Sky Dragon

DragGon7601's page

53 posts. Alias of DragGon.


RSS

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Naoki00 wrote:
... I can't exactly swap the abilities without ruining part of the joke actually, since they appear in that order for a reason.

Needs at lest the option of "See The Invisible", lets you see invisible things. Maybe it works as a X ft blind sight.

I cant think of what it would grant but there also needs to be a "Fight the power" ability... Maybe a spell counter, so you can dispel / suppress high level spell/s your opponent has cast/is casting.

---

After I started writing this next bit I realised it could come of as criticism, its not. I'm just telling you what I would have looked at doing in case you like it better and would like to develop it into a thing.
I would have had Signature Attack be something different. A maneuver works fine. But a custom attack would be better IMO. Let them have building blocks that make a basic "spell" of their own design. I would have it build power with each successful hit until they have built up enough to "cast" it. "casting" it wouldn't provoke AoO or have spell failure but would be conterable by a powerful enough villain (whats a Protagonist without his Antagonist? Archtype idea?). This way they are not doing right out the gate on mooks. But when against an opponent that can take a few hits; they can brake out the "Big Guns".

Building blocks would include:
Damages/ranges (The more damage, the less range), for attacks like Kamahamaha (Low damage because long range), Crimson Lotus: Exploding Flame Blade (mid damage, mid range) and Raikiri (High damage, short range).
Stat buffs, for things like second gear (luffys) or other super sayan modes.
I guess debuffs could also be in there (but I cant think of a main hero that does that off the top of my head... I'm sleepy), but it shouldnt be anything to complicated that could be exploited to make the class OP/unbalanced.

---

Now if you will excuse me, I need to go listen to "Rap Is A Man's Soul" again before heading to bed.

◥▶◀◤:
Chorus:

Do The Impossible
See The Invisible
Raw! Raw!
Fight The Power!

Touch The Untouchable
Break The Unbreakable
Raw! Raw!
Fight The Power!

What You Gonna Do Is What You Wanna Do
Just Break The Rule, And You See The Truth
This Is The Theme Of *G* Coming Through Baby!
Raw! Raw!
Fight The Power!

Verse 1St

Power To The Peeps, Power To The Dream
Still Missing Piece Scattering, So Incomplete
We Be The Most Incredible Soldier From Underground
See How Easy, We All Fall Down
Digging To The Core To See The Light
Let's Get Out Of Here Babe, That's The Way To Survive
Top Of The Head, I'm On The Set
Do The Impossible, Don't You Wanna Bet?
Cuz, Alot Of Things Changed, We Be Waiting In Vain
If You Wanna Get By, No Pain No Gain
Wow! Fakers Wanna Test Me Again
(Damn! Suckers Wanna Test Me Again)
Sorry, My Rhyme's Gonna Snatch Your Brain
I'm So Sorry For The Straight Up Skills
(I'm Still Starving For The Straight Up S~!+)
We Gonna Make It Happen With The Crazy Rap Skill (S$%+)
Get Ready To Rumble, Now Is The Time
Uh Huh, This Ain't No Nap, You Know
(Good Luck Fellows! Ha Ha)

- Chorus -

Verse 2Nd

2Nd Verse Dedicates To The Real Peeps
What We Got To Say Is So Real Thing
(What We Got To Say Is Damn Real Thing)
Cuz, Revolution Ain't Never Gonna Televise
Kicking The Mad Flow, Microphone Phenotype
(Kicking The Dope S!*!, Microphone Phenotype)
Open Your Third Eye, Seeing Through The Overground
I'm About To Hit You With The Scream From The Underground
Whole City Is Covered With The Cyber Flavor
*G* Is In Your Area, One Of The Toughest Enigma

- Chorus -


ErrantX wrote:

Also, wondering where all the traffic went on this thread? I used to get lots of posts from Paizo - did you all just stop wanting martial books over in this bend of the internet? Did we offend you? I know we can be kinda casual at times, but we try to make it so you're talking to friends and not some soulless guy. So... what's up?

-X

You definitely didn't offend me. My comp died last week (I seem to be having issues with the HD the OS is on, its the oldest on in there so its to be expected I guess) and I have yet to get it fully back online, using a linux live CD right now. Before that I didnt have much to post about, but was watching the thread closely. Had it in my RSS Feed reader. :)


ErrantX wrote:

So I have a new Harbinger archetype that I have written to introduce to you all, meet the Omen Rider, a harbinger that rides a spectral steed on his mission of malice. Enjoy.

-X

How long does the mount last for? Until dismissed? Does dismounting it dismiss it? I mainly ask because you have a section in there about how you can call it to your side and I'm trying to work out when you would use this ability. It would be nice if it was just a way to get it past obstacles...

Since its functions as a druid's animal companion it will gain HD and stuff, thats good. I take it that it can also take the Companion Archetypes... Does Indefatigable (Ex) (Charger Companion Archetype, Companion becomes immune to fatigue) affect Ethereal Riders 10th level ability any? Does your mount using the full run not get fatigued/exhausted at the end and stay with you?

I find that ability a bit odd... I'm Going to run as fast as I can for 10 min to get to the target, then I'm going to rest for an hour because I'll be fatigued have no horse in spite of the fact that could have kept on running for days... Maybe I should get overrun and just repeatedly use that... I don't get fatigued if I don't stop running right?

Maybe change it to you have to rest for half (or 1/4) the time spent running, but no more than an hour.

