Nargin Haruvex

Lord_Rachen's page

37 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


Heather 540 wrote:
Those all sound pretty good. If there is an actual battle wheelchair with stats and pricing, please link me.

Not that I know of. Its something you would have to create yourself.

Personally I do like making custom magic items. But I do have to say its very difficult and very easy to break your game.

I have had to nerf my own created magic items a few times mid session because I realized it broke some stuff.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree that its not a good way to deter powergaming. Which is not my intention in the first place. It more to blend everything together.

Also in my homebrews, that I mostly run, I always try to tie in personnel stories and events related to the characters. So I use characters traits and backstories as hooks and tools in my story writing to incorporate elements from their character creation into it.

MrCharisma wrote:
While there's no right way to do it, it can feel like you're swimming upstream if you try to do things in a vastly different manner to the rest of your group. It's probably more important for you and the GM (or you and the player if you're the GM) to make sure you're vaguely on the same page about a character than to have hard-and-fast rules about this kind of thing.

I definitely agree with this, I'm not really hawkish about it. And I am the firm belief no matter how a GM wants to run the game, if the players aren't on board there is no use. Were here to have fun, and sometimes that means doing whats fun for the players even if that not how you as the GM always wants to do it.

Ill see how the next session goes.

I might just give them a bit more info next time before we start.

Maybe I just need a bit more experience.

If I end up with more questions/problems maybe I will be back looking for more advice.

MrCharisma wrote:
I don't know if it's too late for this to be useful, but another alternative would be just to start your PCs at level 3 and have them play from the beginning of the AP. Yes they'll probably stomp through the first few encounters, but they'll get through that part so quickly it won't matter, and withint a few sessions they'll have caught up and be the correct level again.

I did level them up one extra level than the recommended since the party is only 3 characters when the module is built for 4 characters.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
My argument is a different tact saying that those who choose traits based on mechanical benefit will not be dissuaded by having to choose to add that to their background, while Lord_Rachen was suggesting some sort of restriction to force the mechanics and background to match each other. If players are choosing traits for the mechanics, it doesn't mean they wont attempt to role play their character but I believe that trying to create a restriction just isn't a fruitful avenue.

I think you got me all wrong, the purpose is not to dissuade nor restrict anyone from taking trait. I allow them all.

The purpose is to promote and blend the mechanics and roleplaying together. It is not to stop people from taking certain traits.

The player most certainly can just pick the most optimized trait or make the decision based on mechanics, they just then have to also bring it back around a work it into the roleplay aspect.

Its perfectly ok to have players write character backgrounds the most desirable traits that is not something I have a problem with.

Claxon wrote:
The problem is you can come up with all sorts of reason to justify something being in your background, that power gamers aren't going to care about.

I mean I am the GM. I come up with all sorts or reasons to justify all sorts of things in my games.

Ive never had any pushback from any powergamers Ive played with. Powergamers from my experience enjoy the challenge of pulling the most from the rules as defined. Plus I dont really feel like its that limiting of a request.

Claxon wrote:
I don't disagree with you that character traits should sync up with backstory, but trying to "enforce" it...

I did specifically say that I not hawkish about it and its just a pet peeve of mine.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:

That will just lead to character backgrounds being written to enable the most desirable traits or fights over what counts as "matching" your backstory.

Is a 14 dex wizard enough to qualify for reactionary?

There are no rules for it. I understand your intention, it simply wouldn't work well for the entire player base, but might work okay for individual game groups.

That's fine with me. I dont really see a problem there. As long as it makes sense in the backstory go ahead.

Maybe the wizard was an acrobat in a previous life or something and thus takes reactionary.

As long as it makes sense lore wise go ahead.

But when someone makes a character with a backstory and then picks traits that dont align or make any sense with their characters backstory has always felt off with me. And yeah their is no rule for it, its just a houserule thing that I do when I GM. Wacky weird things are fine as long as it can be justified within their own lore.

And yeah 14 Dex would be fine. But even if someone came to me with a low Dex character and took reactionary but justified it in their background I would be fine with it.
i.e. maybe they grew up in an abusive household with alcoholic parents or something that would fly into fits of rage and beating so their were always aware and on edge and its just a tick that stuck with them for the rest of thier life. Always staying in their room reading books etc. that why they ultimately became a wizard but arent very dexterous.

If someone wants to start with the Rich Parent trait it needs to be justified somehow. I feel like that should be the same for all traits.

Just personally how I run it. But Im not hawkish about it. its just a pet peeve of mine.

TxSam88 wrote:

Adventure paths require some player buy in. They need to know that they need to at least try to follow the story and clues. Sometimes it even takes the GM saying hey guys, you're doing the wrong thing.

Most AP's are written "in order" So you can just go chapter by chapter.

APs can be loads of fun, if everyone understand their part. I fins that for the same amount of preparation time, I can have a much better game experience for my players.

Yeah I think that where I went a little bit wrong. I probably needed to give them more information in advance than I did. I was just hesitant because I didnt really know what information they should or should not know and probably leaned too much into the later.

They did buy in, I just think it was a bit of failure on my part since I am more used to running my own stuff where I am more comfortable with seeing where the players turn and adjust accordingly.

Maybe before the next session I will just let them know and give them more background information and tell them more stuff they should know.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really tend to like the idea that each trait you take needs to match your actual backstory and designed character.

