You could probably crib the Vindictive Bastard archetype from Paladin. It should apply fairly well, since AntiPaladin is basically a per-ability reversal of Paladin. If you're leaving Cruelty and Fiendish Boon intact, you'll want to skip the Vindictive Bastard's Solo Tactics, Teamwork Feat, and Gang Up abilities.
Now, I have no idea how this will balance, since I'd never tried it before (or even thought about doing this before just now), but the Vindictive Bastard's abilities seem to be a strict downgrade from Paladin abilities, so I'd be willing to chance that you won't throw too many things out of whack by trying it.
(written-out address for above link: https://aonprd.com/ArchetypeDisplay.aspx?FixedName=Paladin Vindictive Bastard )
I'm sorry I hurt you. I would have taken more care to phrase things in a gentle fashion had I realized that it would affect you so.
Hugo Rune wrote:
I'm wondering how many people who think the wand sharing trick is okay, would feel the same if the GM used the same loophole against the players.
As a GM, the difference in giving 50 NPCs one 50-charge wand and giving 50 NPCs fifty 1-charge wands is formation, action economy, Attacks of Opportunity, initiative, and a feeling of justification.
I think it might be a good time to point out that we're on the rules section of a website that is devoted to a written ruleset of a game and you're accusing me of being absurd because I suggested that basing ad-hoc rulings on NO! may go over poorly to players when your values of NO! are based on whimsey.
Yeah, you're either missing the point or being willfully obtuse.
Set to 3? Good. Great, even. The point is that this is a house rule and surprising players with ad-hoc house isn't a fair thing to do. If you're GMing Pathfinder and are suddenly struck by an insatiable urge for realistic dropping rules that will fly in the face of other Pathfinder rules, then good for you. Put your dropping rules out on the table before you start your dropping-based campaign.
That's fine. But we're not talking about players attempting something that is not clearly defined in the rules. We're talking about players attempting something that is clearly defined in the rules, being told NO! and trying to infer the actual ruleset.
I'm glad you could take the time to come back and completely miss the point. Or maybe miss 49 points.
But not 50 points. That would be a silly number of points to miss.
The point is that the line between Normal and Absurd is not defined. If it's fine for time to stop for 48 people while one person fits 6 seconds worth of actions in, but not fine for time to stop for 49 people, then that's an arbitrary distinction. If it's absurd for time to stop for a number of people depending on how the GM feels about the situation, then that's unplayable. That makes every player's action begin with, "Can I...?"
If my teammate disarms a wand from an enemy wizard, can I pick it up? If I can pick it up, can I use it? Can I drop it and quickdraw my rapier afterwards? Can the enemy wizard pick up the wand after I've dropped it? If the enemy wizard picks up the wand can he use it on me? If I use my AOO to disarm the wand from the wizard, can another enemy pick it up and use it? Could one of my allies instead?
Where does too much lie? It isn't codified. This just adds ambiguity without actually providing any benefit.
So, what do you do for initiative? Do you make your players declare actions at the start of the round and hold them to their choices? Do you also write down your NPC actions at the start of the turn so you won't be tempted to change them?
So, if I had 50 people with 50 wands, could they all line up and shoot magic missile at a target sequentially, each waiting until the previous has finished to see if the target has fallen yet?
It could also work in the opposite direction, with the PCs leveraging the influence of the runaway princess to accomplish their goals.
They keep on her good side by doing things that make her happy -- sneaking her out of tiresome banquets, smuggling her boyfriend to see her when her authority figures would not approve, keeping unwanted suitors away because the PCs "didn't recognize them", writing speeches when she needs to comment on recent events, preparing letters making requests from or pledging support to nobles for her to send, and generally doing the day-to-day responsibilities of someone of her station for her.
Having a disinterested noble at your disposal is a great asset for a group of potential "advisors"
I've seen "politics" used as a shorthand way of saying, "Touchy subjects that people may feel strongly about and are likely to make others uncomfortable or argumentative if you bring them up and have a high likelihood of completely derailing the task at hand, especially if you say something that someone feels is inaccurate."
