Dragonsbane777's page

Is there a list of the prestige classes anywhere, like a table of contents? I was reading through it, and thought how nice it would be to have a index or contents or something.

Amazing work!

With all due respect Chelios, it is the 21st century. Most people don't use the term "retarded" anymore since it is quite offensive to many if not most people these days.

Cool PC ideas though. :)

The gnome! :)

Now, make your players solve this in your next adventure. It got REEEEAALLLLLYYY quiet at my virtual table last weekend lol

Charon got it! :)

There is no "trick" to the riddle, it is a logic puzzle :) But good to think out of the box man!

This is a conversion of the famous "Einstein Riddle" converted for fantasy RPG stuff. Took my group almost an hour to figure it out, so I thought I would share.

Answer posted tomorrow! Einstein said only 2% of the population could solve it. *shameless troll*

====================================================

There are 5 wizards sitting in a row who wear five different colored cloaks. Each wizard is a different race. The five wizards drink a certain type of beverage, smoke a certain type of plant, and have a different familiar. No wizard has the same familar, smokes the same plant, or drinks the same beverage.

A sixth wizard wants to sit with them, but wants to be safe.

The question is: Who owns the scorpion familiar?

The Dwarf wears a red cloak
The Hin has a Bat as a familiar
The Human drinks Tea

The wizard with the green cloak is on the left of the wizard with the white cloak.
The wizard with the green cloak drinks coffee.
The wizard who smokes cannabis has an owl as a familiar.

The wizard with the yellow cloak smokes tobacco.
The wizard sitting in the center seat drinks milk.
The Elf sits in the first seat.

The wizard who smokes saliva sits next to the one who has a toad as a familiar.
The wizard who has a cat as a familiar sits next to the wizard who smokes tobacco.
The wizard who smokes Bidi drinks beer.

The gnome smokes cloves.
The Elf sits next to the wizard with a blue robe.
The wizard who smokes saliva sits next to a wizard who drinks water.

Good luck! :)

Also, I think Knowledge (geography) is used more for things like this:

Identify a creature's ethnicity or accent Geography 10
Recognize regional terrain features Geography 15
Know location of nearest community or noteworthy site Geography 20

Or it could be the DM is creative, and making sure that his players can't just rattle off the usual tricks to win?

I myself recently considered making spells such as resist energy have additional damage types, namely divine (against flame strike, blade barrier, etc) as well as force (magic missile and disintegrate).

Perhaps the treant had some stoneskin variant spell on it from a crazed druid?

Things don't have to go by standard rules, as long as there is consistency. And as a DM and player of 25+ years, I can tell you from experience that good DMs have surprises for experienced players, especially ones who know the stats of monsters well.

We usually play 3 to 4 hours, once a week. Goes great. Just finished a campaign that got players to 12th level and it was 34 sessions long.

EPIC story and it was all sessions under 4 hours.

Just in case you are bored and need a morning read you can
click here

Nothing wrong with short sessions as long as people pay attention and continue to show up week after week!

Question for the math people:

Say we took the list of items that make most christmas trees (cloak of resistance, stat items, amulet of natural armor, etc) and made the max bonus +2 for all of them. Would this break the game?

I see some advantages for this, twofold:

1) Player difficulty will increase, which is ok in many campaigns since players have so many options / classes / rules / etc

2) People who can cast stat spells or AC spells might actually have to use those spells.

Gamebreaking? Or just making it a little less xmas-treeish and more challenging?

I don't see how you would interpret holding to mean anything other than drawn within the context of the game rules. Drawing items is a major part of pathfinder's action economy and "holding" items like rods, wands or staves without drawing them would be a significant and completely unnecessary boost to casters.

Yes, it sucks for battle-casters who use weapons (I play them frequently) but the alternative is having wizards running their hands along a bandoleer of magic sticks switching from item to item as a free action.

Madness I tell you!

This.

I'm glad for this. It destroys a lot of terribly cheesy builds.

Exactly. Requirements aren't there for RAW specialists to find ways around them, they are there so things are balanced in the way the designers originally planned.

I have the players make two blind rolls at the beginning of every "important" NPC interaction - Diplomacy and Sense Motive. The player can always substitute Bluff or Intimidate for Diplomacy.

