![]() ![]()
![]() Hi, I would like to cancel my Player Companion Subscription after January 2017, so after the "Healer's Handbook" which I still want to receive. Somewhat unrelated, today I received "The Whisper Out of Time", but I have never ordered it. I am not sure what I am supposed to do with this Book now. Should I send it back ? Kind Regards
![]()
![]() Hi,
![]()
![]() So I've got a witch in one of my groups who is interested in the major hex "animal skin", but I'm not 100% sure how it works exactly. For example, what is the duration of the hex ? Is it 1 min/level like the spell it's based upon (beast shape II), or is it as long as the witch wears the skin of the animal ? If it is just 1 min/level, what prevents the witch from just "rehexing" it as soon as it ends ? Or are the animal skins consumed during the activation of the hex ? (which would be .. bad, because it would force a witch with that hex to carry around more animal skins, than a furtrader) Any insight or input would be much appreciated. ![]()
![]() Jason Bulmahn wrote:
A. is boring, and also not really balanced. Instead of choosing weapons with high crit ratings, optimizers will simply choose weapons with other special qualities (Disarm, Trip, Reach, etc.). To truly balance the sacred weapons you would need to remove these specials as well ... and then whats the point in choosing different weapons at all. B. is probably the most balanced, but also the most difficult solution to use. C. is easiest to use and for me the most fun as well. Sure not all weapons will be perfectly balanced, but I don't think they will be so unbalanced to each other that we should force all sacred weapons into the same bland damage/crit-mold. So my vote goes clearly to C, but I could live with B. ![]()
![]() far_wanderer wrote:
That's exactly how I feel too. I really like the Druid-spelllist an I think It not only fits the shaman thematically, it also closes a gap in my Character choices. Until now If I wanted to play a nature themed caster, I also had to be a shape-shifting freak who babbles incoherently about some natural balance (aka a Druid). And that just doesn't fit every nature-themed character (or NPC) that I would want to build. I also think the current idea of giving the shaman the druidspellist + some extra spells to deal with spirits is ingenious. Not only does it cover most of the things a shaman should be able to do, it also avoids having to create a unique shamanspellist. He currently has a spellist that can can use existing books and supplements and will keep on growing. A custom shamanlist would not have any golarionspecific spells and would have to be remembered whenever new spells were added. That being said, the class still needs some work regarding spirits and hexes. Some Hexes are just plain bad (for example Fearful Gaze and Speak with animals), and the greater spirit ability of the Lifespirit is ... underwhelming. ![]()
![]() RJGrady wrote: If folks want a bone-nose druid, I think that would be better accomplished by creating druid archetypes than trying to shoehorn the shaman concept into a dedicated nature-caster. And I could say the same about a "bone-nosed cleric" being much better as an clericarchtype than trying to make the shaman into one. But such buzz phrases don't really help a discussion. Its clear that this is a very emotional Topic, with different people having different views what a shaman "should" be. And I don't exclude myself there. That's why I still think a choice at first level when you pick your spirit between druid and cleric list would be the best solution. While a custom list could solve a lot of the different expectations of what a shaman should be able to do, I think it's not a practical idea. We have tons of spells in different books and likely will keep getting lots of more spells in the future. Picking a Spellist from all the existing spells would require immense effort from the Devs, and each future spell would have to be checked if it would fit the shaman. Much easier and smoother to just give the shaman one if the other lists to choose from. That way he won't run the risk of not getting interesting new spells in the future. ![]()
![]() For me one of the reasons I would prefer the druid-spelllist over the cleric-spelllist is the fact that a shaman with cleric spells just feels ... boring. Its just an prepared oracle without a curse, or an cleric archetype or something like that. And as such I see little reason to play a shaman. But give it the druidspelllist and the shaman "feels" much more like I envision it. Calling on the forces of nature, command the animals of the wild. That's my kind of shaman. Lastly giving the shaman the clericspelllist means we would than have three fullcasters using the same spelllist. But If you want the druidspells ... your stuck with druid. ![]()