I was thinking about this thread and accuracy depicting a culture, and it reminded me of this article about an anthropologist studying the Tiv people (and the Tiv people studying the anthropologist's culture through her). They ask her to tell a story, and she tries to tell Hamlet to them.
The article is from the 1960's, which I feel illustrates my point that things don't age well (she seems openly condescending to her audience in a way that feels uncomfortable through 2020's lens). I also feel that it illustrates the difficulty in portraying a different culture accurately, as other cultures are always seen through the lens of your own and it's hard to understand concepts that don't exist in your own culture. That is to say, we may get the "what" accurate, but will struggle with the "why" unless we've lived in the culture (or unless we were born into the culture).
So, if we're destined to get things wrong despite our best efforts (most probably offensively so, if we have a wide enough audience), what's our solution?
I mean, really? What is our solution if we're trying to create an inclusive gaming experience that isn't jarringly offensive?
The class lacks unique abilities. It doesn't match up to any other classes, and it's just not that interesting yet. It needs more.
I agree with this.
The class has 13 "dead levels" out of 20 and is really only marginally more powerful than the Warrior NPC class (if at all). You should have at least 13 more powers throughout the class so that players have incentive to take the next level in Adventurer.
Honestly, Trap Sense is a weak enough ability that you could add abilities on those levels, too.
If you're looking for ability suggestions, something to supplement torch use/fighting would be nice. Maybe improved Keros Oil firebreathing (improved damage, range, and/or area), improved attacks with simple and/or improvised weapons (or maybe just with the torch), more torch bonus feats, trap use as per Trapper Ranger (or maybe even access to some traps at level 1), weird (i.e. Su) detection abilities using your torch light, ability to impose Dazzle as part of an attack, inspire others with your torch-bearing moxy, etc.
In general, for any class to meaningfully contribute in the game, you're going to want to consider the following and how your class would accomplish these and react to these being imposed:
- A way to restrict the movement of enemies (wall)
Remember to keep scale in mind, where high-level challenges require much different obstacles and much more damage to hamper them due to the number of resources they'll possess and where low-level challenges can be trivialized by certain abilities (like flight).
That's one of the reasons I like the rotation cipher as a solution -- It helps keep usage consistant if you're using an actual word. It also, in my opinion, makes it feel more real to me. Just preference, I guess.
Saying something like, "Hey! Flarff you, buddy!" doesn't feel as real to me as saying something like, "L'jaqa dug! There's no way I'm going to do that!" or "Tell you what, geyaya, you go first!"
Again, just my preference and it interests me seeing how others feel about it.
Plus, I'd be self-conscious that others would recognize the language I'm swearing in
This works pretty well with a language where you're not really familiar with the pronunciation scheme, too, since an intuitive English pronunciation of a significantly different language (say, Japanese) can result in words or phrases that sound like they're part of a real, indecipherable language (I got this idea from an anime where they gave Japanese dialogue to foreigners who didn't understand Japanese to accomplish just this).
Also, consider a rotation cipher and/or transliterating English into a different language.
As an example, take a word written in Japanese syllables in Romanji:
fa a ku
rotate them over 2 categories and down 1 (hiragana or katakana lists available in many places).
pi ki su
And you get pikisu (or, if you want to leave out some vowels, you can get pikis or piksu or piks).
Here's a few places with syllable lists if you want to try out the rotation cipher:
Magus Black wrote:
The ultimate insult and profanity: "Elf"
Reminds me of the Trolls in the mini series 10th Kingdom who were always exclaiming, "Suck an elf!" when anything went wrong.
I also liked "yar" as a somehow profane affirmative.
Heh. Now I'm amused by the thought of "um" as a profane affirmative.
"Tell us, brave adventurer, are you with us to storm the castle?"
* CROWD EXPLODES IN CHEERS *
Another fun formula I like for culture-specific swears is (deity name)'s (body part) - it doesn't even have to be anything particularly inappropriate to work well. Desna's thumbs!
Yeah, blasphemy works really well when you have so many gods.
