Staff

Lavawight's page

156 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Azih wrote:

So how would you guys deal with a player who decides that they're going to wear a Second Skin underneath Thinplate which is underneath other armor and that the ACs of all of them should stack.

Other than telling them not to do that of course.

Well, armor bonuses don't stack, so tell them that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could make it so that you have to "give" the simulacrum your slots/prepared spells/SLAs per day for it to be able to use them, and they remain unavailable to the creator in the mean time. There would need to be further limitations, I think, but it's a start.


He's asking about non-psionic classes, though mind blade is a psychic class, not psionic. There's nothing besides soulknife and mind blade magus that I'm aware of that generates weapons on the fly.


nennafir wrote:

Thanks for the replies everyone...So I'll bite:

Targetting a spell component pouch is surely a called shot. Since it is at 10 ft range (i.e., with reach by clothing, not adjacent) the rules say it has a -2 penalty. In addition to this penalty, it has the normal called shot penalty. Do you think this additional penalty is like vitals (-5) or more like ear (-10)?

This would seemingly put me at a -7 or -12 penalty to the touch attack with my 1/2 BAB witch. Am I reading this correctly?

Note: Despite all of this, I am still interested in the archetype. :D A friend yesterday just asked me, "Why don't you just play a normal witch and take prehensile hair hex?"

Why does a touch attack with reach have a -2? There's no range increment there, and it's not even a ranged attack. And I'm not sure it has to be a called shot any more than any other sunder attempt, especially since called shots is an optional rule that my everyone plays with.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Brew Bird wrote:
The Sword wrote:
A Witcher. The signs don't tie in with the magus spell list and a magus/alchemist loses too much fighting ability to represent Geralt. It needs a paired down magus archetype build that swaps spell casting for alchemy and Arcana that mimic the signs.
I think a few Investigator archetypes come pretty close to this.

I feel like a witcher would need full BAB. They were the best swordsmen around. So skills, knowledge, tracking, limited spells. Ranger chassis fits, but the spells are wrong.


Milo v3 wrote:
I'm still confused how someone could think OA material is sci-fi....

Less so than psionics, but probably *because* of psionics. That doesn't extend to the kineticist, because of the Avatar series.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like I need to clarify that they don't make a big deal about it, and they're fine with me using it. The mechanics would just really suit some of the characters they've tried to build over the years, and I can't seem to convince them that it's ok to reflavor a set of mechanics as something other than the written description.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've used psionic classes before, and I'm using a cryptic in the current campaign. They don't have an issue with psionics being in the game, but it conflicts with the flavor of their own characters because they're so firmly attached to the new age perception of the word. Changing the name to runic magic makes zero difference for some reason; they're still stuck on the original imagery. "It is what it is." one of them said, and the argument that it is what you MAKE it did no good.

I haven't tried what Anzyr suggested yet, that's a good idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Two of the people I game with refuse to use psionics or anything considered psychic because they perceive it as science fiction, and that interferes with their immersion. They are okay with third party content in general, and psionics/OA would fit many of the concepts they've tried to create over the years. This also occurred when one of them wanted to play something exactly like the Pathfinder ninja, but would not because they didn't want an Oriental-themed character.

I'd like some advice for convincing them that they can attach whatever flavor they like to the mechanics provided by a class, and their character doesn't have to be just like the fluff description or iconic image. Is it possible?


I can't link to where, but I think that was clarified at some point to be ok as long as you start casting in the same round.


It's iffy. If you have an evocation focused mage, it might irk them a bit. If not, barbarian/fighter/paladin/zen archer etc can make 15d6 damage once a round look silly later on, so it's more an issue of party composition. Just make sure magi aren't spellstriking snowball with the close range arcana, since it isn't a ray. Not that that is related.


Diego Rossi wrote:


A lunar oracle almost certainly would recover his spell when the moon is in the sky, not when he wakes.
That can be inconvenient at times, depending on the cycle of the moon in your world.
As most caster that don't recover their spell at the same time as other member of their group they can suffer from the Recent Casting Limit.
PRD wrote:


Recent Casting Limit: As with arcane spells, at the time of preparation any spells cast within the previous 8 hours count against the number of spells that can be prepared.

Have you never seen the moon in the sky in the morning? Assuming the moon in setting is similar, it's just brightest at night.


How many insights do cryptics get? I don't have my pdf in front of me, but I seem to remember not having enough to get the debuffs I wanted along with all the other really cool stuff they can get, like tattoo shenanigans and folding up traps. I guess you could spend all of them on disrupt pattern, but you'd be missing out on a lot of unique things they can do.


I may have contributed to the creation of this thread when I asked whether ammunition fired from an enchanted bow received the hardness and hp increases that come with enchantment. It was a very odd case that had something to do with arrows being sundered in flight, if I remember right, but for all the "this is silly, who would ask this?" people, that was possibly the original question that started the thought process.


