Firelock's page

... Manifestations are just the excuse why you can spellcraft and get AOOs vs spells that have no visible or audible components such as psychic casting. ...

This.

It's a wonder anyone can see the moon at all, if you apply distance penalties. But then I guess the moon probably isn't actually trying to hide.

...or is he?

Veil can only make creatures look like other creatures.

Veil wrote:

The subjects look, feel, and smell just like the creatures the spell makes them resemble.

Sorry for late reply, but I'm currently researching illusions and I have a question about Veil related to this.

By the way RD, I've been reading a lot of posts here about illusions spells and seen that you've posted several times about your frustrations with the wording of illusion spells dating all the way back to 2012 I think - just want to say dude that I feel your pain!

Ok here's my question:

The spell description for Veil literally contradicts itself when it says you can make the subjects appear to be "anything you wish" and then "just like the creatures the spell makes them resemble". Notice the wording "anything" not "any creature".

So which is it? Anything I want, or just creatures? The description seems to me to be saying that if you wanted to look like a creature, you can, not that you can ONLY look like another creature, probably because of lower level illusion spells like Alter Self etc. But why couldn't you make yourself look like a chair or a bookshelf if you wanted to? If you don't think it should work this way, is there any other illusion spell that does allow that?

I'm currently running a game that has the PCs on a ship, and I've done a bit of research into this as well.

The rules on ship travel include some abstraction, but I think overall it works much like a PC's travel does.

Rationale
For a ship, like a PC, it's top speed is a lot faster than it's "overland travel" speed. Realistically, with favorable winds and currents and sails and sailors, etc, etc a ship can reach faster speeds than it does on average over long journeys, but the average speed it will have attained includes times when the wind is calm, the current is against you, you must tack against the wind, etc. so the average speed is less. It's similar to how a PC may have a run speed of 120', while a move action is only 30'. And, while a realistic comparison of a walking human might happen to match, remember that the distance traveled in a day of walking is explicitly stated to include taking breaks for meals etc. Plus, what if every single step of that journey is not on perfectly flat, solid ground? Even the rules for walking distance in a day have included some abstraction you see!

Realism
Plus factor in the difference between types of ships. Is the typical sailing ship in your game world a caravel? In reality the average speed of a caravel was about 4 knots, which translates into 90-100 miles per day. On a world map with 30 mile hexes, that's 3 hexes per day, while the game rules say a sailing ship can only travel, as you've stated, 48 miles. A caravel is a very old style of ship that was available in medieval times. If your game world also includes ships typical of the golden age of piracy, like sloops and schooners, those ships could cover well over 300 miles in a day. The game rules say a sailing ship can travel 2mph for 24 hours... that works out to about 1.7 knots... slower than even the slowest sailing ships in history and more in line with such a ship being propelled by rowers with oars.

Conclusion
I think ultimately the realities of sea travel, and the rules in the book should be balanced with the needs of the fantasy campaign. Do you want distances in the campaign to seem vast? Is water travel just a nuisance to be redlined? If you want ships to travel more slowly, go with the standard book speed. If it's just something getting in the way of the adventure, let them travel on a faster ship and get it over with, or just hand-wave the travel all together. But to answer your question, the rules aren't really "inconsistent" so much as "abstracted". A ship might travel 90'/rd in a combat battle map setup but only make 48 miles a day on the campaign map. That's just abstraction and gamey-rules to make the game work and in most cases it's fine. If you wanted to get more realistic though, you might find that there are an awful number of those "inconsistencies" already built-into your campaign world. If your fantasy port includes a Chinese junk sailing alongside a 17th century Spanish galleon and a medieval french cog and an 18th century English brig and a 19th century mediterranean Xebec? These ships all have different cultural roots, sail plans, handling characteristics, construction, speeds, etc. Well, with wizards and dragons in your world already, why not?

Hi,

While generating treasure for my group, I noticed the random weapons table in the Appendix is missing results from 65 - 85. The table goes like this:

64–65 Rapier
85–87 Spear

There's nothing between 65 and 85.

I have to disagree with this idea that a PC shouldn't be able to make money by creating and selling magic items. Should you allow them to make 40,000gp on it? Of course not, but how about 400gp, or 40? What's the difference between making a skill check to earn cash at a Profession skill (or Bardic performance) and making a Spellcraft check to earn cash by making magic items? You don't have to let them make 50% markup, but neither should you shut them down just because their schtick is making magic items instead of playing a flute.

Also, imagine all the loot items most PCs leave behind anyway. They could be saving every normal mundane sword just to get the 2.5gp for it. All that money is technically slipping through their fingers anyway. Think they can't carry it all? Wait till they get a bag of holding. Or a horse. If you try to actively discourage the PCs from making money in more ways than killing people, you're creating an escalating situation that you as the GM cannot win - because your job is to make the game fun and fair, not stymie the players. Let them earn some money making a "normal" living during their downtime if they want to. Just don't let them abuse it.

As the GM, allow your PC who puts forth a little effort in finding a buyer or making a deal with a consignment shop to earn a little cash during his downtime. Give them a fair, non-game-breaking payoff for their effort. You don't even need a formula - if you arbitrarily pick a payoff that seems fair (like the same amount another PC could make doing other skill checks) the player will likely never even ask how you came to that amount. If they spend a few weeks making a 4th level wand in their spare time, they are at least a 7th level character and earning a few hundred gp on it is not going to break anything.

Plus just imagine all the role playing opportunities you are wasting by not allowing the PCs to make and sell things! The NPC who bought something might come back with another specific order, or he might tell his friends about the PC and then you have instant plot hooks when the NPC asks them to make something exotic that requires hard to acquire components. Or maybe the item is flawed somehow, perhaps by a poor Spellcraft roll and the NPC gets hurt because the item failed in a time of need and their friends are out for payback, or maybe the item was found at the scene of a crime and the PC crafter is now implicated. The possibilities make my mind swim... We spend a lot of time as GMs looking for ways to herd the PCs into doing what we want and making it feel like it's what they want... never pass up a good opportunity to turn something a PC actually DOES want to do into a plot device for your own purposes.

Scott

To some it may seem like a broken power, but in reality it isn't. Economy of actions is everything in Pathfinder. As far as a Cleric using Bit of Luck on himself in combat, using a Standard Action to re-roll dice doesn't have a significantly positive impact on damage output. If fact, using that standard action to attack is more effective than using it to give yourself a chance to roll the dice again for the same action next round. Put another way, it's exactly like choosing between rolling 2d6 and taking the best one, or rolling 2d6 and adding them together. Besides, thinking outside the box, if you have the power to give someone else a Bit of Luck for their full next round, why are you somehow a less valid recipient than them? It's somehow less broke for the cleric to stand by and give the Fighter with 6 attacks a Bit of Luck every single round than it is for the Cleric to use it on himself every OTHER round? The best Cleric attacks don't even involve a D20 roll! "Save vs Implosion"... 'nuff said.

Let your Clerics have some luck if they want. They're the ones paying the Standard Action for it.

Firelock