Dreihaddar's page

Thanks Stazamos, this is more along the lines I was looking for.

I know to enforce the rules, that's not an issue.

The issue is really how do I make the encounter interesting 'WITH' flying involved?

Like...a camp of baddies. PC's move over ground to attack. Encounter plays out.

How is this different if they are flying? PC's fly in...baddies shoot them? Meh they can shoot them while walking too. Net them? Can also happen while on the ground (and is too close to 'neutering them' for me to think its cool). And so on...

How can I 'enrich' an encounter containing flying PC's...make it more fun for them.

Them 'not flying' or 'enforcing fly checks' is not what I'm after, sorry. =/

Mind you, I want to make it interesting, not impossible.

I really dislike just making it impossible for them to use a good idea or a cool ability...but I dislike it when the use of it neuters an encounter and makes it uninteresting.

Seems like flying, in general at this level, does just that...=p

Hi!

My Rise of the Runelords campaign has rolled into chapter two of Hook Mountain Massacre and my five PC's are now level 8.

The group is quite well balanced and they work great together. I'm modding large parts of the adventure arc to better suit their adventuring tastes so flat out changing things doesn't bother me.

I'm just at a slight loss at what to do about their newest trick. At this point the entire group can fly. Two characters can do so 'naturally' (Aasimar and Oracle wings) and they have a wizard who can be very liberal with casts of 'Fly'.

I'm just not really sure how to make things challenging for them in the parts to follow. Sure, there are 'boss' encounters like Barl or a few of the other stone giants and their allies (like a certain dragon) but in general, it does seem like they can just wtfpwn anything that isn't wielding a ballista or is also flying.

I dislike just giving every enemy the tools to negate their flying abilities...I want them to feel like flying is amazing...but I also want the encounters to be interesting and challenging.

So...I'm looking for advice on how to 'spice it up' for an all flying group of characters that has access to ludicrous amounts of ranged power if they want to.

Currently I'm thinking that Barl has pressed a nest of harpies into service and has them patrolling the mountain passes that lead up to his lair in the hook, a few having taken up residency in the former Rok nest above Rannick. That will atleast have something in the air for them to play with while the blast the hapless ogres apart =p

I've also got some things brewing concerning a Skaveling or two, since they've already fought one under the Misgivings (so itd' be familiar).

tl;dr

Advice for running a flying group.

Just a reiteration.
This is not an attempt by my player nor me to 'cheat' or 'min max my way' past the curse.
Its just an interesting proposition. (I'm GMing this game. If the intent was an easy work-around the curse I'd just remove it ;D)

Other than that some really fun thoughts on this so far. =D

Edit:
I'm thinking of allowing the use of a mirror with some penalties. A more dedicated mirroring rig might reduce them further, and if they really want to sink their gold into it they might even allow her to see the sunrise once more.

Hi!

I'm wondering what people think should happen in the following situation (or if there's any RAW way to handle this).

A Clouded vision cursed oracle (lets have her at level 1) looks into a mirror.
What does she see?

Everything reflected back normally?
Everything reflected back but only out to 30 ft?
Something else?

Its a magical curse so I can sortof buy that it'd magically cut off your sight outside of 30 ft...I think its still kinda interesting though =D

I have a Oracle player in my group and it just occurred to me that she might be able to rig somekind of headgear with slanted mirrors to extend her sight range.

This is not about flavor nor player min-max or anything, I'd just like your thoughts on this ^____^

As someone who regularly plays an alchemist I'd love to give the GM more ways to mess with my setup.
No seriously.

I'm not exactly sure what kind of game alot of the naysayers are playing, but I for one don't see Pathfinder as a hoarding game where you can't touch the stuff I've 'earned' through murder and mayhem and must either present bigger dangers or smaller rewards to temper my onslaught.

As long as nobody is trying to gimp you 'forever' I don't mind.
Having your stuff stolen, rendered useless or having yourself be crippled in some way is great RP fuel as your character needs to deal with a situation he's not equipped for.

Hell...as a GM I go way WAY further than the innocent suggestion of sundering reagents and I've had materials tampered with so they produce wild or inaccurate effects, weapons replaced with cursed versions of them, players killed and replaced by shapeshifters, arms and legs chopped off, eyes gouged out and so on and so on.

Its not something thats appropriate for a universal rule, but to fly off the hinges because someone asks about ways to mess with a class is just silly.

The assumption that interfering with a player is always malicious is just offensive. As an example I recently asked my Oracle player if she was particularly attached to her Oracle Curse. Answering in the negative I engineered her to go blind and switched her curse to the clouded sight after a failed Remove Blindness spell backfired. It fits the story perfectly, it fits the character arc, it just fits. The reason I don't even post about this here is because, just like in this thread, I'd most likely attract "OH YOU CANT JUST CHANGE CLASS FEATURES!" or "OMG SPELLS CANT FAIL!" or whatever...

This isn't the only thread I've noticed this in, but seriously...get a grip.

*goes back into Lurk Mode*

In a Age of Worms in Eberron campaign my Warforged Juggernaut Paladin was swallowed whole by an Ulgurstasta (think giant necromantic maggot). Since the damage in its gut was 'negative energy' I took no damage.
Instead I sighed and activated my Flaming Undead Bane armor spikes and just held on with my warfists so I couldn't be vomited out!