As an outsider your mount cant get the Jumper animal companion feat. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/jumper)

Are there any special rules for Veiled moon and mounts? If the mount teleports it does take the rider with it right? *Mount uses [lunar Penumbra]* *PC is now riding BBEG*


Ssalarn wrote:

Here's a Prince approved draft of the Mirrored Soul, a Summoner archetype that trades spellcasting for initiating.

Let me know what you think.

Note that though the evolution pool reduction seems pretty harsh, you've got two highly synergized combatants who can maintain different stances, activate separate boosts, etc. I may still kick the points up a notch, but I'd like to see some playtest results at the current, more conservative, level first.

*Sees link to doc* *Gets excited* *Reads Doc*

*Is slightly disappointed*

Man I hoped to use elemental flux and a Synthesist summoner whose eidolon turned his eyes blue and made his hair gold/stand on end... Ow well, its still cool. I just wish more of your archtypes could work together with other archtypes.


You should not talk about a "thing" just after I watch the latest season of Korra... I kept expecting one of your examples to involve Zhu li.

"Do the thing!"

Well it was a good thing you wrote. I shell try to keep it in mind if I'm ever making something where its relevant.

-----

Anyway I came here to ask a question. What Domains would you switch out for warpaths?

More info (than what you likely need to know) as to why Im asking: I'm DMing a game. Due to how it came about and that I'm using it to test out a few house rules its a little broken. So I'm not overly worried about things being perfect at this point. I have 2 players: Bushi Zweihander Sentinel Warder. And a paladin. Both are new to the game. When the paladin asked where the gods were, I drew a blank and and then failed my search checks in the CRB for couple of min. So I grabbed my copy of Deities and Demigods and told them to pick the pantheon they wanted to use. They went with the Olympian Pantheon and the paladin follows Athena.
It doesn’t make sense for me that you would get to pick your spells if your a divine caster, so I have decided as a house rule that they get all of their gods domain spells instead of making their own list (they still get the same number of domain powers if any). This goes for pallys too at this point. As part of the house rules is a spell point system they now have spontaneous casting so that should help make up for it.


rainzax wrote:

The way an initiator class recovers a maneuver is very central to how the class functions both mechanically and thematically. ex:

Fighter rolls a 20 on an attack roll: regains a maneuver!
Monk rolls a 20 on a saving throw: regains a maneuver!
Rogue rolls a 20 on a skill check: regains a maneuver!

Fighter is ok but the other 2 are a bit... Umm... Weak? Maybe... What I mean is that the fighter at level 20 can be making up to 4 attacks a round, they make 2 from level 6 on ward. Where as the other class's will not be making their rolls so often, unless they have some special build (making it harder to pick up maneuvers) or the an odd enemy.

Is it even possible to make 4 skill checks in a round? Sure the monk just needs a bunch of doods fire balling him or something, but I don't know if you can make more than 2 skill checks.


It would be cool to have arch-types for full casters, but to keep it balanced you would likely have to nerf their spells somehow. Or alter them so much that you would find it easier to just make a new class. Prestige classes are likely the way to go for full casters.

A base class that mixs casting and maneuvers would be cool, be it Arch-type or new. A sorcerer type that has one list of known holding both spells and maneuvers could work...

Wait what about a feat that lets Sorcerers learn Maneuvers in place of spells.. How overpowered would that be?


ErrantX wrote:

I don't like feats or traits as a solution to this, I think that's FAR too expensive. I'm trying to find a way to make this work without a feat.

-X

If your using them, maybe it could be a skill trick.

Ssalarn wrote:
Broken Blade (if I'm recalling the name correctly, it's early and I'm not in front of a real computer) is an unarmed discipline. And generally you get a small boost to DCs and/or damage when using a discipline weapon with the related techniques.

It is...

Flurry Strike: Strike – Make two quick attacks on a target enemy.
Pommel Bash: Strike – A vicious elbow strike, inflicting an additional 1d6 points of damage.
Pugilist Stance: Stance – While in this stance, unarmed or discipline weapon strikes inflict an additional 1d6 points of damage, +1d6 additional damage / eight initiator levels.

And thats just copy pasting some of level 1!

and that reminds me, no one replied to my post about Zweihander Sentinel trading the wrong discipline. I'll put it in a spoiler here:

Spoiler:
DragGon7601 wrote:
ErrantX wrote:
Gambit wrote:

Cross posting from the OotS forums in the hopes that Jeremy sees and it can hopefully be remedied before the book goes to print.

In the book it says that the Zweihander Sentinel trades Broken Blade for Scarlet Throne, and loses Bluff (aka, the Iron Tortoise skill) but gains Sense Motive. Shouldn't it lose Acrobatics (the Broken Blade skill), not Bluff.

Also in the Dervish Defender, it says you gain Thrashing Dragon and lose Iron Tortoise. It then says that you lose Bluff as a class skill and gain Acrobatics as a class skill...except the Warder already has Acrobatics as one of his base class skills (seeing how its also the skill for Broken Blade). So does he just lose Bluff and gain nothing?

I was confused on the question, for some reason (high on cold medicine I suspect; this cold needs to leave NOW) when I was fielding this on GiTP I was out of my mind. Zweihander Sentinels should drop Acrobatics to gain Sense Motive, not Acrobatics. And yes, Dervish Defenders drop Bluff. The reasoning for the 'gain Acrobatics' line is say you're also a member of the Veiled Moon tradition, and drop Broken Blade for it (losing Acrobatics and gaining Stealth), this would give you Dragon (gaining Acrobatics) and losing Bluff with Tortoise. Make sense?

-X

O.o Sure it wasn't the style that you got wrong and not the skill... It makes sense that those who "eschew shields and focus on utilizing a single two-handed weapon for both offense and defense" by taking that arch-type would lose access to the shield style... I would still want the unarmed style as a back up... So maybe I'm wrong and its a balancing thing.

