Grindor's page

varathiel wrote:

I hesitate to lump climbing and swimming into one skill. You could be a great swimmer and absolutely be bad at climbing. In fact, chances are, if you are a highly trained swimmer you would be bad at climbing.

Look out!

Dolphins!
In the trees!
They're coming!

Snorter, you'd be surprised how appropriate that quote would have been for one the NPCs in the last game I ran. The PCs were in a forest and as the sorcerer cast lightning at a sniper in the trees a magical mishap occurred (thanks to liberal interpretation of the Paizo Critical Fumble Deck) and the PC ended up casting lighting coupled with a summon dolphin spell. That NPC ended up being electrocuted and crushed to death by a flaming tree and a raging dolphin. Her last word was "...whaaat?".

It was good times :)

I tried to download the pdf and got this "The key you provided for file download was invalid. This is usually caused because the file is no longer stored on Mediafire. This occurs when the file is removed by the originating user or Mediafire." Is the file still there?

I guess the Mediafire one is gone now. It may have expired.

I just tested this link and it worked fine: http://grindorsgoods.googlepages.com/TheNonGenericCleric_20070726.pdf

You can also view it online at: http://grindorsgoods.googlepages.com/nongenericcleric

Thanks for the interest. Hope you like it! :)

Table 12-6 (Monster Statistics by CR) in the Pathfinder RPG rules is similar to what you're describing, at least for coming up with monsters on the fly.

Thanks hogarth, that's quite close to what I was looking for (in regards to damage for monsters) and is certainly very useful. I thought there might be something like this in the Pathfinder RPG but I couldn't find it (haven't thoroughly read the whole thing yet).

Looking at the table, the progression of damage is obviously meant for the use of powers in the 4E engine, so it would have to be tweaked, because increase in level in 3.5 doesn't necessarily mean an increase in damage done.

On the other hand, damage in 3.5 is modified by the tendency for armor to become pretty much useless at about 15th level or so, unless there's some DR or fortification involved. Characters have more hit points, but they're hit almost every time, because defense doesn't keep pace with offense.

I've wondered how to address this. Such a table would have to take it into account.

True. Good points. I haven't experienced a lot of high level play, and I hadn't really thought much about actually creating a chart yet... it seems like the sort of thing that would already exist, though I couldn't find one through Google. And yeah, there are different things to think about in 3.5, which is - as you've said - why the 4e table unfortunately can't just be swiped, without careful tweaking.

By the way, I did find a similar thread which hasn't had any posts in a little while, but hopefully it will get more active soon: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88732g

One thing I really like about the 4E DMG is Page 42.

For those who haven't seen it, the page is basically all you need to help you improvise and adjudicate rules on the fly, including a chart showing Low, Medium, High amounts of damage for each level (or small range of levels) and shows this for once off attacks and for ongoing attacks. It also has brief info about other helpful things such as the "DM's Best Friend" (+2 bonus for advantageous situations, -2 for disadvantageous situations) has DCs (including for skill checks) appropriate for each level (or level range) and so on.

It's meant to help you work out how much damage a campfire or a boulder would do, and you could use it for anything really. For example, if you come up with a monster on the fly and want it to be a heavy hitter, use a damage amount similar to the High value listed for ongoing attacks (because it can attack several times).

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had seen or made something similar for 3.5 (and/or Pathfinder RPG), particularly the damage reference chart part of it. I think it's a really useful tool.

Thanks :)

So, I admit it, I went whole hog with 4e. I got caught up in the "shiny". But now I see the serious flaws everyone was talking about.

Seriously though, I am getting really excited about this release. I think 4e might have shown me how fantastic 3e really was. Sure, I might play 4e every so often but I am starting to think PFRPG might be the game I have been looking for all along. I think I might have been.....wrong (boy, that's hard to say).

Sounds like we're in the same boat. While the first RPG I ever played was 3.5, I've since added a lot of house rules, so the early previews of 4th edition sounded like just what I wanted, but once I got my hands on the books I just didn't feel it. I straight away started thinking about how I could try to fit my games around the rules, rather than the rules enhancing the gameplay and story. I ran a few games and it still didn't feel right. Then I checked out the Pathfinder RPG and was (and still am) so inspired and excited reading through all the awesome changes, and I just knew that it was what I had actually been looking for.

So... is there room for one more back here in the land of Pathfinder?

Congratulations Paizo! You really deserve it!

This one is the one I have. Requires a little work to make your own panels, but it's 3 panels wide (landscape orientation). Put two of them together and it might be exactly what you need.

Check this one out

If I could find it on the Paizo site I'd link it here, but this was the best I could do.

Slanky, it looks like Paizo is selling that one here. I think it's the same as the one you linked to. It looks good :)

Hi everyone (sorry for the long post and minor threadjack... this was more relevant a few pages back, but I still think this is the thread for it).

I’ve had a lot going on over the past few months, including moving out of home, starting a new job, and so on (in addition to an unstable Internet connection at my new place). Anyway, these are some reasons why I’ve dropped off the radar for a while. Another reason was avoiding the turmoil of messageboards during the wait for 4th Edition.

I’m one of those people who “knew” they were converting. Early 4e previews were exciting and seemed to streamline the game. As time went on, I became less excited and more uncertain and worried. I did buy the core books, read them, generated a few characters, ran a few games, but the excitement and the love wasn’t there. Instead, I felt like my creativity was constrained. There’s arguments both ways about whether 4e is limiting or not, but this is how I felt.

