Elfabet's page

RPG Superstar 8 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 20 posts. 1 review. No lists. 1 wishlist. 3 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


And then we added one more. Did someone say squirrel?

Page 18/16 (Pdf/book numbered) Mercicul Spirit Secret, Missing a Close Parenthesis mark ')' after the word 'fire' in the 4th line of Benefits paragraph.

Same Page, Occult Weapon Secret, /corrosive burst/ from APG, the 'APG' is not set to superscript.

Page 20/18. Spirit Imp Secret. The special cross denotation behind the word 'imp' in the Benefits paragraph also is not superscripted like other instances (such as new spells). [Sorry I don't remember the name for the character; clave? grave?]
Or is this intentional, and only to have it superscripted on new spells?
Because I find a page or two later Undying Salvation and it has a slew of what I can only assume are feats or secrets that are also noted with the same mark. (Do Secrets ever have feats as prerequisites? If they do, how do you distinguish them for prerequisite Secrets, which would be terribly confusing.)

Anyways, that's 4 hours for the first 20 pages of so. I don't know how the rest of the weekend's going to go, but, I'll see if I can't find time to add some more.

Sorry if this isn't the place for it, or if it's already been addressed, but here goes:

Crimson Countess Harbinger Archetype. Crimson Claim (Su) ability, what kind of damage is it?
Is it susceptible to DR, are creatures with immunity to bleed susceptible to it? Most importantly, does Hardness apply to it.

Thanks for your answers.

Tigger has his finger on the trigger while aiming at the tiger in a fruit salad extravaganza.
Was it the shot heard 'round the zoo?


FlamingPhenex wrote:

That being said, I'd love to see a vampire-themed class with power over blood itself.

Not to derail or anything (still excitedly awaiting my own copy of the book), there's a 3pp class from the Path of War line called Harbringer, that totally has that in mind, and specifically from it an arch-type bent in that direction:

Harbringer product announcement
Document Link to specific archetype

Sorry for redredging a 2 y.o. conversation, but:
Apparently the first time you navigate to that product page from search that line does not appear. Only after clicking to the Product Discussion tab and then back to Product Reviews did the link show up for me. Could this be something with the directed link from the search feature?

GM_Solspiral wrote:
First 3 to respond to this can have a free copy if they agree to review

What would be involved in such a review? I have no formal experience with it but consider myself a half-way decent writer.

I'm always interested in free product though~

For a high level we did this past weekend I made a healer cleric. 13 Channels per day, specialize in Charisma only for the purposes of Selective channeling, and if someone isn't hurt, she may aid-another her personal charge, but it's not likely.
Besides squire feat, that's a couple other 3pp feats that give you helpful cohorts, the one from my game was like 'Personal Guardian' but we came across a couple other ways to get a helper.
As for passive builds, a full tank that can't heal is probably a fine consideration. Tribal Scars and Undefeatable archetype will make them hardy, if potentially a slightly larger draw on resources...
H-orc Magic Missile master build stands in the back with his wand and just blasts away, every round. Doesn't meet the 'all martial prof' req though.

You can do it. It has a Reflex save for a reason. It counts as a magical trap if the rogue has that awesome auto-detecty thingy...
And maybe you just botch the damage, on purpose like, so they know she's serious.
Paizo's bosses have a huge history of being highly overleveled compared to the PCs and using this number advantage to do things they can't yet, and at lower levels especially, they often tend to be spell casters.

But it's a home-game clearly, so my question is: How would your players most likely react to it? Are they going to get vindictive in a 'oh-ho-ho, so you want to play?' kind of way, or are they going to complain and whine when you spring a trap on them like an intelligent foe would?

2 cents.

Have you ended up pulling this off yet? What tactics did you try? Did it go well?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyrad wrote:

For those who had the pleasure of playing a 5th Edition game, are my concerns actually present in the game? Having a character adapt in response to their adventure experiences has massive appeal to me. A character that follows a set path and doesn't change with respect to their experiences strikes me as really boring.

I'll give you this Cyrad, when playing a cloned character for the second time for 1st-12th level, choosing nearly the same stats and path progression, in numbers the two characters were very similar.

However, what I was delighted to find (and hopefully this can be true of most systems) is that the characters developed differently socially, mentally, and tactically. Because they had difference enemies, experiences, allies and goals, they developed their personalities and to a point, their role in combat and social situations in unique ways. We collected different treasure, learned tactics for different enemies and had different availability of resources (like town, resting, consumables, etc).
Basically, thanks to the story they progressed through they became very different characters despite looking similar on paper - sans equipment section.

Who's the best GM/DM you've ever played under for any length of time and what made them special?

I'm thrilled to see all the cool things people are finding in the system.
For my own 2 cents, I like how stream-lined 2 Weapon Fighting has become (being subject to a multitude of Dervishes in 3.X, this was a clean change), how helpful PCs can intuitively be to each other and the ease of story elements taking precedence. I had some trouble with that in Pathfinder just this past weekend, but in 5th I wouldn't have had any problems with it, I suspect.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LordSynos wrote:

Despite owning all the Discworld books, I've never read one.

This makes me very sad for you. Not wanting to start another discussion on whether an author is 'good' or not, I'll just say I find his humorous writing very witty and his satire nearly always spot on. If that's the thing for you, give it a shot when you can.

If not, that's okay too! Maybe someone else who does will see them in your possession and ask to borrow one~

2 people marked this as a favorite.

