Apparently, the SRD that was published under Creative Commons mentions beholders, slaads, and mind flayers (although it doesn't include stat blocks). Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this mean that Paizo could include their own versions of these creatures in Pathfinder and in Golarion, as long as they give proper attribution to the Creative Commons license?
I know that people are going to be of differing opinions about about whether or not Paizo did right or not in their attempts to re-balance various items in the game. I will say this about the Jingasa, though. In the campaign I'm currently playing in, every PC except for one is wearing a Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier (although based on the theme of the campaign, they're probably more like Pirate Hats of the Lucky Freebooters). The one guy that doesn't is a Spellslinger Wizard sporting a Cyclop's Helm. Barring any changes, in our next game, everyone would have been sporting brand spanking new Jingasas, even if they doubled the price. Someone argued that making an item that everyone must have into an item that nobody wants doesn't improve the game (or something to that effect). I disagree. I actually think it makes the game marginally better. Removing the Jingasa from the game entirely is preferable to having it everywhere, in my opinion.
I've been wondering where to put my gunslinger/steampunk nation... I guess the answer is to put it on the southern continent and then I can address any final accusations that my world is racist by virtue of its geology... So you're saying that the South is full of gun nuts?!? Sorry...I couldn't resist.
I'd like to see an occasional module that's actually done like Part 6.5 of an Adventure Path. Basically, take an Adventure Path, and write a module that's designed to be run after the completion of Book 6, but can also be run on it's own. By tying it into an existing Adventure Path, it may help increase sales, and it may fit in better with a higher level campaign that's spent most of a year running through an Adventure Path in that particular setting.
hoods are the new masks because they can be worn more freely, and some people actually wear them for warmth so the criminals have an excuse. But look at modern criminals and count the hoods, they really are the uniform of a criminal, too damn bad they are also popular with others for different reasons. This is a good point. I feel a whole lot safer knowing there are Neighborhood Watch Dudes out there braving the mean streets everyday, and ready to shoot every hooded person they see, before they can do me harm...
What of martin's possible drug use? his internet handles? Any news that brought those up or showed a recent picture of what he ACTUALLY looked like was called racist. I'm sure Zimmerman took into account the kid's internet handles and drug history, and then made an informed choice to follow him with a gun, and shoot him dead...
Please don't take off the lawful restricting, because I hate it when someone take monk for their power and act with no discipline at all. I don't hate people who play Monks for their power, but I do fear them, because they're delusional. People who play Monks for their power are far more likely to stab me with a spork than those who don't.
That's kind of a ridiculous argument, you know? The Weapon Master archetype of Fighter requires discipline. "Devoted to the perfection of a single weapon, the weapon master’s meditations upon his favored weapon border on the obsessive, but none can deny his consummate skill." Yet, strangely, no alignment restriction. Being a Wizard requires remarkable discipline and dedication. I suppose you think that they should all be lawful? All of the Heroic classes require a high degree of dedication to master. Maybe all of those should be lawful, as well. I'm sorry you think it would violate the tone of the monk. I'm sorry you've drunk that kool-aid.
I'm playing a Monk (Master of Many Styles) 2 / Magus (Kensai, Bladebound) X in my current campaign, and he's incredibly hard to take down. He gets +Dex, + Wis, and +Int to AC, casts shield, can cast mage armor through Spell Blending, fights defensively, uses Combat Expertise, and so on. His AC (and his Touch AC) are through the roof. He has Crane Style and Crane Wing from Monk, so he can ignore one melee hit per round. He's a very durable tank. I recommend Threatening Defender and Magical Knack (Magus) for traits. He uses a Scimitar (Black Blade) with Dervish Dance and Power Attack (we play in a 25 point buy game, which helps with the 13 Strength).
I suppose you'd be happier if the Rapid Reload and Crossbow Mastery feats just didn't exist? No, if you are doing something that you normally couldn't do, it seems reasonable to expend feats to pay for that. Now, if someone normally couldn't keep a bow strung constantly in anticipation of a combat or ambush without damaging their weapon, maybe an archer should require a line of feats that would enable him or her to string a bow more quickly, so that they could more quickly use their bow for something other than a club once combat begins unexpectedly. I'd be happiest if the same standard of realism that is applied to crossbows were also applied to bows.