And for those that want to say I'm wrong because their Armament Shield ability mentions Iron Tortoise, please keep in mind that there is a feat to get maneuvers from styles you don't have and there is also things like cross classing that could get you them.


Insain Dragoon wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...
I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

They are. And Cursed Razor comes with the most AMAZING BRILLIANT flavor EVER. Hot DAMN did I throw Whisper and the Quills into my homebrew setting the INSTANT I read about her.

PLEASE tell me that's still in =)

[Blushing intensifies]

Speaking of, I'd like to request feedback on Traditions as a system & the Traditions themselves. I realize that I say this a lot but they were my first foray into...formalizing an organization? I've implied them plenty of times, but never really went out and done it.

You wrote the Traditions on page 152+ in PoW? I gotta say they're almost my favorite part of the book (My favorite part is the Class section).

The explanation given on 152 explains exactly what the traditions are and how to use them in a game. The explanations are very clear on what's optional, suggested, ect and comes across well. The format you used for the Traditions themselves is perfect and the headers are accurate to the content. The lore behind them is also very awesome and fun to read. I believe that a player with an Oath to an Organization has just about everything needed to role play that character. I don't think anything could have been done better, which is pretty high praise I think.

The only gripe I have is that I feel the Traditions combined with Archetypes let a lot of Disciplines that really defined classes for me previously can now be spread to anyone (Scarlet Throne, Veiled Moon, and Iron Tortoise) I think Traditions may have been better off using Disciplines that don't show up on classes, like Black Seraph. This probably isn't a common opinion, but I don't...

I like that the Traditions gave class's access to the disciplines of other class's. If I want to play a guy who can teleport around the room punching people then a Steelfist Commando warlord who can use a lot of Veiled Moon moves would fit perfectly. Would he be over powered? Not as far as I know. He would be unique, but as heros are we not intended to be unique? If I have an idea for a character then the rules should only get in my way if it would be overpowered, otherwise the rules should inspire me to come up with something different. Something that can help make a story interesting...

I find the Traditions a good tool for this. Good job!


ErrantX wrote:
Gambit wrote:

Cross posting from the OotS forums in the hopes that Jeremy sees and it can hopefully be remedied before the book goes to print.

In the book it says that the Zweihander Sentinel trades Broken Blade for Scarlet Throne, and loses Bluff (aka, the Iron Tortoise skill) but gains Sense Motive. Shouldn't it lose Acrobatics (the Broken Blade skill), not Bluff.

Also in the Dervish Defender, it says you gain Thrashing Dragon and lose Iron Tortoise. It then says that you lose Bluff as a class skill and gain Acrobatics as a class skill...except the Warder already has Acrobatics as one of his base class skills (seeing how its also the skill for Broken Blade). So does he just lose Bluff and gain nothing?

I was confused on the question, for some reason (high on cold medicine I suspect; this cold needs to leave NOW) when I was fielding this on GiTP I was out of my mind. Zweihander Sentinels should drop Acrobatics to gain Sense Motive, not Acrobatics. And yes, Dervish Defenders drop Bluff. The reasoning for the 'gain Acrobatics' line is say you're also a member of the Veiled Moon tradition, and drop Broken Blade for it (losing Acrobatics and gaining Stealth), this would give you Dragon (gaining Acrobatics) and losing Bluff with Tortoise. Make sense?

-X

O.o Sure it wasn't the style that you got wrong and not the skill... It makes sense that those who "eschew shields and focus on utilizing a single two-handed weapon for both offense and defense" by taking that arch-type would lose access to the shield style... I would still want the unarmed style as a back up... So maybe I'm wrong and its a balancing thing.

And for those that want to say I'm wrong because their Armament Shield ability mentions Iron Tortoise, please keep in mind that there is a feat to get maneuvers from styles you don't have and there is also things like cross classing that could get you them.


I came to the conclusion that the fighter is part of why martials can't/don't have nice things. If you think of giving martials anything you have to consider if its going to step on the fighters toes/render them obsolete. From what I understand that is why the feat per level idea (from Monte Cooks Book of Experimental Might) never caught on. And why some hated Tomb of Battle (Book of Nine Swords in 3.5), it had a class that made fighters redundant.

Anyway Tomb of Battle has a PF update in the form of Path of War. Between PF giving all the class's a slight buff and Path of War being done by Dreamscarred Press (who are known for their well balanced work) it shouldn't step on the fighters toes so much and it gives you class's that can do some very cool things. And Feats that let other class's do a few of those cool things too. This should let you do what you want to do, unless I've miss understood what you wanted to do.


If you use Spell point system or some other type of spontaneous casting then the tattoo could just be added to the spells known, the caster pays the cost (in sp/mp/whatever) each time they use the spell stored in the tattoo... Even if you don't use such a system you could let them sacrifice a spell for the tattoo spell like cleric can for heal spells. A feat to learn how to use them would be appropriate; not having it could give a chance of spell failure, 5% per level maybe? A character could get a tattoo and then role play learning how to use it for a level or 2 before getting the feat. I would limit to 1 (maybe 2 for arms) per limb, 1 on the head, 1 on the back and 1 on chest. Each would have to be thematically correct for that slot so Fly spells would have to be on the arms or back.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...

I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

Gambit wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.
I think a Sworn Protector Warder with the Bodyguard and In Harms Way feats would embody this concept pretty darn well.

You are right, but I think that if there are multipliable ways of doing something then you have more flexibility. Sworn Protector locks you into one class, a style can be granted to any POW class through an organisation. You only get so many feats as you level so having other ways to gain the same bonuses would help those who wanted to use their feats for other things.