It was glorious!

In my current game Tsuto escaped to Thistletop. Later, when the party was confronting Nualia, he wanders into the fight, sees the PC's loaded up and ready to smash face and he flees into the room with the Shadows, hoping to lure a few of them in there and use the terrain against them.

The ninja in the group gives chase and, without knowing what is in there, bars the doors from the outside so they can deal with Nualia without him interfering.
A round or two later the door starts banging in the frame and pitiful screams start echoing down the halls before ending in a sudden gurgle 4 rounds later.

What's handy is that Tsuto is worth exactly the same amount of XP as a Shadow...and I got to add another one to the room =D

Due to a hilarious crit deck draw the wizard then managed to charm the shadow long enough for the then dead Tsuto to mime a few things to the Ninja (who'd known him since they were kids) before finally being vanquished. Ninja decided to take up Shadowdancer after that encounter and bring Tsuto back as her companion!

The table genuinely felt bad after Tsuto died and they miss him. Success all around I think! ^____^

I think that attempting to gauge the sense of the rules in a vacuum is never going to yield an acceptable result, especially when dealing with something as game breaking as 'Wish'.

RAW there has to be something preventing the Efreet from entering into such a bargain since otherwise there'd be no game. There'd just be Efreet-Central where you all start as serfs in some Efreets mad vision of the universe.

There is no mention of this mechanic anywhere...but it must exist because they haven't done this already.

*shrug*

I could care less about whatever meta-argument is going on here.
I do find the assumption that Efreet would just sit around and let their people be kidnapped one by one by some mortal punk abit silly.
Can't they planeshift at will?

So you call one and force the wishes. Great. Then you do it again, and again. And that efreet tells another efreet who tells another and then (due to them being familiar with where they keep being called to) they all planeshift into your apartment and wreck face.

@Tels
I ask again.
Why is this a problem in a game with a supervisor with full control over the rules and game world?

RAW you can bind genies.
So what? BAM I just undid it in my game. BAM I just reinstated it. BAM all genies are now dolphins. BAM said dolphins just founded a fascist interplanetary empire bent on subjugating their hated manatee neighbours.

BAM.

What's the problem?

To the best of my knowledge, using Planar Binding to gain access to infinite wishes has not been disproven.[snip]

Why is this important?

If you want infinite wish machines then by all means go ahead. Can't force a GM to do this. Page 9 man...page 9.

Just in response to rules serving setting etc.

I see the rule-set more as...say...resin and the setting is the mould. On its own I don't find the rule-set horribly interesting but when its injected into a setting, taking on a new shape and invariably some bits being left out, does it start to be interesting and fun to explore for me.

In my own worlds I viciously rewrite the core rules. In my current most played one, for example, I rewrite druids entirely, change divine magic on a fundemental level, change/add various rules and mechanics and so on and so on.
I do this to match the ruleset to the logic and physics of MY setting, not the other way around.

This is what I took to be the OP's question.

The 'fey' in my world are alien, amoral, sociopathic schizophrenics that pass, generally by accident, into our world via places of ley significance or through gates (that we tend to recognize as rainbows).

I've had a few fey encounters in my games, enough so that when my players see a rainbow they get edgy. =D

Their values are different and changing. They could sing and laugh with you one moment and then attempt to eat your face the next. The more chaotic and vibrant the fey, generally the more powerful. The more stable of the fey, such as elves, also wield only a fraction of the power of say nymphs or dryads.

My fey are largely based on Terry Pratchett (my megalomanic Elves for example) as well as Icelandic and Norse mythos fey myths.

I write nothing down.
I run a homebrew world that use to have a wiki page and allsorts of stuff, and then the server HD bricked and backups got lost etc. I was really sad about the entire thing but then I decided I might as well memorize it since it's my own world after all.

I usually have a single sheet of A4 that I keep with me as I GM. On it I write down the names of NPC's the PC's meet (names I make up on the fly) as well as placenames, names of buildings, towns, location of important McGuffins etc. All to help me remember for the next session.

I wing everything aside from the overarching plot. I'll often flip through a monster manual/bestiary for ideas for opponent abilities and the like but almost never am I using something directly. There's a plot, there's a world that is moving even though the heroes aren't and I like the uncertainty and 'freshness' that comes from opponents and challenges making sense as opposed to being necessarily 'balanced'.
My players have told me that they trust no one and take nothing for granted while playing in my games...which I found hilarious actually =D. Currently I'm running a game where the PC's are playing members of an extremely militant theocracy. It's alot of fun for me and them since these guys have shown up as baddies in almost all the games I've run in this world and now we get to see things from their point of view!

Generally I'll work out what happens next session as I walk to or from work or to the store or whenever I have time I don't need to think about anything in particular.

I think the most important thing to have clear is what the purpose of the session/encounter is going to be. Is it to let the players feel powerful and fight a bunch of things? Is it to let them experience more of the world or discover more about the story? Is it to make them despise or fear a certain entity within the world?

Answering those questions for myself helps me prepare a session. Helps me know which 'voices' I need to have ready and I'll often prep a few lines of dialogue I know will come up (again, generally as I'm walking somewhere...I like walking =D).