However, everything I’ve seen from Paizo has been excellent, and reading through the Pathfinder RPG made me *excited* and filled my head with all sorts of creative ideas, without even trying. This was in stark contrast to 4e where it took great effort to unleash the same sort of creativity.

Anyway, the 4e GSL pushed me squarely into Pathfinder territory. I understand that it's not as bad as many people are making it out to be, but I just can't bring myself to support WotC after seeing it. It’s not just the GSL, though. It’s the constant delays, the seemingly low production values on recent products, the poor marketing and all that other stuff. It wouldn’t be so bad, but then I see Paizo and their commitment to excellence, their ambitious and exciting products, their amazing customer focus and the creativity-supporting open playtest of the Pathfinder RPG (and of course, the great community here on the boards).

The choice for me is clear. Paizo and Pathfinder are the future for me. I’ll keep my 4e books, and I’ll keep an eye on WotC over the next year (especially to see what happens with third-parties) but I’m feeling very happy about my decision to stick with Pazio and Pathfinder.

I just wanted to thank everyone involved for your awesome efforts and your love of the hobby. You’ve won me over, again :)

1) Do you plan to convert to the new edition of D&D?

1) Yes, I will convert to 4th Edition. I started playing D&D with 3.5 and only have a few books, unlike some who have a lot of money invested in the current edition. Much of what I've seen of 4th Edition is in line with the house-rules and changes I've been making - or planning to make, but that are too much work for a lone DM - and it'd be great to have it all together as a supported whole rather than my own cobbled-together variant. The few parts that haven't appealed to me much seem to be easy to change.

2) If Paizo converts its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

2) If Paizo converts, all my subscriptions will continue. If anything changes, it would be that I may buy more Paizo products.

3) If Paizo does not convert its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?

3) If Paizo doesn't convert, I'll keep all of my subscriptions till the end of Crimson Throne, then reassess and most likely stop them and just buy any particularly interesting looking products (and convert them myself, or just use them for fluff) rather than subscribe. I love the fluff and flavour, and would buy any edition-neutral products. I will buy the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting book regardless of what happens (though I really hope that it will use 4th edition rules, or easily convertible rules).

Gah!

Beaten to the punch by Grindor, AGAIN!

GET OUT OF MY MIND!
GET! OUT! OF! MY! MIND!

Heh, heh, heh... get out of your mind? NEVER! It's nice and cosy in here, though slightly dusty :D

In addition to the resources provided by others, if you want some of Lovecraft's work in PDF format (among others) you could check out manybooks.net, which - by the way - also has a lot of other great books that are now in the public domain.

Have you heard of www.portraitadoption.com?

My girlfriend told me about it and has now done a few portraits there. It's a site where people draw/paint/etc character portraits and then sell them, but the cool thing is that you can also write up a description of your character on the forums and then any artists who are interested will "claim" the idea and start doing a portrait. This way, you might get five portraits done of your character and you can choose to buy the one you like the best, not buy any of them - in which case the artists can sell them to anyone - or buy all of them, if you so desire. You can set the price you are willing to pay, and anyone interested in your character and willing to work for that price will pick it up and work with it.

There are many artists with varying styles - from sketches to 3D models - so you might find something that suits your needs on there. Good luck :)

It's good to see this thread getting bumped again :) Glad everyone likes our work so much. It was interesting, because this idea had been floating around my head for a while, but then seeing Snorter's post and some of the responses to it prompted this thread and it progressed really quickly and productively. I know I'd be thrilled if Paizo picked up this variant and gave it the Pathfinder treatment - and if we got credit for our efforts, then even better :)

Thanks again to everyone who helped (I haven't been around for a while, due to moving and having no stable Internet here... it's a problem that's slowly being solved. If I suddenly disappear again, that'll be why).

Anyway, yes, the Non-Generic Cleric does use only OGL stuff and can make the standard Player's Handbook cleric, so it is therefore compatible with any variants based on that core cleric.

On a related note, it's interesting to hear the few snippets of 4th Edition cleric news, with healing and resurrection becoming 'prayers' instead of spells, and clerics supposedly using about one round per encounter to heal others (on average). I'm eager to see what they do with 4e clerics, and if they go for a more modular class like we've done here.

I just checked my Google Reader and found that it handles http://paizo.com/paizo/blog&xml=atom just fine. Perhaps you just missed the RSS buttons all over the Paizo site? They have them for all sorts of things…

And the internal links work. I guess Google Reader is smarter about guessing the base URL. :)

Hmm... well on the blog page I saw "Top Sellers", "New", and "Upcoming" but they didn't help. Anyway, I tried adding in the one you just showed me and it didn't work... so I tried again and it did. Not sure why it didn't work the first time.

So, thanks! Now I can read all the bloggy goodness right from Google Reader. Hooray!

I'm another one who checks the blog daily. However, I'd like to be able to have Google Reader check it for me like it checks messageboard posts here. Giving the blog a proper RSS feed would be great (I think Gary mentioned it's on his miles-long to do list). However, I may just be missing something, seeing as Kensanata says that you can use bloglines to check it. Anyway, the normal way I've been trying hasn't worked.

Other than that, I'm really enjoying the blog. The art and previews are probably my favourite part of it, and that alternate map of Magnimar was cool. Unlabelled/alternate maps and material that had to be cut from the modules is something I would like to see more of.

Yep. Both are set in the Pathfinder Chronicles campaign setting, in the world of Golarion.

The Points of Light description got me thinking similar thoughts. They have said that 4e will be more about the characters' abilities rather than their gear and they won't need to be carrying so many magic items around any more. This doesn't mean low-magic necessarily, but the magic item economy might be made a bit more believable because magic items will be rarer.

