Best bet is to read this series: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060207a The rules themselves are not clear. 1) I would say they all get a save if they all saw the arrows going through the 'wall'. But that there would be a modifier to the other peoples saves if someone says "that wall is an illusion". 2) I would say no. You could only tell by their reaction. Possibly bluff vs Sense Motive if they pretended they believe it. --- The tricky part is if the archer should get to shoot in the first place. If it just suddenly appeared probably. If they ran around the corner and it was just there maybe no save - or a save if they know their is no wall there normally.
Orcadorsala wrote: On "dump stat is cheese": It so is if all the player wants out of it is munching his stats to be powerful. If the campaign is about RP and interaction as much as fighting, you'd need a character that isn't going to be useless for that. (Or if your concept is being useless at that you'd need a talented player and some... I have two distinct point in reply to this: 1) If you prevent a min/maxer from dumping stats then they do not suddenly become a better roleplayer. Becoming a better role player requires a lot more than not having dump stats. ---- 2) Following the rules (you can reduce stats down to 7, which means down to 5 if you have a negative penalty) is not cheese. Cheese is bending rules, breaking rules or using strange RAW combinations to get over-powerful effects. How can doing exactly what is written in the rulebook be cheese? Building the most powerful character you can is not cheese in my mind. For some people this is the fun part of the game. For some its part of the fun of the game. If you want better role play encourage it, set a good example. Use some carrots and if needed some stick. In my opinion don't change the RAW to try and encourage role playing. Especially when it will have almost no effect.
StealthElite wrote: am I being a jerk for saying no when a big part of the jade regent is having a character that's somewhat likeable so the NPCs dont kick them out of the caravan? Yes. --- Cha 7 + 2 rank diplomacy = Cha 14 0 rank diplomacy Yes the Cha 7 will not bluff, or intimidate but why should say an honest Good character do that kind of thing? Lets fast forward to level 10 Cha 7 10 rank diplomacy >>>> Cha 14 0 rank diplomacy So the Cha 14 guy will not get 'thrown out of the caravan' but the Diplomacy modifier +8 guy will? --- People keep nasty people around if they are useful. "Yeah he's a great fighter and saved us from the Minotaur's but he's a bit of a boring guy so lets get rid of him." Doesn't make much sense to me. --- As for 'dump stats are cheese': why? Characters with clearly defined flaws and strengths offer much richer roleplaying opportunities. If you really want to 'punish' player just make them do skill checks in skill they don't have. No meta game punishment is needed when the rules of the game will penalise them enough.
So what you want is all traps to be spotted and disarmed by the Rogue by 2 skill checks? Where's the fun in that? Traps SHOULD be like this. They are way more fun! In addition to any of the options above (after about 5 or 6 minutes thought: Assuming its like a wand in that it has a limited number of charges just throw rocks until its out of charges. Suck up some damage. Illusion spells - a traps will save can't be great. Experiment on what does and does not trigger it. Is it movement or what it perceives creatures? If only creatures then block its line of sight. Smoke spells, smoke bombs. Ooooh this is my favourite: a fire, producing a smoke cloud - just chuck a load of fire wood into the middle. The fireball will even light it for you. The smoke means it doesn't know where you are. If it starts shooting just run across and hope you get lucky.
How are you calculating your CR? Looking at the rules its: APL = Average level (5)
Normal encounter CR = APL So that's 1 CR4 monster: Barhast (3 +10 attacks) Grizzly Bear 3+7 attacks (but the grapple is better) If you find they chew through things fast you can up the CR by 1 or 2 (or even more). Also remember those rules assume several encounters per day. If the spell casters stop every encounter to rest throw an ambush or a quest with a severe time limit in... However an Epic encounter is APL +3 so.... CR7 Picking a random monster: I have thought this kind of thing would be a MAJOR challenge: Chimera CR 7 XP 3,200 CE Large magical beast Init +5; Senses darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision, scent; Perception +10 Defense AC 19, touch 10, flat-footed 18 (+1 Dex, +9 natural, –1 size) hp 85 (9d10+36) Fort +9, Ref +7, Will +6 Offense Speed 30 ft., fly 50 ft. (poor) Melee bite +12 (2d6+4), bite +12 (1d8+4), gore +12 (1d8+4), 2 claws +12 (1d6+4) Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft. Special Attacks breath weapon (usable every 1d4 rounds)
If you are a 'waste of space' they won't mind you not acting next time they are in trouble. If you really are the key party member they will wipe and you have have a 'relatively' clean conscience. Not that it matters - your character is hardly likely to miss any sleep being Chaotic Evil and all... Seems like a much more Machiavellian way to go. Maybe a bit Lawful Evil though... Alternative is kill them in their sleep, then go and hunt down their families. If you can imprison them somewhere and make they watch so much the better. That sound more CE to me. I still prefer option 1 though - nothing like smug people being proved wrong.
