Harrythefish's page

Organized Play Member. 16 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In regards to armor.

High dex trumps armor in 3.x/pathfinder simply because the better the ac the more it limits your dex. In pathfinder 1.0 I remember rogues gonig for bracers of defense because they were the best option due to their dex.

The simplest solution it to grant DR to armor.

You want your plate armor to have an advantage over 1/2 plate? Give it higher DR.

Simple rule

Armor give a DEX pen (not a max dex limit) which equals the DR given

Leather armor/ studded leather / other natural armors like hide) no dex pen no dr bonus.

heavier clunkier armor dex pen of 1-2 with a corresponding dr bonus.

Heavy armor dex pen of 3-6 with a equal dr bonus.

and to have those values scale, magic items bonus no longer add +1 to ac but instead lower the dex penalty by 1 (or if already 0 adds one) and increase the dr by 1.

Classes of armor stays (light medium heavy) which can still effect move penalties and also give guide lines to how much dex/dr shift there is.

Effect. High dex people are hit less but take more damage when they are, heavy armor people are hit more but take less damage per hit.

A high level character in magic +5 full plate would get dex -1 and 11 DR. Making the character in that armor seem invincible to fist level characters (because although they can hit him they cant hurt him) which seems fair and a high level character in leather +5 that is high DEX seem untouchable by low level characters due to very high AC which also seems to fit in a theatrical sense).

my two cents.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel that the solution that would be the middle ground between what the dev's are going for and what the players want would be something like this.

Single use items. No Resonance. To stop spamming you could do a 10 minute cool down. Use the current rules for pushing resonance for pushing single use items instead. ( in game logic the power of the scroll/trinket/potion has lingering effects that can interact with other consumables making the new one fail)

Items with charges. Use resonance to bind like just like the new wearable items rules below. Keep wands at 10 charges and lowered the rolled die of all wands by one (ie 1d4 = 1d3, 1d8=1d6 etc). This should make spamming a clw wand a thing of the past at high levels.

Wearable items. You can only equip a number of item = to resonance. No pushing as it is no longer needed. Use the rules for pushing and use them for single use items only. (using a item before the 10 min cool down).

Also I like the idea of resonance points linked to your primary stat.

Hopeful effect. until you can increase your starting stats the best you can have is 4 wearable/multiuse items. With the cost of magic being high the limiting factor for usefulness is how much money you have. As you level up you gain a more resonance but they are taken with other magic items and by late level you have the money to buy lots of magic but are limited on healing by 10 min cooldown on potions, 10 charges of less powerful wands and not being able to use multiple wands due to resonance.

I feel this system while possible more complex in that there are more rules, is way better balanced and less punitive. The potion would most often be saved to revive a fallen comrade, but they would be very low on hit points and would have to hang back or risk death (adding tension). The wand of clw would be good at lower levels but pretty useless at higher levels requiring the purchasing of more powerful wands. The christmas tree effect is still removed due to resonance. Linking resonance to your primary stat is non punitive to players who want to play a gruff character (low charisma) and seems to place a nice focus on primary stats.

Just my two cents.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cantriped wrote:

Am I just missing it... or it is currently impossible for anyone to become an Expert (or better) in Light Armor? I sort of expected Fighters to get a more mutable form of Armor Mastery. I.E. Become a Master of Shields and an Armor Type of choice, and experts of all other armor types. It seems odd they can even choose Dex as their primary stat when their Class Features push them exclusively into Heavy Armor. For example, I see the bones of a 'swashbuckler's' features in the class-feats list... But cannot imagine a swashbuckler having to wear Half-Plate or Split Mail to maximize their AC. Likewise for a classic fantasy Archer, whom I usually imagine in light or medium armor.

I agree the armor proficiency upgrade should be expert in all and master of one. Also it would be nice if at expert level in a armor you got some bonus like ; light armor max dex goes up by one for the armor, medium armor the skill penalties decrease by one and heavy armor the speed penalty decrease by 5 foot (just off the cuff). Then what you get is the trained person in a armor getting the benefit of the armor but the higher skilled people getting better use of the armor (and maybe untrained getting their speed reduced by 5 max ac one less and it always being clumsy to show that you really don't know how to wear armor?)

--my two cents


One thing I noticed as a GM when my players were making character was the layout for classes left something to be desired.

Spells
At the start of the spell section please layout the total amount of spells the class gets from all sources.

The reason I find it would be useful to have all the spell info front loaded like this is when I read the bard entry I was like 1 first level spell only? That sucks, and then went on to look at other caster options. also to find your total amount of spells you get the info is in 3 different locations (spells, muse and compositions). a summery at the start would let players know what sections to check for spell info.