Pharasma's (Un)Holy Daggers! -- And if you mix in a little bit of Gadzooks or 'zounds, you can get something like Rasdag (also spelled Razdag), an abbreviation/bastardization of Pharasma's Daggers. You would use Holy Razdag for a pleasant surprise and Unholy Razdag to refer to something that is unpleasant. "Holy Razdag, am I glad to see you guys!" or "What the unholy Rasdag are you doing here? You're supposed to be keeping watch in the tower!" Also, "Razdag it!" as a suggestion that Pharasma stab something or someone with her (presumably unholy) dagger.
Three-eyed -- A reference to Lamashtu's holy symbol, most often referring to some rundown or foreboding place (a place where you would most likely see the symbol flying) or to the type of person who would lurk in such a place. Also three-looker to describe such a person. "I'm not going in that alley alone. I'm sure some three-looker's in there just waiting to put a knife in my back."
Zon hook 'em/you/me -- A reference to the god of pain and... well... his hooks. Often shortened to Hook 'em/you/me. "I'm gonna throw a fireball into the mix next round. If the guards can't get out of the fray by then, hook 'em."
Cal-slapped -- Suffering a beatdown or some misfortune, presumably as a result of one's own actions or misdeeds (as if suffering retribution at the hands of CalIstria). "After getting Cal-slapped so hard last time you charged in here, I didn't think I'd see you come back."
Sacred Suds -- Or simply suds. Having the guts or chutzpah to do something outlandish or risky. A reference to Cayden Cailean and his mythology's propensity to portray him drunk. "I didn't think you'd have the suds to face me alone, but here you are!"
I've liked the idea of removing the penalties from the attribute spread, but I think this is also a nice step into not pigeonholing race/class combinations. These are the issues I can think of:
1. It reduces the power of Humans, but that doesn't matter, since they're the strongest
2. It reduces the attractiveness of Half-Elves and Half-Orcs. I don't know that these races were particularly powerful, barring rule abuses. It's very likely that they will be rarely played (if that's a problem).
3. It makes a Small martial a lot more attractive when they can have a bonus to AC, Hit, and also have a +2 to Str and Wis. This might lead to some frustration when NPCs have a difficult time effectively challenging your martial. But, then, you're the GM. If you can deal with the frustration, do it.
Sara Marie wrote:
That's kind of the problem, though, even when we're trying to be "good" about potrayal of cultures that are not our own. The world has changed a lot, and consequently our fantasy RPGs are a reflection of the modern world, most often with a thin veneer of Western culture streched out over a 5000 year period, broken into pieces, and assembled into a fun, accessible mosaic. And adding other cultures seems only natural if you want to be more inclusionary and expand your RPG world.
But this turns into "defaultism" and "exoticism" where the improperly portrayed cultures in the base game come across as familiar, inviting, and fun and the faithfully portrayed cultures come across as rigid, alien, unfriendly or even wrong. Or worse, it turns cultures into designated enemies when the values of 500 or 1000 years ago clash with modern sensibilities, even when we're trying to be sensitive and avoid this very outcome.
My opinion which nobody asked for is that erring on the side of fun, accessible and modern is generally better than erring on the side of accurate-but-jarring, and that modern movies produced by the culture you're including are probably a better source to emulate than straight historical fact.
And I do agree that you should research at least enough to be able to identify a sensitive subject in a modern environment (and, indeed, your group of gamers).
"We are a laid back group primarily consisting of people in their 40s and 50s (eek!), many with kids. We are not rules lawyers, and individuals may have to pop off the call for a few minutes here and there to deal with family tasks. If you want to ask how long the dragon is so you can calculate her hit dice and points, or if you are going to tell me all the ways you never could have been surprised when I say, “Suddenly…”, then this isn’t the group you are looking for. If you want a fun and casual game with some occasional jokes, movie references, and bad puns thrown in then this IS the campaign you’re looking for."
This is something that I've found that it's difficult for a player to judge -- whether the GM has simply forgotten that the player's character has a supernatural sense which prevents her from ever being surprised or whether the GM is just ignoring the rules to highlight the abilities of a new super-cool sneaky NPC.
The other problems seem to spawn from a misunderstanding whether the group is playing The Adventures of Robin Hood, Robin and Marian, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, or Robin Hood: Men in Tights (and picking a concept for the wrong tone).
We all love lists.
