Your party rounds a corner and comes face-to-face with an orc (or goblin, or whatever).
Your GM says "Roll initiative."
You win, and go first.
My guess is that 99% of the roleplaying groups out there would act on a preconceived generalization about the orc (or goblin) race and attack. However, is attacking the orc unprovoked an evil act? Is it racist? After all, they haven't done anything (yet) to provoke the attack, and you have no proof that they will do anything.
If you think attacking a character because of their (fantasy) race is evil, how many Paladins (and GMs) just sweep that grey area under the rug and don't talk about it?
I mention this because having an orc or goblin PC is a possible choice in Pathfinder. I also like to introduce new players in an organic way, rather than "poof", player X appears out of thin air. Also, as a player, I've almost killed a new half-orc character joining the group in this same way (we had recently been fighting orcs), not realizing that the half-orc I saw was supposed to be the new PC.
I'll admit that I think it is evil to attack anyone unprovoked, but my characters have done it (see the above example) and as a GM, I do nothing about it when my players make those choices.
Two questions about a gorgon's breath weapon...
1) A gorgon's breath weapon is described as a gas. Does that mean a Necklace of Adaptation (which protects from harmful gasses) makes you immune to a gorgon's breath attack? If not, is there an item that does?
2) Are gorgon's immune to gorgon breath attacks? If not, a 60 ft. cone attack is VERY dangerous for the herd (which can number up to 12 large creatures. That takes up a lot of map space, and that means that a breath attack is likely to catch at least 1, if not multiple other members of the herd in their cone attack. With an intelligence of 2, they would have pretty simple combat tactics, and this could easily happen.
I am trying to create a flame trap that will fill a hallway. However, my creations are nowhere near the CR to a similar trap in the book. Then I decided to check the pre-gen traps. When I use the trap creation rules on page 423, I can't even recreate the sample burning hands trap (page 420) at the same CR.
This is what I come up with for the burning hands trap on page 420:
magic trap base CR: 1 (as per page 423)
That's a CR 8, not the CR 2 listed for the trap.
Is there a typo, or am I doing something wrong?
The rules for bull rush state "You cannot bull rush a creature into a square that is occupied by a solid object or obstacle."
The question is, what is an "obstacle?"
It seems obvious that a table or pillar counts, but...
Can I push a person into difficult terrain?
Can I push a person into a pit?
Can I push a person off a pirate's plank?
Can I push a person over a low railing?
Can I push a person into a fire?
Can I push a person into a lava square?
Can I push a person into a blade barrier?
Can I push a person into a Gelatenous Cube?
Just wondering how these combine.
Spell Storing Weapon: "A spell storing weapon allows a spellcaster to store a single targeted spell of up to 3rd level in the weapon."
Maximize Spell Feat: "A maximized spell uses up a spell slot three levels higher than the spell's actual level."
Metamagic Rods: "This does not change the spell slot of the altered spell."
So, can I store a maximized 3rd level spell in a spell storing weapon (with or without a metamagic rod)?
I'm inclined to believe I can, and I don't even need a metamagic rod, since the spell level doesn't change, just the spell slot used.
I was toying with the idea of changing the way flanking worked for my game. Instead of making it a situation dependant on the attacker, I thought of making flanked a condition, imposed on the defender. It's a subtle difference, but one that certainly would have a consequence in the game. The flanked conditon would still rely upon two people attacking from opposite sides, but once that was achieved, all attackers would gain the benefit.
My reasoning for the change is this:
If a defender has to worry about attacks coming in from multiple sides, then he/she/it should be distracted enough to affect all incoming attacks, not just those two individuals that happen to be at exactly 180 degrees apart.
I think all PCs would benefit, but ranged combatants and rogues would see the biggest benefit. Of course, this change could work against the party, but in my experience, it would help the PCs more often than hurt them.
I was wondering what other people thought about this. Is there some "butterfly effect" I'm not considering? Does the rule change make sense?
This will be a bit long, so I will warn you in advance. Also, I want to say that I think you have a good product, so please don't take this long list as negative feedback in any way. These are strictly my opinions, and I want to help make the best product I can, in whatever way I can. You did ask for feedback. That said, here are my observations:
Issue: Page 13, The new feat progression is too generous. Eventually all characters of the same class will acquire the same feats, as they will have extra feats to spare.
Issue: Page 14, The Designer’s Notes suggest increasing the starting HP for core races.
Issue: Page 17, Bards are too front-loaded. They get 7 abilities at 1st level.
Issue: Page 22, Channeling Energy needs to be better defined here.
Issue: Page 36, Trapfinding
Issue: Page 50, Wizard
Issue: Page 51, Wizard and Sorcerer HD
Issue: Page 54, No skills require Constitution. I feel this is a mistake.
Issue: Page 54, Editorial suggestions below.
Issue: Page 54, Jump is included with Tumble.
Issue: Page 52-75, trained only skills.
Issue: Page 52-75, Improper capitalization.
Issue: Page 67, Linguistics
Issue: Page 70, Cook is an example of a profession.
Issue: Page 104, Flail and Dire Flail.
Issue: Page 107, 111, 114, 116, 117, Masterwork Equipment
Issue: Page 114, War Horse and War Pony.
Issue: Page ??? (Somewhere in a pathfinder product), Quadrupeds are vulnerable to Bleed.
Issue: Pages 197-289, Missing Spells
Issue: Page 291, Class levels and CR
I hope this was helpful. If this was not the right place to give feedback, please let me know.