GM_Drake's page

And yes, GM Drake, this is the first game I have you with.

Did you mean first Star Wars game? I am in two of of your other campaigns: Zion High and Aundairian Tales.

GM_Drake wrote:

Elton: how are we handling determining hit points above 1st level?

** spoiler omitted **...

Okay, Drake, the answer to your question is on Page 37 of the Saga Edition. Scoundrels and Nobles gain 1d6+Con modifier for more hit points.

I meant if you are having us roll (default) or houseruling it to something else.

Here are her hit die rolls for 2nd and 3rd level.

2nd HD roll: 1d6 ⇒ 6

3rd HD roll: 1d6 ⇒ 3

Elton: how are we handling determining hit points above 1st level?

More mechanic than pilot (as she needs to be trained in mechanics to take the Starship Design feat).

Also, though she is a scoundrel, she is going (nearly) all-in on the Fortune talent tree (taking the Gambler talent multiple times), so she is not a striker (so a scoundrel who focuses on the typical sneak attack route would be good to add to the PC mix).

I wonder if we will cross paths with an old male brenneri scientist doing top-secret experiments on children with numbers tattooed on their wrists. :P

Context might be needed for anyone who has not seen the first season of Stranger Things. It was a reference to that Netflix series.

thanks for helping organize all this! I'm much better at running the game than recruiting.. :-)

You're welcome. :)

Right now, what I have in mind is:

Kalo Solarian Electrician (terraformer background from the PG) who could fill the Gunner role and, depending on final training allocation, a middling Pilot or a basic medic.

An alternative idea is an Astrazoan Operative, probably a CHA path or possibly an INT path.

I suggest Engineer role as potentially ideal ship role for (one of) your character ideas (for being an electrician and having the terraformer background)

What kind of ship are you thinking of? A YT class Corellian transport?

Elton, is the Starship Designer feat from SW Saga Edtion Starships of the Galaxy allowed to be taken?

If yes...

I am thinking my zeltron gambler's goal to design her own 'traveling casino' came to fruition (for a larger ship, which she lost during a ill-advised bet against an unnamed NPC you can cook up), and (dependent on credits you decide we start with) created a new smaller such ship (which could be the PC's transport).

I could work with the calculations I did for PC Wealth by level (expanding it if you decide to have us start at higher level than 3rd) as number of credits to work with to design the ship her second ship (that is the PC's transport), and of course the more decked-out one she lost from making the ill-advised bet. She has a -1 Wis modifier.

I could work with how many credits (by RAW) a party of 4 PCs of our starting level would have earned by RAW (200,000 credits for a 3rd-level PC party) to design the ship she currently has). Some/all of the other PCs (not sure if makes sense for the jedi PCs or not) could be part owners (due to putting up part of the stakes she used that won the credits to pay for the construction of her new ship) or basic agreement from when they put in part of stakes, that they always have room and board above the ship, a percentage of the house's winnings, or something simiar.

I could work with the ship she lost being worth a number of credits that a group of four 3rd-level PCs would earn by RAW to reach 4th level, which is back to the 'blackboard' (will edit in the value --> additional 90,000 credits per PC (in addition to credits for being 3rd-level PC) ==> 360,000 credits to design ship she lost)

Mechanics, of course, will be part of her trained skills. Looks like her Charisma is dropping down to 17 so she will gain a bonus Int skil (for mechanics).

Another option for PC by wealth, Elton, is to use both, but in the following ways:

Working with pooling the majority of the wealth by level (towards a starship purchase for the group) and taking that off the individual PC's 3rd-level wealth.

I am posting this now, but will be editing it...as I need to read up on the credits cost of starships in Saga edition.

So we could begin with the starting credits by class plus 1,000 credits/level (3,000 credits + rolled OR average credits for class OR rolled (but take average if it is better than what was rolled for startig credits)?

I am going to make a coffee before looking up starship prices...