I didn't number these, but there's not quite 100 anyway....
Players should find that they're able to milk the thing. It gives off a sweet, delicious substance (similar to horchata) that provides some benefits (consuming a dose counts as a Goodberry, gives an alchemical bonus to something-or-another, provide a bonus to Perform and other creative skills, etc.). The point is that the players should want to protect it because they think it's a wonderful thing to have around (without being too over-the-top wonderful, thus appearing to be an obvious trap). It does this as a natural response to protect itself from predation. Hopefully, this would also make them want to adopt and protect any more of these things that they find in the wild.
For nurishment, it should consume negative emotions. When a creature around it succumbs to a negative emotional effect (fear effects, despair effects, etc), it should "consume" it by casting a limited/targeted form of Calm Emotions (it should remove penalties, although it shouldn't negate combat). Players should note that if they have enough of these around, they have a difficult time feeling sad or angry. Alternately, you could have it consume parts of dead monsters, disolving them like acid (although this may cause players to get squeamish about how it makes its "milk").
It has no "endgame." It's just trying to grow, eat, and survive. It's not malicious. It has no ulterior motive, though it may seem a little scary at times.
What are you working with? Is the problem that you have a lack of magic that cures HP or is the problem a complete lack of a way to cope with statuses like Blindness, Petrification, Poison, Death, Fatigue, Intestinal Hedgehogs, etc? Are you mostly running from published adventures, or homebrewing the encounters? What classes do you have now, and what levels?
The proper choice is to postpone adventuring and devote your lives to rearing the goblin children. You will need to establish a homestead away from Sandpoint and other settlements in case the goblins aren't able to overcome their early learnings and resort again to violence. You must raise them as your own, hoping that that they take any and all of your teachings to heart, bucking the norms of their society and becoming their own people. Perhaps learning individuality will help them understand that what their forefathers did was wrong and allow them to become members of civilized society. Once they're adults, you can perform summary execution on the lot of them; they reach adulthood at 13.
But seriously, you should ask the GM what the tone of the game is. Any GM who uses morality traps is just asking the campaign to get derailed, especially if the campaign expects the players to partake in genocide without batting an eye.
This build will actually make you weaker, but it may accomplish what you want. It's a little complicated and will take your Swift Action every round you want to cast a spell.
Take the first 5 levels in Wizard.
You will need the following feats:
Light Armor Proficiency
At 6th level, take the Hellknight Signifier prestige class (work with your GM on satisfying the requirements ahead of time). This class has features that let you cast better in armor.
This will hurt you in the following ways:
Take your swift action every round you want to cast a spell
This will help you in the following ways:
d8 hit die
*** another option ***
Take level 1 as Cleric
you will need the following feats:
Arcane Armor Training
...and the following trait:
If you take the Chivalry inquisition (and your Game Master agrees that it should work like a Domain for the Hellknight Signifier's Catechesis ability), you should have a horse Mount that scales with your level.
This option will hurt you in the following ways:
Take your swift action every round you want to cast a spell
This will help you in the following ways:
d8 hit die
A horse is suitable for riding, so your corporeal undead horse should likewise be suitable for riding (and actually seems to be a pretty common mount among players with looser morals).
It has no Int score, so it cannot be taught tricks with Handle Animal (also, it is not an animal). It loses the Docile special quality since it is not an "...extraordinary special (quality) that improve(s) its melee or ranged attacks." It is not subject to fatigue, and can be the target of Spur Mount until it falls apart.
If you want to be technical, it cannot be guided with your knees, since it only obeys verbal commands. Consequently, though, you do not need hands to guide it.
If you want to be absolutely "WO-HO-HO-HO! GOTCHA!" technical, it cannot be combat trained. Mind you, it doesn't make sense for undead to be spooked in battle and war- or combat-trained only is mentioned in respect to Animals.
I have question. Are any creatures out there that have the ability to regrow limbs and organs, but don't have the unkillable aspect of regeneration? Being unkillable, while nice, is not always what I'm looking for when I want to regrow limbs and organs.
Palidans can at level 12 by taking the Amputated mercy from the Healer's Handbook.
