Juda de Kerioth's page

620 posts. Alias of judas 147.


1 to 50 of 620 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

hell man, you want more feats? even more feats? how many sheets do you need to use to feel that you have enough feats?

5 feats at 1st lvl plus class abilities

Makeitstop wrote:

Another version of how this could work, perhaps more conservatively balanced:

Dual Ancestry: Either your parents were of different ancestries or one or both were of mixed heritage. With GM approval, you may select one ancestry other than your own. You gain the corresponding trait for that ancestry, must select one of that ancestry's heritage feats at level 1 and may select ancestry feats from either ancestry whenever you gain ancestry feats.

You mean the way hybrid races actually works?

It was better in Blood of Bastards a companion suplement.

you had your heritage and you roll for a hint of any other mix in your blood.

The way your rule works will lead to a half dragon half tarrasque half dwarf half human with half elven heritages...

how many half could you and to make a whole?

Hi all, where could i see wich parts of the rules are ogl?

so this is out of reprint, so now we need to pay the pdf 20 usd

Print the 30+ sheets in a good way 30+ usd, then make them in plastic cover 30+ usd, then the glue and bases... lets say 5 usd:

a 115+ usd damn you paizo, better to make a kickstarter or something to ask for reprint

mekka2000 wrote:

Inspired by PF2 playtest.

Add a "racial hp bonus" to your character at level 1 :

Base is 8
If the race is small, -2
If the race is large, +2
If the race has a bonus to CON, +2
If the race has a malus to CON, -2
I think I reverse engineered how pf2 calculate it :)

you could check my houserules in some of my posts. I always give 8 hp as ahumanoid racial bonus at character creation.

The variation of hp from pf2 comes from unearthed arcana 3.5, but since humanoid have HD d8 it not make sense, since the races has pluses and minuses to their stats to represent this very variation.

So, it is kind of silly to gves an orc 12 hp (unearthed arcana version) when you will give him alongisde that 12 a +2 to constitution.

I use Sanity rules from Horror Adventures, mixed with Cthulhu Mythis from Sandy Petersen, as a Sanity bonus I use those Vitality granted by racial bonus in Starfinder.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Guurzak wrote:

This is where I'm stuck too. What is PF2's value proposition to players who might otherwise be playing PF1, or 5e, or 4e, or 13th Age, or Dungeon World, or Blades in the Dark, or Gloomhaven? What kind of player is PF2 looking to attract who is underserved by the current library of games? What will PF2 do better than any of the other options?

I've played a lot of different kinds of games with a lot of different kinds of gamers, and after reading the rulebook, I can't think of a single person I've played with who would say "yes, I'd rather play this than my current favorite game." If Paizo could state a specific design goal that we're trying to make a game that does X better than any other game does or that appeals specifically to Y kind of players, that would help greatly in the community's ability to provide feedback on reaching that goal.

Man this is my same feelings... I don´t understand how this will be beter than PF1... making changes just because you want to launch a new edition isn´t a good move.

You need to offer something new, evolved mechanics from previous edition (see how D%D1 changed to AD%D, then AD&D2E and so on, there were significant and atractive changes).

Runequest is another example on how to take the bullet; since 7th edition is about to come, we all still love the 2 edition of it, and it seems that 7th edition will take a lot of it.

World of darkness evolved too... more simple (ppl say that the last version of the game was like D&4thE too) and White Wolf take note on it.

So, moving to PF2 with this set of rules, is at least to me, going back to 2008 and jumping from 3.5 to 4thE entirely blindfolded

3 people marked this as a favorite.

mmm im here by my own, excited as all of you on how the game i love will take changes, i love changes with purpose, and im not a d20 player only, i played CoC, WoD, Runequest, D&D, and some others.

The fact that launching a new edition is an important happening, a risky move (see what happened to WotC when they tried to steal from us with that awful 4thE), but also, i think you must offer something atractive, and decide for whom you are making this new edition.

