Jerald Schrimsher's page

I have had an experience that defied any logical explanation. I lived in a house where mine & my wife's bedroom was right next to the living room, we tend to sleep with the door open. One night I awoke to the sound of my recliner squeaking as if someone were sitting in it. We have two children and one often got up and slept in places other than his bed. I got up and went to tell him to go back to bed. As I entered the living room I saw a vaguely tear-drop shaped blob of...well I am not sure what. Not light, but it was a sort of flesh-tone rather than a white light or mist. It streaked out of the living room faster than my bleary eyes could track it, so I figured it was still the boy and I had simply mis-seen it. I checked and both boys were in bed asleep. To this day I cannot figure out exactly what I saw.

Some folks like vanilla, some folks like super-minty-double-fudge-chunk. I have only seen the playtest materials and the basic set. A friend of mine, who was very excited about 5e got the starter set and said he was disappointed by it, but he has been playing D&D for almost 30 years, so he didn't need the hand-holding approach that he felt like it gave. He is still going to run some adventures and maybe the Tyranny of Dragons adventures. I will play, but I will continue to run pathfinder and will try to sway the group to stick with it. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Neither system was built for every player or D/GM. Some folks will prefer the simplified "proficiency bonus" mechanic, but I hate it. I built a mountain dwarf wizard who could wear medium armor, and hit as well as a fighter of the same level, then add the spells on top of that. We have yet to play a single session, but I already feel like I broke the game with only the basic rules. Maybe I am wrong, but with Pathfinder I feel like if I am going to get massive bonuses somewhere, I should lose out somewhere else. I also dislike the skills/proficiency system, but again, I have only seen the basic set and the playtest materials. It could be great, it could be awful. Either way, so folks will prefer the simplicity and the "back to a simpler way" play-style. So far I do not, but as many of you have said, there is a lot more to come, so we shall see.

Please don't pass over the Fate system. It is simple to learn and can be used to play any genre, also (I believe) still available as a "Pay what you want" download, making it highly accessible to students for "homework." I think RPGs are great for developing quick math skills, critical thinking, story comprehension (not just reading, but being immersed in a story), teamwork and social skills. These are all things I have taken from RPGs, in my case D&D mostly, along with it's spiritual (if not corporate) children. I have taught at a university and I have seen that many students could have benefited from these things. Seeing a junior in college use their fingers to add single digit numbers was all I had to see to know America needs more bonus/penalty math.

I think this is too powerful, maybe there is a way to separate this into two feats? It really seems more like an alternate class feature than a feat to me.

I would love a class builder system. While some of the new classes wouldn't fit my play style, neither does gunslinger or summoner. Some folks love them, but they aren't for me. I may or may not disallow some of them at my table (always announced before beginning a campaign), but I do not see this being anything like the poorly put together class-bombardment that was the hallmark of the later days of 3.5. For one, there will be some playtesting. Conceptually, I think this could be a great addition to PF. Practically, I think it will run in the middle between the most and the least useful of the PF books. Of course, even the least useful to me still have useful parts that I like.

