of the 4th level spell effect MAGIC happens and it doesn't work.
Just like I can't go outside and shout FOS ROH DAH and actually knock over any cars, our physics doesn't apply to a gamified world.
Except the spell does have 30 ft radius, so it would not react to any magic outside that area, and it would definitely mean you can at the very least narrow down the area where the magic is located.
You understand how quantum states and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle work, yes?
Magic, when deteced with Detect Magic, only tells you "it is somewhere in this 30 foot radius area." A second pulse cannot tell you more information if you overlap the areas because you're resolution on the spell is "30 feet." The spell explicitly says that you cannot pinpoint unless it is cast at a heightened level by the very fact that pinpointing is a 4th level feature.
Ergo all you can determine is a vague "somewhere in this 30 foot radius zone."
Maybe it didn't pick up the moment it entered the field, maybe you still pick it up for a moment after it leaves the field.
The mechanical effect is that you can locate a source of magic with a precision of 30 feet. You can't zoom in, you can't enhance, you can't triangulate.
That's a 4th level effect.
All simple and martial blades might work better. Or just drop the "make them common" part. You might be able to consider yourself trained with an elven blade, but its still uncommon in availability (ie you can't buy it in char gen).
Agree on INT instead of WIS, but definitely a CON penalty. If you want to do a WIS penalty, then give them a weakness to bludgeoning damage (5) to represent the hollow bones aspect instead. Birds really are owned hard by bashing; kick the goose attacking you, it'll either back off or be too injured to continue. If not, kick it again.
That supports the "can't find it, never" with Detect Magic that I was getting at. The bolded part of my post was specifically in reference to what you can or cannot find with the spell. I did not say anything about mundane searching.
The point was "You cannot use this spell to search, no matter how you move about the room and add/remove squares from your effect." The "ping, there's magic" doesn't blink out the moment you remove the item from the area (or the area from the item). Its just a "oh, there's magic somewhere here-ish" sense not "there's magic within exactly 30 feet / there's no magic within exactly 30 feet."
With that line though, you've nailed it down so that you can never find anything but the highest level magic. :)
Without that line, you can't find anything at all ever, as with restricted mobility options (a room that's only 15 feet by 15 feet and a single corridor leading to it; an arrangement of chasms/immovable 'furniture'; etc) and items placed in certain ways means you can never pin any of them down.
But sure, if you want to quibble over the wording, go ahead. All I was doing was giving the heightened 4th benefits as an activity instead of never. You want it more permissive, fine. The point is that one additional sentence lets the GM go "you CAN search the room this way." Without that line you can't search the room with detect magic at all (that functionality is in Read Aura).
Forcing things into encounter mode for this kind of nonsense is pointless. Either you have the time or you don't. It shouldn't rely on a player's metagaming shenanigans that waste everyone else's time.
you must actual search for the room, figure out what is worth keeping and figure out what is magical later, or do a manual search while casting read aura. it's not impossible to find magical items like you seem to think it is, it's just not a flick of the wrist.
Watch this easy textual trick.Nothing up my sleeves.
Without that line you force the players to go into encounter mode and detail exactly how they position themselves to pinpoint. Or you CAN'T pinpoint even with positioning. Once you detect something you just have a general idea that it's in some 30 foot area. You back off ten feet and try again and you'll get in-determinant results (that is, assume precisely one magical source and you get the first result: if you move 15 feet east and ping and get a result, then move 30 feet west and ping and get a result, where's the magic?).
even taking your example seriously, you CAN just stow it all and go through it meticulously later. nothing about my second sentence was a straw man, even worst case scenario you will still be able to find out what is magical, just can't do it if you're under time pressure.
The problem though isn't actually the 30 scrolls in the book case (the 30 scrolls, for reference, was from the room description). Its the fact that Detect Magic can't even narrow the magic down to the 5 foot square the book case is in without meticulous triangulation tedium and why the +1 dagger in a desk drawer throws the whole process out the window.