There will be ppl loving it, entusiatical, esceptical, and haters... im still in a disapointed mood... trying to be optimistic and i want to offer my experience, but i think this will be a waste of time.

In the 5thE playtest (wich took 3+ years with fans to test) we all apport something, and you can see your opinions making it a better edition than it was intended.

But with pathfinder 2, it seems they already have done the edition, and want to line up the finishing details.

sorry if i look so underwhelming.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tithron wrote:
No one is forcing you to stop playing PF1. Especially if you are really enjoying it. Paizo seems to be trying to reach a new market outside of "die hard 3.X fan" which is a bit of a niche. Time will tell how it goes.

Im sure about it, but we all 3.X players runaway from D&D because of 4the. don´t know why they made those decisions to bring it back for pf2 at all

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Charlaquin wrote:
There’s no round 2, friend. The new edition is coming out in about a year. This is your one and only chance to provide your feedback, use it or lose it.

I guess i will keep my game in PF1 then, with some equipment rules from pf2

7 people marked this as a favorite.

After reading the whole ruleset for the playtest, I get so disapointed.

Im not going to lie, there were some rules that I liked (equipment section only).

But as a responsible customer, one who take care of what i buy and such, why do i need to move to pf2 if the rules offers nothing new at all?

I mean, Racial Powers (now called Feats) were in D&D4thE. Class Powers (now called class feats) were in D&D4thE PHB.

Someone told me last night "the half elf and half orc are a feats only for humans"... yea, but that was also a rule from 4thE. You need to be a human, and take the "half vampire feat" to make your human a dhampir.

Skills: they overcomplicated the things you could do without feats in PF1, now you realy will need a feat to take a shower or so.

I think that paizo´s crew need to remember why we all moved to Pathfinder 1 back in 2008: because we all dislike D&D4thE.

Gladly this is the first step for what seems will be a loooong playtest (if they hear us all). So, with a lot of luck, we, the testers have a lot of work to do to make it the game we want/need/desrerve.

I will not test this round, tell me when round 2 is out because this one really sucks

the fact is that putting rules into the games that we were using before, means that you dont have more house rules to run with.

i like the idea, but i feel that gms needs to work on their own houserules for sure.

There are a lot of Rulelawyers outside, and they will make their players know this rule... and this isn´t a good point at all.

mmm this sounds like paizo want to erradicate gms in pf2.

Tholomyes wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

uh sounds good, like more tactician now.

The only thing i would be worried about is that at 20th lvl you want me to try to hurt a tarrasque with a d8 of damage

How do you mean? Do you mean with the snare? Because that's only an 8th level snare, and presumably by 20th level, you have a better trick up your sleeve.

I mean regarding Trapper archetype from UM; you were doing a d8+wis mod in a trap... at 20th lvl

uh sounds good, like more tactician now.

The only thing i would be worried about is that at 20th lvl you want me to try to hurt a tarrasque with a d8 of damage

Hi all!

Any way to get this reprinted soon?

I need it

how many skills have a character at creation phase?

sounds a bit more than interesting

Welcome to all!

you only miss someone there to make it even better: ME!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am esceptical with paladins, since I think Paladin should be an Archetype or even a Prestige Class at all for Clerics, Monks (also a Samurai for monks and fighters)and Fighters (wich would result in a better approach to the meanings of the entire concept of the class, not just being a hole to fill in a book with to hit prob and divine powers.

Doing that, you should fulfill some prerreqs and accept some rules before attempting to become a paladin (Being lawful, being good, being the representation of right and justice, and the enbodyment of their deities needs). And with this as an option, every deity could have their own paladin´s oaths, codes, flavor, and even aligtmens

gustavo iglesias wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:
Rob Godfrey wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

ahhh nice!

I was affraid you were with paladins being of variant aligment.