Personally, I agree that you can't pick the CL on wonderous items (with the exception of pearls of power). The FAQ could use an extra line stating that it is for pearls of power only, not precedent setting for all wondrous items. Except for this... According to the errata: "Page 460 - In the Magic Items Description section, under Caster Level, delete the last sentence of the second paragraph." The sentence they're telling you to delete is this one: "For other magic items, the caster level is determined by the item itself." They specifically removed the line that indicated that caster level is determined by the item. "Other magic items" in the above sentence refers to anything that is not a potion, scroll, or wand. There's no ambiguity. You just have to read the errata.
What SKR was saying is that for Pearls of Power specifically, the CL should be adjusted to the power of spells it can grant. Applying this to all wondrous items is, in my mind, twisting his words in a manner he did not originally intend (not that I claim to know his intentions). Though the listed Caster Level for a pearl of power is 17th, that caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. Therefore, the only caster level requirement for a pearl of power is the character has to be able to cast spells of the desired level. "caster level is not part of the Requirements listing for that item..." For a Belt of Physical Perfection, CL 16th is not part of the Requirements listing for that item. The Requirements for a Belt of Physical Perfection are listed at the bottom of the description under "Construction Requirements", and do not include a minimum caster level. The requirements are Craft Wondrous Item, Bear's Endurance, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace (and only Craft Wondrous Item is a hard requirement...the others can be bypassed by adding +5 each to the Spellcraft DC).
Umm...if you can't stack templates, how could you possibly build Clifford the Big Red Dog? Depending on the story, that dog can grow to Colossal size. Some might ask why it would be necessary to build Clifford the Big Red Dog for Pathfinder? I presume that's not actually a serious question, though.
I've always played Int x 10 as being the approximate IQ of the character. So, a 7 Int would be a 70 IQ, or Borderline Deficient on the Terman scale. I'd expect a player to roleplay a character with an Int of 7 as though he was mildly mentally retarded. In some circumstances, it might make for an interesting character, but I would expect the player to play it. I realize not everyone would use a direct correlation to IQ this way, however. If you do, it looks something like this: 7 Borderline Deficiency
Death Scam is more like it. I'm just flummoxed to see how many fools have sunk money into this. It just goes to show that when you thought you'd seen the ultimate level of stupid, someone comes to lower the bar another notch. I find your lack of faith...disturbing.
I'm fond of Reach Spell. Nothing beats being able to cast touch spells from a safe distance, and it scales somewhat with level (since you can change the spell level by more than 1 to increase the range further). It's even more useful for Oracles, because access to ranged healing saves a lot of actions, but still quite handy for Sorcerers. I like Reach Spell for Oracles, but not so much for Sorcerers. I'd rather take spectral hand as a 2nd level spell known. Then I've got the equivalent of two levels of Reach Spell (Medium range) on all touch spells, without raising their spell level, and without requiring a full round action to cast them. And Spectral hand lasts for minutes per level, and you can extend it with a Lesser Rod of Extend. For casting classes that don't have access to spectral hand, Reach Spell is great, though.
Step One: Relocate Paizo to a country without extradition treaties. Step Two: Publish Warlock class.
Yeah, you've pretty much summed up all of my problems with Toppling Spell. It works okay if you're mainly fighting humans or Medium-sized humanoids, but in every campaign I've played in, we pretty much graduate to mainly opponents who can't be Toppled by mid-levels.
If you want to go Goth Chick Succubus Dominatrix, you could make her Necromancy focused, maybe with the Sanguine bloodline and the Tattooed Sorcerer archetype, for a +2 caster level with Necromancy spells. Any Sorcerer can pick up a couple of fire spells. You're going to burn a lot of feats on blasting, though, if you want to be really good at it. Also, I'd second Fey bloodline as a good choice for a Succubus if you like using Enchantment [Compulsion] spells.
If the GM thinks that the conflict could lead to some fun roleplaying and player interaction, then there's no problem. If the GM thinks that it's likely to turn the campaign into a train wreck of sorts, then he/she could just declare, "In my game, a familiar becomes same alignment as the spellcaster he's tied to". Then both players could play the characters that they want to play without the need to knock heads. Whatever makes the game more fun.
If I use Aelyrinth's rules, all I have to do is find a wizard with Quicken Spell and magic missile and copy it into my spellbook.
