Felix Danger's page

Organized Play Member. 15 posts (16 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 5 Organized Play characters.


RSS


porpentine wrote:


Chaoskin, if you look around the first couple pages of the boards, you'll find a really long thread I posted titled Hide and Seek. This has a clarified system for everything that touches Stealth and invisibility, including light and darkness.

There's still no level above bright light in that system either, though. Easy to add if you're GMing, though - just use the dazzled condition as a basis for most creatures.

I was looking through your "hide and seek" post and still have questions.

A torch has the effect of raising darkness to normal light in the immediate 20 feet but that's 2 levels not one. Darkness to Dim to Normal. So while Light changes the condition 2 levels in the immediate 20 foot area and 1 level further out, Darkness only appears to lower the light 1 level. Is this because it would be too powerful if it was equal?

The eclipse spell feat says that it basically reverses the Light spell but that would only be true if torches cast dim light or if the eclipsed version of Light lowered it 2 levels in the immediate area and 1 level further out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
-Grijm- wrote:
Unless otherwise specified...

I saw that too but haven't found a power that is 'otherwise specified' so I wasn't sure if there are any permanent bloodline or bloodrager powers. Is there any that are 'otherwise specified' or was that just to make room for future use?

(Edit) - I guess there's some 20th level bloodline powers like elemental body that are always on


Rysky wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

i cannot understand any basis for your complaints. There are lots of mechanical ways to gain claws. Use one of them. I dipped 2 levels of barbarian and the claws last longer than the adventuring day. If you want to be monstrous your claws can be visible all the time and then extend when you go into combat. If you want to have claws to pick chainmail out of your teeth or slice cheese, i don't think many dms are going to charge you a daily use.

claws aren't the only thing this ruling affects. Imagine someone taking weapon focus: tail, weapon focus, gore, weapon focus, bite, weapon focus, wing, weapon focus left butt cheek. By what you're saying each of those feats grants someone an extra attack.

*takes notes*

I like the solution of having claws that extend for combat and so long as the rules allow for it then that's a creative way of getting the concept within the rules of bloodline or raging. That certainly satisfies my personal character concept.

I still don't understand why there aren't any "mutation feats" that would essentially grant something like claws or a tail or a single cyclopian eye (with negative social modifiers but the benefits of the mutation) in a world of magic, alchemy, dimensional travel, and monsters. It feels less out of place than gunslingers and robots, but I appreciate you giving me a narrative way of getting the specific concept I'm looking for.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Felix Danger wrote:
Most experienced players seem to be pretty clear that claws and tails and teeth and scales are all only mechanically worth it (sometimes) at early levels and since most of these racial natural attacks are in the neighborhood of 1d4 or 1d6 damage,

Experienced players know that the die is irrelevant. Real damage comes from addons and riders: Sneak attacks, smites, and as high as you can get them stat bonuses either dex or strength. Adding attacks is very powerful because its a literal force multiplier.

For PFS, if you want a bite attack you can also be a kitsune. Or one of the three ways to gain a bite attack that an orc has.

I don't think you understand the Developer statement. A feat, for kobolds, that increases your tail attack by a step assumes that you have a tail. If you do not have a tail, the feat does not grant you one. That's it. The feat does not grant you a tail for the simple reason that it doesn't say that it grants you a tail.

Personally, I'm only looking for claws...and only in the narrative "sounds cool" sense - but claws are only available as a bird creature which is not the feral "sounds cool" concept OR I get a race boon for a specific race at a convention OR as a sometimes magical change like a bloodline power. The end result being that a cool concept idea in a fantasy world where all kinds of monsters and mutations and races live has no real way of happening without some kind of large GM, con, or venture captain intervention because of a concern over power gaming?

Claws are hardly the fastest way to overpowered meta munchkins and restricting them certainly hasn't stopped that problem. The claws don't do much from a rules perspective unless you can combine them with a host of other feats (like sneak attack and power attack that you'd have to build up). Claws are more likely to be used by players that are into the _idea_ over the actual mechanics...and being willing to burn 2 feats in order to get there seemed reasonable enough.

But the developer statement says, having the Mixed Blood Heritage feat AND the Sharp Claw feat doesn't grant claws that your race doesn't have.

Now I haven't read all the feats and there's probably some racial or monster feats in PC creation that'd be too powerful to allow through this (like steel wings or swallow whole or something). But I'd love it if maybe the Wilderness splat book that's coming out or something coming soon allowed for a simple feat like "your ancestry cursed you with a mutation at birth - gain claws 1d4 but suffer a -1 when dealing with people of your own race because you're not normal". It's a solution without making too big a deal about it and it's been 5 years of players clearly wanting some kind of animal or feral mutation in this thread alone.


So when a bestiary lists one attack in melee - say "bite+15 (2d6+9 plus grab)" but under special attacks it has breath weapon, rake (6 claw attacks, swallow whole, and constrict...special attacks aren't all added, right? It has to choose one or the other (it's full melee or 1 special attack)?


