Enkili's page

A full, 12 month AP installment would be about 700,000 words. At the very least, that would likely mean we'd shift over to the slow XP progression.

That said, it's not something we'll be likely to do. The Adventure Path format continues to be one of our most successful lines, with its popularity continuing to grow. That isn't the right time at all to make drastic changes like this... especially when I'm seeing a fair amount of "This AP isn't the one for me, but I like the sounds of the next one." I've heard that conceit since the start, honestly, and the fact that if we do an AP that doesn't appeal... you only have to wait 6 months for the next one to start is, I suspect, one of the greatest strengths of the AP. Not one I'm eager to tinker with.

I still like the idea of a 9 month (launched at Gen Con), followed by a 3 month (maybe launched at Paizo Con). That would allow for a longer AP to cover 20 levels and then more focus on the lower levels for the next six months (3 months of the short AP follower by the first 3 parts of the next one).

With Skull & Shackles announced I've seen a number of posts on how paladins fit in a pirate campaign. Personally I'm more concerned about the Cavalier. I know it's 8 or so months out, but do you think the player's guide will have options on aquatic, flying, or amphibious mounts for cavaliers, or is a cavalier just a bad idea for this AP? An Order of the Cockatrice cavalier just screams pirate to me.

I guess it's possible this question will be moot once Ultimate Combat is out.

On the Rolemaster issue, I just have to jump in and add that most of the things people look for houserules on like facing, critical effects, and effects of low HP, are all covered by Rolemaster. Rather than trying to add all these to Pathfinder, people should just try Rolemaster.

Don't worry about. Let the PC have his glorious victory and move on. As for the heavily tweaked bad guy, keep him and use him for something else. It's not like the PCs knew the full extent of his powers, so they won't know the difference. Also if he died in one shot you are either at a fairly low level, or he wasn't "tweaked out." BBEGs should be able to take a scythe critical especially if magically prepared.

On another note I remember a time playing Rolemaster a demon from beyond the pale showed up that we were supposed to run from, but I (decidedly the weakest character in the party) took a pot shot and killed it. If you are familiar with Rolemaster that was an open end on the hit and a double open end on the superlarge creature critical. Totally changed the course of the adventure.

Sorry for reminiscing, but it goes to show that events like this in game are great and memorable. Don't look for ways to take them away.

Here is a long discussion on exactly this topic.

Thank you. This is very helpful.

For the next game I'm running I am considering just giving out certain feats to anyone who meets the prereqs. I guess I'm wondering if anyone thinks this is a terrible idea and why. I get tired of the entirely formulaic characters when there are so many interesting feats out there, and this should allow characters to branch out. Most of the feats suggested have a penalty to use.

Combat Expertise - isn't a great feat by itself (usually just a gateway) and it has a penalty to actually use.

Power Attack and Deadly Aim - there is a penalty to use these and they are almost a feat tax on melee and ranged combatants.

Vital Strike feats - allows for scaling damage for high BAB, even when hitting a moving target.

Two-Weapon Fighting feats - two-weapon fighting damage on a full attack scales fairly close to the two-handed weapon fighting and it requires feats and it does MUCH less damage against a moving target when he can only make one attack. Why not?

Point Blank Shot - mostly something for the ranged attackers and why shouldn't you do a little more damage up close.

Metamagic Feats - these all have a penalty to use (higher level spell slot) and in some cases no one thinks the penalty is worth the boon especially if you have to spend a feat first.
Heighten, Maximize, Silent, Still, Widen

If you think this is the worst idea ever let me know why. If you think it's great, and should go even further with more freebies, tell me which ones.

Yes, just as there were charts for race sizes in the Core Rulebook. But don't get your hopes up that much... wayangs are Small. The closest analogue to them in the Core is a gnome... but "reversed" in theme. (They're tied to the Shadow plane, not the First World.)

Gnome-like things with a connection to the Shadow Plane...any connection to Count Ranalc?

One thing that might come up in the case presented is the good old limit to the number of Attacks of Opportunity. Unless the Ogre has the Combat Reflexes feat he can only make one aoo per round.

In any case Evil Lincoln's responses are correct and remarkably prompt.

whether that's an Asian-themed adventure, a Numerian adventure, or whatever--is followed up with something more traditional that will appeal to folks with more, shall we say, "classic" tastes.