The first army to realise the power of the Message Cantrip (and higher level message spells) and used it to coordinate their forces like a modern army instead of like a medieval one would have a significant advantage. One of the main problems faced by historical armies is you don't know what's happening out of your own line of sight. This meant commanders had to do what they thought best based on what they knew - or horse delivered messages that could be minutes or hours out of date (and based on even older reports the main commander received). During WW2 the fact that American forces had more radios was a significant advantages over the German forces.
Is there a level where you are so stupid that failing a Will save on a charm effect has no effect? :) --------------------------------------- Do you think you could swing playing as a Construct? http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/creatureTypes.html A construct is an animated object or artificially created creature. A construct has the following features. • d10 Hit Die. • Base attack bonus equal to total Hit Dice (fast progression). • No good saving throws. • Skill points equal to 2 + Int modifier (minimum 1) per Hit Die. However, most constructs are mindless and gain no skill points or feats. Constructs do not have any class skills, regardless of their Intelligence scores. Traits: A construct possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry). • No Constitution score. Any DCs or other statistics that rely on a Constitution score treat a construct as having a score of 10 (no bonus or penalty). • Low-light vision. • Darkvision 60 feet. • Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms). • Immunity to bleed, disease, death effects, necromancy effects, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning. • Cannot heal damage on its own, but often can be repaired via exposure to a certain kind of effect (see the creature's description for details) or through the use of the Craft Construct feat. Constructs can also be healed through spells such as make whole. A construct with the fast healing special quality still benefits from that quality. • Not subject to ability damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, energy drain, or nonlethal damage. • Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects, or is harmless). • Not at risk of death from massive damage. Immediately destroyed when reduced to 0 hit points or less. • A construct cannot be raised or resurrected. • A construct is hard to destroy, and gains bonus hit points based on size, as shown on the following table.
BigNorseWolf wrote: Most constructs are mindless, and afaik don't have the skill to make anything. Also the up front cost of a golum means you probably won't be getting your money back in your lifetime unless you're an elf. Well I don't know the exact costs as I didn't look them up. They wouldn't be used to MAKE anything - they just walk forward. Like a donkey in a wheel. Does a steam engine need to be intelligent? You just need something to turn a wheel and drive a factory off that. Could be any number of things. Some sort of wind spell to drive a wind mill. Could be anything.
Well. Thinking about it logically (and when I DM a D&D game this is the line I will go down): If you have magic you have the potential for industrial scale manufacturing. If you can create a force - say make a golem or something to turn a wheel, whatever - then you have engines. This leads to factories. So really the 'medieval' (farmers and craftsmen) type setting makes no sense. You could still need farms but they could be more like modern industrial farms. No mass labor is needed. So they factories would need intelligent workers and cities would develop. The economy would develop along similar lines to the industrial revolution. Those with industry grow more powerful and look for markets for their cheap magically produced goods. Economics would develop. --- Turning to conflict: If you have extremely high power spells (EHPS) and your opponents do not you will defeat them. This would probably lead to the development of nation states (as opposed to small kingdoms or city states). Conquer your neighbours, swallow them up, assimilate them and grow. Once you have nation states with EHPS someone might come up with a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction. This could in turn lead to a cold war forming. Proxy wars, insurgencies sponsored by one side. Seeking to defeat them economically. I can see an evil run autocracy vs a more open society potentially developing. But you could have more than 2 sides developing. You might just go straight to a modern worlds set up. No 2 sides just a multitude of nations. Some more powerful some less so. So basically you cannot look just at battles you need to look bigger picture. -------------------------
More on topic though - yes fireballs kill people but why doesn't your party always die to fireballs? You can buff against fire. Battles would be like D&D games on a larger scale. Buffs, debuffs, battle field control, and damage dealing - with a little healing. Give 100 soldiers haste and protection from fire and send them charging. But before they arrive the enemy position has been pounded by artillery for days - until the defenders run out of shields. The problem of course is that wizards can just sleep 8 hours and be restocked in power. But they can be exhausted eventually. Therefore attrition and very long wars would result. Ultimately the outcome would be likely be decided by morale and economics. So long as neither side gives up whoever can produce more will win the battle of attrition Its also possible that a small strike force could decapitate the leadership throwing them into disarray... All sorts of possibilities for a game there. :) |