Those wanting to take a path close to what you have pointed out may also want to look at the Bushi's "Bushido -Respect" class ability and the stance "Ready the Draw" from Mithral Current. Both could help those feats. The Warlords Tactical Assistance class ability (gain at level 8) could also be of interest (to boast those feats) but then your multi classing or not a Sworn Protector. Just some ideas.

Edit: If you have Combat Reflexes and are using Ready the Draw stance, do you gain both your Dex and Initiating Modifier in extra Attacks of Opportunity. Or just the greater of the 2? I wouldn't be surprised if it was the later as it is kind of a named bonus, but I wouldn't want to deprive myself of the extra attacks if its the former.


Don't know if you've been told this one (I only searched through the last 5 pages for "Sentinel" & "160") but I was looking through the orders and noticed:
"AA Scarlet Sentinel who violates her oath"
I think you intended to have only one A there... Unless the Scarlet Sentinels have a grading system... It was on page 160.

On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.


If I take the "Weapon Group Adaptation" feet I can use Mithral Current moves with my fists... Now I just got to work out how to sheath my fist so I can punch people from 30 ft away.

Maybe if I cover it with something, like my pocket... Or my other hand... What do you guys think? Is there a way of using "Iron wave" (2nd level strike) to full effect with your fists?


I played in a campaign where Wizards didn't auto get their spells... as the wizard.

It sucked; Had I known how it would turn out I wouldn't have played the wizard, if they tried to make me a wizard I wouldn't play at all. We were on a quest that had us chasing the Big bad across the globe; There was no time to go back, and each town had less and less to do with magic. When I just left that chara (only one I have ever abandoned like that) he had 2 spells of 4 level, none higher; he was level 10!

Basically the reason Charas get these things automatically is so they don't have to stop the current quest to go level... Would you make it so the fighter has to go see his trainer to learn his new feat? No?

Plus it makes your chara look stupid. You would think with all that int he could work out a couple of spells for himself.


I think Tryn has the right kind of idea. Its how it worked on Stargate SG1... The Asgard and the Goa'uld had a "Protected Planets Treaty"; the Goa'uld were always on the look out for ways to get what they wanted without breaking the treaty. Maybe Heaven/Hell had a big battle and much was lost on both sides, the treaty was made to stop more loss's; But it permits them to come to the mortal realm if they are summoned by a strong enough person...

One more thing! Jackie chan Adventures gives another option. Destroying Hell would simply cause it to be replaced with another evil. Maybe a stronger one... Maybe this is how they landed up with the current Devil/Demon problem, they "killed" one and it just split into two.

One more thing! This was also the case in Legend of Korra. Or rather it just couldn't be destroyed, this worked in their favour as it was the same for light.

One more thing! Uncle is Awesome.


GreyWolfLord wrote:
Da'ath wrote:

I hate to be a broken record, but I'll assume the role anyway: instead of spells auto-succeeding where one would normally make a skill roll, spells should grant a bonus to said skill, treat you as trained, add rerolls, and so on. While the binary nature of skills is problematic without GM intervention, the number 1 issue with skill use is, "don't bother, Bobgoblin the Wizard has <insert spell> which has no chance of failure."

When Gygax and Co. wrote the original spells, skills as we know them didn't exist. The 3.0 writers did not account for that -or didn't care - which caused many of the problems we still deal with today in PF. Continuing to purchase products and support a company that refuses to correct this oversight, however, is our own fault.

My opinions, of course, so take them with a grain of salt.

Wow, that's a pretty good idea actually. Of all things, that's one thing I could think would be a particularly good thing to implement, though some caster fans may hate it.

I'm a caster fan... I don't hate it. In fact I like it, allot. Lest say my thing is spells that make stuff invisible. On myself I would use Grater invisibility, and then there are no higher level spells that fit my theme that target myself (maybe there is 1 that I don't remember but you get the idea). So I take other stuff and become an over powered wizard like all others because why not? Try to fill an entire 20th level wizards spell list around one theme, its not as easy as it should be. And this leaves them going the OP path.

With spells doing what Da'ath suggests the Martial / caster gap becomes a lot smaller because they are finally playing the same game. But you also need to put better high rank stuff into the skills.

Da'ath wrote:

Let's alter the numbers a bit, taking into account your arguments regarding skill focus and skill boosting feats (which I'm now learning toward agreeing with – particularly with my proposal) and my proposal of a reversion to ½ cross class skills.

* Bob the Human Fighter, with a Wisdom of 10 and no Perception as a class skill, gets a +10 to Perception (the 10 ranks).
* Sandy the Elf Wizard, with a Wisdom of 10 and no Perception as a class skill, gets a +12 to Perception (10 ranks plus Keen Senses).
* Chuck the Dwarf Cleric, with a Wisdom of 23, and no Perception as a class skill, gets a +16 to Perception (10 ranks plus Wisdom bonus).
* Mary the Halfling Rogue, with a Wisdom of 12 and Perception as a class skill, gets +26 (20 rank + 3 class bonus + 2 Keen Senses +1 Wisdom), which also increases further to +27 when looking for traps.

You now have a noticeable difference. The chance of a GM surprising some of these guys is a good bit higher without having to inflate his numbers. If we assume that any of these guys wanted to take alertness and skill focus, we could add 10 to their total. Just like in 3.5, the rogue is able to do his job well, and chance to be surprised is increased for the party.

I don't think this is a good idea... For why just look at the many threads on base saves. If the skill system was done right then it would likely work allot like/be as important as saves.