THAT'S the problem and THAT'S the reason Read Aura isn't a solution and why your quip is a straw man. The rules don't offer an "out" that narrows down where the magic is and makes the players tediously manipulate their positioning and what objects are in range in order to get the effect that was built into the spell in PF1!
The Great Rinaldo! wrote:
"the" wouldn't work because of the heightening mechanic.
OTOH, which is easier to read?This or this?
Also, which one lists the book without having to navigate to a new page (even if the book abbrs are impossible to identify on occasion; quick, what's PZO1115? PZO9226? PZO1134?).
I think this is why Penthau suggested casting Read Aura thirty times. Once for each scroll.
Of course, there's still the entire contents of the rest of the room to deal with too. What if there's a +1 dagger inside a desk drawer?
Words that (apparently) have never been said at Paizo: "in my spare time".
To be fair I'm not sure I say those at my job either.
I spent an hour wresting with a tree view of every enum available in every assembly in a workspace.
Just doing fully-qualified-assembly-namespace -> enum works well enough
But if I want to have nested folders for each . in the namespace, I either got only the top level or ran out of memory.
Barnabas Eckleworth III wrote:
Thanks for the heads up on Shadowrun. I had been considering getting it. I haven't played Shadowrun in years, but thought it'd be cool to check out the latest edition for old time's sake.
This video goes into good detail about where the system is. The first 20 or so minutes is general feelings, then they dive into specifics.
or complaining to those that will listen that the game is "literally unplayable" or something (note: I haven't seen anyone declare PF2 unplayable... but I have seen it a lot with other games recently released).
PF2 is playable. It has some issues, sure, but its playable.
Its 6th edition Shadowrun which is unplayable. There's entire sections of the book that were copy-pasted word for word from 5th edition, despite several mechanics no longer being a Thing.
Then there's the wild die which you get "on some tests" which counts as 3 successes when it's a success, or when it rolls a 1 makes all your 2s count for glitches. There's 6 mentions of it in the entire book. 3 are in the mechanic's own description.
Its real bad.
But no, Pathfinder 2 is not that flawed. Right now PF2 players can work around the problems and have a decently functional system, even if there are subsystems that aren't working correctly.
But those missing/broken subsystems are important enough that anyone who wasn't on the preorder list for a book is going to wait for a second printing, with the errata included before they buy. And maybe will even wait for the errata before they play at all.
Tender Tendrils wrote:
Germany want even the worst.
Hungary, 1945-46. Highest monthly inflation rate: 13,600,000,000,000,000%. Highest currency denomination: One trillion. Time it took prices to double: 15.6 hours
Zimbabwe, 2007-8. Highest monthly inflation rate: 79,600,000,000%. Highest currency denomination: 100 trillion. Time it took prices to double: 24.7 hours
Germany is 4th on that list with an inflation rate of 29,500%
In other words, on creatures so far below your own level you don't even get experience for fighting it (and oh yeah, the talisman still does buggerall about half the time).
I could consider using it if we were able to get it at lower level as showed.
If it was a level 10 item with all the same stats (but cost to reflect the lower level) I still might not buy it. I'd have to be fighting a level 8 creature which is going to have a save of about +16, or a 30% chance for the item to get wasted
And oh yeah. This isn't even the worst thing printed.
Compare Grisley Tooth vs. Jade Stone, they both cost about the same (100gp; one of them's actually 90, but whatever)
Option a: a trinket that makes the enemy you've already attacked flat footed until the end of your turn
Or how about the invisibility coin (can't recall its actual name off hand). 160gp to be invisible until the end of your turn. It explicitly lists it as "2nd level invisibility" which, as a scroll, is 12gp (and lasts about a minute). Sure, its a cross-class effect, but wow, that cost differential.
So that's sort of unclear in the actual description of the fatal trait. In the deadly trait description, it explicitly says that it doesn't double, whereas the description of fatal has no such clause.
Its certainly not helpful that it's not listed there in the Fatal trait description, but at least the rules for crits calls it out specifically (it mentions "deadly and fatal").