Vodooist Monk wrote:
My favorite part of that is that your organs grow back in a few days from the Barbarian ability and you're perfectly fine without them.
1. The Goods, Labor, Magic, Influence system works if you require that magic items be bought with a certain amount of magic, that influence buys political favors, etc. Fluff-wise, this means that the materials you need to make the items you want aren't just laying around available for purchase, but that you supply them. Rules-wise, this adds a layer of complexity and bookkeeping that may not be worth it.
2. That's a good question. If the response to "I buy a house" is "Okay, now you own a house" and that's the end of it, I'm a lot less likely to buy a house.
In a game where every mechanic is interconnected, there are no small changes; only simple write-ups.
The investigator comes online at level 1 as a skill monkey. It’s the secondary role of damage that waits till level 4. It’s like complaining that bloodrager doesn’t come online as a spell caster until level 4. That’s not really what it’s meant for.
Combat is a large part of the game that takes up a significant amount of gameplay time when it occurs. If your character can't meaningfully contribute for the first 10 sessions or so, you're both being deadweight in a situation where you should be helping and boring yourself.
* * * * * * * *
To switch gears...
To address the Useless Feats problem, I saw someone with a houserule to have useful feats on odd levels and "flavor" feats on even levels. That would probably warrant a list of "Useful" and "Flavor" feats, though, but I liked the idea.
* * *
At the end of this, are we wanting to start a list of proposed and/or existing solutions?
Here are some of the complaints I'd been kicking around (I'd made a more comprehensive list somewhere, but I don't have it on me):
* Self-sufficient classes/builds - Some classes or builds don't depend heavily on feats in order to function correctly. Others must use every feat available in order to make the build workable (often, these aren't the most powerful builds). If the class is supposed to do something (Cleave, Power Attack, Two Weapon Fighting, Dex to Damage), that should be included in the class, and not rely on an external package.
* Meaningful feats - Why should anyone spend a feat on getting a +2 bonus against being mind-controlled by aberrations? Why should necessary mechanics (like Power Attack) be locked away in a feat? I want feats to be meaningful and powerful customization options that are distinct and separate from my class. I'd even be willing to sacrifice multiclassing if spending feats would allow me meaningful but limited access to other class' abilities.
* Build target - How strong should my character be? How powerful is too much? Monsters don't have a power-target per CR (well, they do, but it's ignored). Consequently, players don't have a target to build to. If we had some idea of what is supposed to be normal, we could try to achieve it. This is related to...
* Useless/Godly Dichotomy - This takes two forms. The first is when a class is completely useless in most situations and completely trivializes other encounters (like a mid-level Gunslinger in combat/non-combat). The second form is where you can either build your character to be overpowered or build him to be weak (like low levels with a Fighter when a player has designed his build so he will be survivable at higher levels). This is related to...
* The Come Online Problem - This is when a class or a build doesn't accomplish what it's intended to accomplish or can't contribute meaningfully for a few levels. Gunslinger and Investigator are two examples that come to mind. I've also seen some builds or archetypes take until mid-levels to get to their flavor abilities.
I'm sure I had a few more complaints written down, but these are the ones that come to mind.
By the rules of fiction, he's done for. The protagonists have defeated him. His threat is over. Now, if he's back as the henchman for a greater evil, that's another story...
If you want him to come back, he should be part of a bigger evil. Maybe he's stitched together, vomiting blood and warnings about his master (Juju Zombie template). Maybe he's been reanimated by fungus invading his corpse to benefit the colony (Fungal template). Maybe he made a deathbed deal with a greater power (Devilbound template).
The point is, if you want your old villain to server some sort of role in your new story, he's going to need to put over the new villain.
I like that FAQ link, especially the part that said...
For most miss chances, such as blur, there’s no need to roll them if an attack would hit a mirror image because a hit and a miss by 5 or less would both pop the image.
That implies that there's some sort of secret rule hidden somewhere that states that a miss due to concealment counts as missing by 5 or less.
Gingerbread Witch. Santa Claus. Ho ho ho.
Pointing and threatening. "You! YOOOOUUUUU!"
Scatting. Skibby dobba dibby hexxy uppi duppi.