I think this info could be placed in the stat block for each class (where hp and proficiency is), possibly having spells and compositions as two listings.
spell casting: Spontaneous Occult
Starting Spells: cantrips 4 + 1 from muse
1st level 1 + 1 from muse
Spell Slots: 1st level : 2
Spell points: Charisma mod
Starting Compositions: 1 cantrip, 1 level one.
(there does seems to be lots of room left).

This format could be used for all classes as I feel that it would help new players (which is everyone but the people at Paizo currently) know what a class get / does.

--My two cents.


Secret Wizard wrote:
Harrythefish wrote:


Aside : can we please allow the characters to increase our weapon and armour proficiency's as easily as we increase our skills. a simple system that allows you to upgrade one weapon type or armour type at level x would be nice. (arcane casters gain a increase in weapon or armour type at every 6 levels would allow them to increase their unarmoured defence as they level or maybe they really want to hit something with their staff). Then you just allow only certain types of classes to advance above expert just like skills... also why can a fighter who has used a dagger all his life suddenly pick up a great axe and be just as good with it? would it not be cool/more realistic to have classes give training levels for armour and weapons just like they give out skills? then you can pick large blades, small blades and bows for your level one fighter to be trained in and just those.
- just my two coppers.

Fully against this.

Weapon profs is how martials do combat better than spellcasters, similarly to how spellcasters do spells better due to DC proficiencies.

Fair Enough. This is a playtest so I felt I should give my first impressions on it. I still feel that as a martial class increases in level they should be limited to one or two weapon groups (like 1e weapon focus) but on the flip side casters don't have to focus only on one school of magic so fair is fair.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Slurmalyst wrote:
Now whether Signature Skills is the right way to implement this, I'm not sure. I can see the concerns.

I'm not against some sort of restriction, I just want it to be flexible enough that you can have at least one 'bonus' Signature Skill without major investment, and more if you invest in it.

Slurmalyst wrote:
Maybe one idea: you can spend a skill
...

I think that maybe your background should be a signature skill for you your class gives you 1 more from a list of 3 and you get one more that you can choose with no restriction.

With this setup you have much more freedom but still will feel like a blacksmith that grew up to be a fighter.

Aside : can we please allow the characters to increase our weapon and armour proficiency's as easily as we increase our skills. a simple system that allows you to upgrade one weapon type or armour type at level x would be nice. (arcane casters gain a increase in weapon or armour type at every 6 levels would allow them to increase their unarmoured defence as they level or maybe they really want to hit something with their staff). Then you just allow only certain types of classes to advance above expert just like skills... also why can a fighter who has used a dagger all his life suddenly pick up a great axe and be just as good with it? would it not be cool/more realistic to have classes give training levels for armour and weapons just like they give out skills? then you can pick large blades, small blades and bows for your level one fighter to be trained in and just those.
- just my two coppers.


just a statement, but does anyone else feel that the bonus to rolls based on your level seems a bit out of place.

example I am a level 13 fighter with master with a long sword my skill would be 13 + 2 = 15

a 16th level mage picks up a long sword having never held one before (untrained) and is skilled at 16 -2 = 14... so the untrained guy is -1 to hit with it verses a guy who in paizo's own words on skill levels is
At a master rank, you’ve achieved world-class proficiency in the statistic or item.

funny world if a untrained guy 3 levels higher is only -1 in the same skill as you.

I know that the gate abilities off based on rank but a untrained guy should never be level -2, I think a much more realistic value would be 1/2 level -1. keeps the rank progression liner and keeps things possible at low levels but at higher levels lets the people trained way out shine the untrained.


Draco18s wrote:

Unarmored is its own proficiency (and monks are the only ones that get any training in it).

You're right that its not represented on the character sheet though.

looking at the npc's in the bestiary there is a demonologist who is not wearing armour... ac is 19 at level 5 with a dex mod of +3...

maths 10 + armour bonus + dex + armour proficiency = ac.
10+0+3+x=19
x = 6
so if they are expert in unarmoured defence then it would be 1 + level. this seems to be correct but there is no listing for why a sorcerer or wizard would get expert in unarmoured defence. also I see no feat that allows it either.

it would be nice in paizo would clarify this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bruno71 wrote:
It seems that the Doomsday Dawn adventure was designed for a party of 4 PCs. What guidelines should we use for running larger or smaller parties? Chapter 5 gives equipment lists for 5 or 6 PCs. But the encounters as written are probably designed for parties of 4. Should we use the playtest rules to adjust encounters for more players? Is there a maximum party size?

ADJUSTING ENCOUNTERS

Pathfinder assumes that the typical group consists of a
Game Master and four players, but often a Game Master
will find that the number of players interested in her game
doesn’t always align with this expectation. Rules for
adjusting encounters according to the number of players
can be found in the Pathfinder Playtest Bestiary.