![]() Cuàn wrote:
I really like this idea. While I think the Druid-Spelllist fits the Shaman better ( or at least fits the shaman I personally envision better), I can understand why some would prefer the cleric list. Another possibility would be to grant the Shaman access to some of the Spirit-relevant cleric Spells (Protection from whatever, spiritual Ally, ect.) by giving these spells to one of his spirits. Ancestors would be a good fit, since an Ancestor Spirit is missing from the class anyway. ![]()
![]() I`m not sure If posting this here is correct, but I didn't have any better Idea where to post this. Last weekend I lost a USB stick with PDF copies of some of my recent Downloads. If i recall correctly, It contained PDFs of "Faiths & Philosophies", "Pathfinder Society Primer", "Quests and Campaigns" and "Dungeoneers Handbook". Since I didn't lose it at a Convention or in a Game Store, I actually consider it highly unlikely that the PDFs will end up in the Internet somewhere. Still I think its better to notify Paizo of this Loss now, rather than later trying to explain how one of my watermarked PDFs ended up online if it somehow does happen. Regards,
![]()
![]() wraithstrike wrote: I will also add that there is no +20 "for trying to find the exact location". Well the reason we thought that would apply was that in the SRD there is that Passage under Invisibility PFSRD wrote: A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack. It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. So Im still a bit unsure if this +20 is added to the Stealth check or not. I would assume it Is, but that would mean invisible attackers (that move away after striking) are really hard to locate without special countermeasures (Glitterdust, See Invisibility, ect.) ![]()
![]() During our latest game we had some trouble figuring out the correct DCs for detecting a rouge under a "Greater Invisibility". If the Rouge is already standing next to a monster, uses a full attack action and then takes a 5ft. Step, is it possible for him to make a stealth-check to be harder to find ? Or is the DC a flat DC 20 as in the Spell Description ? For Moving an being in Combat.
And if the Rogue just full-attacks an doesn't move (and so doesn't use a stealth check) is the DC than 40 ?
Thanks for any clarifications in this matter. ![]()
![]() Umbranus wrote:
Except that isn't true. It has been clarified, by James Jacobs if I remember correctly, that the XP gain isn't for a single character but for the whole group. So the only effect a high Charisma character has, is that the group as a whole will gain more XP. ![]()
![]() Just a quick question regarding the "Blood Money" Spell. Does it work with Spells that have a casting time longer than 1 round, like 'Glyph of Warding" or "Symbol of Healing" ? The reason I ask is this line from the Spell: "Material components created by blood money transform back into blood at the end of the round if they have not been used as a material component". Is the Material compononent considerd used If I start the casting or at the end of the Spell ? ![]()
![]() While I'd agree that more pregen encounters would be nice to have (and certainly make my life easer as a GM), what I would really like to see is some more cursed Items. Idealy not with curses that kill the characters using them, but rather something thats still a bit useful, but with a dark twist. Examples of what I mean would be the "Ring of bureaucratic wizardy (still granting you the extra spells, but forcing you to fill out paperwork that magically appears in your hand whenever you try to cast a spell) or the "Runestone of Answers" (with a 50% chance to give good Advice, but forcing a Will save with constantly increasing DC to not ask the runestone for Advice before every action). Put me down for the Witches Class Act please. ![]()
![]() Knight Magenta wrote:
The Problem would be that you (and your Party) are affected by your own cackling Skull. The Spell text says: "All creatures that can hear the cackles must save or become shaken for 1d4 rounds." ![]()
![]() We have just finished the first Book, and the current Party is: Akenaten - Suli Time Oracle from Osirion and a follower of Nethys as well as an aspiring Pathfinder (N-G)
![]()
![]() Our Group is just starting Book 2, so the Nation isn't that big yet. Nation: Realm of the Sylvan Dales
The next city is planned to be at Oleg's former trading post, but they first want to improve their capitol a bit. |