Editing (in progress)

fuel cost:

For a ship of colossal (or smaller): 1 day's worth of fuel (approx 1 kg) costs about 50 credits. Multply this cost by 100 for each size category above colossal.

A ship uses the abvoe amount of fuel for 1 day in reakspace or hyperspce, or 1 hour of flight in atmosphere, combat or a single jump to lightspeed.

Restocking: Consumables cost about 10 credits times the number of living creatures on board times number of days of operation

Docking fees: about 20 credits/day in average spaceport. Long-term docking fees about 200 credits/month.

Routine Maintainence: after 20 hyperjumps, costs about the same as 4 days worth of fuel. Without proper maintainence after 20 hyperjumps, roll twice when checking for system damage.

Emplacement Points (page 38 of SW Saga edition Starships of the Galaxy)

Question for other players: I am considering either Duros or Wookie. If I make a Wookie, will someone be able to understand me and translate if needed?

If we both get into the game, @Phntm888, I'll volunteer to learn wookie. We can work out the details later.

If you get in and Kalter does not, I can drop my zeltran's Cha down by 1 point (before +2 species adjusmment) from 16 to 15, and use the 2 of the 3 points gained to bump Int up by 1 and take the Wookie tongue, if you make a wookie PC.

There is a problem, Star Wars SE doesn't do wealth by level.

I did the math (from pages 248-249) from the SW Saga edition CRB, to calculate how many additional credits 3rd-level PCs should have gained by reaching 3rd level from 1st level.

Do you want to use starting credits by class plus the 50,000 credits for our 3rd-level PCs, Elton?

I did not include percentage of wealth that would be for consumables. (edit: I did, but without knowing the prices of actual consumables in the game.)

If 10 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 45,000 credits. (plus 100 credits worth of consumables)

If 20 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 40,000 credits. (plus 200 credits worth of consumables)

if 25 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 37,500 credits. (plus 250 credits worth of consumables)

If 30 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 35,000 credits. (plus 300 crdeits worth of consumables)

If 40 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 30,000 credits. (plus 400 credits worth of consumables)

if 50 %, that would make it starting wealth plus 25,000 credits. (plus 500 credits worth of consumables)

Working with consumables are used up per encounter (and recuperated post-encounter), the consumables for the last encounter to reach 3rd level would be: 100 credits worth of consumables per 10 % reduction used above.

Thanks, Elton.

For my character application I will be going with Zeltron.

Are you looking for jedi characters as well as non-jedi characters?

If non-jedi as well, I am considering scroundrel for my Zeltron.

Some clarification, please, Elton.

25 point-buy: As stated on page 18 (starting ability scores are 8 (at 0 points) with the default 25 point-buy SW Saga gives, and increasing a score to 14 costs 6 points) OR using the PF1E 25 point-buy (starting ability scores are at 10 (at 0 points) and increasing a score to 14 costs 5 points).

Interested.

Paradox changed to Anomaly, which better fits the character concept.

I might have the character backstory typed up and posted by tomorrow.

Seeds of my character concept:

Ancestry: Human

Heritage: Golarion Survivor Human (Golarion Lore, bonus language: Varisian, treats starknifes as simple weapons)

Background: Time Lost (Trained in Society, History Lore, Dubious Knowledge skill feat)

Class: Witchwarper

Paradox: Gap-Influenced

Anchor: Core Memories

The New Hire background from the Player's Guide is the one that best fits my character concept.

I am interested.

I have always used claws as slashing and piercing.

Bite i recently found out was all three.

When I first read the Bestiary years ago, I worked with the bludgeoning from the force of the paw (think a bear swiping at you with its paw) - it does not poke you with it (piercing) but rather 'bats' you with its paw (B) and at the same time the claws of the paw slash through your skin.

Hi, Alan. Drake here.

I played a starfinder 1E briefly a few years ago. I have not looked at the 2E rules set yet, but will peruse them and come up with the basics of the ABCs to throw my hat into the ring.

I have read through most of the past two pages of discussion tab on your Threefold Conspiracy campaign.