I'll turn 40 this year. Started with 1st edition D&D, I have played every edition, I think that evolution worked through 3.5, then D&D turned into a weird RPG/video game/MMO platypus. I have tried it, and the system is funtional and it seems easy to learn, but it is not my D&D, and I don't care what the books say in that regard. I have playtested Next, and I do not think it is moving in the correct direction. I have played a lot of other games as well, and some of them are great, some of them are barely playable, still-mobile trainwrecks that can be salvaged by good GMs or made worse by bad ones. I can go grimdark, but I don't like to stay there too long. I never really got into Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms. Really never played in published settings until PF, also never really ran published modules. I also never played most of the big ones. We had money problems. Mostly my friends and I made up our own adventures with a story, a monster manual, and some graph paper, usually at the table. I also didn't read a lot of the core sci-fi or fantasy stuff that most folks seem to think are required reading for a grognard. I still cling to the DM as god, inasmuch as I understand that the DM (or GM) controls everything BUT the players, including the actions of the gods. I still prefer playing on and making it up as I go to having to refer to the book for every detail, so I don't run a lot of published adventures, although I love to use the maps! I prefer to play with a group that has played for a while, but I can work new players in, as long as they mesh. I have tried to play with folks that wanted to argue the meaning of this sentence or that asterisk, but they didn't last long, for a variety of reasons. I don;t play a lot of video games, including some of the major rpgs that people like and some of the ones I have played I do not like. I don't like trying to play an entire adventuring party. I don't like MMOs, and I am not at all excited by the PFO game, although I did support it to get the Emerald Tower PDF. I like PDFs at the table, because I am pushing 40 and one laptop is a lot easier to carry that a ton of books. I still have the books at home and I use them a lot. I have GMd more games than I have played, but I really love to play. The last couple of game groups I have played with rotated games to allow everyone to play and GM, so that has been great. I do not get the My Little Pony thing, but whatever, at least it isn't Twilight. Vampires don't sparkle. I never read Harry Potter, nor have I intentionally watched the movies. What I have seen has not inspired me to read them, but my son loves them, and they get him to read books longer than a pamphlet, so it is all good to me. I dislike Magic:The Gathering intensely, as it drew a lot of tabletop gamers away from RPGs when I was trying to keep groups together when I was in college and the Navy. I have a long history with game and I do not appologize for it. I am a tabletop role-playing gamer. I like rules, but I understand the time to skip past them for the sake of the story. I like battlemaps because they help visualize movement and everyone can be on the same page as far as where they are and we don't have to have a long arguement about "my character wouldn't be standing there!" ever again. However, I draw the maps to help tell the story, I can add features and details as needed, even on the fly. DMs are gods, but gods without followers are forgotten, and no one hears their stories. Characters are not beautiful unique snowflakes that are worthy of plot devices to save them from logical consequences. Unique, non-opomized characters are fine, but characters without any usable skills should not be going out into the big scary world to go adventuring, and if they die as a result, well, that is verisimilitude in a game world (not realism, because they go eaten by a f*&^%$ng Dragon!)
WALL OF TEXT--END

My preference is Mutants & Masterminds. I played Heroes Unlimited, and I have played Champions/Hero system. I was fond of Heroes unlimited because it allowed true randomly rolled characters, but the game play could get pretty complicated, Champions/Hero allowed you to really design a character to fit a theme, rather than a set of number, but then when the numbers began it really would have helped to have a PhD in Mathematics instead of Sociology. Mutants & Masterminds lets you point buy and build a character that can be as vanilla or flavorful as you want it to be (sometimes using the same stats) and lets you create a pretty broad range of characters with a broad range of powers. Play goes smoothly for people familiar with d20 systems, once the damage save is explained once or twice. My M&M preference is the 3rd edition, but you might be able to pick up 2nd edition books pretty cheaply, and there are a lot of them. It was a good, playable system, I just like the new and shiny.

At least that is what the mindslugs WANT us to think!

pbp means play by post. the section is actually called online campaigns, and there is a subthread for recruitment.
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/campaigns/recruitment

I have used PCGen, but I was not really pleased with it. There are a lot of achetypes that are not fully integrated. Bonus feats that do not add, and cannot be added without knowledge of how to manipulate the code. I have used the free trial for Herolab and I like what I saw, but there are a lot of additional datasets that I would have to buy to use what is available on D20pfsrd.com, which is where my players get most of their stuff.

OK, so by my reading, Spellstrike allows you your full attack routine, but the highest level attack includes the touch portion of a touch attack spell. My question is whether that means they have the -2 penalty with that. I do not read it that any combination allows additional attacks as a result of the spell. The Spell Combat would allow the Magus to cast a spell and attack with a weapon both with a -2 penalty,regardless of whether or not the spell is a touch attack spell.

You could advertise in the pbp section. then just give them the link when you have some folks ready to go. Site looks good, btw.

I do mine between session, however, there are some stipulations. If we stopped the game at a resting point, everything advances as per the new level. But, if we stopped in the middle of an adventuring day, spells wait until the next day (preparation/meditation), new HP wait until any pre-existing wounds are healed (had a player in one campaign make it an entire level without ever being fully healed, so he had an incredible hp jump when he did). x/day powers or abilities don't show up until the next rest period.