There's some discussion of it in this thread, but it's basically like Turin said. There's little travel between towns (which are the points of light in the big dark dangerous world) and those who do travel stick to the roads. I think they mentioned adventurers being those ones who stray from the safety of the roads. They've said that some crazy cult or weird thing could be happening one town over and people wouldn't really know because they're so separated.

I like the idea (in some respects) but I hope it's not vital to the rules in any way, so GMs don't need to adopt it if they don't like it.

EDIT: As for not wanting to make an account, it was previously possible to log in just by using the username "guest" but it doesn't seem to work any more. If they kept that active, then people who don't want anything other than to see the articles would be able to do so with no commitment or effort. It's strange to me that they had the facility for that, then seemingly removed it.

I am positive the format for the actual version of 360 (PDF version at the end of the month) will be formatted and pretty and all that fun stuff.

These are my thoughts too. They've said they'll compile them all together at the end of the month and once we see that we should get a much clearer idea of the look of their online magazine and the issues to come.

I liked that they could link to various sources and had hi-res images. It'll be interesting to see how the magazine looks at the end of the month.

THREAD: COMPLETE!

We played last night and the player was very receptive of the changes as presented by his alternate self and father. He's been told that his sword will power-down as a warning if he breaks his new code, and he can perform a (somewhat expensive) atonement ceremony in which he admits his transgressions and (if possible) rights his wrongs. He's looking forward to using the new code and admitted the faults with the old one.

Thanks for all the help, everyone :)

I would really like to send in something, but right now it's crunch time at my university, and I'm not sure if I'll have enough time. Maybe if they do another one of these sometime in the future I'll give it a go. It would at the very least give me an adventure idea that I can use with my gaming group!

That's my problem too: hectic time in my life, with the possibility of a lot of big changes (such as moving and getting a new job). I did write up a draft submission, but I don't have time to refine it. Even if I did, I don't think I'd have time to actually write/submit anything else if I was successful. And judging from what Mike said (below) I decided that I'll sit this one out. Hopefully when they do the next one, things won't be so crazy around here.

Talion09 wrote:

When is this slated to be published if the completed manuscript has to be in by Jan 1st 2008?

May 2008, I think.

Yes, it's a very aggressive schedule.

Don't enter if you can't write that many words by the deadline.

If you win but you're late with your final submission, expect to never work for us again.

So don't be late. ;D

Thanks for your comments Sam. After responding to them (below) I think I'm pretty confident about dealing with this out-of-game but at a point in-game where it makes sense. I'd be having the NPCs present the same situation to the PC as the I am presenting to the player.

You have a number of problems.

First and foremost, anyone who comes up with a code like that is not someone you can "teach a lesson." He will either ignore your tests, or actively do the opposite, just to teach you a lesson for trying to teach him one. As a worst case, he could decide to try and tank the game because you will not let him get away with his pushing the rules that way.

Second, unless you have some hefty limit in the game, he can always just shrug and say he is changing his alignment. What will you do if he just decides to become CN?

Third, he slipped that "code" by you once, he is going to try it again. And if you manage to catch him next time, he will just shrug and say never mind.

First: I will give him a choice one way or the other (code or no code) so that he can either live up to the character concept or fully embrace the way he's actually playing the character. For example, he's been non-LN for a while, but now he'd have to make the choice for real.

Second: Here's my current plan for the situation. His dead father's spirit is what powers his sword (giving it the flaming ability and some other cool things that he discovered as he levelled) and it's been helping him because his main quest is a noble and honourable one, but once his father's spirit realises that there's people around who could possibly get him to change his code, he will stop powering the sword. This should prompt the PC to seek out his tribe in this world to find out what's wrong with his ancestral sword. If he accepts the new code, then his father's spirit powers the sword again, and the mark of exile from the tribe is removed. If he rejects it, then he changes alignment, his father's spirit refuses to power the sword (depriving him of some of his combat power) and he is marked mystically marked as dishonourable and a traitor to the family. Other wild-elf tribes that uphold family honour (most of them) will treat him as an outside and be weary of helping him or associating with him. That said, I don't actually mind if he rejects the code, I'm just not a fan of the loose code: either have a worthwhile code or none at all.

Third: I won't let him write a new code. I'll use the one developed here and allow no alterations. (Or if he really wants a code after becoming non-LN, then it won't need to be very restrictive and he will already be suffering the penalties, so he can't become much worse off.)

I would suggest telling him that you have changed your mind, and his code is not suitable for a LN alignment. If he wants, he can modify the code, but he can not keep using it and be LN.

That kinda is what I'm planning to do, but in-game (as well as out) if I can work it. I've mentioned a few times that he doesn't seem very LN, so he'll understand what the NPCs confronting him about his code means. And I'll metagame explain it to him as much as he needs as well. Basically, I'd be doing what you suggest, but instead of him suddenly just having a new code out of the blue, it'd be because the NPCs confront him about it.

This way, I'm explaining it to him in and out of game, and making it make sense in and out of game.

Having nothing to judge him by except for his "CoC", I'd say that he was never LN. This is fine, as anyone can have a CoC. I don't think that you really need to prove anything to him; just tell him what his alignment actually is--I'd say he's NG but you said he's become callous so maybe true neutral is more appropriate. Tell him why he's not LN, and why his CoC is mostly pointless. If he wants to change his character to actually be LN, make sure that he knows that he may someday have to make real sacrifices to do so, regardless of the letter of his "CoC". You might even want to write a real CoC for him.