I loved Oath from 5thE but oaths and lawful good should not be a separate thing

why? Why is good corrupted by law best good? Why are gods polluted b6 law the best gods?

Becaus if not aligment restriction on the most powerful class in the game, what is the difference between a mere Cleric, an Inquisitor or a Warpriest from a Paladin?

Clerics, ibquusitors and warpriest are more powerful than paladins.

sure if you made a cookie recipe for them from builds and guides, but as they are in the book paladins are the most powerful class of those mentioned above.

And that´s not the case, the flavor of being the embodiness of righteoughness and the vivification of a good deity is a big deal at the time for roleplay a shining knight

Rob Godfrey wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

ahhh nice!

I was affraid you were with paladins being of variant aligment.

I loved Oath from 5thE but oaths and lawful good should not be a separate thing

why? Why is good corrupted by law best good? Why are gods polluted b6 law the best gods?

Becaus if not aligment restriction on the most powerful class in the game, what is the difference between a mere Cleric, an Inquisitor or a Warpriest from a Paladin?

The mere name should suggest the nature of the class PALADIN the paragon of lawful and loyalty, devotion, zeal, and such, the virtue personified not a mere knight or cleric, a PALADIN.

but i know nowadays, the new wave of players do not want/know/understands why there must (YES A MUST) be some restrictions in some classess..

Then you could tell me that a multiclass on Rogue/Barbarian/Monk stacks

ahhh nice!

I was affraid you were with paladins being of variant aligment.

I loved Oath from 5thE but oaths and lawful good should not be a separate thing

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don´t like what i´m seeing here...

I don´t like Starfinder KAK and TAK and all those stuffs...

I would rather piecemeal armor and AC as DR instead of all of the above options.

Sorry guys, you lost me here.

I will recomend you to use D&D5thE Backgrounds and Background rules instead.

What I did to my Backgrounds;

- 5the Backgrounds, all of them.
- Every Background grant 1 stat point (related to the background, acolyte +1 wis, Enterteineer +1 cha). The idea came from Starfinder
- 2 Character traits from Ultimate Campaign (i took them all from the book and put them into a single file, i use hombrewery to write house rules)
- I always start my campaigns at 0lvl using only the background features.

I think this spell point could be much like in Conan d20 or even like in RuneQuest II (wich would be great if you ask me)

I will join to the playtest for sure, I am a big fan of the d20 system so, i guess i could give some feedback. The thing is that I wish a mature version of the game, meaning no more than one spellcaster class, different stat values (as in D&D2E) and more significance for every stat instead of roling with a flat 8 on half the stat.

I love the idea of classes giving aditional 2 stat points, also, background should give one aditional stat point.

For Spellcaster I wish there were only one spellcasting class, and forget about cleric (being cleric a background or such), so you, as a caster decide wich path you´ll chose with a little help of your background.

Cleric. Wizard amd Druid as a Background or even Archetypes for the class. Much like the Vigilante class did but focussed exclusively on spellcasting classes.

You are worried about magic missile and fireball?

take a look at Meteor Swarm, a so nerfed spell that you always try to maximize your delay blast fireball instead of casting meteor swarm.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

ahhh alchemy :(

I wish paizo make it like in the witcher video game, with toxicity, so you could use a little ammount of alchemical items per level.

As a houseruler, i use Vitality (con score + fort base) and every potion has a toxicity equal spell level (even cure wounds potions). amd toxicity reduce your max vitality score.

So, once you get at half your vitality score, i apply the rules from pathfinder unchained wound treshold (p. 136).

I hope you read my comment and consider this at least as an optional rule.

well ok... but hellish page. I will use to it, but will took time to learn paizo´s-site-fu this time.

Matthew Downie wrote:
Runequest was published in 1977, more than a decade before AD&D2E.

Yes, but i meant that if he doesn´t like how 3.X and needs a new way of how to roleplay Runequest is an amazing variant

Want a better feeling?

mix everything you want from any edition you like or try Runequest (the real successor of AD&D2E).

mmm why not approach starfinder from pathfinder?

