Kaelidin's page

Organized Play Member. 35 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character.



1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wolfsnap wrote:
Kaelidin wrote:

What would happen is pretty clear, but the real question is are you ok with the outcome?

My guess is if using it as a trap or an attack the only things preventing the player from falling in is a dice roll. It is a very real potential of save or die, or go on an adventure to recover. Is the plot of the adventure ok with that sort of outcome? If so then please see the best arrow ever.

Link is dead and I'm really curious.

Strange the link still works for me, but anyway here is another link.

Arrowhead of Total Destruction
original link http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7733/unledrcn.png.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've really wanted to run/play in a church themed campaign where the entire group are all of the same religion, and likely religious themed classes doing some sort of pilgrimage or something. Spreading the influence of their deity one mile at a time or something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Scythia wrote:

This goes to the question of what matters more in alignment issues, action or intention.

You won't find consensus on this issue, it's the same one at the heart of several alignment debates. If you're running, do what's best for your game.

Hell...I think this has been a topic in philosophy four a couple of thousand years, with no firm consensus on the issue.
True,but it's specifically reared it's head in the "does casting an [evil] spell make you Evil" threads, especially in regards to Infernal Healing.

Personally I always thought that Paladins and Clerics ping alignment so easily because they are "anchored" into a plane/power that radiates that alignment so strongly. The person may not have to match the alignment they ping in such cases, but if the devotee's alignment gets too off the mark they can't sync up with that anchor and thus lose their benefits. Paladins have a much narrower band to sync up whereas Clerics only need to be within 1 step.

I do take as supporting evidence that some spells will cause you to temporarily appear as a specific alignment regardless of usage/intent or personal alignment. The taint of connecting to that other plane/power covers over your natural alignment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Those are fantastic, that party really must have good player cohesion to keep the story going so well when their PCs are so at odds. Sounds like a lot of fun!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@thejeff : I agree with you in the idea that telling a character story that traits of the character to give a reference point do have to be used. I do prefer my fantasy to use more blank slate characters so I can mentally fill in parts I would prefer. To me characters are just people, straight, bi, gay, other all just people, I don't really care about the labels. Maybe that is a privilege thing that I am getting to enjoy "just because" I happen to identify somewhat closely with a well represented set of characteristics. Using Dumbledore again as an example, in his author's mind he was gay, but realistically no real "come out and say it" was done, as his intimate life wasn't intended as part of the story. His gender and how he gender identified admittedly was known (or was it...).

I do cringe when I read stories written where it feels a character was made just to fill in a set of check boxes rather than the character and story fitting together like a .. well.. 'like a well told story'. I think Paizo works hard to not make bad stories both for business and because they have a vested love of stories as well.

I suppose the reason I'm even chiming in at all is I've had discussions about sexuality fairly often in my personal life, and have basically come up with the conclusion of "what get's your motor humming is no business of anyone else's unless you make it so". Don't identify yourself as a single bullet point as that shouldn't be all you are.
People should just be people, someday we'll get to that point as a society again; before it was assumed normal was everyone being straight and narrow, now we are going through changes and expanding what people can do and be, and someday the definition of what is "normal" will include everything talked about in this thread and likely other unique traits.

I still want to see the characters that other players have in their own "mind's theater" because there really won't be enough official characters to even do minimal service to all the races/countries/classes/genders/self-identifiers we have, from a game standpoint the classes races and countries have a very important mechanical component in giving ideas how to play said adventurer types with your own twist on a character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So if someone dies by Shadow Str drain, is brought back to life via resurrection or something. Goes on their merry way to a long life of living, is str drained by poison years later, instead of falling uselessly weak they die because once in the past a Shadow molested them.

I don't assume the above is the way anyone would play it. Once you die the shadows ability drain *special* is expended and doesn't linger on past being brought back to life. So once alive again it is just 0 str penalty not penalty + shadow *special* .


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally I adhere to the idea that elves are able at an earlier age, but they aren't yet seasoned to the point where the Elvish Society deems them worthy of speaking in public.

A parallel I draw from this is human history. Humans in less than desirable situations/cultures could do all the adult things in their early teens normally, up to starting families, taking over the family business and so forth. But more recently with a higher desire for culture and education, and also more favorable circumstances to allow a longer childhood I would say that some people aren't quite ready to start their long career lives until late 20's to early 30's (like Doctors they have a long seasoning period).

Another example is the Lord of the Rings mythology, look at the Hobbits, there were many references to how old the hobbits were before their society deemed them worthy of being "adults" that had little to do with their physical development.

I am sad that the referenced story about the lost Elf having a physical maturing that took decades in that city, it kinda set, a distasteful, idea in stone.

The trope that I've often seen in the Fantasy series is that elves are wise, and patient. Never prone to hasty choices and ultimately being very conservative. Humans dominate because of passion, that passionate zest for life feeds the human psyche allowing them to make leaps of progress that allowed them to spread over the world. Learning-wise that passion would likely translate into being very fast learners, making intuitive connections that speed their learning. Elves are smarter (capacity) but humans being more clever allow them to "fill" their learning capacity much faster.

-- Now the question from me is, if Elven maturation rate is more a cultural than a biological thing, what would happen if a human baby foundling was raised in an Elvish society? A geriatric just getting ready to start their career, or would exceptions be made? Or conversely if the maturation is all biology, how would the Elvish parents react to this human maturing like a weed?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I cut my RP teeth on 2nd Ed, and I loved every moment of it.
I liked the themes that demi-humans were much more powerful (levels ahead) of humans early on with their bonuses, but then had to work past their level caps, it gave a good choice between short or long term goals. Thac0 wasn't terrible but it could have been done a little cleaner.

Pros:
1. Every class had its well designated niche, if you want roguish things done you need a rogue, not just someone with some levels and a high int to buy the skills to cover it.
2. You did feel pretty epic when you were at high levels, and the adventures tended to pan out to be greater stories than what the adventure had on paper, likely due to the "free lancing" the party and DM had to do to keep the game running forward.
3. The setting boxes, so many awesome things there, I wish I had the time and talent to fully convert a few of my favorites over to PF to run, Night Below & Ravenloft being top of my list of wanting to relive again.

Cons:
1. If your stats sucked you certainly were stuck as far as character development
- NonWeapon Proficiency were so few in number and improving them so hard coupled with the inconsistency of wanting to roll LOW to pass it was certainly more awkward of a system than the more expanded skill systems of later games.
- Having 18/00 strength was near impossible to attain, but getting it literally made your martial class character levels better and much more potent than any lower strength character.
2. Inconsistent die roll targets. For attack rolls you want to roll high, for NWP you want to roll Low, for Saves you want to roll high, some of the d100 charts would fluctuate target high or low. Would have been nicer if everything did flow in 1 direction (up = bonus, down = penalty).
3. Book Keeping, players had to keep track of their xp and gains very closely to know when they leveled up since there were bonuses, penalties and different growth rates for every race/class/situation. I liked the idea that rogues get levels faster than wizards, and the themes of Druids having to do story mode to advance to high levels, but game mechanics intrude a lot on those ideas.
4. Book bloat, nowadays like 10 "kit" books would be rolled into 1 book for pathfinder, and having so many settings to support led to a near impossible 'keeping up' scenario.

Later games mechanically do run smoother and consistently, but I do feel a little of imagination and uniqueness may have been lost with the smoothing over the edges. Of course maybe it is just a heavy nostalgia of younger days with more free time and a better tolerance for inefficiency than I'm allowed nowadays.