Gingerbread Witch. Martha Stewart explaining her hexes to the 4th wall.
Talking Trash. "Hey guy. You're doin' all right. You missed that last time, but you'll do fine next time. Just swing. Swing hard, guy. You can do it. Aw you missed again. Maybe you are garbage."
The ol' soft shoe.
Have a target
If a fighter needs to survive past level 15, he needs to plan his feats a lot more carefully than he does if the campaign only goes to 8. Let your players know how far they need to go. If the fighter or rogue doesn't have to be competitive with high-level summons, they might not feel like they have to go full-tilt from the beginning to keep up with the curve.
Have a goal
Feats, skills, traits, and class features are all limited resources. If your players know which direction they need to focus, they will be able to move away from the "safe" choice of being better in combat.
Not all classes are made equal. Some classes trivialize an encounter if they have the right spell prepared. Some classes are damn near useless in most situations until level 5. Wanting the Paladin to spend this level's skill point on Profession(Haberdasher) is a lot to ask for. Wanting your demihumans to buy their 8s into 10s will get you a lot of humans. Weak point buy creates more pets and fewer Magi or Monks. Etc.
* * *
In short, consider doing something to help the feat-hungry, skill-starved classes who inherently have fewer options. Maybe something like the Background Skills option from the Unchained book.
Edit: At the risk of making an on-topic post...
If you're not married to the idea of a Bad Touch, you could play a Varisian Pilgrim, and deliver your domains at range. This helps if you're thinking about taking the Magic(Arcane) domain by being able to center the effect on the Wizard and extend the range to 30'. This would, however, reduce your melee capabilities to shouting, "Not in the face!"
Applicable (Golarian) deities are:
Barbatos (Arcane, Travel/Exploration/Trade) -- You may want to have an Intelligence of 6 to explain away why you'd follow the Archdevil of Animals, Corruption, and Gateways. Decent domains, though. If your DM is a fan of rough terrain, Travel is nice. Otherwise, the others are solid boosts to your party.
Isis, Alseta (Community, Arcane) -- If you have a Barbarian in your party, you'll be the team player of the century, boosting the Wizard's CL or save and removing the Barbie's fatigue. Go you.
Abraxas, Shiggarreb, Tsathoggua (Chaos, Arcane) -- Like Barbatos, but worse. You probably won't want to get into range to deliver Touch of Chaos.
Alternately, you could pick Shelyn (Love, Luck) for good general buffs. With the love domain, they'll take you seriously when you shout, "Not in the face!"
Also, Calistria (Luck, Trickery) is good for throwing a 50% miss chance on someone with your move action while also buffing them with your standard.
Feats I like to complement this (assuming you're a human) are War Blessing and Channeled Blessing. This should give you two minor Warpriest blessings and let you deliver them at range. Check with your DM to make sure these work together before committing.
Nope, you're right. Those are the same distance away due to diagonal measuring rules.
I take back my statement, and support the Valid Charge point of view.
What you're saying does make sense, but...
1. The save is part of the description of the Energy Drain universal monster ability
2. The save to remove the Temporary Negative Level is based on the Spectre's HD and Charisma
This supports that the save is from an "effect[s] created by evil creature[s]", which the spell specifically helps against.
Note that the bonus given by Protection from Evil is a resistance bonus, which is a very common bonus which does not stack with resistance bonuses from other sources, such as a Cloak of Resistance (but does stack with the bonus from the Guidance spell, which is a competence bonus).
1. Technically yes (and it should be allowed in my opinion because permanent negative levels aren't fun). If you want to find some sort of "gotcha" to keep them from doing so, you could point out that it would be hard to time the casting of a 1 min/lvl spell to exactly 24 hours after the level drain occurred.
2. Yes. It also gives the character a +2 Deflection bonus to his/her AC against the Nagaji's touch attack to hit with his venom.
It's a strong spell.
Technically, you have to charge to "the closest space from which you can attack the opponent", which would be the 2 above. This would draw a line between 1 and 2 that passes through the A on the left, preventing the charge.
As a DM, you would not be unreasonable to allow the charge from the OP, but a player with a "high level of rules mastery" would be at a disadvantage due to rules uncertainty.