I was thinking of having some influential NPCs that should be important to him (his alternate father and self) show him the benefits and restrictions of the new code and encourage him to use it. They are a LN clan and might tell him that he should either accept and abide by a proper code, or just do as he wishes and not bother with a code. This way, his character can choose what to do in-game. If he chooses the code, he'll stay (or become) LN, but if he chooses to leave the code behind, his alignment will change to what he and I jointly agree it really should be. This will have implications for him. If he takes the code, then its restrictions apply but he'll be accepted back into his tribe (he was exiled for other reasons in his backstory), and if he doesn't, then even the other LN wild-elf tribes will probably not want to associate with him any more. He's a bit of a loner anyway, so I think that's not too bad a restriction and seems like a fair compromise providing benefits/drawbacks in-game.

I'd first propose a change to your player, as follows:

Code of Conduct wrote:

1.When asked, always render aid to the innocent.
2.----
3.----
4.Will always keep a promise, no matter risk to self
5.----
6.May only kill as a last resort.
7.----

1. Really, he's striving for a neutral version of charity; the above requires him to aid people whenever they asked (if they don't ask, they don't need help), but provides for the enemy loophole. Your enemies aren't innocent in your eyes.

4. Don't strive. Do it. 'Striving' lets you off with a 'well, I tried' excuse. The above change allows you to really put his code to the test.

6. C'mon, only allowed to kill if you're defending yourself or innocents? That's pretty much every combat situation an adventurer comes across. The rewording forces him to extend some mercy to anyone he doesn't /have/ to kill (No coup de grace, no killing someone who has surrendered, etc.), regardless of who or what they are. Don't tag him for just dropping something during the pitch of battle, AND allow him to 'let' die if they're below 0 HP. That way it's not Good, but it can inconvenience him when people surrender. Even then, it's still not much of a stricture, but it's good color.

Nice. I like it :) Thanks!

You're right about a lot of those not needing to be in the code. I'm glad you agree. I really like the changes you've made here. I was having a lot of trouble seeing how I could present a combat situation where he couldn't just outright kill the opponents, but this helps a lot. He's a crazy powerhouse, and can sometimes get over the massive damage threshold in one hit (with spells), so this is a nice restriction that still lets him be the main warrior, but sometimes situations will come up where he has to lay down his sword.

I totally agree with the removal of the "strive" and "possible" bits. EDIT: Like TS said though, it could mean "unless it is physically impossible".

As for the first one, I like what you've done there, and it's a great way of "neutral charity", as you said. I was having a tough time trying to make it worthwhile without being too Good. However, I might change it to the following instead: "When asked, always render aid to the innocent and needy." That way, if beggars or old people or whoever ask him for help, he has to give it to them (if they're innocent and not his enemies). It may be a superfluous change, but it makes it clearer in my mind.

I don't think I just want to present these changes to the player, though. I think I'd like to do it in game, especially because I have the perfect vehicles for it (his NPC self and family). I've brainstormed a bit and there's some great ideas I've gotten from this new code. Thanks a lot! :)

After writing this, I see that it is long and rambling, so I'll do a quick summary here:

* LN Duskblade with a code of conduct

* The code is so loose that he rarely breaks it but it provides almost no restrictions
* The PCs are in an alternate universe, so I have an NPC who is the alternate version of the PC and have an NPC who is the alternate version of his father (in the PC's world, his father is dead); the alternate PC has power over the PC, because the PC needs his alternate self to willing give him a piece of hair, blood, etc. (out of desire to help)
* I want to test him to get him to stick to his code, and/or show that the spirit of the code is harder to stick to than the letter, and/or show that he really shouldn't even bother having a code, and/or show (using the alternate version of the PC) how the code should be followed

Okay, now onto the rambling...

I'm running a game with the following characters:

NG Seakin Spirit Shaman
NG Human Sorcerer
CN Human Rogue
LN Wild-elf Duskblade

The duskblade is giving me problems. He's part of a semi-civilised tribe, living in the slums of a small town. His father was killed in raid (arranged by the captain of the guard). We started and he chose his alignment and decided to have a code of conduct. I only noticed the problem a fair way into the game: his code barely restricts him at all.

Here it is:

1.Will always help those in need, who are not enemies

2.Will not immediately trust anybody, trust has to be earned
3.Will always strive forward in my training, however can see helping people as improving self
4.Will always strive to keep a promise if possible, no matter risk to self
5.Will hold to a strict and exhaustive training regimen wherever possible
6.Will only kill those who attack myself or an innocent party
7.Will sacrifice self to save a friend; a friend is only someone who has earned my trust

He's acting Chaotic Neutral and has turned from a somewhat lawful person into a very callous person. But he still sticks to his code, because it's so loose. My problem here is that he hasn't broken his code - so there's no consequences there - but the code was far too loose to start with. Much later on he told me that he purposely wrote loopholes into it. I didn't think he'd do that, and on a glance it seemed fine, but now I see that it isn't.

Take point number 6 for example, he can beat people to the edge of death and still be within the letter of his code. Number 3 says that he'll keep promises, but he never makes any. Number 2 is more of a personality trait. Number 1 is covered because they're on a quest to save the world, but he doesn't go out of his way to help people he sees (beggars and so on).

They were fighting a giant animated statue of a dwarf and they had heard rumour that a great dwarven hero had come this way long ago and never returned. He "killed" the statue and it cracked open, revealing a dwarf, and the whole thing began to fall towards him. He immediately said he wanted to stab the dwarf. All the other players/characters told him he shouldn't because it's probably the hero they heard about. He did it anyway, and killed the dwarf.