Make your pathfinder character and use feats and spells or some items in your space trip. My players and I decided to buy the book and give it a read, but did´t make it for us. So, we take what we need from it and keep playing 3.X

And by the abuse of current material for pathfinder we have capped it to CRB, APG, ACG, Bestiary 1-4, all codex (wich are bestiaries), UCombat, UM, Unchainned, and UE. We don´t need more than that for our campaigns.

Advanced Prestige Classes!

A 20 lvl Shadow Dancer with some dip into arcane spells (4 spell levels at most)

Paizo should make another kind of approach to monsters, at least in my though. perhaps more monster codex. with different monsters in it.

also, if it is for homebrew game, then skip all the rules and all the rulelawyers saying, just mix a number of potions, perhaps, max your int mod in a single potion with a percentage of fail or becoming a new potion

alchemist can mix potions.

And in the alchemy manual are rules for it. also, in 5the in the dmg are rules for this too

damn man, you must have a big issue when asking for a 7th bestiary.

You have 6 already, how many of them do you use?
also, there are 5 monster manuals from 3.5 and the 5the mms wich are fun to intermingle with pathfinder.

a 7th would result in a reprint of existent materials (or the adventure´s path monsters)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

well it was a great movie, a great storyline and I loved it.

Also, the galaxy is a vast space for a story to move around the same characters every new trilogy (please, let the skywalkers die)

I never liked star wars movies, I would prefer a saga regarding Revan and the Mandalorian Wars at the Old Republic.

I think it is good for fans to have the story advancing. I´m turning into a fan actualy, for the first time, im watching star war movies (the new ones) and don´t feel bored, yawning, or something.

ep 1 to 3 were so bad, that i thanks to disney to take it away from gl.
the first trilogy i didn´t watch it until my 20s and man, they are boring (i love old movies, and those aren´t in the list)

So, now, we have a star wars movies that look like star wars (at least how I pictured in my mind when a fan told me what it was about)

Wevi wrote:

When it comes to your games that you run or playing in, how diverse is your NPC's? I'm talking about race, skin, gender, body type for NPC's. I think I do a good job on race, gender. I need to work on skin, but I fell on body type. I looked at my NPC's and say only 001% of my NPC's are heavy, but very little are paper thin too.

For race's I use what ever I think would be good or a race that I have not used in a while.

For gender I flip a coin.

For skin I just need to find a pic that's not white.

For body type I need to work harder to find pic's that are more varied.

I use core races and some of the half-humans (tieflins, aasimars, genasi, shifter (A.K.A. skin walkers), changeling (doppelganger and hag version), dhampirs, but the rest of the races i use them as monsters, and lore heavy (Kitsunes are female elven maids only who went cursed and are evil monsters known by Vulpines, catfolks are a kind of wolf-were, tengus are vicious and cruel beings (much like hobgoblins) and so on, still I don´t know how to make griplis work into my campaign.

If some player want to run a rare race I ask him why and work with him to make it happen but still, it won´t show often at my table, i´m guess its my fault since i do not promote all of them

I have two questions:

1 When Vampire Hunter´s D will be offered at sale? if don´t, why, and if don´t the class would be used in another material?

2 I love Carrion Crown AP, but I hate almost every aspect of Rule of Fear (i love the lore). When Ustalav would get his own book as other countrys from golarion have? Perhaps Ustalav, birthplace of horrors or something.

And bonus question: there will be Pawns for Carrion Crown someday? im starving for them.


taks wrote:
swoosh wrote:
taks wrote:
I ban it, but only because we use mostly Paizo published material. It would take too much work to balance, IMO.
I agree. I actually can't even see how you could balance it. Like what could you do to the Oracle to bring it down to the Stalker's level comparatively? Beats me.