I have also looked at changing the elements used for magic. I remembered playing a game years ago, I think it was Grandia... Anyway in that game magic was tied to the 4 elements Fire, wind, water & earth; You got ice & lightning spells later (when your skills were high enough) by combining 2 of those elements (Ice = Wind + Water | Lightning = Fire + wind). Naruto did something similar with its chakra, and had Wood be Earth and water, it also had the Ice as wind and water again. Metal would be Earth and Fire as "Earth bears Metal" (Wu Xing) when cooked as far as I know (could be wrong).

In most case's acid is a liquid (water) that burns (fire). I've been told that its the solids in the water that are the acid but have you seen a acid warning sign/symbol that depicts the acid as a solid rather than a liquid? I haven't.

That leaves only sound with out a combo to be made from... And Earth (solid) and Air (transparent) as the only combo that don't make something... Its up to you to decide if that fits...

Drawing that may help you understand.


Insain Dragoon wrote:

How would you scale stances that

-Make your movement Teleports
-Give you freedom of movement
-Let your allies flank next to you

Lots of the stances are effects without numbers that are hard to make "scale"

You make them numbers that fit the same fluff of what the stance was doing. I haven't memorized or even read most of the stances in ether ToB or PoW, so I don't know which stances have the effects you speak of. But I can could see the Teleport one have its range of how far you teleport scale as you level so it only starts at like 10 and as you level it progress's to say 60 or even 90 ft as a move action (I'm guessing the original was a move action). The Freedom of movement one could start out as a growing boost to Escape artist before gaining its Freedom of movement effect. The last one is a bit trickier but I'm sure there is someone smarter than me that could come up with something.


I liked the fix that glosz came up with over on giant it the playground for the problem of stances not fitting the level they are gained. He made them all available at first level and then scale with level...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?293910-Scaling-ToB-stances

Once I get my hands on the finished product I would likely have someone do this to your stances, unless its already done. Having you guys do for me would be a big bonus.


I've seen systems where the gain of new spell levels is slowed down so instead of having spell level equal to ((level + 1)/2), they had more like a ((level/3) + 1). They ended up with 7th level spells at level 18 and that was as high as they went. Saves, HP and ect are much better under this system that yours.

I still don't think this is a complete fix. The problem is not with how fast the spell are gained but with the spells. There are to many absolutes... If invisibility gave a buff to stealth rather than completely making you invisible then it wouldn't invalidate the rogue... If sleep reduced Wis and hold person reduced Str or Dex then they wouldn't be the overpowered combat ending spells they are. Their could also be higher level versions of spells without having to add in other things to make them worth the higher level slot, their numbers would be increased and that would be enough. How do you make a single target 7 th level invisibility or hold person or fireball?


Goth Guru wrote:

3D6 unadjusted does not work for combat because acidic burst only happens on a crit. 2D10 does work for this. Unfortunately, I prefer to not eliminate dice types.

Sometimes, to speed combat, a player or GM will put the hit and damage dice in the same hand when they roll. This "Fist full of dice" method speeds things up. The crit. dice are all ready laid out and only require scooping them up and rolling them.

You must have missed the part bout the new crit ranges in the rules I linked... Threat range 20 would be 16-18, that happens 4.6% of the time, so not much of a decrease.

But yeah I can see your point about the Fist full of dice, been known to roll to hit and damage at the same time my self.

You could still use 3d6 for skills while keeping 1d20 for combat... Just a thought.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

That's another thing that bugs me about how this game works. The d20 creates such a massive gap between a 'good try' and a 'bad try.' To use Javiar as an example, I HIGHLY doubt he ever jumped less than 7 feet during his warmups/practice runs, but under the rules of this game his results over repeated leaps would have been all over the board.

Makes me wonder if maybe yanking the d20 out and replacing it with 2d6 in some areas might not be a good idea. (Obviously numbers will need adjustment to compensate.)

Use 3d6, no need to adjust... Full rules here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Everyone keeps bringing up 'vague description.' There should be nothing vague about mapless combat, if there is then the players are being screwed out of details they should have/it becomes impossible for everyone to envision the same scene because everyone fills in the blanks differently.

More time spent is describing things the slower combat goes. People already complain about how long they have to wait for their turn. As I said a picture is worth a thousand words.

Even if you give what you think is a good description, people will still envision slightly different things. Its the nature of language; Ever played Chinese whispers, not everyone hears the same thing.


Out of a dungeon exploring the world me and the other players ran into some bandits that had a carriage. During the fight I snuck round, climbed atop of it and killed the archers. Something scared the horses while I was up there, wanting to keep the carriage/ect as loot I stayed and tried to work out how to get the horses under control...

The DM told me there was a bend in the road coming up and the carriage was going to go off the road. I thought that it would be a bumpy plain or the likes and made sure to get a good hand hold... Off the road for the DM = off a cliff. Some of the loot was explosive and it was a very high cliff... Time to roll a new character.

Moral of the story is that not all people imagine the same thing if given the same vague description. You may all be successfully imagining a full / working / Highly detailed Dungeon, but I guaranty its not exactly the same. Sure you can explain things in more detail, but that takes time; and you may land up wasting time explaining stuff no one is going to make use of just because you though they would. Even a simple picture is worth a thousand words, you can convey the same info faster.

That is my 2cp anyway.


Makhno wrote:

...Other things that need fixed.

I think that spells that grant immunity to things should go. Pretty much all of them. (I am open to individual exceptions, but can't think of any offhand.)...

I agree, but I think you may not be thinking far enough. I think there should be no (or at lest as few as possible) absolutes with magic, everything should give a save or an opposed roll.