I acknowledge Draco18s statement, but will admit I didn't find that a necessarily ideal past state, with the degree of nova it enabled.
Note that I did not say that I agreed with the PF1 mechanic either. I simply stated that that is where the overcharge comes from. People didn't like the once-a-day-that's-it mechanic and the risk for a second go was the result.
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?
Captain Morgan wrote:
Fatal is better than Deadly. But the rapier has other traits that the pick lacks.
I'd amend that to "Fatal is a better trait than Deadly, but takes a reduced die size to compensate, which is flat worse in most situations."
There are no Deadly weapons with the same base damage die as any Fatal weapon (IIRC) and (IIRC) taking a -1 die size is equivalent to taking a -2 on your attack roll: that is, you miss out on 10% of your expected DPR.
The only time Fatal makes up for this...fatal flaw is when you're attacking creatures significantly below your own level. As in you crit on a 12 on your first attack, giving your second attack a decent crit chance. Any higher and Fatal won't trigger often enough to make up for the reduced die size.
I tried really really hard to justify a Fatal build during the playtest.
Otherwise, I'd be curious what rules you used for breaking specific bones, how it related to the healing rules, and what it takes to put someone in armor either with them unconscious or resisting.
Player: "We break every finger on both hands"
Ellias Aubec wrote:
No, +1damage per creature for a total of +3.
...For a level 1 MM. A level 3 does +3 per creature, just like a level 3 fireball does +3 per creature.
If Draco's comment is correct, then yes, and I recall reading a similar comment myself, though sadly I can't find a source now to back that up.
Found it. Thanks Reddit.https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2vay1?Sorcerer-Dangerous-Sorcery-feat-and-Magi c
Then, do you have ideas for trap-related kobold feats? I suppose some Thievery bonus could work, but I'd rather have something that isn't just a straight numbers upgrade to a narrow playstyle.
Sadly I do not. :(
I think what I'd rather have is snares that are actually usable. A bunch of ideas came up during the playtest, but I didn't really like any of them.
I just came to accept that snares, as a feature, are just not meant for PCs (in the vast, vast majority of situations; as rules for creating improvised traps when you have time to set an ambush, they're great, but 99.9% of scenarios are going to be written with the assumption that that time won't exist).
That's a little higher on the scale of anthropomorphism. One step away from "cat ears and a tail" but still not "animal, but biped."
Its actually that level of mixing that I don't find attractive, personally (well, ok, I like the "cat ears" level even less, but then again I don't find particular beauty in the human form, soooo...but at least humans I can classify as humans and neko I can box with them for the most part). There's obviously a group that likes and wants that, but its not me. If I'm going to play a non-human I want to be as far away from the humanoid bodyform as I can get.
I've just realized one can't "buy" Snares as such, you can only craft them on-the-spot. So I'll need to rethink the trapper feat.
Snares are as useful to a Kobold as they are to any other PF2 PC: literally nothing. Even at 20th when you can have all the super awesome skill and Ranger feats that exist dealing with snares.
So I'm not overly concerned.
I don't watch a lot of anime, so I'm not sure what you mean by anime half-dragons.
"Ears and tail." Or I guess for dragons, its "horns and tail."
Check out the main dragon character in Miss Kobayashi's Dragon Maid for instance (Miss Kobayashi is the one in the background, drinking some tea).
Donovan Du Bois wrote:
The description for tremor-sense should tell you! That's where it should be.
Lets look, shall we?
CRB p464: Precise Senses wrote:
CRB p465 wrote:
No current creatures have tremorsense as a precise sense.Only giant bats and vampire bat swarms have a "precise" sense other than vision, here's what's listed.
Bestiary p39 wrote:
That's it. Who knows what forms of concealment work against it.
Donovan Du Bois wrote:
Ah, but you're wrong, because it isn't in the description of the precise sense. We already know that invisibility doesn't work on precise senses other than sight because of the rules written into that of invisibility! And all other precise senses that do exist do not specify such things and it is left to GM discretion.
Does tremor-sense work through walls? Who knows!