No idea. What I do know is that Paizo material was written with Paizo material in mind. I simply don't have time to go through and figure out which rules are compatible on top of the already 1500 or so feats, 45+ classes, and myriad other rules. Your incredulity is rather absurd.

Edit: note, too, that I have access to the majority of Paizo's rules, in my possession, which is not true of third party rules.

The whole thing with compatibility was absurd at the begining, you as a gm need to do a lot of research when one thing from 3.5 comes to your table.

There are a lot of archetypes doing abilities that were feats in that edition.

also, rogue talents have some of the older feats in it. So, compatibility is a falacy to me. At least for feats.

For prestige classes is kind of the same, there are archetypes doing kind of the same abilities, if you allow them without double check, you will end in a place you dont want to be in the first place

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Instead of bringing things from 3.5 I would love other things comming into game:

Instead of lots and lots of feats, perhaps a rank on a feat (I.E); Iron Will. you need to spend a skill rank on it at any level except the one you take that feat and progress in the nex feat of that chain.

Improved Initiative
- Quick Draw (1 rank)
- Rapid Reload (1 rank)
- Fast Armor (1 rank)

Gorbacz wrote:
There are dozens of psychic monsters in Pathfinder, starting with the whole Occult Bestiary, and Intellect Devourers are pretty much the replacement for Mind Flayers as far as brain-eating monsters go.

Sure they are, but man, they aren´t Mind Flayers!!

So, perhaps a Cthulhu Mythos from Sandy upcomming early next year i guess

Alchemist 23 wrote:

Monkey Grip: Let you hold a two-handed weapon in one hand. This one was OP as hell but you could probably balance it out with a STR 18-20 requirement or worse... probably worse.

Mindflayer / Illithid: Psychic brain eating monster from Cthulhus fan-art collection. I know actual D&D holds a copyright on these guys but come on. We have Psychic classes in the game now and need some Psychic monsters. And these guys are THE Psychic monster. I am sure someone can come up with a replacement version for Pathfinder. Maybe they have proboscis instead of a mouth, tentacles for hair, three eyes, eight fingers per hand, neon-blue skin, and five arms the fifth being in the middle of their chest, and bone like scythes for its four legs. There take it and make some Psychic brain eating monsters.

I have made a file where every armor and weapon have a prerrequ PM me and I will give you the tables.

uhm Jason, I will, but I didn´t buy this one (most of this i have it already).

Perhaps a review of every item that I have from your products would be better.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
What's wrong with the Vigilante class? It's a great class (with some mediocre archetypes, but so it goes.) Like the Avenger Vigilante is easily one of the more functional martials.

It is an emulator, you could emulate a cleric, a bard, a wizard, a fighter and the rest of the classes but you need the book...

I rather emulate the vigilante with my rogue, my fighter, my wizard, my cleric or so instead.

As I see, Shifter has the same issues than the Vigilante Class:

It is an emulator of a mix for druid with monk or something alike.
So, if you want a monk/druid thing, then just make it happen. it is a bad class, definely (i guess that´s why paizians didn´t made a playtest for it).

Also, I have a lot of issues with the art In the book; they are supposed to inspire me to try that archetype or else am I Wrong?

If so; Stormcaller, Famelic orc who eats tofu and insects (or Rot Warden), and that guy walking over pee (p. 88).

I love the Herbalism section to make some house rules, but, 4 valuable pages for a 258 pages book for 40+ usd i think it is too much to spend.

I think paizians are trying to make some downgrades to pathfinder, and i understand that star finder are the new trip to take on (but i won´t), also, the pathfinder system is flooded with tons of materials, and stretching it with more content just for unjistified sales hungry are kind of obvious here.

Sorry, perhaps my post will be deleted, hated, or so, but someone has to put the steak in the grill.

why don´t put the starving orc?
or the witch-man walking on his own pee?

I don´t want to see 5000+ Feats!

nor more feats from PF.

1 to 50 of 620 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>