For instance the Invisibility spell, why does this need to make you perfectly see through? In many video games and movies there is a blur where the invisible thing is. This would be better represented by a big bonus to your stealth skill, maybe caster stat+bonus based on level of the spell. True sight would be a bonus to perception. Magic missile would do higher dice damage but would need a roll to hit, maybe using your caster level in place of BAB. Fear spells would give a bonus to a intimidation skill check.

I think intimidation needs to be slightly reworked for the last one to work fully. I remember once trying to look up rules on how to handle players trying to intimidate each other. I only found the ToB rules, but they don't help those without intimidate from what I remember. Combining all the rules is the best bet in my book. Everyone adds their level to intimidate or what they are using to defend against it. Defender may choose to use either their will save or intimidate as standard, feats ect may add other things. For every X points the loser fails against intimidate (not will) they progress one step farther into fear (shaken -> frightened -> panicked). If the defender was using intimidate and won then things might get interesting for him, I put loser there for a reason. every Y rounds (based on level of winner maybe?) the fear level drops by one step until its gone, or maybe a will save to drop it by one step. IDK. These are just some Ideas I've had floating in my head for a while.


If you wanted some randomness but not the full dice range worth you could just have everyone roll d4's and add a mod based off the original dice (so d6=d4+1, d8=d4+2, d10=d4+3 & d12=d4+4). Fighter could still roll lower than the wizard but that is way less likely to happen.


You have to be completely and absolutely exhausted to have a second 8 sleep in one day. This would normally only happen if your very ill. Sure you can get an extra 2-4 hours if you have over worked yourself, but you wouldn't get spells for that. Maybe if your using a spell point system you could get a fraction of them back, but not spell slots as its to hard to fraction them. So yeah, I think this is a non problem...

If it is then just rule that if anything happens to the rope the connection is lost... You could just drop them back, prone if not asleep on the ground. Or if you really wanted to be mean, force a save/caster check. Fail and your stuck in where ever the pocket dimension is made, succeed and your prone around whoever messed with the rope.

And remember you don't have to know what it is to mess with a Rope Trick... If you found the rope what would you do? 'Pull it', or even 'climb it' is something I could see allot of people doing. Monsters would 'investigate' it, as in pull/push/climb (climb to follow the scent). And if they found food in one in the past they would be looking for others. And if your in the BBEG base, how high is the roof? 10? 15 ft? The rope maybe 30 ft, but if the roofs only 15ft away I could see a minion climbing it to see how its attached to the roof and if he knows that area why? Its not there normally there. If the minion knows there are intruders he is even more likely to check it out, to try and workout where you went.


JTibbs wrote:

Using a modified spell points system, in which you have to prepare each and every use of the spells you cast, and each spell costs its level in points:

Wizards, and other prepared casters who can learn new spells get 1+ their Int modifier in spell points each level, much like their skill points per level. Essentially, your magic powers ARE skill points each level...

A 2nd level wizard with 16 intelligence would have 8 points, and be able to cast 8 first level spells.

Sorcerors and other full spontaneous casters would receive 2+ their chosen spell casting stat bonus each level.

I was thinking of making something similar to this, never finished typing it up for review... I wanted to make it possible for any class to learn a spell or to (if they wanted). Caster level was going to be inverse to BaB (so if you had half BaB you had your full level as your caster level).

I was going use the point cost set out in UA and limit the amount of MP/SP used in one round to your caster level. This would hopeful help counter the Nova problem most Point systems have; as even if you have a way to cast more than one spell the limit on total cost per round would mean they would have to be lower level... If a 20th level caster cast a 9th level spell he would then be only able to cast a 1st level spell in the same round...

I was going to use the number of 1st spells per day at level 20 as a guide to MP/SP gain; like your system I was going with Number + stat per level. Stat would be what ever spontaneous casters used for their Spell DC; Non-spontaneous casters got a buff by becoming spontaneous but nerfed as they are now more MAD. Hoped this would balance it out. Wizards MP gain would be based off non-specialized even if they were, and Divine casters wouldn't count their domain slot.

I was thinking of adding 2 to this (so [Number of 1st @ lvl20] + stat + 2) so that even fighters (who have 0 first level spells at 20th level, but still get MP/SP in this system) would always get some MP/SP each level. And then making magic items (either new ones for lower level or existing items) be powered by this MP/SP. So that cape that teleports you once a day no longer does it for free, but works as many times as you have the MP/SP for. Flaming swords would work for so many rounds and then need more MP/SP (I'm thinking 2 MP/SP, as thats the cost of Meta magic to do the same), and may even have stronger special attacks that cost more. The end result would be that the power would be more from you than the item. If some NPC picks up your item and trys to use it, he's not going to have an easy time of it.

This wasn't all I had in mind but is a good overview.


Maybe make it 3/4 BaB with an Improved version that grants full?


Blaeringr wrote:
... Spears, for example, were phenomenally good defensively. Having seen spear vs sword demonstrations, I'm thinking it would make sense that weapon length be tied to active defense bonus (ie. not count when flat footed or flanked)...

I believe that the defensive bonus of spears is intended to be taken into account by that fact that they have reach. Can't hit someone who is using stand still to keep you from getting in range.


A Flanking condition makes more sense to me, so long as their is a clause stating that it cant drop AC lower than flat footed AC... How does having someone stand on the other side of a foot thick standard tree (standard as in not a trent or something) poking at it help me hit it? To my knowledge of RAW that works. A Two-Handed Sword swinging knight whos AC is only Base(10)+Full Plate(9) is fighting two rouges, one gets round him and he is now flanked; How does this give a +2 to hit to both Rouges, The armour is still going to get in the way and he is still moving (swinging his sword at one of them) so getting into the joints isn't going to be much if at all easier. Any bonus gained would be due to facing not team work...