Firefly-esque frontier romp.

Gritty old west meets John Carter?

Sounds like it will be a very fun campaign.

Reminder, recruitment ends tonight at midnight.

Which time zone?

Lia, I just checked my Sandpoint map on owlbear. You now have access.

If we decide a particular format isn't working out we'll switch to something else freely accessible without an account if at all possible.

Some of the games I have played/playing in use slides. I can find it a bit frustrating (particularly accidentally selecting the map grid instead of a token). This usually results by trying to move tokens without first zooming in on the map to where the token you want to move is.

A free to use VTT I have been using for years is owlbear rodeo.

A free account gives you two rooms. You can have multiple maps on a free account. I tend to edit maps in Paint3D to make one larger map so using only of the two rooms (you get with free to use accounts) you do not have to 'lose' visual of where some players's tokens are, for when the PCs are in various different locations at the same time.

Here is an example of how good a free account on owlbear rodeo is:

I made the map of Sandpoint into an actual 5 foot grid space map using it.

I will have to grant permission for you to enter the room (map). When I get back tonight, I will check it and grant permission to all who requested it.

"I don't carry lockpicks." (truth). "I'm not a thief." (bluff)

He has two concealed weapons on him (silver dagger and cold iron kunai).

His hand crossbow is hidden within his glove.

His thieves tools are non-existent until he needs them (locksmith armor).

Fortune shown on both the witch hunter and the supposed thief the day he saved him from being burned at the stake.

Will expand backstory at a later date, when you have more for us to work with, Rizz.

I'd be interested in one of the remaining group members.

Maybe a warrior of some sort that the inquisitor saved him from being burned at the stake. Although he was not guilty of the crime, he owes the inquisitor a life debt and feels honor-bound to protect him until his his debt is paid.

Happy New Year, everyone.

Looking forward to you potentially running something for us, DQ.

How It's Played video about Draconic Codex book

At time stamp 5:40, updated draconic exemplars chart (from Adamantine to Executor).

Conspirator Dragon: occult tradition, speed: climb; cone of poison; saving throw: Fortitude

Starigati's PB sheet

While stealthing (which the Taumata was doing) Taumata has a +7 Initiative.

In an evenly matched fight there would be no need for a Crit confirmation as a roll of 18 (2.16% chance) would easily hit an equal opponent. So, I'm good with a 2% chance of a critical. I'd prefer damage be more planned so that you are forced to go power attack (-1/+1 untrained -3/+3 with feat).

OCD observation: 18 on 3d6 is not a 2.16% chance. It is a 1 in 216 chance, which is a 0.4629629 % (with the 629 repeating).

One of my personality quirks/perks/flaws is correcting friends and family members when they state something that is factually (not opinion-based) incorrect, so to prevent the probability of them coming off later in life as not being very bright to observers who know that such 'facts' they are uttering are flat-out incorrect when repeating the same incorrect info as 'facts'.

That is if they listen to me and choose to learn from me regarding the subject manner.

Some do, and appreciate my counsel. Some simply become annoyed at me for informing them the 'fact' they thought was a legitimate fact actually is not. I think part of why they might become annoyed is that my words make them realize what they stated as a 'fact' is something an uneducated/not very bright person would deduce as 'fact' (and instead of allowing themselves to be humbled when it makes them realize they just made themselves look like a fool, direct resentment towards me for voicing my observation that pointed out what they just said is incorrect).

My intent is not to make them feel stupid, it is to educate them with the correct fact.

My intent is so that they do not make themselves come off as being stupid in front of strangers (such as when someone on a city bus says an incorrect 'fact' as a fact and the majority of the people on the bus know that the person is blatantly incorrect about what he thinks is factually correct when it is not, and thus the other passengers on the bus view the person as not being very bright.

I hope no offense was taken, Ironperenti.