Did you hear that everyone - Paizo is doing a techno-fantasy AP next year. Probably going to be the August release since the one after Jade Regent will be more "classic." Unless Sutter is talking about the classic Expedition to Barrier Peaks, then it might start at the beginning of 2012.

That's what I heard anyway.

EDIT: Did I mention Enkili is the god of wild speculation. And since we were talking about APs we're Not-At-All excited about, well, I'm not a big fan of super-tech in my fantasy. Maybe now is the time to say something, before it is set in stone rather than after.

Okay, I'll bite (not too hard):

Stop teasing! What's your new campaign world!?!

I'll second that request.

I like Golarion but it already suffers from what I call "The Glorantha Syndrome". Much like Glorantha, if Golarion is something you've followed since the beginning, it's not much trouble. But if you're just coming to Golarion for the first time it's tremedously overwhelming. Information is spread out over so much material that even finding where a certain piece of information lies can be a challenge. Not to mention the monstrous buy-in cost to obtain the information can be a big turn off to a lot of people.

Actually I think the Inner Sea World Guide covers most of the basic information on the campaign setting for a relatively low cost (if you just get the PDF). Yes you can branch out and get more specific information on various regions, but none of that information is really necessary if you aren't using that regional setting. You don't have to buy everything. Although just one AP with the associated setting book, that usually comes out, would run around $140, but that's months of entertainment. Still cheaper than cable TV.

It's really not much different from the Pathfinder RPG. You can just pick up the Corebook and Bestiary, but if you want to branch out into other areas there's the Advanced Player's Guide and the "Ultimate" books.

Also, much of the Campaign setting stuff is freely available at Pathfinder Wiki. Just Google it, or someone else can post the link.

On the other hand it might just be that my gaming budget is unreasonably high....maybe I'm crazy. Is there some kind of support group?

Was ANYONE, other than mortal cultists, on Rovagug's side in the big showdown? Some demonlords? A Horseman or 2? Some unnamed lost/forgotten god? Was it really just him and his creations? Is he THAT badass?

Sebastian wrote:

Would you call me sane?

I DUB THEE SANE!

Ooh! Ooh! Can I get that dubbing too? Maybe if I get an "official ruling" from the Creative Director my friends will believe me.

I tend to agree with the OP that Golarion is a little too generic. I think from a publisher perspective you have to make a world like that in order to fit all aspects of the system, but in doing so you have very little that makes it feel significantly different from other game worlds. Golarion does have the Aroden incident and all the mini-catastrophes (Abendego, Worldwound, etc.) that followed, but all those feel isolated and relatively unimportant if a PC is not directly involved in those happenings. It's the, "yeah I heard about them demons breaking into Sarkoris (I think that's right), but they got it contained, so what's it got to do with me," attitude that marginalizes major things like the worldwound

I say it is too generic in that it could be a post-apocalyptic setting, or a gothic horror setting, or a Arthurian setting, or a medieval Japanese setting (coming soon to a game store near you), or just about anything else, but in doing so it has nothing to set it apart that makes Golarion unique. What's the hook to draw people to Golarion?

To give some other examples of settings with a good hook (the OP gave a few good ones: Dark Sun, Gemini and Midnight) I think the Diamond Throne (Arcana Unearthed/Evolved) was unique and kinda cool just by taking away the human-centric view every game setting has. In that one Giants, and later dragons, were at the top, not humans. From a human perspective living in a human area nothing was greatly different, but as you get out into the world I found it more enjoyable. Scarred Lands did a great job of keeping everything that a traditional D&D game has, but threw it into a post-apocalyptic world where the gods and titans just finished a major world shaping war. The world had a unique feel, a hook, to draw you in.

Obviously despite the criticisms I have for Golarion I still support it, just look at my subscriber tags. Most of the material I transplant to a different world. I ran one AP in Golarion, and whereas my players enjoyed it, they were grateful to move on to another world when it was done. That could be my own prejudices coming through, but...

Honestly I think Golarion could be great if there was one big hook that would tie everything together, so that Brevoy felt like it was in the same world as Katapesh. If I could think of something specific I would probably be a better writer, so don't ask me what that hook should be.