Blind Pilot wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Change casting times from one standard action to one full round.

If you're damaged during that round, you lose the spell.
That along with a feat to restore casting time to normal could work.

Maybe not a feat but a class feature gained long after you gain that level of casting. So when you gain 5th level spells you can finally cast your 3rds as a standard action.

Another (not quick) fix is to rewrite all the spells so they're not so OP.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dabbler wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:

Dabbler, I had thought on a fix for the monks move & attack synergy that I wanted to run past you before I put it into my house rules (I will GM a game one day, I swear.). Change "5 foot step" to "1/4 move", moving 1/4 of your base speed rounded down for most would still be 5ft but for the monk (and barb) it would be more. At high levels (15+) you would be moving 20ft and still be able to Flurry! Get Fleet twice and you could move a 25ft at 18th level, that is nearly as far as most peoples move action.

What do you think?

Interesting, at 3rd level a typical humaoid monk can move 10', at 9th level 15', etc. On the other hand at 10th level a barbarian can rage-pounce, moving up to 80' and full-attacking. It helps, but I think 20' as a swift action or an extra attack on any attack action from 4th level helps more, and working out 1/4 moves requires a bit of number-crunching. A simpler option might be to say "Move half your bonus movement plus 5' when making a 5' step."

I think the barbarians rage-pounce maybe a bit OP anyway, trying to match it maybe a bad plan. When I read about pounce in 3.0 (*1) the fluff seemed to be that at the end of a charge (or was it movement) you where jumping on them with all your claws/teeth/other ready to hit them at the same time. It was because they were hitting simultaneously that you could do it when normally there wouldn't be enough time, if a barbarian can do it on a charge why cant s/he do it at other times? I don't see how a barbarian has the time to do that, have they changed the round time from ~6 seconds in PF? Anyway this isn't the place for this, We are here to talk about monks.

So you don't think my idea is OP/broken Fluff or mechanically? That's good to hear. The number-crunching could be fixed with a small table or maybe just telling them that its 5 feet for each 20 you can move with a note before the math saying that its 5 feet for characters that move 20 or 30 feet, that note would fit at lest 75% of characters anyway. If they cant work out how many 20s go into their move maybe they should be playing a game with a little less math, or maybe they should play more to improve their skills. IDK. 1/4 move could also be a feat so that those that don't want to deal with the math don't have to.

I like the idea of monks getting 'Move half your bonus movement as a swift move' in addition to my idea, don't think its quite what you had in mind but that’s what my brain recombined it to. Have you seen the feat 'Snap Kick' (from ToB), it maybe along the lines of what you want for extra attacks.

*1) I had a WereTiger wizard, made for a good gish at mid levels & the d8 HP helped one of the wizards biggest weakness.


@The Beard: Can this monk you speak of kill things in as few rounds as the other class's. Not doubting it could be possible. Its just that every round the monster sits there is a round it could hit you and your allies with an AOE or a delay before you can go help others with their problems...

@Keydan: I would also like to see a arcane version, maybe Sorcerer based with a spell list that mainly focus's on self buffs/spells that further turn their body’s into a weapon. The caster level could be the same as their base attack, representing a balance between the two with flurry showing their favour for melee.


Dabbler, I had thought on a fix for the monks move & attack synergy that I wanted to run past you before I put it into my house rules (I will GM a game one day, I swear.). Change "5 foot step" to "1/4 move", moving 1/4 of your base speed rounded down for most would still be 5ft but for the monk (and barb) it would be more. At high levels (15+) you would be moving 20ft and still be able to Flurry! Get Fleet twice and you could move a 25ft at 18th level, that is nearly as far as most peoples move action.

What do you think?


o.O nothing appears to be stopping a character from having both Powerful Build/Immense Stature and Narrow Frame/Beanpole... I can't imagine what that would look like... Could someone show me a picture? Also shouldn't these 4 feats have stat requirements? Str fits Powerful Build/Immense Stature, maybe 13 and 15?

I like the idea of giving more options like these to non-casters but they must be balanced. There are only so many spells you can cast in a day (sure at higher levels you have lots but the limits still there and if you use them at every excuse you will run out) and they can be stopped with dispels, anti-magic fields and such. Feats tend to have no limit to the number of uses per day and cant be blocked by an anti-magic spells. So they should be slightly weaker. That being said, if anyone can learn to be a wizard then surely anyone can pick up some cantrip grade magic by level 11... It would be dispel-able but could be stronger than a non-magical feat. Just a thought.

I do like the feats though...


In book of experimental might it was suggested that you give Characters extra HP equal to there Con Score as a one off bonus at first level. This made them strong enough that they could survive facing monsters whos ability’s would normally be weak by the time the PCs could face them.

Maybe your template could give them this HP. That way they wouldn't have to know what class they were going to take later...


Arcana Evolved didn’t have alinement’s, I think the Champion was their replacement for the Paladin. Maybe you could take a look at it, see if it has a power you could replace smite with, or you could land up converting the class over. I don't know, just thought I would point it out.

I've always hated alinement's... Anyone who sees the world as being black and white (good and evil) needs to experience more of it/open their eyes/mind. Only a child has an exuse not to understand the world is made of grays (ALL things have good and evil in them. If you can find me something that you doesn't; I will believe I am not wise enough to see good/evil it has before I believe it doesn't have it.).