If you want close to 2% chance of scoring a critical hit between two evenly-matched combatants, without needing a confirmation roll, then I suggest rolling a 17 or 18 on the 3d6 roll being a critical hit, which is a 4 in 216 chance, which in percentage format is a 1.851851 % (with the 851 repeating) chance to score a critical hit against someone whose defense stat is evenly matched against the attack strength of the attack.

I made a mathematical error in my previous post regarding calculating the DCs for damage effect rolls against the defender's Toughness, as I increased the DC for the attacker to damage the target, but that should have been lowering the DC by one degree for the attacker (which is the equivalent of increasing the DC for the Toughness save if the defender made the roll).

@Ironperenti, if you would like me to, I can figure out the correct probabilities for using DC 11 as the baseline for Toughness saves (from the attacker's perspective probability) and/or using the baseline Toughness saves which uses a Toughness DC that is one degree higher for the defender (DC 14), which from the attacker's perspective would be one degree lower (DC 8).

The reason I increased (instead of decreasing like I should have, as noted above in this post) the DC for Damage effect rolls to a baseline of 14 (instead of 11) is because in 3E the DC for Toughness saves has DC that is one degree of success (5 points in 3E, which is 3 points in the 4E beta test) higher than the DC for other defenses.

I have also thought about using an exploding d10 or even a d12 but we'll play with that later if you guys can stick with crazy me long enough.

Sounds fun. I plan on sticking around with 'crazy' you long enough to see how that works out for our gameplay.

One of my pet peeves as a GM of many years are players who rush to make use of content from brand new source books but think that GMs should not also be able to change the rules being used for the campaign to incorporate new rules introduced in the very same new sourcebooks. In my experience, those players are also the ones mostly like to habitually 'fudge' their dice rolls (attempting to use their hand to block other players and the GM from seeing the die roll and quickly picking the die up, thinking no one saw their blatant cheating) and lying about the number they rolled.

edit: Our GM posted while I was typing this up.

@GM: You will see if using 16 or higher for critical threats, and needing to roll the DC required to inflict 1 Toughness hit point to confirm the critical hit, means that an attacker with an effect modifier that is equal to the target's toughness modifier (using base of 14 DC to inflict damage, as DC 14 is 1 degree of success higher than baseline of 11 for resistance DCs against attack rolls), that an attacker that has an effect modifier that is equal to the Toughness 'modiifer' of the target, only nets a critical hit 1.736111111 % of time (and is the ONLY way for such evenly matched offensive ranks (attacker) and defensive ranks (target) for the target to gain the Incapacitiated condition (working with them having enough Toughness hit points remaining before the critical hit that the loss of Toughness hit points from a non-critical hit would not incapaciate them).

Using only natural 18 on the 3d6 dice roll to be critical hits (with no confirmation rolls required) would result in it taking an average of 10.8 attacks to gain the same probabilty of rolling a natural 20 on a single 1d20 roll.

Adding in (after seeing GM's post) to account for only 18 on the 3d6 dice roll to be a critical threat (with confirmation roll needed, using DC to cause 1 Toughness hit point to the target): 0.1736111111 % (111 repeating) chance of such evenly matched opponents for the attacker to score a critical hit and the target gaining the Incapacitated condition. That is 1 in 576 odds of such evenly matched opponents actually getting a critical hit on each other.

@DQ: In 4E beta rules, every 3 points in difference from the DC is an extra degree of success/failure, not 5 point as it is in 3E.

With using 11 as the base to figure out resistance save DCs, it will simulate using 10 as the base with defenders winning ties. With DC baseline of 11, it makes the attack/effect roll a 'exceed the DC' instead of a 'meet or beat' the DC to gain 1 degree of success.

I like using 11 as a the base, as when the 'active'/'attack' ranks being the same as the resistance ranks, the one taking the action needs to roll 11 or higher (the top 50%) with the 3d6 rolls.

Since using 16 or higher on the 3d6 dice roll being a critical threat, even using the lowest DC (enough to inflict 1 Toughness hit point) to confirm a critical hit, means that two evenly matched effective modifier of attacker and Toughness modifier of defender, only scores a critical hit 1.736111111 % of the time.