I hope that helped. I use to write everything down but found that the way I organize and relate things in my head doesn't really translate very well to paper and often gets horribly convoluted as I try to put down all possible angles!

I'd build a giant maze to distract from the fact that the entrance into my secret lair is actually in the lobby of the maze. The maze itself is an unsolvable horror pit filled with monsters and the traps are maintained by duergar who get first pick of any loot that finds its way in there.

Just a thought.

Thus me specifying "in a sword and shield fight".

For the sake of argument no armor, short of something magically reinforced with some kind of shock absorption would help against a giant.

Still doesn't change that your best defense against a regular opponent is your own sword and shield and not 'letting him hit you in your armored face/chest". You don't need to rework the entire system. Just make shields a larger part of your armor set.

While it isn't what bothers me most about PF, I agree, it's abit silly.

Alot of people seem to be overreacting to ArmoredSaint's post. He wants armor descriptions to make abit more sense THEREFORE Paizo should not write new adventures, should spend less time writing new material and more time on armor descriptions, automatically means he has a problem with fantasy physics etc. etc.

Chill yo.

Personally, when it comes to armor, what bother me most is how sucktastic shields are. Honestly, your best defense in a sword and shield fight is your sword and shield!

U.S. politics are so weird.
Two major parties across all the states? What?

Iceland has 6 political parties represented in parliament with another 6 not represented but still active.

Iceland.
With a population of 319.000.

That you get a choice between A or B is really weird, how can you people all be that alike?

"It wasn't being eviscerated by his greatsword that did me in, but his flailing fist of fury"

Made me laugh, tagged for FAQ!

It's a nonsense term really.
I can make the most optimized farmer at the exclusion of all else and technically be a 'power gamer'.

When I hear 'power gamer' I generally associate it with the obnoxious jerk who knowingly brings a gestalted munchkin frankenstein to a RP heavy table and then, due to boredom or sheer jerk factor, starts screwing with the game.

That's my first go to mental image, which has nothing to do with power gaming apparently. I thought being a jerk was a requirement =p

This is a weird discussion for me since I don't mingle much with the unwashed RPG masses.
Sure, I do PFS but my regular RPG group is pretty tightly knit.

What's the definition of a power gamer? Is it to do with sacrificing character for power? What's the opposite of a power gamer?

Optimization has been mentioned, but that's too vague. I can be the most optimized non-participant in a RPG ...that's hardly power gaming.

Can it help me hold a Greatsword? I mean, along with another hand.

RAI. If it can, then you can't use your other hand for anything except to hold an item.

My group had the handouts and knew there was a Quasit 'somewhere'.

Sadly there's no sign saying "Now entering Catacombs of Wrath. This is the place mentioned in Tsuto's notes and the freaks discussed are the sinspawn. Expect the Quasit to be here."

They pieced it together as they went. "Hey, maybe the freaks he mentioned are these icky things!". When the doors to the cathedral opened and Erylium does her "INTRUDERS!" spiel the Abjurer immediately asked "That wouldn't happen to be a Quasit, would it?" Then there were knowing looks all around.

My group absolutely manhandled the Glassworks Goblins and Tsuto escaped down the tunnels. They then followed after him, releasing Ameiko on the way and grabbed his notes as they pursued down the smuggler tunnels. They found a hidden cove there with some rotten boats and tracks indicating that Tsuto must've had a rowboat stashed here. They then notice the once-bricked up smuggler tunnel and headed in.

I can understand it if groups 'head back to base' after every encounter and stock up on what they somehow assume must be in the next section of the adventure. I personally feel that the adventure flows quite naturally from the Glassworks and then straight into the Catacombs, them going back to town first didn't even occur to them and I agree that it would've been kinda weird. My group took the North path through the prison, ran into Korovus and then camped out near the levitation champer thingamy and then took on Erylium after a brief rest.

I find it abit strange that the only way for it not to turn into a grindfest is to have a certain class. Or that they need to encounter her, succeed at a knowl. check, flee, resupply and then have at it again.

As an aside, both the Oracle and the Wizard knew what she was and what she was resistant/vulnerable to. Helped so they didn't waste spells on her, but its not like knowing she's vulnerable to Cold Iron makes some appear =/. Additionally, she can stay easily out of reach of even reach weapons with her flight. If it hadn't been for a string of good rolls for the Oracle they'd have no ability to bring her down. What saved them was me sticking to her combat tactics and not preemptively going invisible to heal up.

I consider Erylium almost a gear-check for the rest of the adventure and I told my players the same thing. This kind of thing will become more common later on (Xanesha is like a pimped out Erylium, really). The players have already started looking at their own builds with this in mind.

@joeyfixit

I believe the answer, RAI, is that the alchemist can make a second attack with the tentacle but at the same penalty as if he were TWF (and perhaps even with the added -5 secondary natural weapon penalty?).

I get that from just using the method described by the devs of counting attacks without the tentacle which would be two given that he has one attack with a dagger and he can also strike with his offhand. Then just applying the same to an attack sequence with a tentacle instead of the offhand strike.

