![]()
![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Joegoat wrote: You could shatter their powder horn... no black powder means they just have very expensive clubs and if you would cast spark on the now un-attended black powder at their feet then I could see it blowing up If you are going to sunder something...why not the gun? ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Pol Mordreth wrote:
As the powder horn specifies it protects it vs. fire, I'd still say you'd need to roll a nat. 1 for the horn to fail. If they had a open keg of black powder that they were carrying then perhaps "boom". A carried closed keg might not explode because the powder is not "exposed" to flame. As a attended carried item I'd think the roll nat. 1 rule applies. This would of course be up to each individual DM. Otherwise spells like fireball that say they melt metal or ignite items would leave PC's running around with clothing and hair on fire with melted coin slag in their pockets. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Pol Mordreth wrote:
That'd be a houserule. Equipment on a character is protected vs spell effects unless they roll a nat. 1 on a save or the spell specifically states it targets equipment. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Would depend primarily on how advanced the gun was. I'd say that emerging guns are going to count primarily as wood. Advanced guns are more like their modern counterparts and may consist of more metal construction. My suggestion is to do a google image search for the type of gun you are using and then talk it over with your DM. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() I've run a variety of "sandboxes" some on a whim, others with a theme, sometimes I'm just wanting to try certain rule-sets. It usually starts with me having an idea. I'll then pose the question to my player's "If I run a game with (fill in the blank) would you be interested? If there is enough interest then I run the game. I never "force" my players to play a specific class, or to play in my world. I run games for those that are interested in having fun sharing the game world I envision. For example: When new books come out, I might decide to run a game with "non-core" classes only. Just to see how the classes function. Or, I might decide to run a "monster" game with "non-core" races only. I've run a game with the theme of "Ninja's Vs. Pirates". While the assumption was that the player's would be pirates I did allow one of them to play a Ninja because he gave me a fun reason to allow it. (Role-play wise) P.S. - The pirate game started on talk like a pirate day and yes there was rum involved. My latest sandbox was under "Magic was forgotten" and "Alchemy replaced Magic" themes and I only allowed classes that did not prepare or cast spells at the beginning of the game. (Alchemists being the exception with their infusions) The idea being that the players would eventually have a chance to rediscover magic. For the most part I don't limit either class or race but do request a "GOOD" reason why a PC turned out the way they did regardless of what world, campaign, sandbox, or system I might be running in. The one thing I do ban would be evil alignments, as I generally prefer a "heroic good" kind of game. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() AdAstraGames wrote:
True Strike is nice... but unless quickened some how... it does limit you to an attack every other turn. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Daelen wrote: I posted a thread about these guys, but didn't get a response yet. I so want to combine this with the Fire bomber archetype for a crazy goblin that sets himself on fire (turns into a fire elemental) and then lunges at the enemy! Setting yourself on fire... workable. Turning into a fire elemental... not so much, as you are no longer a goblin. A combo alchemist/barbarian does have good benefits from the stacking bonuses to strength from rage and mutagen. Depending on the flavor of alchemist, you also get any number of interesting abilities from the mutagen as well. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Now back to the main question. In the event of having your armor or other worn metal equipment slagged, should a PC need worry about being covered in molten metal? Do they need to remove the armor or suffer continual damage? In the case of a clothing item failing a save, I'd say it'd be on fire. Would this also occur in the case of "soft" metal items? ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Happler wrote:
I've bolded the bit I think is relevant here. I was thinking in order of layers and forgot about held items. I'd actually think that a cloak would be one of the items at the top of the list as it is an outer garment that goes over everything else. Next would be armor as it goes over clothing. I can see how a shield would go first though as you'd be holding it up to defend yourself. A weapon or held items would be in the top four as well I guess for the same reason. Anywho... thanks for this. :) ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() BB36 wrote:
Funny thing... the barbarian rage actually INCREASES your will saves and the ability to resist taking INT damage. If you INT is above average and your WIS is high... you'd be gimping the character yourself to play it like a retard. Most of the "Hey guys, watch this" comes from low wisdom. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Ah... but are you jumping off the bridge with a parachute or bungee cord? I was just saying, that if you are willing to take the precautions necessary to provide a high enough will save that you practically just have to roll a non-one not to fail once a round, you effectively have that parachute or bungee cord. You can still fail, but rolling a one on a save is relatively rare. In that instance the RageChemist becomes viable. Granted, you CAN fail, just like something could happen to your parachute or bungee cord. Luckily in this case, death is not the result, the save just gets harder but again... if your starting stats and will save is high enough that is not the end of the world and does not guarantee a unconscious PC. Also, I'm not suggesting this is an option for a game that using point buy unless its a very HIGH point buy. If you'll note I mentioned "if you got good rolls". I've known players who can take any set of dice and consistently roll high on their starting stats and generally love to play characters that have "MAD" issues. Just being a RageChemist does not automatically make you eligible for the darwin awards. PC or Player alike. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Not sure how others would do this but if the situation came up in my game I'd rule it like this... As this is a flask that needs to break like an alchemical item, I'd rule this touch attack is special in that it does not need to just "touch" the enemy. If you are using deflect arrows, you'd slap the flask away randomly (treat flask like a grenade-like weapon that has missed). If you are using snatch arrows, you'd catch the flask without it breaking. However, having gained possession of the flask it'd be nullified as per the rules on others using alchemist stuff. Again... this is just how I'd rule on it in my games. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Ah yes. Knowing where to look helps. So items are only effected if they are non-attended or on a nat-one saving through if attended. Un-attended magic items get a save, non-magical items do not. A PC rolling a one inside a fireball is likely to have armor, cloak, clothing, or a bag go up in smoke. A PC being hit by a firestream and rolling a one has a good chance of taking it full in the chest or back. Again - in the case of bronze armor getting slagged (steel will most likely just shatter or something) would the PC need to worry about molten metal? ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Ok... let me widen the question to the Fireball spell as well. I ask because I've never really run into a situation with a fireball or the firestream spell and armor that can be melted as I'm usually running in a game or running a game where steel armor is the norm. Fireballs are also one of the spells that I've always aired on the side of caution with when I'm running and kinda glossed over allot of the fire effects. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() I'm just curious how other DM's are ruling or would rule on this. Say you are running a bronze age game. What would be the additional effect to a character wearing Bronze armor when they get hit with a FIRESTREAM spell? Are they covered in molten bronze that continues to deal damage? ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() StreamOfTheSky wrote: No, Ragechemist is never worth it. But I'm sick of explaining why, so now that I've done my civic duty once again, I suppose I'll just sit back and let characters who don't "get it" earn their Darwin Awards. Its a matter of opinions that just don't agree. No need to be calling us idiots. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() It depends... does your character have some of those permanent flaming ink tattoos? If so, between those and the hair, you may have the rest of the party throwing water on your character to extinguish you. I'd agree with Are. Base rules wise there is nothing that says you actually produce heat or light with your hair, it just "moves" like flames. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Lune wrote: Please Don't Kill Me is correct. The +2 Str is not worth the drawbacks of the Rage Chemist. I recommend against it. If you can manage the MAD because you got good rolls... then bumping wisdom up for high enough will saves makes the +2 totally worth it. If your will save is high enough it never gets worse. :) A Barbarian with a nice will save is also something most enemies have not encountered often. No Calm Emotions draining YOUR rage. :D ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Benoc wrote:
Ah... I got partially ninja'd ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Monstropolis wrote:
As you'll be doing the game online, you might consider setting up any maps you might be using and pointing a webcam at them. You can then lay out a grid with letters down one side and numbers down the other. This way you can control the minis and the players can decide where they wish to move. Being in front of a computer also makes it very easy to have the rules right at hand via the PRD. I always suggest starting "new" players at first level. It lets you build your character more "organically" as the game progresses with the PC's picking up abilities based on what they have experienced. There are a few published adventures you can pick up from paizo as a free download. I find that by running some published adventures it can give you a feel for the right kind of pacing you'll need for your own games. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Elamdri wrote:
Having just viewed the movie again... I think I may just do this sometime. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Third Mind wrote:
You can find it HERE ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() minoritarian wrote:
The "little shaky head spirits" would be a Kami, Kodama. Firearms would be emerging or worse. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Elamdri wrote: Nausicaa wouldn't be that hard, just cover most of the world in an inhaled poison that does 1d6 of Con damage per round and then give the players a mask that filters the poison. The difficult parts would be the airships, planes, and gliders. We'd also need to stat up the chocobo-like mounts. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() I played a wizard like this once in 3.5. He would either toss the shrunken items against a ceiling, toss them above his target and then dismiss the effect, or while "flying" hold the object over his victim and dismiss the effect. In all cases he let gravity do the work. Damage was limited by the height he could drop the object from and the size of the object he could shrink. Were you to toss a shrunken block of stone against a enemy, the effect would not be nearly so pronounced. However the enemy would still have to content with having several hundred pounds of mass suddenly appearing in their arms. In all cases I believe the DM was ruling that I was just targeting a square and the enemy got a reflex save to avoid being crushed. ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Nodnarb wrote: If I lived anywhere near there (or even considered moving anywhere near there), I'd take you up on the offer. But Michigan is a bit far to consider that kind of move.... Buy in now and you'll have a place to stay when vacationing away from the cold in sunny florida! ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() Assuming you are using a single firearm (so you have a free hand) and can reload as free actions then I do not see anything in the rules that would prevent you from firing two shots as a single attack (but making two rolls at -6 each), reloading, and repeating until you've run out of attacks. Progression should be something like (+5/+5)/(+5/+5)/(+0/+0) ![]()
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
![]() CountMRVHS wrote:
It depends allot on what your DM will allow. My suggestion for special bolts would be to make batches of bane bolts of different races. As a cleric can cast summon monster this is a easy one to make.
|