With that in mind, unless the GM wants critical hits (without the Improved Critical advantage) only happening 2% (rounded off) of the time between two evenly between a stong guy with effect ranks against tough guy with toughness that are equal to each other), I suggest making rolling 16 or higher on the 3d6 dice roll an automatic critical hit without any confirmation rolls needed.

Note: By keeping confirmation roll needed (with DC 12 baseline confirmation roll), it effectively makes needing effect modifiers to be at least be equal to the toughness modifier of the target for an an attack between to evenly matched opponents to land an incapicating 'punch'.

Jimmy Olsen will never be able to score a critical punch on Superman, if critical confirmation rolls are needed. If they are not needed, then Jimmy (punch effect modifier +0, Luck advantage) still could not score a critical hit (working with Clark being Clark or not moving out of the way as Jimmy punches at Superman to let out stress, knowing he will never hurt his super pal), as Superman has (Protection 4, Impervious Toughness 18).

edit: When I previewed this post, I saw that our GM had posted while I was typing this up.

I need the baddies' Will Defense scores for Freefall's Teleport Attack.

Are the following examples correct?

Example 1:

Gust uses Kaikias the Blasting Wind (+10/+10) against one of the imps.

DQ (Gust) does the following:

Kaikias the Blasting Wind attack: 3d6 + 10 ⇒ (5, 4, 1) + 10 = 20 vs DC 16 (base 5 + 11)

He previews post to see if his attack roll was successful, if it was not, he adds the flavor of the missed attack. If it was successful, he then scripts for the effect roll. In this example, the 20 succeeds by the DC by 4. Question: Does getting extra successes on the attack roll affect the successes of the effect roll?

Kaikias the Blasting Wind effect: 3d6 + 10 ⇒ (4, 3, 3) + 10 = 20 vs DC 14 (base 3 + 11)

In this example, the effect roll exceeded the DC by 6, netting 3 successes. The imp loses all 3 of its 3 Toughness Hits (hit points) and becomes incapacitiated (unconscious).

Example 2:

BD (Atlastic) does the following:

Atlastic does his Big Finish against a goatman.

Big Finish attack: 3d6 + 10 ⇒ (4, 6, 5) + 10 = 25 vs DC 17 (base 6 + 11)

He previews to see if his attack was successful. If it was not successful, he then adds flavor of the missed attack. If it was successful, he then scripts for the effect roll. In this example, the 25 exceeds the DC by 8 (with 3 successes). See question in example 1 regarding if extra successes on attack roll affects successes of the effect roll.

He succeeds, and his total of 12 on the 3d6 dice pool roll does not trigger the Improved Critical of his Big Finish (which would have had a +5 bonus on the effect roll in Atlastic's favor).

Big Finish effect: 3d6 + 10 ⇒ (5, 3, 4) + 10 = 22 vs DC 21 (base 10 + 11)

He scores 1 success on the effect roll, so the goatman loses 1 of its Toughness Hits (hit points) and gains the dazed condtion.

The above was using passive defenses (using 11 as base).

See spoiler below regarding how ranks of Improved Critical convert to 3d6 dice method (keeping the closest equivalent odds the advantage has in d20 dice method).

@Lia: Will you reconsider adding the Ancestry Paragon variant rule for our characters?

You will see from the spoilers below, that if you add the Ancestry Paragon variant rule, the story/thematics of Taumata becoming more like a true conspirator dragon becomes more significant throughout the campaign.

As can be seen by the numbers generated at the ends of bell curve, rolling a total of 5 or lower on the 3d6 is the closest equivalent of rolling a natural 1 on 1d20; and rolling a 16 or higher on 3d6 is the closest equivalent of rolling a natural 20 on 1d20.

So if we do move to passive resistance DCs, our GM might want to lower the resistance DCs of NPCs (including super villains) from 3E (or earlier editions) stat blocks by 4, so our characters have the (closest to) same chances of rolling a 'natural 20' (highest possible effect against baddies' defenses that can be attained in 3E & 2E) with our attack and effect rolls against such NPC stat blocks.