Brass Knuckles would take the hand slot. However, spiked gauntlets do not.

Would Huntmaster stack with Boon Companion? If you have multiple animal companions, can each of them be up to your full HD for effective Druid level of are they limited? I really like the idea of a pack leader type character, but having multiple low-level companions seems like a recipe for them dying pretty frequently in mid-level games.

the Fleet feat gives you a 5 foot speed boost. You can take it more than once. I don't know of any feats that affect armor encumberance.

I think that Two-Weapon Ren is additional damage. Power Attack would not apply. If DR is an issue, then split the damage from TWR and add it to the initial attacks.

If you want to play with spell lists you may want to look into Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed.

He split spells unto common/uncommon/rare all classes in his books share the same "spell list"

I used it for my home games for some time.. worked out VERY well.

I played Arcana Unearthed, and I was pretty fond of the division of spells. All caster have access to some, specialized casters get access to more, greater access can be bought with feats. However, the casting classes were different, so that system is not an automatic port. A PF update for Arcana Unearthed would be interesting. I mixed the classes together in 3.5 and refered to the UA classes as Eldritch casters, essentially muddying the water further. I like the idea of a unified spell list, but I think the current classes would be greatly changes by this.

Perhaps since they are not going to do any after RotRL, they would be OK with a fan produced free conversion for the old 3.5 APs to bring them in line with the pfrpg rules. Other than that, I agree with pretty much everyone else. More new stuff is the proper profit and therefore business survival mode.

I often stat out the characters well in advance of ther current level, but I also understand that, much like a battle plan, a character plan rarely survives first contact with the enemy. I have started a campaign fully intending to multi-class, but the campaign never allowed me the opportunity to recieve the training I wanted to become a wizard. So, by the time I had both the means and the oppotunity to become a first level wizard, I was already a 10th level fighter with a pretty sweet set of armor, and little desire to remove a large part of my character development for a miniscule ammount of spells that would have been largely ineffective at the level of the campaign.

I am in the process of working out a build for all classes and races (that I would play) I have not and will not do gnomes (can't stand them). I am almost done with the core classes (working on a dwarf wizard today). I will not do gunslingers, still questioning cavaliers. But the idea is that no matter what I may need (if I join a party mid campaign, need an npc for a game I run, or to use for a pregen or template character for new players) I have it.
Plus, I like building characters, and it helps me not go berserk when I have to deal with things from work bleeding over into my home time, as it often does.

My wife build me an awesome game table, not traditional I suppose, but awesome. Plus, I don't feel like I tell people often enough that she is awesome.

I think the name recognition is important. To people who have never played picking up something that has been recognized as the "world's oldest RPG" or "most popular RPG" is easier than buying the book that is based on improving an older edition of that same game. If they want to play the game, why not buy them game? Sure people who have played D&D and others know that D&D is no longer the be-all-and-end-all of RPGs, but for those who are not so knowledgable about the ins and outs of RPG hobby politics and preference, they are more likely to pick up a D&D book regardless of the general RPG community reaction to that particular itteration of the rules. D&D is the most recognized brand of RPGs in the English speaking world, if that brand were to be shelved then the hobby would lose a lot of media pressence. As has been stated before, RPG books would likely dissapear from a number of non-hobby oriented retail outlets, and if someone does wander into their FLGS and ask about D&D if they hear "D&D is no longer being published" they are more likely (imho) to think that since the flagship, most widely known, most popular, and only ones they've ever heard of by name is no longer being published, then they will probably think that all the hype they heard to make them want to try it was bunk, since obviously it isn't even good enough for the people who own it to want to keep it up.
Now, if they allowed the brand to be sold to another company, with all the settings, that would be an entirely different story. It's been sold before, it can be sold again.
Sorry for the wall of text, I rant sometimes.