I think that's what's intended?

edit: I thought I had it...now I'm not even sure.

I just ran Erylium again last night! Group composed of two players who'd been there during the last TPK event and two new ones =D

Ifrit Oracle of the Flame
Human Abjurer Wizard
Human Cavalier of the Blue Rose
and a Kitsune Ninja

I changed the encounter slightly, having a sinspawn already there and then having Erylium summon another one. I also armed the sinspawn with ranseurs.
I did this mainly due to how quickly the group had handled the sinspawn previously. One look at Erylium's spell list told me that if things went the same the sinspawn would last 1-2 turns and then it'd just be Erylium flitting around debuffing the group semi-pointlessly.

The fight was excellent at the start. Oracle and ninja jumped into the cathedral with the Cavalier standing in the door and the abjurer standing behind him. The sinspawn split up and go for the oracle and ninja with Erylium successfully casting Hold Person on the Cavalier. Later she then summons a spider in front of the Cavalier with the sinspawn and oracle/ninja fighting the sinspawn who are now flanking with the spider against the two of them.

The spider can't manage a hit against the cavalier so it skitters up and over him and goes for the abjurer while Erylium summons a dire rat and keeps the pressure on.

After this though, things start falling apart for the Quasit. Spider times out, sinspawn fall, rat times out and it turns into "Chase the Quasit!" I followed the tactics for her and she didn't go invisible since she was at such high health and regenerating most of the damage dealt to her. After several unsuccessful lasso, rope around a crossbow bolt, climb and grabble attempts the Oracle whips out a grappling hook and grounds her. What follows is a sickening boot party on the Quasit, who can't escape no matter how much she tries.
It takes them about 6 rounds or so to finally kill her off due to a combination of her actually turning invisible (thus having total concealment but still being pinpointed due to the rather large grapping hook) and then through sheer toughness, since DR/5 and Fast Healing 2 goes a long way against Level 2's.

They finally killed her meaning they've cleared the entire catacombs of wrath save for the Varghouille fountain area, which I don't expect to be much of a problem.

I find it hard to imagine how it does not turn into a boot party grindfest at the end, especially since there are no good aligned/cold iron weapons/temporary enhancements to be found =p

I have to say, this is fast becoming my favorite thread.
Absolutely love the input here! =D

Trust me, tis a very good build...especially when combined with mutagen benefits, discovery powers, and extracts as well.

Well, I know that. I run a game where the vestigial arms and tentacle are treated as secondary natural attacks and allowed along with my primary claws and bite. He even has 'armor spikes' as a separate discovery, emerging once he gains the natural armor bonus from the mutagen. As you can see we don't really play RAW, but that's really to be expected given the 'most important rule' on page 9 of the Core Rulebook.

The fighter and monk in the group still do just fine and are not underpowered in comparison. Its not something to base all rulings off of, but my experience with it isn't bad.

You can't just hat of disguise your extra arms and tentacle away, since the spell is way underpowered for such an extreme morph. Granted, there are plenty of spells (especially at the levels where we have the extra arms and such) that can hide it. I personally have those spells work weirdly when interacting with the arms and tentacle. The price of admission is social stigma. Both I and the player agree that glossing over it with spells is lame beyond measure.

----

As SKR stated. Reading the rules as intended, is that the arms and tentacle cannot be used to gain any kind of attack gain/advantage/use. They're effectively item bandoliers and a 'freaky science' flavor ability.

I know this. And knowing this I change it for my games. Nothing wrong with that imo =p

Without a special ability like hips, you need cover or concealment to hide. [...]

Don't know how many times I read that thinking "Hips are a special ability?...what?!" =D

I'm really enjoying this thread.
As soon as I think I know what is possible within the rules I start getting doubts, then I think I finally got it...aaand then it goes!
Fun stuff!

I think its quite clear what the intent was with the arms and tentacles. By what SKR and JJ have stated, they weren't meant to give you the ability to use them for anything except as an elaborate bandolier for items.
I know this. However, I also do see how you can make them work to do more than just that within the game rules (ignoring RAI). I think this kind of thing is very important. We 'know' they're not meant to do this, but it's possible anyway.

On a unrelated/peronal note.
I don't really see the problem with allowing a alchemist to become a clawed multi armed, tentacled, fang-gnashing beast hopped up on mutagen. Sure, he gets a ton of attacks, might rip a few limbs off and such(if he ever hits). But honestly he's sacrificing so much to do this. Even if we give him Bite/Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Tentacle and compare him to an equivalent Fighter/Barbarian/Monk build its not really a fair comparison since the alchemist is still a horribly mutated murder beast at this point. Good luck adventuring when you are mistaken for a monster right at the city gates! I don't find the social stigma that comes from turning yourself into a monster is really taken into account here.
Its not even like a druid who wild shape fights. At least the druid can stop and just walk around like a normal fellow. The alchemist is stuck with his extra limbs and a slimy tentacle at all times! He's more liable to be killed by superstitious or glory seeking heroes than he is to ever be praised. He'll have to live in hiding, only coming out to kill or feed lest he risk bringing the kind of attention that gets you hunted down and killed.

I say give him the attacks. He'll need all the help he can get if he wants to start down this path.

