Kalebon's page

Description Block wrote:

...relying on predictive prerolls to navigate clutch situations and quick reflexes to manipulate combat.

Maybe I misread that, but it does seem like Dexterity would be kind of important?

There are no touch ACs in Starfinder.

I think Improved Familiar is in the Core book. That will allow the homunuculus to be a familiar to the wizard (or arcane bloodline sorcerer).

One handed sniper rifles, heavy weapons, and longarms?

What would the Capacity of charges that it can hold Would be?

If you are taking suggestions a flat Level x5 would work for all sizes.

Noticed they (Krogans) did not seem all that agile due to their extra mass compared to others that are the same size. I agree that a -2 Dex would work for them.

There must be KLINGONS!

How about going to visit The home of the androffans?

Niven's known universe had some interesting races in it.

Yes, they where, they died painfully. very painfully, as in twice there Hp in one round painful.

Fun I have been currently having is this adventure path was great.... up until the caravan encounters book 3 and beyond, only the first caravan encounter we had we walked away from with no problem... the others we had (1 story, 1 random so far) the caravan was wiped out both times.

The caravan for the PCs I feel does too little damage, while the Caravan for the NPCs (opposition) does ridiculously higher amounts of damage. The DM has allowed us to use the constructs as a total replacement for the normal horses in the caravan by the fact when the caravan gets destroyed the constructs get repaired equally with the caravan repairs. Otherwise we would have never made it over the crown of the world due to consumption.

cool, got a response. will show him when the game is done.

the Pathfinder Society response.

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6iqs?do-Alchemist-bombs-Critical

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz6ipt?Do-alchemist-bombs-critical

as I said there I will say here.

as the question says, the critical hit came up in the game and the dm said because it was a splash weapon it does not receive an chance for a critical hit at all so no multiplying the 1d6+int bonus by the usual x2 damage. can we have clarification on critical hits and alchemist bombs.

and

Can any Pathfinder society judges confirm this? Wanting to make sure before showing the gm.

That and the gm plays an alchemist in a game I am not part of and was told this.

want clarification fully for this, since I am uneasy about the bomb not being able to crit (even with just the first d6+int bonus) and feel the fact that most everything else with to-hit rolls can crit for x2 at least.

Can any Pathfinder society judges confirm this? Wanting to make sure before showing the gm.

That and the gm plays an alchemist in a game I am not part of and was told this.

as the question says, the critical hit came up in the game and the dm said because it was a splash weapon it does not receive an chance for a critical hit at all so no multiplying the 1d6+int bonus by the usual x2 damage. can we have clarification on critical hits and alchemist bombs.

@David Jackson 60: The breath weapon limit is easily taken care of with a feat from one of the dragon books (cannot remember which one) which strengthened the breathe uses from 1/day to having a 1d4-1 round delay between uses.

@K: quit looking at the other classes, look to just this and think this: "Hoe can I maximize the potential of this class from going just being a 20 sorcerer"

My opinion is that this class got a significant power boost over the regular one since it got more class abilities than just 'I have spells!' Considering the bard, ranger, paladin, cleric, druid, and wizard have things to do now that make them unique for each character made. (I HATE cookie cutter characters!)

To everyone use your brain to get your dm to tell you to stop doing that.

~Kalebon

'The golden rule of any game is the DM/GM/storyteller has last say!'

dodge is decent and I like the way one game in particular changed it (dungeons and dragons online) they made it +1 to all AC types: Total AC, touch AC. Also there are Class abilities that can let you keep it (uncanny dodge). But I think the AC bonus should increase for each additional feat that branches from the dodge feat (i.e. mobility, spring attack, etc.) by +1. but that is my thought.

Which is why they should be free. People who care to minmax even a little don't pick Profession or Craft or Perform. After they get all the things they need to function in their class, they'll cross-class a useful skill like Spot or a new ability like UMD.

Give people four or five Professions or Crafts or Perform Skills for free, then see how much it doesn't change your game. Its just fun roleplaying stuff, and trying to price it the same as something as essential to the game like the new Perception skill or Use Magic Device is just illogical on first principles.

You forgot those who actually play bards, since you have to have perform to use any of the bardic song abilities.

I'll take the point about not needing strain though. On second thought it's probably better to provide carrots like unlimited talents.

Agreed on making the free talents considering you can end up using most of your power on just manifesting (not casting) those. A side note I would like to add is that they use manifester level to explain the psionic classes since that leaves then out of the 'spellcaster' boosting PrCs.