For our Pathfinder style, the word "orcish" is a grammatical error itself, by the way.

We don't use "-ish" at the end of any of our races to make adjectives. We generally just use the name of the race.

Then I have to ask if "Axe of the Dwarvish Lords" is an error, or an exception out of respect to tradition?

I asked about this in another thread, but I didn't get much response regarding the flavor of the ability in question, and I was wondering what you thought.

My old game group is restarting a game that has been in hiatus for around a year now and changing from 3.5 to pathfinder. In the old game I played a monk, and in the rewrite a few questions came up.

First off, comparing Touch of Serenity to Stunning Fist, Touch of Serenity sucks. Serene creatures can't attack or cast spells, but suffer no other penalties while stunned creatures can take NO actions AND are denied heir dex bonus AND take a -2 to AC AND Stunning Fists does damage. That is until I noticed Touch of Serenity does not contain the line, "Constructs, oozes, plants, undead, incorporeal creatures, and creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned." Does Touch of Serenity affect all of these types? Most of these things generally don't have to worry about will saves, so was that line not included because of that effect? It doesn't actually say it is a mind-affecting effect, but is it implied? If it does affect those creature types, how do you justify the serenity effect on constructs (and oozes for that matter), flavor-wise?

Second can you mix the two (and some of the other monk feats) on the same target? If one fails can you try the other?

The GM for the game has said that unless there is errata or something somewhere saying it's mind-affecting he will allow it to affect mindless stuff. I'm guessing it's some kind of mystic "serene vibration" effect. If you would allow Touch of Serenity to effect constructs, do you have any advice on how to describe the effect? I guess we could always just say, "it's magic"

Interesting. From what I see, ToS would affect anyone no timmune to will save effects. Touch of serenity doesn't have to be a mind effect, and it could affect a construct. A monk that could calm the raging waters of a water elemental for a turn just by touching it, sounds pretty iconic to me.

General advice? Be careful.

Thanks. I guess I'll just be touching the constructs (and undead, and plants) and sending them, "Good, good, good, good vibrations."

My old game group is restarting a game that has been in hiatus for around a year now and changing from 3.5 to pathfinder. In the old game I played a monk, and in the rewrite a few questions came up.

First off, comparing Touch of Serenity to Stunning Fist, Touch of Serenity sucks. Serene creatures can't attack or cast spells, but suffer no other penalties while stunned creatures can take NO actions AND are denied heir dex bonus AND take a -2 to AC. That is until I noticed Touch of Serenity does not contain the line, "Constructs, oozes, plants, undead, incorporeal creatures, and creatures immune to critical hits cannot be stunned." Does Touch of Serenity affect all of these types? Most of these things generally don't have to worry about will saves, so was that line not included because of that effect? It doesn't actually say it is a mind-affecting effect, but is it implied? If it does affect those creature types, how do you justify the serenity effect on constructs (and oozes for that matter), flavor-wise?

Second can you mix the two (and some of the other monk feats) on the same target? If one fails can you try the other?

I guess that's it. Any general advice for a Pathfinder monk?

joela wrote:

If the good nations of the Inner Sea got their act together and focused on eliminating the evil nations, who'd they target first?

Probably the least good of their own alliance.

That is probably my favorite response from this entire thread.

To me, a "cool" eidolon would actually be one built to resemble an existing outsider, honestly, and played as if it were a unique member of that type of outsider. I get that that's a pretty different take on how most folks view eidolons, but I really do value the concept of things belonging rather than things being weird one-of-a-kind freaks.

In my games the ONLY summoner that has shown up either by a player or GM was a kobold who's tribe lost their dragon master and "formed" his eidelon to look like the old dragon so neighbors would still see it and fear it.

Appropriate use of a summoner?

I know the idea of longer and shorter AP has been brought up before and shot down on several occasions, but on the topic of "epic level" play do you think Paizo would reconsider a longer AP to get to use some of those rules? Here's one possibility - do a 9 (or 8) part launched at Gen Con, which I know is a tradition no one wants to abandon, and follow that by a shorter 3 (or 4) parter launched at Paizo Con. Then you are back to another Gen Con launch. That should generate a bit more buzz for your own con, and the timing of the long AP reaching "epic level" should coincide with the spring rulebook release.