The statue the crushed him, doing lots of damage, and the earth spirit they were visiting told him that dwarves would now see him as an enemy. The duskblade started asking questions after he had killed the dwarf, such as "Was he in control when the statue attacked me?" and the answer was "No". He then felt somewhat sorry and gave a bit of his reward to help resurrect the dwarf.

Now the PCs are in an alternate universe where they didn't get together, and there have been many huge natural disasters (floods, eruptions, etc) and burning undead roam the land. The PCs need to find their alternate selves in this world to get a piece of them as a material component to power the portal to get back to their world. The alternate PCs must willingly (out of desire to help, rather than fear) give a piece of hair, skin, blood, etc. to the PCs. So, the PCs can't just hunt them down, draw blood and leave.

I want to show the duskblade that his code is so loose that he almost might as well not even have one. Or show that he's abiding by the letter of the code, not the spirit of it. I am in the unique position of having the ability to NPC the alternate version of the PC. Also, I'm thinking that his father is alive in this world, so I can NPC him too. He also has a half-brother.

Basically, I want to have the alternate PC (APC) show how the code should be followed. For example, having him help beggars, and get something of a high shelf for a halfling, make promises to people and then keep them, and so on. But I also want to present the PC with situations that would require him to stick to his code (like an NPC making him promise to do something, then I'd see if he actually does it). I haven't been very good with this so far, because I felt the code was so loose that it rarely mattered. I have had a few situations where he needed to follow it, though.

I guess the trouble is that if it was a knight's or paladin's code, it would be strict and therefore easy to see if he's following it or not, but because this one is so loose, it rarely even matters, and he basically acts like the characters without codes (sometimes worse).

I'm not quite sure what I want from the Paizo community here. Some situations that I could put the PC in to test his adherence to his code would be good. And ways that I can show the APC sticking to the code (or it's spirit), where the PC wouldn't stick to it (or would stick to the letter). I've got the alternate version of the PC, his father and his half-brother to use.

In honor of the work we did recently on the cleric, I thought it high time to add some versatility to the fighter as well. My goal here is to allow options other than the basic heavy tank--so that, in essence, the swashbuckler becomes merely a fighter variant, as does Monte Cook's unfettered.

Sounds good, Kirth. I may be a bit busy in the coming weeks, but I'm up for making another Non-Generic class. The cleric was lots of fun and worked well :)

When you say it should be able to make the swashbuckler, do you mean exactly, or something like it? I ask because I wonder whether we want to keep this OGL-compliant or not.

I've only recently started looking into OGL and non-WotC products, but I'm getting hooked on them, and I think Necromancer Games is definitely one of the best out there (even though I only started D&D with 3rd Edition, so I don't know much about 1st Edition and how it should feel) . I can't wait for the 4th Edition Tome of Horrors, and I'm excited to see what else this partnership brings :)

Complete Mage presents Spell Sense as an alternative to Trap Sense.

You just need to be 3rd level with 1 rank in Knowledge(arcana) and then you choose this instead of trap sense. It gives you a +1 dodge bonus to AC vs. spells and spell-like abilities, which increases at the same rate as your trap sense normally would. Seems like it'd be a lot more helpful to your bad guy (and to some PCs) than trap sense.

Barbarians are eligible for this to, by the way.

Apparently they're getting rid of LA altogether and instead having something which seems like racial levels, except you get them automatically. That is, you pick your race and over the course of your adventuring career as you level up in whatever class you picked, you also get more racial features. It's discussed in the Races Design & Development article. I think this quote illustrates it well: "If we spread the tasty magical abilities of drow out through their levels, they could start at 1st level on a par with other character races."

So I agree with Werecorpse: wait and see. As for the warlock, all the classes are changing in some way (yet to see how substantial these changes are, but some seem big), so if you hate the 3.5 warlock, you might not necessarily hate the 4e warlock.

Hope that helps.

EDIT: Oh, also, for a bit more "confirmation" on the tiefling, the cover of the Player's Handbook features one, which would indicate its in that book.

I believe the WotC's official answer for this questions was that retailers will have a harder time stocking large quantities of all three books in the same month.

Yeah, that's what I heard too.

On a related note, has anyone heard anything about the possibility of a "boxset" release like they did with 3.5? I'm thinking that they probably wouldn't announce that until after the core three are out, so they can try to make some collectors buy them all over again. Anyway, my 3.5 boxset slip thing has done a great job of protecting my core three in the time I've had them, so I think I'd go a similar route for 4e if it's offered.

(I think the 3.5 boxset came out only a few months after the core three).

Well, as I said, it's very much under construction and really just a place to host D&D creations (so I don't have to keep reposting here if it changes, and I can host PDFs there too). By the way, I went with Dragonmann's idea of having our real names and nicknames.

Here's the link if you're interested, and here's the link straight to the Non-Generic Cleric.

Grindor wrote:

Anyway, I think that I'd need to use real names, not just messageboard aliases in the copyright bit.

In this specific case, it'd probably be OK.

You're saying using your aliases for this should be okay? Hmm... I dunno. I don't think it'll matter too much either way (I don't think they'll hunt me down for misusing the OGL) so if you want me to use your alias instead of real name then I can do that.