But again, personal opinion, kinda unrelated to hardcore rules discussions. =D

In the game I run I let the alchemist (who has a tentacle, vestigial arm, feral mutagen) make Claw, Claw, Claw, Bite, Tentacle attacks treating the tentacle and vestigial arm as secondary attacks.

So far so good, no conflict with our monk or fighter who still kick liberal amounts of ass regardless.

Haters gonna hate.

[snip] It's kind of like the old "you can't serve two masters" thing, only reversed.

You can't master two servers? =D

[snip]

If a druid decides to use flame strike to burn down a forest, it will work, he'll just lose his divine favor and powers afterwards.

Weeeelll....

Wildfires are a natural occurrance and serve important ecosystem functions. Forest landscapes are dynamic and change in response to variations in climate and to disturbances from natural sources, such as fires caused by lightning strikes. Many tree species have evolved to take advantage of fire, and periodic burns can contribute to overall forest health. Fires typically move through burning lower branches and clearing dead wood from the forest floor which kick-starts regeneration by providing ideal growing conditions. It also improves floor habitat for many species that prefer relatively open spaces.

After a fire burns down a swath of woodland, a sequence of ecological responses, or succession, begins. Amid the charred forest remains, a flourishing of pioneer species begins, usually quick-growing grasses and weeds, followed by a steady advance of slower-growing, taller species of plants. The first trees to emerge are often small pines, followed by larger pines and finally by hardwood species, including oak and hickory. The succession process begins quickly but can take decades or even hundreds of years to move from early 'pioneer' to a 'climax' stage.

Depends on how much the nature spirits/gods know about ecological cycles I guess =D

They didn't read his mind.

They had fair expectation that these kobolds (despite being unsure why they might've done so) were responsible for kidnapping the kids. Using player knowledge of kobolds, that alone would've given them fair expectation that he was a sadistic lizard man.

That he was the one kobold in a 1000 that just wants fair treatment, a spot by the fire and a chance to show off his tap dancing routine doesn't make their reaction to it unjustified. I can show you any number of monster tropes and most RPGers would be able to give me a rough estimation of what they're like.

Orc: Violent
Giant: Lumbering and stupid
Squid headed man: Sinister
Gnoll: Violent
etc etc.

That you choose to change them into beings as diverse as humans is great, I like that. That you don't inform your players (it seems) is not so cool. And that you then assume they must have knowledge of things they clearly don't and THEN punish them (him) for it?

Not cool at all.

Dreihaddar wrote:

A "lol u lose all class abilities!" move is not cool and MOST importantly hardly serves the story.

Rubbish.

Many an awesome story has featured (and even revolved around) falling from grace, redemption, bad choices for good reasons, and attonement.

In fact, its a ridiculously common theme in fantasy literature.

I may have to start prefacing all my comments with 'Read the reply'.

No?
Yes?

Many an awesome story feature an AWESOME FALL FROM GRACE. Not acts taken by characters thinking they were justified when clearly (according to you) they were not. As even the player himself has stated, he didn't know it wasn't entirely in line with his code to shank the beast right there.

Its a child eating and sadistic lizard man, not an innocent bystander.

Dreihaddar wrote:

We have spells and magic items that can ward a character about unknowing breaches of his deities codes or things that'll affect his alignment.

I know.

Sadly he didnt have one.

Quote:

Obvious things should be made obvious to the player

Murder of a helpless terrified sentient is fairly obvious I would have thought. At the very least (as this thread shows), it should have raised a massive question mark in his mind.

Highlighted the operative word there, unknowing breaches (as opposed to unknowing breeches) require an item or magic for the GM to chime in with a 'you realize you'll forsake your paladin code by this action?'. For more common sense things (from a characters perspective) this should be the default.

Its a scaly monster that as far as the player knew had been eating children, what's that stuck in its teeth? Is it childflesh? You monster! Taste my blade!. It comes down to you, as a storyteller, to convey why killing it, begging for its life or no, is a breach of his code.

A paladin that knowingly commits an act that is in opposition to his code should fall. Hell, I've even done such an act because I felt that strongly about something and I gladly took the fall (and it was a great time all around).

A "lol u lose all class abilities!" move is not cool and MOST importantly hardly serves the story.

[snip]

Many a Paladin falls thinking he is doing the right thing via his interpretaion of the code.

His God may very well disagree.

I'd be careful about this interpretation of Character vs. Player knowledge.

By your own admission you don't even know if he was aware of the severity of his actions and from what I can tell you didn't give him a heads up that this was a clear violation of his code. We have spells and magic items that can ward a character about unknowing breaches of his deities codes or things that'll affect his alignment.

Obvious things should be made obvious to the player.

I have a campaign that is basically based around making my players make hard moral decisions. They're killing unarmed people, children on occasion, they're using torture and often underhanded methods to get their way, committing genocide on a mass scale against people for crimes no larger than being different and none of it is done trivially. My players have the mechanics of their codes and faith explained to them. I often get a question along the lines of "Right, I know what I'd do but what would I do if I were following my faith?". If there is a well known case they might know of, a few lines of dogma with an example puts them in the mindset of the zealous followers of a jealous god they're supposed to be playing as and helps set the precedence for future encounters.