MatthewJHanson wrote:

The one thing I'd like to add though, is that I really think talents should come back for Pathfinder so that Psions can have all day abilities just like wizards and clerics get. It would be pretty easy to look back at 3.0 or put the 1st-level 3.5 powers that don't really deserve to be there (my light, catfall, I'm looking at you) back to 0th.

My take on this is: the mechanic already exists in the form of psionic focus. Just add in some an additional feat/class feature gained at first level along the following lines:

Discipline Focus: Choose one first level power from your chosen Discipline. You may manifest this power for free when you expend your psionic focus. You may augment this power as normal, but your manifestor level for this power, when manifested in this fashion, is one-half of your character level.

I like this makes being your discipline and picking your powers fun, but I can see potential abuse at the 7~9th level powers for some. That is fixable with the good old 'DM has last say' rule.

I will reserve my comments for the second release, I like the rogue class as is. I hope you add the psionic classes (psion, psychic warrior, soulknife and wilder) some time in the future.

I started playing with 2w.

What version is that I never heard of 2w. I heard of basic, advanced, core rules basic (2ed DnD), advanced 1e, and advanced 2e. so what version is that?

I have the feeling that the number of skills a rogue has is fine. I defend the rogue (which is thief from previous editions) because they have had so much taken from them in the first place. Considering the sneak attack is useless against certain creatures (undead, plants, etc) and there are spells to out right deny it (heavy fortification). SO take the skill points away what are you going to give for compensation?

Also If you want jack of all trades play an advanced dungeons and dragons bard. (pre 1e)

Also the reason bards have 6+int instead of 8+int is that they pay for their ability to limited casting of spells and their music abilities plus the bardic knowledge.

You obviously never played any edition before 3e as how you are ranting. I liked when thieves had a backstab multiplier, and percentile scores for 'thier' skills. Back when weapon proficiencies and non weapon proficiencies where optional, but everyone used them. I think gimping the skills will hurt the thief and takes alot of power compared to the other classes away.

If you want to reduce the skills, reduce the feats fighters get, remove domains from clerics, reduce the bard's song abilities, Reduce the unarmed damage a monk gets, reduce the holy effects a paladin has, reduce ranger combat abilities, reduce the rage potential for barbarians, and take familiar away from sorcerers and wizards.

Also from the sounds of things people are saying, I am the only one defending rogue to leave as is.

Also on 'caught off guard' & 'throw anything' I would like to add that it is better than calling it exotic weapon proficiency (improvised weapons.) and I think it applies only to the first attack. Once the opponent draws a weapon or has 'Improved unarmed attack' (or monk) He is no longer unarmed. (or in true bar brawl style grabs something himself to use. like a halfling.)

SO you are all saying to just screw the rogue. I think that rogues need all those skills in order to do their 'thing' as the party thief. If you say that the thief has no place make a character then have him used without the player knowing the party is heading into a trap filled area. I love to watch him survive THAT. You build a thief (Rogue is the Politicaly correct term) to do most the things that and 'iconic' thief is to do. considering he is suppose to do all the things listed in the thieving scores that got turned into skills. Also lock picking is a whole lot different than disabling devices.

Nice work, the only problem I have is that you made the psion lose 15 powers known at 20th level.

To add on that That means the psions will have less powers and be hurt since once you learn a power cannot change them AT ALL unless you have psionic reformation or psychic Chirurgery. Then those have hefty EXP costs to use.

I love shapers because if you play your cards right you will always ahve a toll for what you need to do. (I gestalt Rogue/Psion alot using the shaper discipline.)

Favorite trick I do is fabricate the door into a tower shield.

I'm not saying gimp them completely. Just spread it around a bit. Allow the fighter to disable traps or serve as the party's face. In fact I really think the rogue doesn't get enough class feature wise to support they're role out of combat. They should be able to do things with they're primary skills that other classes couldn't even dream of doing. And also make them more effective in combat. I was thinking of giving them a bonus to attacks when they can use sneak attacks.

IF fighter's could disarm traps why have a rogue in the party at all, considering the mage types can cast a spell to open locks automatically. (knock)

But keeping rogue with the full 8+int is what I say. Ya there might be dipping, but the dips will get hurt in the long run.