@Jubal (Sigil): With respect, please keep this in mind for future posts:

If I post something that could affect the way we decide to handle the dice generating number method for how we play, there is a good and valid reason that I did so. It will prevent headaches for both of us if you keep this in mind. This applies to any such posts I make, be it for this campaign or other campaigns, as well as for other ttrpg rules sets.

I mentioned the consideration for using 8 for the base (instead of 10 or 11) for passive resistances in case our GM is pulling stats from 3E (or earlier) editions (which were designed with the 1d20 method as the core mechanic, not the 3d6 mechanic of the 4e beta test). As most source material is 3E (or earlier editions), that oversight (if no one caught it) could have had an unexpected negative impact on our gameplay dice rolls while fighting foes with high defense ratings.

There is a significant difference between "You need to roll the highest, or close to highest number(s) possible on the die/dice pool roll to hit the Big Bad", as opposed to "Even if you roll the maximim number result on your attack die/dice pool roll, you can never hit the Big Bad".

There was a very good reason I brought up the observation in the first place.

'marginal benefit' can also be worded as 'slight advantage'. Thanks for echoing my point. :)

You taught me nothing new about the fact that using 3d6 instead of 1d20 weights rolls towards the middle of the bell curve of the number totals generated. As I mentioned, the highest-possible number achieved using 3d6 is 2 less than what is generated on 1d20, which the designers have used for 3e and 2 e (I do not know if 1e was a d20 based game as well).

Using my observation and advice from my earlier post, if our GM decides to go with passive DCs using 10 or 11, he is now aware that if he is using pre 4E resources that he might want to reduce their resistance DCs by 2 to compensate.

Actually, he might want to lower their passive resistance DCs by more than two, considering the bell curve of using 3d6 to generate our attack and effect of our actions.

Reminder: Using default rules, Taumata and Myrp get only 2 actions each while Myrp is riding Taumata. Normally a rider PC has to be at least 2 sizes smaller than the PC that is the 'mount'. Roll both their initiatives and use the lower of the two results. The two PCs act in either order on the same initiative count.

Pretty sure the RAI is for a bipedal rider riding a bipedal 'mount'.

As Taumata does not have the mount special ability, the restriction of 2 actions per PC is in effect.

Since Taumata has a quadruped form, the rider PC only needs to be 1 size smaller.

PCs riding PCs

From the centaur ancestry:

Your equine body is well suited for carrying trusted allies. A PC can ride you if they are one size category smaller than you (Medium size, for most centaurs), rather than needing to be two size categories smaller.

Note that if Myrp is riding Tuamata and an encounter starts, both only get 2 actions per round per the Players riding Players rules introduced in Howl of the Wild. That said, if it's something that they do often, at higher levels, we can adapt Centaur ancestry feats to allow those penalties to be reduced.

Thanks, Lia.

I was going to plot in the summoner's Steed Form feat for other PCs to ride Taumata without a penalty to their action economy, but the summoner feat only has benefit when the summoner rides the eidolon.

The relevant centaur feat to allow for that is Accomodating Mount

I have updated Starigati's summoner feat plan to incorporate Accomodating Mount in at 10th level (delaying his increase to large size until 12th level, replacing Towering Size). As he is growing at each level increase (but within the same size category until he gains the Hulking Size feat), he eventually gets big enough that it easy to accomodate one of the small-sized riders in the group without the rider needing to use an action to remain on, so when he becomes large-sized, he will be able to acommodate one of the medium-sized group members of the group.

The benefit of Myrp (or Jikah) riding him, is while Taumata is using the Avoid Notice exploration activity, the rider can use another exploration activity (and benefitting from Taumata's stealthy movement, as they do not need to make a separate Stealth check (as long as they are not making noise).

Welcome back, Lia.

Glad you are doing better.

Happy holidays to everyone.