It is both interesting and sad to hear that a developer has said using the feat would twist the RAW if you said it granted a limb or feature when combined with yet another feat.

Not only is it odd that combining two feats to gain this isn't enough without claiming it breaks the rules (when some of these races with those features are playable on their own) but the very nature of the typical benefits (tail slap, claws, tusklike teeth) are minor and never seem to grant an amazing level of mechanical benefit.

Most experienced players seem to be pretty clear that claws and tails and teeth and scales are all only mechanically worth it (sometimes) at early levels and since most of these racial natural attacks are in the neighborhood of 1d4 or 1d6 damage, it's almost punishing to the 'fluff' of a character to prohibit. I can think of very few ways that these features would actually cause uproar at a table where a 1st level barbarian is going to brutalize someone with far more damage than a couple d4 claws.

When a player really wants to play a character with claws or sharp teeth and the PFS playable races (without boons) only offer a bird-like (and very odd looking) way to that, it just seems petty to keep a player from adding that bit of character style (claws or teeth or tail) just because it doesn't fit with what most people would consider normal for a human in a fantasy world where you can get lycanthropy or mutations from protoflesh or take damage to your physical abilities from a touch spell.

If I understand correctly, the comment from a developer puts the issue to rest but I have to admit that I'm personally dismayed to hear that anyone in development considered giving a human the odd body part through two feats (even if you limited it to character creation) would be game breaking.


Yes the narrow surface rules for a bridge 3 feet wide offer 0 chance of failure. Adding severely slippery and heavily obstructed would raise that to 10. But even then, the rules are vague and say "avoid falling or being knocked prone" but not which. I feel like the scenario as written wants a chance for the players to fall into the water but there's no rules to make it happen.


Did anyone else just arrive at 7pm to be told as the doors are shutting that it's a Starfinder special at PaizoCon and not Pathfinder?


I'm Felix Danger from Reno, NV.

I have a level 3 gnome ranger. A scout and an archer known for his odd sensibilities and for wearing a leather bird mask to hide markings of an Ekujae ritual he undertook in the Mwangi expanse after temporarily contracting werebat lycanthropy.


Well I'm hoping I'm actually signed up. The events listing shows it "on my schedule" but my actual printable schedule doesn't show anything on Sunday.


I agree that it's worth it if your'e a player but my wife will be at the hotel and wanted to wander the vendor alley. I'd certainly like to know if she's got buy a pass if she chooses to look for gifts for me.


PatientWolf wrote:
Espy Kismet wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:


That is not true but you have to make that claim because of your twisted interpretation of this text do you have to make that claim. Alchemist abilities, spells and many other things, including feats, make changes to your body long after creation. Just one example would be several of the Ifrit feats that cause your body temperature to be extremely hot or your blood to be boiling.

So since feats can change your bodily features and you claim those very bodily features are an effect and subject to Racial Heritage then that logic compels the conclusion that a character could be going along for years looking just like a normal human and then take Racial Heritage and look 100% like a Kobold right then and there.

I do not have any twisted interpretations of the text. Mearly point out at character creation, your appearance is set. Yes, there are a plethora of ways to alter yourself afterwards, however we're not using those ways are you.

Feats can change your bodily features, this is true. But like gender, you cannot simply just wake up one day after going to bed male and wake up female with no magical reason for it.

Your appearance is created at level one, affected by the races you have at that time. Or perhaps you're trying to say at later levels a male character can just poof into female without the use of magical methods?

Again, quite wrong in this, unfortunate to say.

The fact of the matter is you've created what you looked like at level 1, and baring magical things or feats that specifically call out changes, you cannot alter your appearance any furthermore. Which is why Racial heritage can give you a tail at level 1, but not grow a tail at level 3.

First you admit that feats can change features but then argue that feats can't change by cherry picking certain features that there just don't happen to be feats associated with them. There is nothing in the rules that says feats can't change your features, any features, after...

Eldritch Heritage actually requires you to be level three and grants you immediate claws. Am I missing something?

A) it's heritage but it didn't manifest until level 3

B) it does not limit your claws to appear after a year of normal growth. You get them immediately

So there are both feats and heritage feats that grant immediate physical manifestation of some altered body and not at character creation but after having made it to level 3 (or later)


brreitz wrote:
IMG, I allow this feat to be used to gain access to race-specific prestige classes, such as Arcane Archer (which I actually allow to any race anyway, but could not think of another race-specific prestige class).

All the argument over werewolf doesn't really matter if you just want aspect of the beast. There's a catfolk feat that would become available with this called "catfolk exemplar" which grants "aspect of the beast". I don't think there's an argument that catfolk aren't a race.

But it does raise the argument of whether it's only core races or if uncommon ones are allowed.


This is currently unavailable here and Amazon.

Is there an expected reprint date set for this?


Am I the only one who seems to see these types of mats as consistently problematic at or near the folds with minis falling over. I've attempted to reverse fold and leave out for a bit but they've never lain completely flat.