Again as I said in other topics: The golden rule: 'The DM has last say'

I haven't read all the rules for psionics, but wouldn't just adding a psion class to PFRPG come with a need of printing whole lot of pages for psionic powers and rules to play them? I'm not sure, but isn't there about as many psionic powers as there are spells? And seven out of eleven core classes use spells. Wouldn't adding psionics increase the page count enormously?

Considering that almost every book wotc has come out with spells for the mages, clerics, etc. (the spell casters) Honestly no. the expanded psionics book's section on powers is 71pages in thin compared to the 122 pages for spells in the PHB. That is not included what would be added for spells from the fellows at paizo.

P.S. I like the term mage for arcane spell caster and cleric for divine casters

Nice work, the only problem I have is that you made the psion lose 15 powers known at 20th level.

Rogues are the skill monkeys, you have to be in order to do all the skills a thief in the party should do. Find the trap, disarm the trap, open the lock, sneak past the nasty monster, pick the guards pockets, scale the wall, slip the bonds, decipher the secret message that says 'don't look up' (I liked that trap). To do all this you have to spend 11 skill choices to do it all. Everyone saying gimp the thief is kind of depressing to me.

so your saying make rogues useless in parties starting out. remember the rogue has to use most of his skills for doing the things a thief is to do. restricting this is more of a hamper on him than anything else. Considering there are no percentile thieving abilities in 3.0~3.5 edition.

There will always be a min maxing of any game. It is up to the DM to keep that under control.

on unnatural beauty - It is more of the effect people tend to be nicer to the elves than other demi-human races. They appear more graceful and pleasant than other races as well. (Which has no impact on charisma.) THis has more to deal with a physical appearance than a mental stat (there is no appearance stat.)

On wish, limited wish, bend reality, reality revision, miracle, and the like. Unless they word it properly the DM can interpret it any way he wants.

The words Elven High Wizard means nothing then, elves are wizards, the original mage. I think sorcerer should not be their favored class. Gnomes should be kept as bard since bard spells have mainly illusions. Turning them into sorcerers is kinda stupid since sorcerers are very restricted in spell selection, but not as restricted as psions, psychic warriors, and wilders are in there powers.

I have always associated elves with wizards.

I like that Idea. Makes it so there is a lesser benefit to multiclass. No seriously, there are some people who front load always because they want A) a specific ability, or B) think that the class the multi into got hosed in some way.

There should be some penalty to it but I remember the days where if you where human you had a class (fighter, thief, ranger, mage, priest, mystic, druid) or you where your race (dwarf, elf, halfling) when it got to advanced dungeons and dragons, then you had a choice of race and class. but only certain races can multi class, and only humans could dual class.

I always had fun with my human dual classed fighter/cleric (10/19), and my elven fighter/mage/thief.

reducing skill points only hurts the rogue in the ability to do all his thief-stuff considering with a 16 int they reduced it to 11 skill choices. Along with the fact I think I missed a couple. I think true multi-class should be from the word go and each class has it's exp tracked separately. Going into another class should use the dual class rules, you can't access the others abilities until you surpass it in level or you lose all exp for that session.

so remove their favored class's main stat bonus for another classes?

Why not just add a +2 to all mental stats then.

I agree with you that psionics gets neglected, Heavily. I think this edition of dnd (3.5e basic) is a good stable one compared to the other previous incarnations. I enjoy playing around with the shaper discipline.

MY thought is the skill system presented in pathfinder is a good idea.

all levels have Skill points can be a fiddly to biased if you ask me. I say have the way it is written for first level then have skill points added on the levels after instead if you want book-keeping. Max all if you don't. Yes rogues are skill monkeys, But they have to be since they don't have percentile based thieving abilities. Yes there is chance for abuse, but the DM (I prefer calling the person who is the game runner not the player that) has FINAL say in anything pertaining to his game. That is what the House Rulings are for.

IMHO I think rogues should be the skill monkey. yes this can be abused but the final say is up to the DM.

The real way to fix it is to reach into Advanced dungeons and dragons Second Edition and bring back the percentile thieving abilities and percentile points, if you want to keep complaining about this.

considering with my 16 int character I made I had the core thief-acrobat skills barely (which in total is 11 skills, this includes linguist and use magical device.)on abuse, ya people will abuse it. but again the golden rule of 'DM has last say' comes into play. If your game becomes a wrecked thing due to player abuse look for ways to rectify this. You're the DM you control the world, the players get to control just their character.

edit reason: typos....