When placing people in the mindset of a different person it takes abit of handholding to begin with. If you want objective good and evil in your games, that's great. You can't assume everyone will understand what that means when it comes to in-game decisions.

tl;dr
If something is obvious to you it may not be to the players.

Reread my post.

Objectivity has no place in that sentance.
Having something explained to you versus hearing it yourself is not at all the same. I of course wasn't there, so I can't know if the cleric was acting it out the same way the Kobold was.
In exactly the same way that reading what I'm writing doesn't intuitively impart tone or volume, having what someone is saying explained to you isn't the same as hearing it yourself.

He clearly did not understand the Kobold, nor the kobold him. It was being paraphrased by another. Even if you just allowed a straight understanding and didn't bother to have the Cleric tell the Paladin what was going on IC, you still can't expect the Paladin to fully grasp the distress of a creature of such a wildly different race from him.

I have no clue how you run Kobolds in your games, that's entirely your thing. In my opinion running them as scaly humans is abit silly.

There's a host of racial tendencies that we just take for granted as humans that might have no relevance to a creature of a different race.
Similar to how smiling to a Kzin (Larry Niven's 'Known Space') is a sign of clear aggression and a challenge to battle, a kobold in distress is not necessarily weeping and rocking on his heels. If he's anything like a Bearded Dragon (the only lizard I'm around with any regularity). He might arch his head back and open his mouth while puffing out his neck, even hiss. That, combined with the clear language barrier (even if its being paraphrased) isn't AT ALL the same has understanding both the language and body language of a creature in distress.

My point was being made assuming they weren't just scaly midget ventriloquists. If they are, it is no longer valid and I retract it.

------

Clearly the player does NOT know that this would've been a breach his code.
WHY ELSE WOULD THIS THREAD EXIST?!

Making your own feelings known in a separate adventure due to the actions of a different character in different circumstances does not count as 'fair warning' for someone about to lose their class powers nor does it do justice to what his own character likely knew about the tenets of his faith and code of conduct.

The player seems happy enough being allowed a remake of his character. I see this as being less him messing up and more a case of the GM not communicating.

Dreihaddar wrote:

If the paladin kills this man, then yes I agree he should fall.

Ho on earth is this any different to the Kobold situation?

Racist against Kobolds.

Kobolds are sentient creatures like any other, with possibly less choice than your average human(its not their fault they are amost always raised in an evil and cruel society after all).

The Kobold has a soul, that travels to the outer planes after death.

Why (outside of blatant racism) would the Paladin fall for slaying the juman guard begging for his life, but not the Kobold one.

You may want to reread my post.

Hearing someone beg for their life and having it explained to you are two very different things. Not to mention if the creature doing so is not only speaking another language but doing so in a way you cannot emphatically understand (barking and yapping).

If the 'kobold' in this case had been a human Mwangi tribesman and the Paladin a human Andoran there's still racial constants that'd give away his distress and sadness. (There's a host of shared expressions and tones that are common amongst humans).

Try to tell me that you could do the same to the buzzing of a giant insect or the growling of a bipedal lion...or the yapping of a lizard for that matter.

-----

Lets add to this that the character that the player is playing has a better understanding of his own moral obligations than the player does. If killing the Kobold, regardless of understanding or whatever else WOULD cause him to fall from grace the character should've known even if the player didn't (and thus the player should've been informed beforehand).

[What follows is Homebrew talk, I'm not saying this is how Pathfinder is written. Just saying how I run things.]

In my homebrew game religion and those that follow it zealously are extremely tough customers.

I run a game where the gods are focused on the material plane. Some of the gods, especially ascended mortals, are more active than others and exhibit more...mortal inclinations when it comes to what their followers must do.

Example:
In my game, Hemondir is a god of Strength, Artifice, War and Honor. He rose to leadership among his people in a time of dire need and led them through a dark time and extreme natural catastrophes. He was laid low by the magic of a 'non-human spellcaster' and thereafter rose as a god to keep on guiding his people.

Now mind you...Hemondir was human. He was also the leader of an aggressively expansionist nation that would break and subjugate its neighbors. They're also racist, seeing as they believe that the human form was fashioned from the first stones of the Earth and that all other races are flawed or made by lesser beings. They're 'arcanophobic' Arcane magic killed their human form god, it is evil and only serves as a tool for evil to destroy and enslave the good of the world. Ontop of all this they're isolated and xenophobic.

Now take a Paladin of this religion. He's Lawful Good, for sure. He follows the tenets of his faith and what is deemed good and just in it is to relentlessly hunt and destroy heretical outsiders and to safeguard the lands against their predation.
So when the Hemondirian Paladin in my campaign came upon a family of Sorcerers (children included)...well...she did what she thought was right even though it left a bitter taste in her mouth, the penalty for sorcery is death so she killed them all.
Not only was it the right thing to do by her code but it was also 'good' by the standards of her religion, nation and culture.
The paladin did her best to make it as painless as possible, she regretted that they had chosen to come into this land she was sworn to protect and regretted the wasted potential of the people she now had to slay. When the chips were down though, she did what was 'Right'.