Sorry here it the passage from the bestiary:

Diff erent Party Sizes
For each character in the party beyond the fourth,
include additional creatures worth an amount of XP
equal to the Character Adjustment value for your
encounter on Table 5. Don’t adjust the actual XP the
characters each gain for defeating the encounter.
If you have fewer than four characters, use the same
process in reverse: for each missing character, remove
creatures worth an amount of XP equal to the Character
Adjustment on Table 5 from the encounter, but keep the
XP that the characters each earn the same.
It’s best to use the XP increase from more characters
to add more enemies and the XP decrease from fewer
characters to subtract enemies, rather than making one
enemy tougher or weaker. Encounters are typically more
satisfying if the number of creatures is fairly close to the
number of player characters.


Unarmoured Defence.
MAGE ARMOR SPELL 1
Casting Somatic Casting, Verbal Casting
Duration 1 day
You ward yourself with shimmering magical energy, gaining a
+1 item bonus to AC. While wearing mage armor, you use your
unarmoured proficiency to calculate your AC.

I can find no mention of Unarmed Proficiency in the main book outside of Monks and animal companions. Am I to assume that everyone untrained in unarmoured proficiency? I also not that only monks can increases unarmoured defence then as there are no general feats to help it. Also also (see Monty Python and the holy grail) there in no actual spot on the character sheet for unarmoured defence. is this intentional or was this missed as only sorcerers and wizards typically don't wear armour and are not monks.

thank you for your time.


I know this is a old thread but I was just thinking of making a character who is a jeweler/gem cutter and I saw a huge flaw in the system in the core book.
Problem
I find a gem worth 500 gp and use it for the base material.
I use that gem to make a 1000 gp item (2 times the cost of the base item)
I take the 1000 gp gem as material to make a 2000 gp gem, rinse wash repeat, my 500 gp gem could at the end of a life of a Gnome who was obsessed with it be worth more than the entire planet....
Artistic items (jewelry gems paintings ect. need new rules.)
As it is under the current rules a 5000 GP crown take a person with 10 skill on average 166 weeks to make, and if you have to roll (not take 10) you will fail enough that it would take more in raw material than the cost of the item being made.

The material cost of the mona lisa, is less than 100$ easy, I am pretty sure if sold on the open market it would be worth more than 300 bucks. Artistic items should have prices based on DC and quality of items. Cheap paint makes cheap artwork, tin necklace is poor quality etc.

You can take 10 when crafting

DC = complexity + artistic quality.

Complexity artistic quality
5 Simple 5 Functional
10 Medium 10 Average
15 Hard 15 Good
20 Advanced 20 Superior
25 Expert 25 Excellent
30 Extreme 30 Incredible

Complexity
Easy: Cast item, single focus drawing with subject present.
Medium:cast item with simple embellishments, drawing with depth or color
Hard: interlocking pieces, detailed or complex image
Advanced: complex interlocking pieces, lifelike detailed images.
Expert: super fine details, intricate multi locking objects,
Extreme: an item with no room for error: the empire states building but made from glass.

Quality is set by the crafter, This is the variable that makes a painting of the sky a 10 dollar picture or a 1000 dollar picture.

Time to make the item is one week. you can modify the DC as below.
DC x 2 = 1 hour
DC x 1.5 = 1 day
DC x 1 = 1 week
DC x 1/2 = 1 month
DC x 1/3 = 1 Year
DC x 1/4 = 10 years
For every +5 you make the DC by reduce the time by the next lower category. IE: you take the 1 month modifier and roll 10 over the DC, you would take 2 week off the time to make.
You must succeed in making the items DC. Fail by less than 5 no progress is made, more than 5 ruin 1/2 for materials and no progress is made.

Material Quality
Poor Material -5 to skill Value 1/2
Good Material Value Normal
Superior Materials -5 to skill Value x2

Base material cost as per the cost of items
50 coins = 1 lb.

Value of item
Base material cost x Quality of materials x DC cost variable (see below)
DC variable cost
10 1/2 Material Cost
15 Material Cost
20 double material cost
25 2.25
30 2.5
35 4
40 10
45 15
50 20
55 50
60 100

Crown= 50 gp of gold, dc=35(complex 10, good quality 15) standard material 1,
Value = 50*4x1= 200 gp for a good gold crown. it would take a professional jeweler (skill 10 take 10) DC35 one month. If he could roll at 13 he could reduce the time by 1 week. (Crowns take time).
Test
a ring is a simple item.
A professional jeweler is skill 10.
to make a plain ring that is just functional is DC 5+5=10
It would take a week normally but he can double the DC to make one a hour. taking 10 he would always succeed. He could pump out 8 rings a day. Lets say the ring is 1/10 of a pound (50/10 =5) so the base materials would be 5 gp. and value from down below is 2.5 go each. Yes he is losing money but they are pretty crude cast items. (a project for a student). If he makes a the same ring but takes his time and makes a nice one, (1 week work) (good quality), the same 5 GP would make him a 10 GP ring, 5 gp profit for the week. If he got some superior materials and just made a average ring, Ring DC 15 but -5 to skill for the materials. Base material cost is 5 gp but it was better godl so lets say 50% more, so 7.5 gp for materials. it works out to 7.5 x 2 for the better materials or 7.5 gp profit, more money for our jeweler but getting hold of the better materials is harder. I have not worked this out on the extremes yet so it might not hold water.