Does the sorcadin into dragon disciple build count as gishy enough? I've never tried it, but I've heard good things.


That brings a question to mind, sorry if slightly off topic. Does a bow with an enhancement bonus convey the extra hardness and hp to arrows fired from it?


There should be a guide to converting 3.5 to Pathfinder around somewhere, and that should be all you need. I just looked through it, and didn't see anything that would require special attention, but it was admittedly a quick look. Things like full casters moving up to d6 hd, merging spot, listen, and search into perception, etc.


It's unfortunate, but I can't even look at this without thinking of Escape from Monkey Island.


I can see what you mean, but her railgun in the show is pretty much heavy artillery, and blasting is kinda underrepresented in Pathfinder. Composite blasts are the best way to represent that that I can think of.

Edit: this was in response to elfinlocks, not Mark, and he answered it much better than I did. Even without going up to a 5 burn meganova, blasts get pretty big later on.


With Kineticist, probably air with electric blast, followed by aether using coins as the projectile. She started much weaker, though it was before the series, and her most damaging attack doesn't deal electricity damage at all; it's an electromagnetically fired physical projectile.

What are the difficulties you're encountering with the build, specifically?


Gaberlunzie wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Gaberlunzie wrote:
So, aboleth tend towards the arcane classes, especially wizardry. {. . .}
So they did, but that was written long before Occult Adventures came out. Psychic (or Psionic, if you go the Dreamscarred Press route) magic seems right up their (dark) alley.

Yes, but I'm not using psionics for this (and the reasons for that are too long to go into, but it's not something I can be convinced of in this case)

Psionics is 3rd party, psychic magic is Paizo, from Occult Adventures. Totally different things.


I don't think you have much to worry about with the Occult classes, especially Kineticist. I'm not super familiar with the others, but the only one I've seen any kind of power complaints about is the Psychic, which is a full caster anyway. Unchained rogue is widely regarded as much better than the crappy core rogue, but unchained monk, barbarian, and summoner are mainly by preference. Summoner was certainly toned down, but I definitely wouldn't call it "nerfed into the ground".


That would result in a +4 mind blade with a +1 equivalent ability at 9th level, while the rest of the group is using +2 weapons. It would also essentially totally cancel out the lowered enhancements from the armored blade archetype, if used. Hmm. I'm not sure stacking is the way to go, with soulknife.


I posted this over on the DSP forum as well, but it's somewhat less active over there so I thought I'd get opinions from here too.
How should the soulknife’s blade enhancement progression interact with the automatic bonus progression optional rules? My group may shift to that rule soon, and the mind blade progresses faster than the ABP chart. Any suggestions, or is it fine as-is?


hiiamtom wrote:

Complaining about creatures using abilities against the rules of the game really just continues the proud tradition of fluff and game mechanics being separated by a massive divide that will never be solved in any iteration of Pathfinder. It would take a new edition to solve those problems that have been evident since the core of 3e in 2000.

Maybe I should dust these off:

Ranger flavor wrote:
Rangers are deft skirmishers, either in melee or at range, capable of skillfully dancing in and out of battle.
Fighter flavor wrote:
Role: Fighters excel at combat—defeating their enemies, controlling the flow of battle, and surviving such sorties themselves. While their specific weapons and methods grant them a wide variety of tactics, few can match fighters for sheer battle prowess.
Rogue flavor wrote:
Most, however, excel in overcoming hindrances of all types, from unlocking doors and disarming traps to outwitting magical hazards and conning dull-witted opponents.
Rangers have a single dedicated combat style and have no class abilities to "dance in an out of combat", Fighters have almost no tactics in combat to their disposal besides dealing damage, and Rogues are probably the worst class at overcoming hindrances of any kind (not to mention how situational their class abilities are).

Don't forget the flavor for white haired witch, "A white-haired witch concentrates her mysterious powers on improving her prowess in melee, using feats of agility and her prehensile hair to deal extreme damage." That's as ridiculous as the rest.


I don't think this guide is being updated currently, but I'm pretty sure I saw an faq or errata allowing dragon disciple to work with the bloodrager draconic bloodline, finally. Worth mentioning, even if you only go 4 levels for +4 str, +2 natural armor, breath weapon, bite, and bonus feat; at the cost of 1 BAB and 1 caster level.


I allow everything paizo, and anything 3pp upon approval. I used to allow anything from Dreamscarred press without prior review, but one player dipped into path of war and was doing way more damage than even the zen archer, who is already a problem. He decided on his own to take the PoW out of his build, and now anything from PoW is subject to strict review.

I have the specific problem that one of my players (the zen archer) most enjoys building spell-less DPR machines; to take that away would greatly lessen his enjoyment of the game.