Next I quietly make the same rolls for the NPC, especially Bluff.

During the RP, I send whispers to some players who got high enough to see through the bluff or who think the NPC might be lying, send some false ones to people who rolled a 1. I RP the NPC's attitude based on the player rolls (usually majority response) and give the players comments that reflect the rolls.

The players aren't forced into RP, but their rolls influence the way the RP goes and how the NPC will react. Works great, and my players actually use those skills!

I found this system in these forums a while ago, it works well.

Determine Awareness: Perception (one roll for group, highest mod) vs DC 20 (PCs are travelling fast), 15 (PCs at normal travel), 10 (PCs travelling slowly) or Stealth of enemies (use lowest modifier). Do the same for enemies in the other direction.

Determine Max Distance:
Forest:
- Heavy 2d6 x10 feet
- Medium 2d8 x10 feet
- Light 3d6 x10 feet

Desert: 6d6 x10 feet

Plains 6d6 x40 feet

Mountains: 4d10 x10 feet

Hills:
- Gentle 2d10 x10 feet
- Rugged 2d6 x10 feet

Rain/Snow ½ range

The difference in the check x5 feet gives the distance they are aware / see the other group.

Example:
Awareness PCs: Perception of the ranger, highest mod of the group, gives a result of 18, vs the lowest Stealth of the orc group (a clunky fighter would give them away, but they are all sneakers), a 21. The players are unaware and could be surprised.

Awareness Orcs: The orcs get a Perception roll of 19 and the PCs are travelling normal speed, so they beat the DC of 15. The difference is 4 (19 - 15) so the orcs see the PCs at a distance of 20 feet. Had the orcs gotten a higher roll, a 29 for instance, then they would have seen the PCs at up to 70 feet.

Encounter Distance: They are in a heavy forest, and get a max distance result of 50 feet. With their high roll above with a range of 70 feet, the distance would be reduced to 50, as that is the max distance rolled.

This gives you awareness and distance, although it is a tiny bit confusing and tedious at times.

I share much as the original posters sentiments on this topic. Personally though, I don't like removing entire spell, so maybe a limit on max bonuses such as +1 per caster level so certain spells are less effective but not removed?

Freakin' awesome program!

Although it had most of what I was looking for, I noted that some of the parts of the CRB appendixes were missing, such as the description and details of invisibility, and a list of conditions on one page.

Well if you say Knowledge local is only about where you've been, what knowledge would you roll for info where you haven't been?

If local is only where you are, what knowledge is for other places?

Maybe Knowledge (Geography)? As a DM I would love to hear if this would be a good use for it, that's what we use in our game.

And that is an excellent point Kryzbyn!

Dragonsbane777 wrote:

Bizarre discussion. How any DM would allow this is beyond me.

As a DM, I nerf loopholes and go by the intent of the rules, not the exact wording. If your player's idea of fun is to find loopholes to exploit, you need new players lol.

What loophole? The spell explictly does what it does.

A 7th level spell that gives a few castings of a 9th level spell without the 25k component.

Come on . . . really?!?

I have been so inspired by the many posts of some players looking to explore exploits I just added this rule to my house rule list:

For any rule that is questionable because of wording or omission of detail (RAW vs RAI) then assume the more restrictive rule applies. Rules are taken RAI by this DM, never RAW.

As an earlier poster indicated, DMs need to stand up to players a little more when dealing with these wording discussions.

Bizarre discussion. How any DM would allow this is beyond me.

As a DM, I nerf loopholes and go by the intent of the rules, not the exact wording. If your player's idea of fun is to find loopholes to exploit, you need new players lol.

The Terrible Zodin wrote:

bump, because sharing is careing

Thanks. In all honesty, if people want to link them or post them elsewere, go ahead. I only know or use the Piazo website so I wouldn't know where to begin, nor would I have the time.

I have them on my website for my players, great resource!!

Damn. I need to post more often, thanks so much!!

Hmm that isn't the one I am looking for but interesting!

Great forums here. My question had a response in what seemed like 5 minutes!

I could have sworn I read a spell that gave a luck bonus to AC. I thought a bard spell . . . but I can't find it anywhere.

Was I have a nice dream? Or does someone know which if any spells give a luck bonus to AC.