Here's hoping Santa visits you and that Krampus does not.

Hope you are back with us soon, Lia.

@Seth: I think there are still two player slots left for the weekly dedicated hour (on Wednesdays from 8:30 pm Pacific to 9:30 pm Pacific). Is that a weekly time slot that works for you?

If you scroll up/through the posts look for my posts via my Preacherelius profile - it includes lists of who (so far) is in the Wednesday night game, including campaign traits each PC has.

@Trawets71: GM Wolf posted two days ago that the other table (for the players posting in here that the dedicated weekly Wednesday time slot does not work for), that he could make it a standard PBP without the dedicated weekly hour.

I hope so as well. I think Dec. 3 was the last time she posted on the boards.

I am interested.

I have not played the computer game for years. I bought the ttrpg book (and the atlas) years ago but never ran/played in a WoW ttrpg game

I do not have access to the Advanced d20 Magic book, would that be an issue?

I do not remember off-hand all the races and classes.

Initial (4 I think) of each side (Horde and Alliance)

Horde: orc, tauren, undead (called something else, correct?), and troll?

Alliance: human, dwarf, elf, gnome?

new horde race: blood elf
new alliance race: large blue-skinned 'monster looking' race?

new race: goblin (could choose either alliance?)

Classes

paladin
hunter
sorcerer (or another name for the magic user)
? priest of some sort ?
?

@Mark Thomas 66: Condolences to you, your wife and others.

@GM Hurley: I will be looking out for your recruitment for Legacy of Fire and Skull & Shackles recruitments.

new Dragonblood feats from Dragon Codex

For ones who are not familiar with this youtuber, he makes well presented videos, that you can pause the video with the full feats/ancestries/etc. write-ups on the screen, if you prefer to pause to read the rules entries.

He also does some entertaining concept character build vids, such as this one.

Continue the theme of suggesting PF youtubers, the best Golarion lore youtuber I have come across is Mythkeeper.

Reminder: Using default rules, Taumata and Myrp get only 2 actions each while Myrp is riding Taumata. Normally a rider PC has to be at least 2 sizes smaller than the PC that is the 'mount'. Roll both their initiatives and use the lower of the two results. The two PCs act in either order on the same initiative count.

Pretty sure the RAI is for a bipedal rider riding a bipedal 'mount'.

As Taumata does not have the mount special ability, the restriction of 2 actions per PC is in effect.

Since Taumata has a quadruped form, the rider PC only needs to be 1 size smaller.

PCs riding PCs

From the centaur ancestry:

Your equine body is well suited for carrying trusted allies. A PC can ride you if they are one size category smaller than you (Medium size, for most centaurs), rather than needing to be two size categories smaller.

How It's Played video about Draconic Codex book

At time stamp 5:40, updated draconic exemplars chart (from Adamantine to Executor).

Conspirator Dragon: occult tradition, speed: climb; cone of poison; saving throw: Fortitude

New ancestry feats for kobolds and dragonblood.

New canon regarding first clutch of dragon deities.

If you have ever wanted a dragon wearing a witch's hat: time stamp 0:48.

https://thefatefulforce.com/battle-resources/token-creator/

@Elton, if we have more than one class, are we allowed one archetype per each class or flat-out one archetype regardless of how many classes we have?

I am thinking of a spirit walker mesmerist.

If we are allowed one archetype per class, I am working with the mesmerist died and his power to affect undead helped him reclaim his own body as a reanimated medium.

I have not decided on race yet.

Is the (spirit walker) mesmerist/(reanimated medium) medium a viable option as a character for your campaign?

edited: Reread character creation rules...so also asking if you will allow the mesmerist and medium classes from OA?

Current interested players (characters):

GrimbleGrumble (?)
Evindyl (?)
Critzible (dwarf paladin stone lord)
DBH (Half-elf rogue (Relic raider) from Elventree on the Moonsea)
GM_Drake (?)

Interested.

I changed the dark blue lines to white so they are more noticeable.