Other than that, I have a much higher level of system mastery than any of my players, so I allow most things with the understanding that anything too broken will likely be countered with something much, much nastier that I build with the same rules.


Well, it *started* with a legitimate rules question, and then continued into extracurricular activities. I don't actually remember if the question was decisively answered, however.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Is all this on topic? I could have sworn this was about diceless spells... Go fight somewhere else please.


Yeah, this looks like a question about Dreamscarred Press's Psionics.


I just have to say, you guys are awesome for how often and how quickly you respond to questions about your stuff on the forums.


This seems odd to me. I've always seen smite as empowering the paladin vs evil, so it always "works", but it just has no effect on non-evil, like a weapon with the holy property. So you're juiced up and totally ready to smite your target, but then you hit him (or he hits you) and nothing special happens. Oops, wasted smite.

On the topic of the detect evil, then murder paladin, that seems like violating the lawful portion of their alignment, even if it could be construed as "good".


Spellcasters very rarely bother to blast in my games, unless they have nothing better to do. Those useful things are mostly what they focus on anyway.


12-42+con dmg at level 12? I have a zen archer doing more than that at level 9, in my campaign. It's not that crazy.


LazarX wrote:
Lavawight wrote:
From personal experience, it's often easier to talk a group into a variation of a familiar system than an entirely new one.
You may not want to admit it, but what you're proposing IS an entirely new game.

I didn't propose anything EXCEPT new games, really, and I spoke of systems, not games. Neither of the other games mentioned use the d20 system (or any die other than d6, if I remember right), and that's too much of a jump for my players.


From personal experience, it's often easier to talk a group into a variation of a familiar system than an entirely new one. In particular, GURPS is ok with me and with one other person in my gaming group, but the others are relatively new even to PF, so the wide-open custom system of GURPS is a hard sell.

If you're willing to jump systems though, Shadowrun is another classless TTRPG worth looking at.


Casting another spell, such as dimension door, immediately ends any active touch spell.


Austin Collins 607 wrote:
Hey guys, just a quick thing that I wanted to ask about. Why did you decide to use terrakinesis rather than geokinesis? The former seems to be a mix of Latin and Greek where Terra means Earth and Kinesis means moving. I'm only making this observation because the other terms (i.e. pyrokinesis, aerokineses hydrokinesis) are totally greek. Is there a reason you decided to use terra instead of geo, perhaps it sounds better, etc.?

I know it's an enormously long thread, but that was discussed early on and i believe geo was agreed upon as the official name.


I would *love* to see a ninja build that used Stunning Irruption and Dastardly Finish somehow.


Does Stunning Irruption count as walking through walls? It certainly ensures that you kick off the surprise round.


The aberrant archetype of Dreamscarred Press's Aegis class could be nearly perfect for this. Tentacles, enhanced physical capabilities, just about everything except kakuja and cannibalism.


It won't help for the first few levels, but spells will help with that quite a bit. Blurred movement, mirror image, long arm, etc. Arcane bloodline in particular gives free buffs when you rage,including some non-AC defensive options.


Unless they've fixed it somewhere or you house rule it, Monkey Lunge requires a standard action to use, meaning you can't attack.


My group uses some of the more powerful rolling methods for stats, and many encounters are indeed easy for them, particularly because of one that is strongly optimized for massive dpr. The main thing I have done to scale up the challenge is simply maximizing the hit points on every enemy. My players know and approve of this because they like the challenge.
Other than that, there are plenty of horrible things in the APs to throw at even high powered groups. In Serpent's Skull, disease and poison were a major issue, and one particular encounter in the second book would have been a guaranteed TPK if I hadn't held back.
I recommend playing a few sessions to get a feel for how the AP works for your group's composition and power level. From what I've read, some APs are pretty brutally difficult even with generous rolls or high point buy.


It would be awesome to use that way, but the text of kinetic cover says one face of a square, and that sounds like it means for the cover to extend vertically from the plane of the battle grid. I know one GM who would definitely allow it, and another who definitely would not.


I'll be getting a text the moment a particular player in my game finds this thread, asking about retraining.


Except reality and physics have little to do with game mechanics. Spells and abilities do what they say they do, and they don't do things that they don't say they do, especially in regards to real world physics. Electricity attacks do not generally spread through conductive materials (shocking grasp's bonus aside),being struck by a colossal creature does not usually knock even a diminutive creature flying, and cold is an energy type rather than a lack of energy.


I'm still not really sure why it was necessary to rename the pool at all.


While it's unclear what portion of an arrow is "significant" by the brilliant energy description, the handle/grip/pommel/shaft/non-business-end of most weapons is not transformed, so most would not fall out or through.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's not true unless bags of holding and handy haversacks are considered living material. If they are not living, then brilliant energy weapons have no effect.

1 to 50 of 156 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>