-----

Now, that's how I run alignments in my homebrew game. It's very subjective, but not so much that it renders them useless. Its a handy way to gauge how different cultures interact, to assess how different characters view each other and what their values are in relation to each other.

When asking people to assign alignments to their own character (because when would anyone ever be chaotic evil using subjective alignment rules?!) then we pick a comparison point and use that to determine the alignments. So you could be chaotic evil, in relation to the Hemondirian faith, and be the most likable and nice person ever while the Lawful Good guy is at this moment ratting you out to the Inquisitors (who are also LG) who are on their way to kill and/or imprison you.

I like my deities different. So different infact that they run the gamut from selfish and aggressive deities that even bar their followers from receiving healing from another deity, to more ethereal and 'universal' gods that are more a collection of thoughts and desires rather than a dominant personality, something like how my version of Gozreh behaves, where reverence and respect is enough and he otherwise doesn't interfere with people being more focused on nature.

----------[Back to Golarion and regular Pathfinder]--------

The Paladin does not fall.
Lets start with the obvious reason: Its not cool.
Falling because you killed a kobold is pretty weak. Not because the kobold didn't have a family that he loved or that he was about to make a donation to the war widows and orphans fund or whatever. But because its a classic monster that the paladin happened to kill while it was at his mercy.
I agree that the Paladin Code should be a RP tool, not a way for the DM to punish a player for playing a Paladin. The fall of a Paladin can be something the players and the DM enjoy.

Should the Paladin feel bad? Yes.
Should his deity send him a strongly worded letter? (Or the deity equivalent)? Yes.
Should she forsake one of her nascent champions leaving him ripe to be picked up and twisted by one of the COUNTLESS more evil agents out there? No.

I agree, there's things the Paladin could've done differently. But make him fall over something more meaty and substantial. The exact same situation but where he can actually understand the creature is even enough since that's a completely different situation!

A blubbering guard that wails on about his arthritic mother and his snotty children and his hag of a wife and how he's their sole provider and how those Norgorber clerics where paying him so much money to look the other way and the church was no help and the rent on their farm is so high and he cant make ends meet due to the recent droughts and this guard gig wasn't paying as much as he'd been promised oh please PLEASE don't kill me noooooo.

Etc.
If the paladin kills this man, then yes I agree he should fall. Having this paraphrased by a cleric who might go: "Something about him being paid off by Norgorber clerics..." doesn't have the same effect.

Barring house-ruling Paladin codes and behaviors to suit a wider range of alignments (like I do), the way I see a Paladin approach law is not as an inconvenience but as something solid and safe in a sea of chaos.

When dealing with "Who's law does he champion" then a Paladin is either a direct agent of his deity in which case the religion defines where and when he needs to act, or he's acting as a divine agent of state, injecting his particular deities brand of justice into regular law enforcement.

When 'Paladining around' in civilization I can imagine the Paladin almost needing a letter of marque from whatever local administrative body serves the area so he can feel free to dispense justice on the fly, given he adheres to the law (and given the laws are not in major conflict with the Paladins code).

BB36's comparison with Judge Dredd is perfect really...so perfect I need to make him real and get to play him! =D
Holy Gun archtype, speaks to his weapon to activate its special abilities, "Throw down your weapons and prepare to be judged!", "I am the Law".
This is happening.

Paladin in action
Lawful Good Paladin & a Chaotic Evil Blackguard arguing

I think both sides need to realize (and loads of you do, don't go crazy now) that we're dealing with two different 'issues'.

1. Currently the Pathfinder Fighter cannot deal with situation XYZ. (OP's view)

2. The Fighter would be better/more fun with some changes to it. (Circa Page 10 where this starts to be more prevalent).

I disagree with the examples provided when discussing 1. and have given my views on it. I find its mainly an encounter design issue.

I agree with 2, but then again I change a little of everything in my homebrew game. I differ from some of the other posters here in how I'd change things, certainly. But I still agree and like hearing how things are changed in different games.

Sort of, yes.
I guess I'm really asking for rules on handling 'Godzilla' combat where the PC's are just normal sized.

Shadow of the Colossus is a game where you, the hero, run around and defeat monsters of reality defying size by scrambling up their bodies and solving 'puzzles' essentially.

I like your suggestions, but I wonder how applicable they are to a foe the size of a large city block =D
This is entirely off topic of course, but its fun.

Sidenote:
Do you still flank just by being on opposite sides of something, no matter its size?

Edit:
Thanks Evil Lincoln! Exactly what I was after =D

Even as someone that sees no problem with fighters at higher levels, I wouldn't mind some insight into how to run encounters where the PC's can swarm up a foe.

Similar to 'Shadow of the Colossus' really, but where the foe is more active in perhaps trying to brush you off.

I'm not even asking for new rules, just some insight into possible ways to run such an encounter (I have, having more input is always good)

I love undead.
I'm bonkers about them.
I forget which book exactly, was one of the many 3.0 Undead books by some 3rd party publisher. They went into some great detail about the psychology of those mortals that achieve immortality. Its different from creatures that are naturally immortal or can live to ludicrous ages on their own since a mortal mind isn't really built for that kind of time scale.

Its not binding in the ruleset. But really, if you're just referencing the PRD when creating something as awesome as a Lich you're missing out.