I would say the above rules cover the shenanigans of using a timeless plane to avoid the IG cost in time of doing things.

Thanks!

Installed! I still can't seem to find where to add a mythic level though. I can see the powers / paths, but how do I add the levels themselves?

In my homebrew setting, one particular deity/entity named Mau grants spells to people who worship gods that "don't exist". They don't know it IC, although I tell the player OOC what is happening.

Worship anyone. :)

Very interesting stuff. Looks ok to me, although I would assume a playtest would be needed to make the final tweaks.

As a DM I love the detail, although I think much of it won't be that apparent to the PCs unless they are running a business or something else like that. Still pretty cool though!

You could also limit permanency overuse by different limits.

For example, the spell is 8th level in my game, and people can use it for any spell in the game (just about, no list).

Oh, and:
= Any person can only have one permanent spell on them at once and items they carry count.
= Areas can't have overlapping permanency spells either.
= And a disjunction ends it for good.
= And spells are more expensive, as someone mentioned above.

Agreed! Roll20 rocks. Made gaming fun again for me, a must check out!

Awesome!!!!!

Roll20 rocks :)

I would avoid it. In the long run, if your players get out of hand with their items it might be hard to backtrack.

If they really need to, I think 1.5x cost is pretty lenient, I would go 2x. And no stat boosters in other slots, for sure!

Keep um coming! *reads the notes, jots them down in his DM book*

I am planning on adding a few new feats to my game and wanted to make sure they were not already out there in some other form, ie a feat I don't know about or another class feature / monster ability. Any of these already represented? Do you recommend more prerequisites?

=-=-=-=-=-=-

Spell Power

Select one school of spells. You cast that school of spells with greater than normal power.

Prerequisites: Int 13, Spell Focus.
Benefit: Select one spell school for which you have taken the Spell Focus feat. Before you cast a spell from that school, you may decide to forgo the bonus to DC provided by Spell Focus to instead treat your caster level as being one higher for that spell.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different school.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Intellectual Tactician

Your quick responses are based on your fast mind rather than your quick reflexes.

Prerequisites: 13 Int
Benefit: You may use your Intelligence modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier for Initiative.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Dispelling Mastery

Your spells related to dispelling magic are more effective.

Prerequisites: Spell Focus (abjuration)
Benefit: When making checks using dispel magic, greater dispel magic, and any other spells that remove magical effects in a similar way, you gain a +4 to you check.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Dispelling Resistance

Your spells are harder to dispel.

Prerequisites: Spell Focus (abjuration)
Benefit: When resisting dispel magic, greater dispel magic, or any other spells that remove magical effects in a similar way, your opponents take a -4 penalty to their check.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reactive Counterspell

You are able to counterspell spellcasters more quickly.

Prerequisites: Improved Initiative, Counterspell, SPellcraft 12 ranks
Benefit: You can use an immediate action to counterspell once per round, provided you have not used another immediate action or attack of opportuinty that round.
Normal: You need to ready an action to counterspell.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Also, since my players can go to 25th level rather than 20th, I was thinking of making Great Fortitude, Lightning Reflexes, and Iron Will be +2 to saves, +3 at 18th level and higher. I figure it might help even out saves at those higher levels.

Thanks ahead for your replies! Replies that use other feats, spells, or powers as examples are even more appreciated.

Glad you brought it up. Nice read! And yes, my day job is a necromancer.

I have almost always DMed, and each time I start a new campaign I have taken the PCs to 20th (or 25th once). I usually kept a good hold on gold and magical items so the high level play didn't become too unbalanced too often. We had once group play through the giants / demonweb pits series which was all high level and crazy.

I can also let the players have world-changing campaign endings since each campaign is set in a parallel reality. They can save the world every time lol

The paladin restriction shouldn't be droped.it's the main drawback for beiing a Paladin, and nearly all their habilities are alignement based. If you want to make a "fighter of the god", the warpriest would be a better choice.

Changes this in my rules, excellent suggestion. Does just what I wanted.

+1 glosz :)

Actually quite the opposite. The last campaign I played in had an Arcane Gnome Beguiler who overclocked his INT. The poor monsters we encountered barely stood a chance against his glitterdust and deep slumber spells. Our DM had to crank up the defences to overcome his high DCs.