As a (apparently very) casual PFS player I have a great deal of trouble accepting both the arguments GMs seem to have against players with 'overly strong' characters AND the sheer player-unfriendliness of the campaign as whole.
I know it's a very delicate balance and the work that has been put in thus far is tremendous, but there's a constant discrepancy, for me at least, in the difficulty of the modules and the intention or will towards the players. And succeeding into the mid tier on the occasional disjointed, world-spanning smattering of mods I've gotten to play only makes the difficulty and stress of keeping such a character (and legal) all the more frustrating.
I also know that making easier mods will not remove all the power characters, but I know, at least in case of many players I see at cons, you bring the 'broken' to survive the bull. If not wiping an encounter in the 1st action would lead to a desperate party loss when the enemy goes, then I'd rather have that.
Heck, I even spectate higher level character builds to learn about new things to try and see the powerful options that some people get such a kick out of playing.
Over and over PFS has seemingly tried to screw their players over, and the GMs that run (myself included) become jaded to the unhappiness of their players. There's a powerful disconnect between the hardened GMs running an encounter the butchers us with some glee and then the teary eyed wonder they get as they relate to you after the wipe how their character shined in that encounter.
I'm struggling really hard right now to express these feelings articulately and in a critical, helpful manner, but maybe I can dumb it down to
'Perhaps the staff/writers/coordinators are only listening hard to their solid core of players and GMs, when that ends up being a very small part of their audience, and in turn makes the campaign decisions not as good as they could be for everyone'

Thanks for letting me try to get that out.

I'm thinking ways to get around it with specifically switching the rings, considering the greater problem, if you prefer:
Targeted Dispel magic on the ring's effect could temporarily suppress said immunity. And there's no reason, if the guildmaster plays it cool, for him to suspect it's not working if the casting is covert.
As others have said, a fairly straight forward sleight of hand during a handshake would palm the ring away. I've seen street performers get watches and jewelry off people unnoticed easily (also ties, cell phones, etc). The problem then is returning it inconspicuously.
I nor anyone else I know, sleep with rings on at night. So again, petty theft could be straightforward. But who knows what guards and wards a 'high level cleric' would provide themselves. Also, none of my jewelry is magically, which would make it easy to change when I would and wouldn't wear it. And how would such a person act when they discover it missing comes up again. The switch could help with that though.
The point of magic aura'ing the duplicate is an important thing to remember.
Would offering a form of protection or escort to the rep help insinuate you? Either for a better chance at the swap or just as a show of goodwill/power-showing?

Minorest of quibbles, but on the Madness and Insanity page, -madness
Schizophrenia's "Description" line is formatted differently than the rest. Chiefly, it is not on its own line and in all capitols with a double spacer around it.
Thanks for your effort to make this a great tool.

Just wanted to say I really love the character sheets a ton! The NPC sheet is great for fitting by stat'd non-monsters on too. I'd be lovely to see the alternate class features from the APG get on there, but I know you've already said you're not superman, but if you did, you'd be Super Awesome!

Alright, played a human one of these at first level tonight. Where to start.
Um, he's weak. He feels weak anyways. Spellstrike. It's useless, or nearly so as written. Used it the first combat how the board clarified it. that is:
Round 1: cast touch spell, hold charge
Round 2: step into combat, smack, hope to hit, deal moderately increased damage.
Can't hold onto it longer than spell level rounds or whatever either, so no pre-combat casting.

After that first combat, the GM took pitty on me and said I could cast (defensively or not) into the sword then smack with it, burning the spell either way (totally wasted both my first tables on sucky rolls). But this is replaced by a slightly more flexible but worse ability at second level.
Let me be clear that I'm willing to give up more than one attack a round for the chance to channel a touch spell into the weapon and attack with it in the same round. This makes give up the flexibility of spell choice for preparing because I would have to keep only touch spells, but still have fireball for when there's plenty of baddies or buffs too. This is a good choice/trade off.

He's fine prepared. He's seems like he'll be fine burning more spell slots for abilities at higher level.
After spells are all cast and used up (minus cantrips!) he feels like my melee cleric. That is, alright to hit, alright armor, but not horrendously effective.
Not looking forward to Spell Combat. If I were gonna have it, I'd want to reverse the penalties (-2 atk, -4 concentration) because I've got a hard enough time hitting as it is.
I suppose lessening them as time goes on helps... but it's soooooo far away from my perspective.
Arcane Strike is my friend :)
But having to burn swifts for my Arcana later will make me less happy.
I have to take Combat Casting as my second feat too, just like any other caster that might get into melee.

As a character he's fine and fun to play, but that's mostly just good role playing. Beyond that, my initial opinion feels like he is kinda weak, and I'd love to be pumping higher level spells into my sword every round and swinging once hoping to hit for massive damage (and missing enough that my average came out lower than the fighter's or barbarian's.)
Let me again reiterate that I'd be fine at higher levels with losing my extra attacks and the flexibility of Spell Combat to make Spell Strike into a channel-and-whack-in-the-same-turn power. It would make me much more melee oriented as I couldn't cast fireball in the same round I'm flailing at the bad guy, but I think that fits, both stylistically, and my play style.

As always, this is just my opinion. I think I like the character enough (after agreed upon adjustments) that Tyr the Woaden will continue, and I'll chime in as we go along if the timing works out.