Character get attacks based on BAB, plus ONE secondary attack. The exception to this is if they have feats that give them extra attacks. Holding many ready weapons just give you many options to make those attacks. If amount of ready weapons dictated number of attacks then monks would rule the world. (they may attack with fist, elbows keens and feet which is 8 ready weapons).


David Thomassen wrote:

I agree Seraphimpunk, as written the use of the Summoners SLA to create a scroll should just create a 1 round summon monster - the same as any other arcane caster. It is possible for casters with feats to create scrolls / wands etc with those built in, but they are created as if they were higher level. I believe that the same should happen here, for the Summoner.

The scroll they could possibly create is equivalent to a 10th level version of the same item, so it would be valued at 250gp. (An extended Summon Monster I created by another arcane caster would be 25[gp]x2[Spell level]x5[Caster Level] = 250gp)
For the equivalent duration at higher levels the generic spell extended wins out over the base spell cast at a higher level. (2 1000/750 3 2250/1500 4 4000/2500)
More interesting items to try and sell to your GM are items that mimic the power of the SLA(Enhancing the duration of any Summon Monster Cast), but that is beyond "Rules Questions" and into general advice.

Although I agree with you on this, you could read this as you could make the scroll as per how you cast the spell but, and here is the catch, only a summoner would have this spell on his spell list as all other arcane casters have a spell that has the same name BUT the duration is not the same therefore making it a different spell. As such you either have arcane casters being able to cast from the scroll but no advantage or arcane casters not being able to cast from the scroll (cause it's not on their spell list) and having to trick the scroll with use magic device to get it to work. I would suggest that if you want the longer duration the name of the spell should be called enhanced summon monster/natures ally (for all you wild callers).


cwslyclgh wrote:
Dekalinder wrote:
You can't stack the same metamagic feat mroe than once on the same spells. However, aside from the explicity stated interaction between Maximize and Empower, other metamagic feat stacks fully between them, so a standard intesified maximize fireball is 90 damage. Now the question is, how much damage it does if is also perfected?
Since neither Intensified Spell nor Maximize Spell provide a bonus that affects an aspect of the fireball spell, all Spell Perfection would do would be to lower the slot it takes to cast it.

the SRD says,

Intensified Spell (Metamagic)

Your spells can go beyond several normal limitations.

Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat. An intensified spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell's actual level.

It says increase maximum number of dice by 5 full stop. The part about caster levels is there so no one can claim that a 1st level caster's magic missile does 6d4+6 (adding 5 dice). As Intensifies spell meets both requirements (affect a spell with the set numerical value and it is a feat it should work). If paizo does not want this to work can we please get the part where it says a feat be changed to a non meta magic feat. That would close this nicely, if that is what paizo wants.


Ok looking a bit more into this I see max and empower do not stack. So my math reads it as 5d5 snowball with the max limit raised to max 15 (double the bonus from intensified.) so 15d6 max = 90 + (15d6/2) with the rime effect and the save for the spell. No spell resistance and no save for half. Ya it only effect one target, but on average it's 90 + 3.5x15 or 142.5 hp damage with a for save and a one round entangle. now at the level to cast this unless a one is rolled they will save, so it's just 142.5 hp and entangled for one round with no saves or spell resistance and although can not be cast in a antimagic field, it can be fired into one as it is a instant conj spell.


I have a question about Spell Perfection.
I cast Snowball as a sorcerer. I have the feat Spell Perfection.
I do the following.
Snowball (lv1). Add the metafeat Maximize Spell (+3) this raises it to a lv 4 spell that only takes a level 1 slot and normal casting time. I then add Intensified spell +1 lv, and Empower Spell +1 then Rime Spell +1 total spell level 7 cast as a level 4 spell and standard metamagic casting time. With me so far? My question the about the last part of Spell Perfection, "In addition, if you have other feats which allow you to apply a set numerical bonus to any aspect of this spell (such as
Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, Weapon Focus [ray], and so on), double the bonus granted by that feat when applied to this spell."

Maximize, Intensified, empower and rime are all feats, and Intensified give a set numerical bonus (in this case 5). Does this mean that I can now cast this spell as listed it would do 15d6 (BTW snowball is a level 1 conj spell no SR and save to negate a status but not damage from people of the north), +50% and assume all dice were maxed, with the rime effect, which is ... 15d6= 90+50%= 135 point of damage no save for damage no spell resistance as a level 4 spell?
Thanks
I ramble sorry.