Inferon's page

So the other day I was thinking about the inherent difficulties that a dual wielder runs into compared to two-handers. Beyond feats, one such problem dual wielders encounter is having to shell out twice as much gold for weapon enchantments. I came up with a pair of ideas that could lessen weapon cost impact.

The first idea I had was basing weapon enchantment price on the size of the weapon. Trying to work such a system off a weapon's weight would be too complicated, in my opinion. The much more simple way of doing it, I think, would be to base the cost off of the weapon's damage. Roughly, I think the prices would work decently as:

1d10 or larger 100% base price
1d8 75% base price
1d6 and lower 50% base price

This system will, however, impact other areas of the game. The first that comes to mind is the bastard sword. Paying the feat to become proficient with a bastard sword seems even less worth it if enchantments would cost more than they would on a long sword. Also, all small characters would be able to buy weapon enchantments at a much lesser rate than their medium-sized counterparts. Maybe set enchanting cost as above, but for two-handed, one-handed, and light weapons, respectively?

My second idea was one of 'weapon sets.' When enchanting a pair weapons, so long as you are applying the same enchantment to each, you may enchant them as a set. Enchanting a weapon set costs 150% of the price of enchanting a single weapon. Only a one-handed weapon and light weapon, or pair of light weapons, may be enchanted as a set. The enchantments applied the weapons as a set only function when they are both possessed by the same character. The enchantments applied to weapons as a set count against each weapon's singular weapon enhancement bonus, and maximum weapon enhancement bonus. When enchanting a weapon set that has one weapon with a higher enhancement bonus than the other, use the highest enhancement bonus among the two weapons to determine the price of further enchantments.

That's it. I'd love to hear feedback. Thanks for your time!

I do not want to come across like I don’t want Paizo to write this book in my small rant. They will, and that’s fine. It is not for me, but I understand that some players will love it, and I am glad for them. My idea of the perfect RPG is going to be vastly different from many people, and I expect and accept that.

So, I don’t really understand why anyone would really want to play Mythic. As Pathfinder stands, all Player Characters are already borderline superheroes from first level onward already. For example, it used to be that 18 was the maximum any character could hope for in any given stat ever, and now it’s common to have first level characters to start with a 20 in their main stat. Magic items are everywhere. Furthermore, I don’t see what these rules can be used to represent that cannot already be represented with higher level characters. Why do we need to be even more godlike in a game where we are already so above the regular humanoid norm? Why does our high magic high fantasy game need to be even more so? I love Pathfinder, but this just seems like a bit much.

I think that this book to me is what Ultimate Combat was for many people. Some dislike firearms in their fantasy game, and others dislike eastern influences on their western setting. I don’t like being given more than what my race, class, and feats give me. So I’m just going to deal with it.

If anything, this seems to me the opposite direction they should have taken. I personally would like to see a source book that deals with lower magic campaigns. A campaign where magic items are very very rare. A campaign where casters may not be able to cast as often or as reliably or only at a great personal cost.

So, to conclude, I’d like to say again that I’m not against this book coming out. I’m glad for the people who are going to like this book, I just never see myself playing a Mythic game. To the people are psyched for Mythic, can you tell me what has you most excited? And to the people at Paizo, do you think we will ever see a lower magic, gritty source book?

Hello all. I've never been a fan of the strict 'lawful good only' paladin style. I really liked it back in 3.5 when unearthed arcana came out with alternate alignment paladins. Having Pathfinder paladins so changed, these were far out-dated. So, here's my take alternate paladins.

Paladin of Justice:
http://www.4shared.com/document/PoaZh-Ht/Paladin_of_Justice.html

Paladin of Freedom:
http://www.4shared.com/document/lcAJKa-6/Paladin_of_Freedom.html

Paladin of Tyranny:
http://www.4shared.com/document/7VnsFTPj/Paladin_of_Tyranny.html

Paladin of Slaughter:
http://www.4shared.com/document/KrgPOF_R/Paladin_of_Slaughter.html

I apologize for needing to download them, as I didn't realize until after that how hard it would be to copy-paste into the forum with how they were laid out ^^' (I may try to do just that later anyway)

As you'll notice, I didn't change much from one to the other, especially in the case of Tyranny and Slaughter. If you have any suggestions for improvement, I'd be eager to hear.

I look forward to the feedback :)