I have a similar problem, I just continue the game without them. I plan for the consistent players and when ol' unreliable does show up, they are lower level, have less gear, and tend to die pretty soon. The problem kind of solves itself. I limit the number of players I allow (not sure if you can do this), and if someone else has asked to play before, then they have to wait for a slot to open back up before they can create a character (1 level lower than APL, which is how I do for all new characters that start after the campaign begins).

Don't burn the heals yet, I can last another round at least.

I might work with one of your friends who is more familiar with the rules, and make sure you are on track there. Paizo is pretty focused on story, but if they have to redo all the mechanics, you may be passed over.

I think the red dragon looks great. So much in fact that if I can find a willing artist, I would like to have it as a tattoo!

8. Oh, sweet merciful heavens, that's the most horrible thing I have ever seen!

180. Oopsie, that one kind of got away from me!

If they have Kn:religion, I would make a secret roll to see if they recognize it. If not and one of them attempts to use the armor, I would allow them to notice that even after they had cleaned the armor prior to using it, it become grossly encrusted on the inside and if that fails to get them to check it further, it becomes slimy and covered in what appears to decayed flesh. They will probably figure it out soon.

I never win anything, so just stop posting and let me win this

I did my PhD work in Carbondale. I tought a few classes, left there about a year ago. Pretty familiar with Castle Perilous. I met my game group from there through the bulletin board. One of my best groups, and I have a pretty long history of gaming.

Which feats have Improved Critical as a prereq?

Never did any plane-hopping. It always seemed that any environment worthy of exploring was so outright hostile that it would kill any character I ever had, or any party I ever GM'd. Also, never made it past 15th level. We never even played any games where we made up characters that level for a one-shot or short campaign.

Please, someone make sure you have a grappling hook (in addition to the rope). If you allow them to buy such things, magical weapons. Also backup weapons, perhaps of specialized flavors like silver or cold iron. Healing potions for those who can't heal themselves, healing wands for one or more characters that can use them. If you are the type to keep track of these things, food, waterskins, extra ammunition. Something to make light, torches, lanterns, sunrods, everburning torches are great, continual flame on a rock in a scroll case = flashlight, but the last two don't work in anti-magic areas, or can be dispelled. It sucks when your only light source goes out, and then combat starts in total darkness when most of the party doesn't have darkvision. Sacks for loot (if no bag of holding, maybe even if). Skill kits, theives tools, healers kit, climbing kit. And the standard backpack, bedroll, 50 ft rope (silk by 7th surely), map/scroll cases, flint & steel, and blankets if it is cold, or you are intentionally heading somewhere cold. Perhaps extra sets of light armor for medium/heavy armor wearers to sleep in (avoid nasty fatigue penalites). Sorry for the long post.

Since he is a knife-master, I would rule that is would be d4s. Using a spell that requires an attack roll is treated as a weapon for the purposes of feats like point-blank shot and weapon focus, so I would rule that it should be treated like a weapon here.
my 2cp, fwiw.
ninja'd

I realize that I am a lot different than many players & DMs (I still use that, I don't care what anyone says). I don't primarily buy APs and modules. I like rules options, but as a DM I reserve the right to say no. I will not allow Gunslingers in my games, nor anyone using the grit rules. I also hate gnomes, PF or otherwise. I have only attempted to run 1 AP, and I cobbled together a campaign with a few published modules (some converted from 3.5) that ran for quite a long time and had a very high level of player satisfaction. I may not be the primary "collector/completionist" gamer that Paizo or any other company wants to get. I love Pathfinder, they fixed a lot of the 3.5 problems and added more new charcter options that make sense to me and my players. As a gamer who started with 1st ed, and got the blue "expert" rules box for christmas, I still run my games as "DM trumphs gods" because the rules expressly state that if you don't like it, don't use it, and the (D)M is the final arbiter of the rules. If you want to play that way, you can. No rules system argues that, and I am unsure where that mentality comes from, or why people think that a new rules system is needed to fix it. I am planning to playtest the DNDNext rules, but do not see myself switching my games to it. It looks OK, and I want to like D&D again, but I love the setting and rules for pathfinder. There has always been room for more than one game in the gaming world, so I don't think that DNDNext is the death knell for Pathfinder. Pathfinder does a good job and has a lot of loyal fans that HATE wotc and would rather play monopoly than anything they put out. I have rambled, sorry all.