I realize nothing like this could happen until 2013 at the earliest, but I was curious what your opinion would be, and how you would plan to support "epic" rules.

On another topic, you are probably the wrong person to ask, but is Pathfinder Basic going to be part of the Pathfinder RPG subscription? If it is there is no way I can see that I'm not going to cancel. Am I missing something about that product, or is it really just the first few levels of Pathfinder?

This thread deserves a bump.

Speaking of zero level "useless" stuff what is your opinion of this old one from Sword and Sorcery? (I'm fairly certain it's not IP) Gives a necromancer a little undead plaything early on.

Animate Vermin
Temporarily animates small animal skeletons or zombies.
Necromancy
Level: Clr0,Sor/Wiz1
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: standard action
Range: Short (25 ft. + 5 ft/2 levels)
Target: 1 animal corpse
Duration: 1 day/level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
Description
This spell allows the caster to animate one animal of no more than one hit die as per the spell animate dead. The corpse will follow simple commands, but is typically useful only for menial tasks and utterly useless in combat. After 1 day per level of the caster, the corpse disintegrates, consumed by the necromantic energies flowing through it.
Material components: The corpse to be animated and an onyx gem worth at least 5 gp.

Post-apocalyptic sci-fi is, as a matter of fact, my favorite genre of sci-fi. Although I much prefer post-apocalyptic stuff that also brings in elements of the supernatural to exist along with the sci-fi stuff.

That being the case I have to ask your opinion about Palladium's Rifts. What do you think, both in terms of the system and the setting? My game group loves it, but I always thought it tried to do too much. The world seemed overpopulated with monstrosities from Starship Troopers bugs to The Four Horsemen. Outside a major city I couldn't imagine humanity lasting a day.

And since it seems to be a hot topic lately, if you're looking at the power curve on class bloat, Rifts seems the perfect example of what not to do. Pathfinder has perfect balance in comparison.

EDIT: The inclusion of tactics for monsters is something that we put in primarily due to reader/GM requests... this is the first I've heard of it being interpreted as something that hampers the GM's ability to play the game the way they want. Is that a commonly held opinion?

I love 'em personally even though I rarely use them. For me they are especially nice to have in encounters I don't find particularly interesting. The tactics bring a little more flavor to something I haven't bothered to prepare for, whatever the reason. They also allow a more powerful bad guy than the PCs could normally handle by giving some info on why this isn't as difficult as it should because, for example, the boss is drunk and his tactics are thus sloppy.

Speaking of grammatical/spelling issues that get under your skin, do you still let people calling a Rogue a "Rouge" bother you? I know it is a bit of a stretch to translate slang, but personally when I hear people use "rouge" as a noun I just assume they are talking about a french communist and react accordingly.

If the rogue/rouge issue does bother you then you might take a look at your good friend Wes's profile. Looks like he's got three levels of "rouge."

My gut tells me that we'll take a stab at figuring out Epic Level rules before psionics

Best news I've heard all day

Some stuff

Personally I think this is the best news I've heard on the psionics front in, well, ever. I agree that adding a power point system is essentially an entirely new system and I've had one too many misadventures with mixing systems in the past to ever think it's a good idea. I was planning on skipping any and all psionic material produced, but this is the first time I'm rethinking that.

What I am hoping for now is a little less transparency between magic and psionics. A magic dispelling/detecting psionic power seems to me to define psionics as nothing more than variant magic. I know there were optional rules for this in the past, but an optional rule will never show up in an adventure.

My 2 cents: If you want a power-point system then play one (my personal recommendation for the best magic system that uses power-points: Rolemaster). You don't have to always play the same system.

Keep up the good work Paizo people.

EDIT: I almost forgot the original purpose of this thread. To answer the OPs question Pathfinder is a Vancian system and should stay as such for all magics. Optional rules are fine, but if you ever use published adventures you will never see the optional rules in those. Paizo has stated before that it's Adventure Path line is its flagship product and optional rules would not be compatible. Other magic systems are for other game systems.

I kinda wish Sarah, who I would also like to thank for her excellent work, could have gotten on stage just once. The art makes a good game a beautiful masterpiece.