Exactly. Having to turn up all the critters because of a caster with insane DCs isn't really fun for the other players.

Wow that is a fascinating idea! Best one I have heard so far.

*runs to do math on his break*

Forcing a wizard to use CHA for save DCs just means they are going to be not only smart but also good looking.

Just a note, in my house rules that CHA is much more a force of personality. It encompases force of personality. Monsters use it in all the Bestiary books for save DCs. One of the ugliest monsters, the Medusa, has a CHA 15 and her gaze is based off of CHA.

A good point on using this only for full casters. Still, if a class only has 4 or 6 spell levels, like ranger for example, then the ability score that governs what the highest spell level available doesn't need to be a 19 by 20th level, but rather 14 or 16. thus, in my mind it seemed not to matter as much but perhaps it is worth a second look.

Thanks!

As always thoughtful insights! Thanks Cyrad.

No no. Players can merely use the option from 5th edition from casting, or cast Vancian style. Their choice, merely an option for any spellcasters.

In my custom setting 5th edition casting is how I imagined casting, but I didn't want to take anything away from people who enjoyed the old system so both can be used.

Nice rules on spells like Invisibility and Teleport as well :)

Great post glosz. I liked this:

Primary goals:
Stick as close to Pathfinder core rules as possible therefore creating minimal impact on DM preparation time.
Keep the books and options available at a manageable level.

As I work so much and try to spend about 4 hours of prep per 4 hour session, it makes total sense to me. In fact, only recently did I start allowing all the core Paizo books, when we started it was Core Rulebook and Advanced Player Guide only to keep things simple.

I saw a few of my house rules in there, such as divine spell tomes. Great stuff to ponder, thanks so much glosz!

Well, I can see a few people disagree with some of the rules, and that's ok, that's why there are different games and different DMs.

I will have to respectfully disagree with Cyrad and leave it at that, as a back and forth over the spirit of the rules I posted isn't exactly what I had in mind lol. Still, some points to think about.

What I was looking for was suggestions like Saigo's on removing the different aligned paladins since warpriest fits the bill.

Out of curiousity, what house rules do you other DMs use? Race or class restrictions? Feat restrictions? Or do some of you allow just about anything and then some?

Cost of everything is not doubled, to be sure. Things are up to 2x cost, and those are just non-disposable magical items, masterwork, alchemy, etc. They are more expensive in some areas of the world, while normal price in big cities, hence why it says "up to 2x".

We had 2 new players join and they were at the same level as everyone else after 2 levels of play, and at the time it seemed to integrate everyone well.

So far, no one has even wanted to play a strange race. It has been my experience that those people often (but not always) want to play a very specific build that often doesn't mesh with RP, ie a munchkin build, etc.

I'd do what I've seen a friend do under a GM with similar rules: when his character died (to something incredibly stupid on the GM's part, frankly), he got up to walk from the table... until the GM provided a Convenient Retcon and said no, they were only mostly dead.

Playing online helps solve that issue. If a player died and was going to walk from the table, I would wish him well and send him on his way, as a player who decided to leave over the death of a PC or rules regarding death isn't a good match for me or my group.

Understand, I am not playing with my friends from high school with old friends, I play online on Roll20, and when I was getting new players into my campaign I could see from the backgrounds and PC ideas that some people created that they simply wanted to play a hack-n-slash or powergame, and the subsequent house rules got rid of those players early.

Good stuff to think about.

The 5 level rule is partially about RP and partially about munchkin builds, its true. As a DM I have had many issues with players trying to get bonuses from a class they didn't even RP, let alone had a good reason to take.

The low score thing isn't "enforced" like you might think, its a guideline. And my players are all very cool and agreeable to it as well. Some didn't take anything lower than a 10, and the ones that did put it into RP now and then. I haven't ever suddenly given someone a penalty for doing something OOC. Rather, the rule combined with talking with players prevented issues.

I have had to play with many PCs over the years, I ran my first DnD game back in the 1980s. Talking with every player about the same type of things over and over got old, I suppose. Now, when a player joins the group, all that is done before we begin. Been smooth sailing ever since, especially online with Roll20 since there are so many players to pick from.

I will settle back and ponder any more suggestions people have. I would love to hear from DMs on their perspective :)