I like Crown of the Kobold King. Really that whole series is good and very newbie friendly.

I like gestalt characters for small groups. You do need to make sure you up the CR a little (+1 normal, +2 for some encounters). When I have run a campaign that was a from the start gestalt game I gave more attribute points to help with MAD issues. I have also run a game where the remaining characters were rebuilt as gestalt characters due to losing half the party (one had a child and his wife made him quit, the other joined the military). We finished pretty well, but it is much trickier to run a smaller, higher powered party. Hit points, although higher on average, are still pretty limited, as well as actions.

There is an old favorite I tend to want to build with every new fantasy system I try. Originally a 2nd ed Fighter/Theif half-elf bounty hunter. I most recently statted him up as a Ranger for PF, but I never seem to be able to play him very long in any system, so I never seem to get it out of my system. There is also a particular modern/magic character I stat out for those types of systems, and a superhero character that I build in every superhero system that I have access to. I rarely get to play them, which is probably why I remain so nostalgic about them, If I actually got to play them, I would probably see all the flaws in the concepts, but so far I haven't. I only have fond memories of them, so I want to try to recapture that if I can.

How far into the AP are you?

I don't ban it. In the past I have run a lot of games with smaller than average parties (2 or 3 players). A cohort can help fill some party gaps, to allow them to take on higher level challenges. However, unless they have established some sort of home base capable of containing them, I do not allow the followers.

I like to find out what a player's plans are for a character, so that I can try to familiarize myself with anything they may be trying to do (or at least create a handy cheat sheet for me to consult in case questions should arise.) I also know my players fairly well, so I know which one's are likely well-versed in their character abilities and which ones aren't, so that helps.

Do you stack hexcrafter (magus) levels and witch levels for the purpose of hex effectiveness? I can't find it anywhere, but I think it *should* be allowable. I can't see any way this could potentially break anything, or is there something I am missing?

I would say yes

More bonus feats could help the problem spots. They are unarmed combatants, give them weapon focus, weapon specialization, and the greater versions as bonus feats (or at least eligible to take them). This will narrow the gap some, with little dramatic change to the class. Also, more skill points would help take the focus off the monk as a combatant and make them more of a skillmonkey which is what they compare most favorably to.

Most of the party picked their own characters, the paladin chose his class based on advice from others and disliked it, so now he wants to play a fighter instead. The healing lack is my real concern. Sure, with that many characters they can kill everything, but will they survive with no primary (Cleric/Life Oracle) healer? We have already started and they are really keen to get to the prison, but with so many characters, the XP split makes leveling harder. If I increase the encounter difficulty or number of encounters, will they be too worn down to make it through with the limited healing?

The characters are as follows
Elf Wizard-Evoker
Human Inquisitor
Human Bard
Human Rogue
Human Paladin (Warrior of the Holy Light archetype)
Half-orc Barbarian

The wizard never played a wizard before, the Barbarian, Wizard, Inquisitor and Paladin have never played 3/3.5 before. Not sure about the Rogue. Most are experienced gamers in other systems, but I am wondering if Carrion Crown will beat them down and leave a bad taste in their mouth. It took a while for me to get them to agree to play PF and I want to keep them playing it. Any advice?

One thing to be careful of with the Oracle, is to make sure that your curse does not negate or too greatly limit your ability to play the role in the party that you have been accustomed to playing for the many levels that you have acheived. If you can avoid that, the Life Oracle is one of my favoriate of the non-core classes.

Some kind of map to mark locations (unless you hate that). I use extra dice for minis, because I am poor and cannot buy enough minis to represent hordes of monsters. I also like some sort of small dry erase board or some other reusable surface, if you plan on running manny games it will save you money in the long run over using a lot of paper.
I keep monster HP and initiative recorded on mine, when combat is over, it is gone with one swipe. There are also some useful logs to keep track of PC info and NPCs on d20pfsrd.com