Non-Generic Cleric is resurrected! For a limited time only :)

I have started a simple GooglePages website (don't have the time, money or need for a more professional one) and I want to post the Non-Generic Cleric on there. I've added the OGL to the website, and I'm taking my queue from Rich Burlew and Sean K. Reynolds on how to cite Open Game Content. I don't expect my website to get loads of hits or anything, it's just a place to keep my D&D creations.

Anyway, I think that I'd need to use real names, not just messageboard aliases in the copyright bit. Kirth, I've got yours from that email you sent me, and Dragonmann, I see yours in your profile, assuming that is your real name :)

Are you two happy for me to put your names on the site? And do you think I need to credit anyone else. I think everyone would agree that we were the three main contributors, but there were a few others who helped.

The wand is a perennial favorite for wizards who favor accurate, damaging attacks. Emerald Frost adepts use wands to help channel powers of cold and deadly acidic magic, while Stormwalker theurges channel spells of lightning and force through their wands.

I guess, in 4th Edition wands aren't what wands once were.

As soon as I said that to someone, it got stuck in my head, so I type it here now to free myself of its tongue twisting terror.

A: Convert :)

I'm eagerly awaiting 4th Edition. Everything I've seen so far looks like a well needed breath of fresh air and it's all very interesting. Anything that speeds things up but allows you to do more sounds great. I'm always looking at new house rules, so a revamp of the system sounds like just what I'm after. My players are excited as well.

That said, I'm running a 3.5 game at the moment, which I'll want to finish up first. I highly doubt that it'll be worse than 3.5. I don't need more information: I will convert to 4e, it's just a matter of time (within the next year, I'd say).

I wish they do a a wallpaper of the sihedron rune from the inside covers of Burnt Offerings.

Hey, yeah. That's a good idea!

I've been reading a few threads about guns recently, and I thought I'd have a go at statting up some of my own for an island based homebrew I'm working on. Firearms aren't widely available and are definitely not available to island tribes, mainly used by the explorers, pirates and settlers. As many people have mentioned here, the intent is a shot from a firearm or two at the start of combat, then charging in with a cutlass.

I've made firearms simple weapons because I like the idea that anyone could be dangerous with them. The way I balance this is that it is difficult to clean and reload the weapons properly, and there is a misfire chance. This is all still in the draft stage and has had no playtesting. Some things will probably change, and I've only just increased the crit range from x3 to 19-20/x3 today. I've never played IK or any other games with guns in them, and have only recently started looking at the rules from various products.

I'd appreciate any feedback, and feel free to use these rules if they suit you and your group.

GRINDOR'S GUNS

One-Handed Simple Ranged Weapons
Pistol: 250gp, 2d6 piercing, crit 19-20/x3, range 50 ft., weight 2 lb.

Two-Handed Simple Ranged Weapons
Musket: 500gp, 2d8 piercing, crit 19-20/x3, range 150 ft., weight 7 lb.

Firearms are relatively simple weapons to aim and fire, but require training and expertise to properly clean and maintain. Even the highly trained are not immune to the perils of using firearms.

After firing a shot, a firearm should be cleaned before it is reloaded. It takes two full-round actions to clean a firearm, and another full-round action to load it. Cleaning or loading a firearm provokes attacks of opportunity. Normally, this would mean that it takes three full-rounds, provoking attacks of opportunity each round to correctly reload a firearm. However, the cleaning stage can be skipped, but it is not advisable to do so.

Each time a firearm is fired without first cleaning it, there is a cumulative 20% chance of a misfire. Cleaning for only one full-round provides no benefit, although, by taking the Firearms Proficiency feat, you reduce the cleaning time for firearms by one full-round, and the cumulative chance of a misfire decreases to 10%. The Improved Firearm Proficiency feat speeds cleaning and loading further.

Even so, most people who use firearms begin a fight by drawing and firing a loaded pistol or two, then dropping their firearms, drawing a melee weapon and entering the fray, only picking up their firearms and cleaning them properly after the fight is over.

Misfiring
When a misfire occurs, the user of the firearm rolls attack and damage as normal, but only takes the result of the attack roll into account if it is a critical hit. The user rolls damage as normal and adjusts accordingly if a critical hit is scored. Roll d% on Table: Firearm Misfires to see what happens to the firearm that misfired. If a critical miss is rolled while using a firearm, the user should also roll on the misfire table. If the result is a permanent misfire chance, this is in addition to the misfire chance for not cleaning the firearm and cannot be reduced, not matter how skilled the user.

Table: Firearm Misfires
d% ........ Result
1-20 ...... The firearm is irreparably destroyed.
21-50 .... The firearm suffers a permanent 50% misfire chance.
51-99 .... The firearm suffers a permanent 10% misfire chance.
100 ....... The firearm is completely unaffected.

FIREARM FEATS

FIREARM PROFICIENCY [GENERAL]
You are trained in the use and maintenance of firearms.
Benefit: For you, the cleaning time for firearms is one full-round action and the cumulative chance of a misfire is 10%.
Normal: Without this feat, the cleaning time for firearms is two full-round actions and the cumulative chance of a misfire is 20%.
Special: A fighter may select Firearm Proficiency as one of his fighter bonus feats.

IMPROVED FIREARM PROFICIENCY [GENERAL]
You have perfected the art of cleaning and reloading firearms.
Prerequisites: Firearm Proficiency, base attack bonus +4
Benefit: You can clean and reload a firearm as a single full-round action.
Normal: Without this feat, the cleaning time for firearms is two full-round actions and the loading time is one full-round action.
Special: A fighter may select Improved Firearm Proficiency as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Using the search box on the side, I managed to turn up the relevant entries pretty quickly. Unfortunately, the Pathfinder #3 wallpaper doesn't have the word "desktop" it the blog post, so it required two searches to get them all.