Please note that as all my info comes from random watching of documentary’s and the odd wiki search. It should not be quoted, I'm no expert on these things. If you look up Mana, Ki & a lot of other stuff used in games/shows/ect as 'power sources' for 'spells' and/or 'magical ability’s' you will find that they are normally historically linked to some form of spiritual energy in their original source/belief system. A lot of magic incantations were prayers to spirits/gods/demons, so bringing Divine casters into the same system is also justified.

So making all the X/Day ability’s be powered by the same source is a reasonable idea. The problem I see with standard systems for this is multi-classing, if you take a level of wizard after taking 10 of fighter the MP you get is for a first level character and therefore likely less than fighter level 11 in spite of wizard being a higher MP granting class. My answer would be to make it so MP gain is much like HP gain, its the same no matter what level you are gaining. I think if you take the number of 1st level spells per day available at level 20 (halve it for the old halve casters like paladins/rangers, and Wizards don't get the bonus slot per day from being specialized) plus the caster modifier and maybe even add 2; then I think you may land up with a good starting point. Next problem is the fighter bonus MP from a high modifier, what do they use? Int? Wis? or Cha? Or do we give them none at all... I like the idea of switching the Divine casters to Cha (as paladins already are), making sorcerers Wis and then making all bonus MP be based off Wis. Most MP systems I've seen land up making all caster class's spontaneous, and then giving no/little bonus to the class's that originally were. I think having the stat that sets your spell DC be the same stat that give you MP is a good buff to replace the specialness they lose (Walking isn't a super power in comic books because most people can do it).

Wow that came out longer than I thought it would... Sorry for the wall of text.


I remember watching a science show on this subject, wish I had a better memory and could remember the full details. Im sure they said that since the speed at which you travel effects the passage of time; while it may take (8?) years to get to Alpha Centauri as far as the people of earth are concerned, the people on the ship would measure the time in months...

So star travel could be possible with only one generation of humans... at less for the ones on the ship.


Seems you and I like the summoner for the same reasons Darkholme. I have a similar question, don't know if its been answered elsewhere as I haven't looked (if it has point me in its direction).

How much points would you give to each level of a Summon Monster/Animal type spell that summoned an eidolon?

I'm thinking you would need a focus of some sort that held the details of what the monster looks like (and can do). So you cant just summon the perfect monster whenever, as this would make it more flexible than a summon monster spell of the same level. So you would have to make the eidolon weaker (less points to spend) than the monsters summoned by the same level of summon monster spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rathendar wrote:
Can use the old ConanD20 (i think) where you roll the d20 and add your AC (-10) as a dodge/parry roll instead of having it be a flat numeric target number.

I seen these rules in unearth arcana, I liked the idea of opposed rolls. Both for defending against attacks (ac) and for casting spells (setting the base spell dc to the roll in place of the 10). Down side is that the extra rolls slow down combat.

I've have an idea for handling counter attacks that came from this. On Your nat 20 Defence/AC/[Whatever you call it] roll your opponent provokes an AoO... If the opponent still hits (in spite of the fact that your AC is 10 higher than normal) and you hit with your AoO then it would be a cross counter. :P

Don't forget to put a feat in to expand it to 19-20.


La'Vantis Tuen wrote:
...That book you linked is cool (how'd i miss over the years?!?!?!) but the only thing it DOESN'T have is how much Wisdom to AC is worth!!!...

You missed it, its on the second page under Method:

Quote:
For Armor Proficiencies, add the CP of all that apply. If the Class has a restriction such as natural materials (Druid) or progressive Armor Class (Monk), use a value of 10 instead.


Pheoran's Advanced Magic feat looks a lot like Practiced Spellcaster, except Advanced Magic can be taken multiple times for the same class. Nether Expanded Arcana or Extra Spell Slot allow you gain spells higher than what you already knew so they need to be reworded to allow for that. Maybe add it in the special line, I'm too lazy to work out how to word it.

I like that Expanded Arcana and Extra Spell Slot are powered up from there 3.0 versions, they only gave 1 spell at 1 level lower than your highest known.


Maybe give them the Preferred Spell feet from time to time, just because they learn all spells doesn't mean they wont have favourites.


RedDogMT wrote:
On the other hand, it could be interesting to have some creatures (especially younger varieties) who have not yet learned the full extent of their abilities. Having your PCs encounter a very young dragon who tries to breath fire too much could lead to some fun and exciting combat.

This is why I read threads like this, game ideas are everywhere. :D


EWHM wrote:
I'd also suggest using the option where instead of getting +1 to a stat every 4 levels, you get +1 build point (i.e. 1/4 of enough to go from 18->19, or enough to go from 10->11) per level. You'll find that it helps with the balance between SAD and MAD classes quite a bit.

I like this idea, going to have to try and convince my group to give it a try. What base do you start with? 15, 20, 25?


ziltmilt wrote:
Lots of fantasy literature gives us the theme of magic as being physically exhausting or taxing, but PF / D&D doesn't emulate that, as far as I know.

I believe the current excuse for casters having a limit to spells per day is just this, as in it exhausts them to cast spells so they can only cast so many a day.

But I find it strange that a professional wizard would become exhausted so much faster than a dude swinging a 2-handed sword at full strength for the entire battle... He nether gets exhausted no matter how long the battle goes for, yet the wizard will soon run out of spells. To me its just a balance mechanism because they made casters to strong in relation to melee, no real fluff.

I don't like ideas like this as it soon leads to DM's making the casters get exhausted from casting normal spells, and as I said why should the wizard get exhausted when melee don't. If you link it to being like Rage for spells so a DM don't make that mistake then I would be fine with it. Otherwise there is that chance, so no I wouldn't recommend it.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>