Congrats to the Paizo crew for creating products worthy of all that hard earned money.

This may have been covered before, but on abilities like Improved Iron Will can you reroll a natural 1 since you automatically know the result regardless of the DC? Can you force a re-roll on an opponents natural 20?

Welcome to Rolemaster - the system with the best spells / magic I have ever played.

+1

YOU are shocked?!?!?!?!?!

I am shocked!!! What about HUMANS?!?!?!

They are the most DIVERSE, the most POPULOUS AND the most IMPORTANT....

Yet... we've got exactly ZILCH on them... Not even some measly vital statistics for the different ethnic groups...

[And don't give me the "there are companions for the different regions/countries" excuse - they ain't race specific...]

There's twenty or so pages on humans in the campaign setting book (a companion is only 36 pages I think). Even though you said not to I add in the fact that most of the regional settings from Cheliax to Qadira are mostly geared toward humans already. Humans, being the most diverse and populous, just means that everything that is not race specific is largely about humans.

On a side note I think they are trying to avoid

measly vital statistics for the different ethnic groups

to avoid ANY appearance of being racist. Same basic reason men and women have the same stats.

Personally I'd like to see something rarely touched on, but with a lot of potential - Doppelgangers.

What if it was a fly spell that got dispelled, and yo are walking at the time? What if, as was the case with the supposed matron mother, it is a contingency spell?

Neither one of those have noticeable effects until you try to fly or the contingency is triggered.

Let me try a slightly different approach. In your games if someone casts Charm Person does the caster immediately know if the spell succeeds? If yes then there is some kind of mystical connection to your own magic that lets you know if it is working. If no, then I can see your point.

In either case I agree with the consensus that from a game mechanics standpoint it's better if the caster knows.

For the record, in our games we use the convention that if it is a dismissible (D) spell then you know if if is working, if not it takes a standard action (same as it would be to dismiss it) to determine if it's working.

One really interesting compromise that would take a LOT of time would be to print out the actual hex map of the region and then as the PCs explore the region, cut out the hexes one by one and paste or tape them onto some blank paper.

I took a slightly simpler approach. I printed off the map, sans icons, and put in a protective plastic thing. I then scribbled over the plastic with a black dry erase marker to obscure the map and as the party explores I simply erase the dry erase. It's all very RTS fog of war. This also gives them a surface to make notes on.

Most of this can be handled by simply delaying. As long as the party is somewhat coordinated, the "Marching Order Initiative" can be taken care of by delaying to the initiative behind the guy in front of you. "Decided Order" can again be taken care of the same way. Number 3 is a little wonky because it comes down to GM fiat which is a dangerous place to go in combat. Some players can handle it, but others will call foul.

On a side note, if the wolves don't notice you then it's surprise round time.

Sorry if this is covered in the book, but I didn't find it. Do two bane qualities stack?

Example:
Devon the fighter attacks a bearded devil (outsider-devil, evil, extraplanar, lawful) with his +1 evil outsider bane/devil bane longsword. Does he get +4 to attack and +4+4d6 damage, or does he get +2 to attack and +2+2d6 damage?

According to Mr. Jacobs only one bane is allowed on a weapon.

... we really like being able to launch a new Adventure Path at Gen Con every year, so that sort of locks us in to releasing an AP in August each time.

You could still in theory launch an eight part one at Gen con followed by a four parter if in the future things seem to be getting a little repetitive. Personally I like the way things are working now, so I say give these guys a break - this isn't the first thread on this issue. They've only put out one AP since the new revised rule system.

Paizo folks do good work, but there is a danger of getting in a rut. Anyway for now good gaming.

"Creatures summoned using this spell cannot use spells or spell-like abilities that duplicate spells with expensive material components (such as wish)."

The spell has an expensive material component even if the spell-like ability doesn't, so it is not usable by a summmoned creature. Otherwise a summoned efreeti could grant all the wishes you wanted without angering him the way a conjuration(calling) spell would.

I remember you had a number of races in another thread, but I don't see them on pathfinderdb. Can you link them please if they are up?

Seeing that I have a player in one of my games that REALLY wants to play a Beastmaster type, I figured I'd give this a bump to see if anyone else had a different suggestion or any comments about the class presented here.