Maybe this thread can become the consolidated list of desktops.

Search for "Pathfinder Desktop"
Search for "Pathfinder Wallpaper"

Pathfinder #1 Desktop Wallpaper (1024x768), (1280x960)
Pathfinder #1 Desktop Wallpaper, Alternate (1024x768), (1280x960)
Pathfinder #2 Desktop Wallpaper (1024x768),(1280x960)
Pathfinder #3 Desktop Wallpaper (1280x960)
Pathfinder #4 Desktop Wallpaper (1280x960)

Yeah, I think the fighter/cleric example is a good one. And continuing the spells of the previous class is pretty cool. For my next campaign I'll have to have a good look at them and see whether I want to make them "official" in my game.

Prestige variants fit that idea from fantasy stories and the like that are the character somehow gaining something new and rich from added up experience. At least that's the fluff/roleplaying angle as far as I see it.

Yeah, that does work well. I think I saw someone complaining that bards are just entertainers who get up and go adventuring, then they're suddenly magical, but with the prestige bard it's a different story because you have to get experience and earn that first.

There's nothing in the Bardic Music class feature that explicitly says you have to be musical with it, just that you have to use a performance skill.

That's true about non-musical performances. I think there's even a weapon drill perform skill in some book. I think if someone in my group was thinking about a bard but hesitant, I'd emphasis the different "flavours" you can have, by using different types of perform skills.

However, it was more the effects that I was thinking about, not the fluff surrounding them. But, Kirth's suggestion has satisfied me, and I've just gotten the last player in my next game to confirm his character class (none of them are bards) so I won't even need to think about this again for quite sometime.

Thanks for your input everyone :)

THREAD: COMPLETE!
HIGH SCORE: K I R

I noticed that the cover for the Planet Stories book Black God's Kiss looked like a placeholder or draft image (the cover looked similar, but rough and the Planet Stories logo, the book title, etc. looked different). They emailed me today saying that they would replace the image. They said that the rights holder should go to http://www.amazon.com/images to give them a replacement image, so hopefully they'll use the one from Paizo.com I originally linked them, or someone like Erik Mona will head over and submit it. They said the change should appear in about a day, and they've taken the old one down, so I'm guessing that they'll just put the new one up tomorrow.

I'd probably go rogue 3/beguiler 2/prestige bard, or maybe straight beguiler until 6th level, the segue over to prestige bard (for better spells and some more beguiler abilities). But then again, I love the "prestige" variants for bard, paladin, and ranger, so my view is a bit biased. You get everything you were after (BAB progression, spell lists, bardic knowledge), and still have the bardic music as icing on the cake (take your Perform in Oratory instead of an instrument, if it fits the flavor you're after a bit better). Thing is, I get a kick out of trying to build what I want out of the SRD rules, as non-conducive as they are towards some ideas.

Thanks for the reply. I also like building things out of the SRD. I guess that's sorta another reason why I started with bard, seeing as beguiler isn't part of the OGL. But your above suggestion is good, and if I don't have to reinvent the wheel, then I should avoid it.

Well... that rogue 3/beguiler 2/prestige bard seems fine. Also gives some sneak attack, which is always nice.
Seems to give what I want without building anything new. Great :) Thanks.

By the way, you've reminded me that I was meaning to have a better look at the other prestige variants. I've never used them before. What is your attraction to them, may I ask?

Thanks guys, maybe I should've thought this through more before posting (and gotten some sleep first). You both make good points. I'll try to explain, if I can, but maybe this whole concept is flawed/futile.

It's not a specific niche I wanted to fill, it's basically that I wanted to beef up the bard a bit, but didn't want the music. As you point out, it's probably better to start with beguiler and remove some things. One of the reasons I didn't do that - I think... - was because I didn't want any of the beguiler's class features, just the spell list. So, therefore it seemed better to start as bard and add in a few more spells. Then I realised I wanted more spells per day, and so on, until it started getting further away from bard and closer to beguiler.

Here's the things I think I want:

* Bard's BAB progression
* Bard's and Beguiler's spells
* Bardic Knowledge

Everything else is optional, I guess. So, you can see that 3/4 of that is bard stuff, just adding the beguiler's spells in. But then, I slowly started wanting more beguiler stuff.

I guess the whole reason for this is that nobody ever plays bards in my group and don't really like the music ability; they're also new, so tracking the bonuses is something easily forgotten. I'm always passively on the lookout for things that would make the bard more attractive, and I wondered - seeing the music ability isn't for my group - what I could replace it with.

I could just offer the beguiler instead, but I would like a higher BAB, Bardic knowledge, and the bard's spells (mostly so they've got some healing and still fill the bard's spell niche).

As I said, I haven't thought about this much or for a while. Do you know of any variant bard with less of a focus on music? And/or can we tweak the beguiler to make it what I'm looking for?

Sorry for the poorly thoughtout concept, guys. I hope this helps clarify things, but as you can see, I'm not all that clear on it myself. Just looking for a less music-based alternative to the bard, I guess. Thanks again.

Some time ago, I toyed with the idea of giving some aspects of the beguiler to the bard. I'm not really sure about balance, though. Beware that some of the following things may be overpowered, because I haven't really thought about it much, and I'd like to hear from you whether they are balanced enough and ideas for how to make them better.

For this model of the bard, I'm pretty set on completely removing bardic music altogether, making the class more like a sneak or adventurer (or beguiler). Now, one of the main issues here is "what is bardic music worth?" It is my hope that by removing it, we can boost the power of the bard in other areas, particularly spellcasting.