Liches have always been a favorite. To me, a Lich's 'evil' is not necessarily built into the process. Sure, you can be a evil bastard and now you're a undead evil bastard. Par for the course really.
A good character can absolutely become a Lich. Nothing preventing him from doing so, but more important is his reason for seeking immortality! Is he doing so to pursue some research? To protect his family? To achieve some seemingly impossible goal?
Then what happens once he's achieved his goal?

Worse yet, if immortality was his goal all along, what now?

Even if there's the moment where lightning splits the sky and the newly born lich throws his hands up into the sky, exalted by his new found immortality, faced with the entirety of time to pursue anything he wants...
Dude...that's a loooong time.
I mean, when I have unexpected days off I sometimes find myself doing nothing all day. I can't imagine how it is for someone, even a driven and motivated person once he's expended all his interests. He has FOREVER to do so after all.

The way I see it, on any timeline long enough the Lich eventually succeeds at his initial goal (or is destroyed) the Lichdom was a prerequisite for (most likely a goal achievable in only an extra lifetime or two). Now faced with eternity where days start to bleed into weeks, months, years it starts to go unhinged until eventually its rendered catatonic by the ages and the weight of its memories.

It's so tragic.
I love it.

Now, short term I see no reason why a lich has to go evil. Long term I don't see a way to avoid going mad/misguided/evil

@Sangalor

I applaud your approach but you clearly don't understand.

See...Fighters...can't fly.
But casters...they can fly.

This will not be resolved by appealing to sensibility.

Heck depending on the level, so long as the wizard has the right scrolls (which he can make himself) he can get out of the situation, then prepare and come back. Teleport, or even dimension door is really a game changer in the surprise ambush factor.

Sure, but again we're assuming prep time for a wizard. The point I was trying to make is that the wizard being compared to a Fighter is being given loads of advantages and no such concession is being done for the fighter.

As for the all your gear stolen. Generally that is worse on martial characters then it is on all but the cleric and wizard. That table leg will not allow a fighter to handle CR appropriate encounters at mid to upper levels. And the sorceror still has all his tools, so does the oracle, and the summoner, and the...

Wasn't trying to say that a Fighter equipped only with a chair leg will take on any level appropriate encounter. I was trying to get across that atleast a fighter with a chair leg is doing something whereas a Wizard without his book and no time to prepare is doing absolutely nothing close to what the fighter is doing.

I don't think we disagree really. The situation that's being attempted to pass off as a problem is just so ludicrous that my mind tends to wander. There's absolutely no reason a Fighter needs to handle a situation by himself. Even if he had to, there's equipment that allows him to do so. Once he slips on his little boots of Flight he's off in a flying monsters face doing his combat style things and mad attacks like its nobodies business.

The problem is a fabricated one. It doesn't exist.
(Come at me! =D)

In my first run of Burnt Offerings, Erylium TPK'd the entire group.

Group was composed of:
Elven Barbarian
Dwarven Barbarian
Half Orc Cleric
Human Sorcerer
Human Ranger

Erylium went all megalomanic as they entered her 'sanctum' and proceeded to flick and out of invisibility either shouting curses at them and throwing her knife or doing some spell tricks.

While the rest of the party dealt with her minions (more sinspawn had gathered here due to how things had played out previously) the elven barbarian runs over to the Runewell (above which Erylium was perching) and starts climbing. Erylium freaks, starts stabbing him, he fails his climb check horrendously, falls into the runewell.
Elven barbarian succumbs to rage waters and when the half orc cleric runs over to help him out, he eviscerates him with his bastard sword (Crit while raging takes the cleric to negatives) the dwarven barbarian tries to reason with the elf and gets a sword in the face for his trouble (dwarf down into negatives). Sorcerer and Ranger both try to stop the barbarian who, amazingly, is able to take out the sorceress as well before being brought down by the ranger.

Erylium guffaws at the entire scene and proceeds to torment the ranger. Ranger attempts to take out Erylium. Critically fumbles three times in a row winding him, breaking the bow and spraining his wrist. Erylium is staggered by laughter at this point but still manages to take him down to zero hit points at which point the ranger gives up.

Erylium gives him a chance to drink of the waters of Lamashtu or be slain. Ranger gives in, drinks, world melts into a tide of blood and monsters, fade to black.

---------

Entire group was brought to Thistletop scheduled to be sacrificed and the Ranger became a recurring villain!

All in all a crazy fight =D

I like how all the spellcasters that are being brought up and toted as superior are always assumed to have time to prepare, the correct spell selection, advantageous terrain, being aware of the danger and have whatever else they need to achieve that superior damage potential.

I take it you've never been:
* Attacked by a dragon that just smashes through the roof of the inn you were sleeping in?
* Assaulted by a kraken while onboard a ship being tossed around by a typhoon?
* Had all your gear stolen prior to facing an encounter?
* Get targeted first by everything the baddies have to throw at you seeing as you're that wizard they keep hearing about?

And so on.
Where the wizard dies due to lack of prep time the more mundane class just smashes a chair, grabs a chair leg and goes to town with their combat styles and superior physical stats and BAB.

I'll say it again: The majority of the problems people seem to be having seem to stem from poor encounter design.