I'm just not sure what class would most benefit from taking this prestige class. It really sounds more like a creature to me.

There's a certain ex-monk in my game this sounds perfect for. Nothing like 18 levels of insanity leading to cannibalism.

The lower level way to "permakill" the bad guy is to bring him back yourself as undead and control him.

700. The 700 Club: Higher level version of Spiritual Weapon, does 2d6 up one size category from 1d8. Anyone successfully hit by the club must make a will save or convert to the religion of the caster. While under their new faith, the target sees all non-believers as enemies.

Hi,

Maybe my math is wrong...I'm adding +1 Mithral Full Plate to my PC. The cost calculated by the application is 6500, but shouldn't it be 11650 gp?

1500 (base cost) + 150 (MW) + 1000 (enchantment) + 9000 (mithral) = 11650

Let me know if and where my math is incorrect.

Well the Masterwork cost is included in the cost of mithril, as it is for several special materials, but it should still be 11500

I too am a fan of the longer more epic (in scale, not necessarily level) games. When setting one up I do usually start with a rough time-line describing what happens if the PCs decide to not get involved. I have had groups that decided after the first adventure to ignore all other hooks and enjoy their new found wealth. The time-line will include several key points where if the party gets sidetracked events will draw them back in.

Getting to the topic of death, this approach also helps when a key character dies. By planning ahead that the party would get sidetracked, death can be just another form of being sidetracked. If it's a "key" character I follow the J. Michael Straczynski approach that everyone's expendable. You just have to plan for the consequences of that character's death. Looking at an example everyone knows, what would happen if Frodo had died. Maybe Sam could be the ringbearer. Maybe Boromir would take the ring to Gondor and the Fellowship would have to hunt him down. Maybe the Fellowship would realize only a Hobbit was resistant enough to the lust for power inherent in the ring. Maybe whoever did carry the ring did not go off alone and the fellowship went all the way to Mount Doom, but Rohan and Gondor fall without Aragorn and Gandalf. All are possibilities that I roughly plan for. Most everything I've prepared can still be used with minor modifications, but the world changes as it should when a "key" character dies.

The other approach that I've played in before is to have some power out there that always seems to step in and make sure the "key" characters continue. This leads to a feeling that the character are not masters of their own destinies, and I find that less fun.

That's my general approach to the epic game anyway. I don't think you're doing anything "wrong," but I would always have a plan in case x character dies. If it's a major setback and an entire country burns because x died I think it just adds to the feel of the campaign.

I would let bracers of armor to work. They are not armor. They just give the armor type bonus to your AC. But if that is how it is worded then my ruling may not be RAW :P.

Since you can add armor special ability enchantments to Bracers of Armor in Pathfinder, I'd say you need Wild Bracers of Armor.

The armor, once you wildshape, no longer impedes your movement. its max Dex no longer applies, nor does its armor check penalty. This is what helps make the "wild" armor quality a +3 equivalent bonus and not +2 or +1.

Does this include the non-proficiency penalty? Could a druid who spends most of combat wildshaped, or spellcasting wear wild dragonscale full-plate with no "real" penalty?

On the issue of "helping" your GM, this is especially important in large groups or high level play. Remember you have one character while the GM has the rest of the world and in a hectic situation like combat he can get overwhelmed. If he forgets an animal companion or periodic effect (like hold person, bleed, or regenerate) then remind him. Most good GMs don't like killing players; actually make that all GOOD ones. They do however like providing a challenge. If you annihilate all their baddies because of an oversight on his side he is likely to up the CRs of upcoming encounters to provide an actual challenge and then overdoes it.

If you give advice to another player on how their character should act in game then it can feel like you are playing their character for them, which I really don't recommend. The GM on the other hand can often use and will often appreciate the help.

Always remember it's not a competition between you and the GM. If you want it to be a competition then the GM will win; he's not just god, but all the gods. If you take an aggressive stance toward your GM then he will often fire back.

I apologize for the use of masculine pronouns for GMs. Women often make the best GMs if the are willing to start.

For antimagic, which moves with the caster, this just means that those four squares "tag along" with you as you move. You can decide which four squares they are as you need to. Easy!

Thanks for the help.

I love you James, and the entire staff of Paizo, but you the most.