My first basic idea was that the bard gets all the spells the beguiler can cast. Of course, the bard can only cast up to 6th level spells. I'm wondering if the bard could receive a spellcasting boost in other ways, in addition to more spells added to the list. I like how the beguiler works, having a set list of spells to cast from and being able to spontaneously cast any of them up to his limit.

Is it too much to leave the bard as is, but remove bardic music and instead add all the beguilers spells (up to 6th level) and the ability to cast like a beguiler?

I'd also very much like to increase the spells per day a bit, if possible. Maybe something a little like the duskblade? Basically I want this so that the bard can be a competent (but limited) spellcaster from the get go (which includes casting 1st level spells).

Summary: Is it too much to replace bardic music by adding the beguiler's spells to the bard's spell list, allowing bards to know all their spells and spontaneously cast them, increasing their spells per day a little (at least enough to cast one or two 1st-level spells at level 1)? If this is too powerful, what are some other suggestions?

Typing that summary, it does sound like too much, but I'm still not sure, so I'll wait for your responses (maybe it'll bump the bard into a category where more people want to play it in a party of four, instead of the fifth/support character).

For reference, here's all the PHB spells that the beguiler has, which the bard does not. When I wrote this list (a while ago) I was only writing SRD/OGL spells, so the PHB2 spells aren't in the list. The list also shows the differences in levels for spells that the beguiler and bard get at different times. However, remember that while a bard gets spells like shadow walk as a 5th level spell instead of 6th level, a beguiler gets 6th level spells at 12th level, while a bard only gets 5th level spells at 13th level (and only if he has high enough Charisma, otherwise he has to wait till 14th level).

1st: colour spray, mage armour, obscuring mist
2nd: fog cloud, knock, see invisibility**, spider climb, touch of idiocy
3rd: arcane sight, hold person*, nondetection, suggestion*, zone of silence**
4th: charm monster*, confusion*, crushing despair*, solid fog
5th: break enchantment*, dominate person*, feeblemind, hold monster*, sending, telepathic bond
6th: greater dispel magic*, mass suggestion*, mislead*, repulsion, shadow walk*, true seeing

*Bards do get this spell, but one level earlier
**Bards do get this spell, but one level later

Thanks Gary, Sarah, James Davis and Vic :)

Paizo has, by far, the best customer service of any business I've ever dealt with.
Thank you for listening to your customers and then going one step further.

I like grabbing names of old scientists and tweaking. Maybe the politics god could be Farad? (From Faraday) Simple yet oddly polite :)

An unpronounceable name? Maybe worshippers have to hollow out molars and then fill one with metal and the other with ceramic. Then they can make a fork-in-a-bowl noise ;)

Hey, those are cool ideas. Thanks! I like names being different but reminding you of something, so that scientist idea works well :)

Ha! Cool. I think with any "unpronounceable" name, people will quickly come up with a way to pronounce it (whether that be hollowing out their teeth, or 'guesstimating'). But that's okay. People say Cthulhu all the time, but are still not 100% certain how to say it. I like that worshippers would mutilate themselves in some way to say their gods name. Creepy.

Thanks for your ideas.

Okay, I'm pretty set on Aevora and Thuridane for the names of the Sky Goddess and her Earth God son. Thanks to everyone for your help :)

I'm still trying to work out a name for the god of power, politics, diplomacy, nobility and magic. I had one, but it is too much like Thuridane, so I need a new one.

I'm also trying to work out the name of the uber-evil ooga-booga mysterious unknown god of my world. He's so unknowable that he doesn't have a holy symbol or any statues or anything. I guess he's kinda like Cthulhu and other Lovecraftian beasties. He's the god of depths, madness, mystery, death and destruction. I want his name to be unpronounceable, to add to his mystery. For an example of what I mean, it'd be kinda like YHWH or some of the Lovecraftian names. The name I've got at the moment is Qxh’t but I'm very open to suggestions. However, I want to avoid really long names. I also need to come up with some "He Who Must Not Be Named" type titles for people to refer to him by, and some shorter ones, such as "That God" or the "Unspoken".

Thanks for all your efforts here, everyone. It really is very much appreciated, and as I mentioned, all the names I don't use are going onto my list of names for lesser gods and other things :)

EDIT: I've just come up with a suitable name for the god of politics, but if people want to throw more names out there, that's fine.

Hi,

I'm an Australian subscriber and I just received Dragon #359 today... missing the poster even though it was in a sealed bag :(

I have not yet received Dragon #358 or Dungeon #150, but I'm guessing they should be here soon, seeing as #359 has arrived. Anyway, the main issue was the missing post.

Thanks :)

hmm, thought this thread would take off and get more action.

Same. Seemed like an interesting topic that others would have comments on. Hmm... maybe there's still hope?

In another thread I posted about why I didn't want to switch to Pathfinder yet, and - in a nutshell - it's because of the ties to my homebrew world and the history that's been built up there as we've played.

Thinking about it more though - part of the inspiration for this thread - made me realise something which should have been obvious: I don't have to switch and never come back to my homebrew, I can run multiple worlds. I could run my homebrew, Pathfinder, and my new homebrew (once it's done) and all would have different themes, feelings, and in some cases, even rules. This seems more appealing to me that plunking Golarion down as a new continent (or continents) in my existing homebrew world, especially when I'm using extra races (or in the case of the new homebrew I'm developing, using humans from the PHB and all the rest are homebrew races).