Actually, that's not quite true. The spellcaster wouldn't need Quicken Spell. He would simply have to have previously encountered Quickened magic missile as a spell on a scroll, and copied it into his spell book. Per Aelryinth's ruling, that caster could then scribe a quickened magic missile scroll for you. In fact, in Aelryinth's world, there's no need for anyone to ever purchase a metamagic feat. After centuries of Wizards copying scrolls of Quickened magic missile (or whatever) into their spellbooks, and in turn scribing that spell as a scroll, I would imagine the spell quickened magic missile would be all over the place.
I realize this is a threadjack, but am I the only one who thinks the permanent duration on Bestow Curse is too much?
I like bestow curse, but I've never had to get into melee range to deliver it. That's what spectral hand is for.
there's no rule forbidding you from keeping a pet mind flayer - there just are no mind flayers in the game, so if you want them, you have to invent them and get the DM to okay it and okay you having one as a pet. Shhh, don't listen to the mean man, Squidbilly. Of course you exist. There's a good fellow. Now go play with your squeaky brain...
under the planar binding argument, risking to threadjack a little, I have to say that the weakness of the sorcerer compared to the wizard comes from the fact that completely different kinds of spells use the same resource to be cast. planar binding is the most blatant example, with one slot, you can summon sth for days/level. but thanks to the sorcerer spells per level restriction, this spell is worthless to them, since it will take up half the spells he gets at a certain level. I have a strong opinion that spells that resemble rituals(casting time in minutes and long effects) shouldn't use the precious spells slots of the casters. Just a thought, but if you had a scroll of planar binding and a scroll of moment of prescience, and had the Craft Staff feat, couldn't you make a staff with those spells (and at least one more that you know)? That way, when you use the staff to cast those spells, you can use your own Charisma modifier and caster level. Also, you can recharge the staff, even though you don't know some of the spells in it, since you do know at least one spell that it contains. Also, you don't need to take planar binding or moment of prescience as spells known, if you don't wish...
I think cha is the crappiest stat in dnd, and paizo did little to fix that. If you don't care about charms, illusions, UMD, binding, Leadership, or social skills, then you're probably right. Not to mention that maybe you really want to play a character who is very charismatic. That desire should count for something. Or was this a crunch-only discussion?
I know that there have been some complaints about Paizo’s editing of their rulebooks lately. It seems as though people’s reactions to these posts have been mixed, with some posters agreeing that it is a major problem, and some arguing that other posters were overreacting. I wanted to tell my story, and explain the heartbreak that Paizo’s editing errors have caused me, in the hope that it will speed the whole healing process for me. I was reading through Ultimate Combat when I discovered a misused semicolon. I can vividly remember the first moment I saw it (I won’t insult anyone on these boards by pointing out where it was, but trust me, it was glaringly obvious). After the tightness in my chest subsided, and I was able to use a paper bag to return my breathing to normal, I realized that the shock of it all had been enough to burst a blood vessel in my right eye. I still sometimes wake up screaming, and I can’t bring myself to eat pie, because it sounds too much like Paizo. Now, I imagine that things are pretty hectic over at the Paizo offices right about now. Everyone is probably running around in a panic, especially since I dropped this bombshell about the semicolon. Bob the Intern (you know, that quiet, recently hired guy with a love of Japanese culture) has probably just grabbed a knife from the associate lounge and committed seppuku to escape the shame of it all. At least one of you Paizo guys (I’m betting Mona) has probably just come up with a plan to blame the whole editing mess on poor Bob. “Let’s just say that Bob was in charge of all semicolons. Who’s to say otherwise? What’s the matter? Too soon?” I think it goes without saying that the errant semicolon not only makes Ultimate Combat completely unusable, but it taints the entire Pathfinder line. If you think it through, I think that you’ll realize that there was only one rational thing I could do in response to the semicolon. I bought a large chipper shredder and fed all of my Pathfinder books into it (including the Adventure Paths, Companions, Campaign Setting, and Modules). This resulted in piles of Pathfinder mulch that I was able to collect into a number of large Ziploc bags. I contacted the Russian Space Agency, and I paid a sizable sum to have the resulting mulch rocketed into the sun. What else could I have possibly done? I’m not going to cancel any of my Pathfinder subscriptions. I think that would send the wrong message. I will continue to feed new titles into that chipper shredder as soon as they arrive on my doorstep and, of course, have them rocketed into the sun. By the way, if there are errors in this post, please understand that English is not my first language. I was raised by coyotes (not the people smuggling kind, the furry ones). I want to thank the users of these message boards for letting me vent my hurt. I tried talking to my dad about it, but he just howled and licked his testicles. |