So the non dexterous wizard who spent all his time studying should not be taking reactionary.

The trait needs to match the character, instead of just browsing the traits to find the best one and picking it even if it does not make sense lore wise.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Heather 540 wrote:

One of my characters is a crafter that can use improvised weapons. She also runs a shop. She focuses on odd types of weapons like traveling kettles and battle ladders.

I was wondering if there were any odd types of armor that she could put in as well.

Odd materials would be useful as well.


If she makes that sort of stuff....

VoodistMonk wrote:

So there appears to be two lines of thought on this...

A) the bullet scatters immediately upon being shot, creating a cone with a range of 15' originating at the sling, itself.

B) the bullet travels from the sling to a point of your choosing before scattering into a cone with a range of 15' originating at the point you selected within the sling's range (and line of effect to you).

Personally, I like "B" because it sucks less, and this is a fantasy game where you want to be able to do things that otherwise can only be done in one's imagination. And without definitive texts saying I can't, that is how I would run a scatter sling. Picking up a handful of gravel and flinging it in a 15' cone does not require a magical weapon... slinging a rock to some random point and having it explode in a directed cone does, in fact, sound magical...

Option A does seem to fail the logical and flavor text test for me. The bullet would just explode right in front of your face, making it harder and virtually impossible to hit already "hard-to-hit game."

"Song’o halflings often use these slings to hunt hard-to-hit game."

So option B makes the most sense.

SheepishEidolon wrote:
Lord_Rachen wrote:
Its just really difficult for me GMing a pre-built module and not a homebrew.
What are you struggling with? Technical aspects? Organization? Getting into a story someone else made up?

I think its the later, getting into the story someone else made up.

Its hard to RP the NPCs when the players ask anything that isnt laid out in the book.

I also struggle with it seems to assume the players will do things in certain ways, and I struggle when the PCs do something really outside the box. Do I force them to stay in the box or do I roll with it and adjust accordingly?

I am also a little bit confused with the order things are supposed to be done, since the module is laid out a bit open but I am sometimes wondering if I am letting the PCs do things in the wrong order.

Finally, I struggle with is the players arent taking the bait with the clues the book is giving the player. And I have given them virtually all the clues the book has, but they arent really putting 1 + 1 together.

These are all things I overcome in my homebrew by adjusting behaviors and mold the world around the PCs actions without breaking the immersion because I understand all the motivations of the NPC and how and where everything should go, if the PCs do something out of the box.

BTW, Plunder and Peril was on the list to play. But Feast of Dust won out among the players.

Ok thanks, seemed like they all did. I know there are modules at all sorts of levels as well as some stuff from the Pathfinder Society. Was just really curious if all the AP started at level 1.

I normally only run homebrew stuff. But we havent really played in a while and some of my friends really wanted to play again. So I said, I can just run something from piazo. Since I didnt have anything prepped and I really dont have as much time as I used too.

But looking up the APs they all started at level 1 and my group really despises playing at level 1. Most of them are comfortable at level 5 or later. Easier for me too, since they are so fragile at lvl 1.

Most of the individuals in my group arent really power gamers either, and just like playing and mostly doing really bad ideas. So rarely are most of the players optimized or play their class to its fullest.

I ended up just picking Feast of Dust and started running that. Seems pretty cool so far. Its just really difficult for me GMing a pre-built module and not a homebrew. Ive only done it once before. Have years of experience running my own homebrew games, but a pre-built is difficult for me.

So I guess any advice for running pre-built modules?

norsethunder wrote:
1. Where in the world does this take place?

My initial reaction is Ustalav. Put it in the capital Caliphas or in one of the boarder counties close to the Worldwound. Since its right next to the Worldwound, good enough justification to have everyone scared about anything extra planar. Plus lost of aristocracy who probably love to party and go to clubs, etc.

Second, River Kingdoms is a good bet. Its flexible enough to create really any town and government small and independent enough.

norsethunder wrote:
2. What are they smuggling?

If in Ustalav you could do something magical, say hes smuggling artifacts related to the Whispering Tyrant to the Whispering Way. The aristocracy would definitely have an interest in stopping that. Bribes wouldn't work.

If in the River Kingdoms you could always just fall back to greed, and say hes smuggling virtually anything, but the local leadership/government demands a really high "tax" or "tithe" for what ever he is smuggling and his operation is a lucrative way to avoid it and make a bunch of money.

norsethunder wrote:
2. What are they smuggling?

You could have a plot twist and make it the businessman's wife or something. Maybe it was her idea in the first place to come up with the ruse. Or maybe it was just a ruse in the first place but then an actually entity does show up and is ultimately the one doing all the killing.

Quick dumb question:

Do all the Pathfinder 1e adventure paths start at level 1? Or do any APs begin at different levels?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
One interesting thing to to is shift the weapon into something you can palm/conceal: a Monkey's Fist! It's the only negligible bulk weapon so it works for that and if can save you bulk if you want to drag out more loot.

Also since I'm obviously not a particularly stealthy character, i like the idea of being able to "conceal" my main weapon if necessary.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Taja the Barbarian wrote:
Loreguard wrote:

While I am all for weapon staffs being able to shift into another 2-handed weapon. Technically, the rune says it can shift into a melee weapon that requires the same number of hands to wield.

It doesn't actually say it can shift into a different weapon using the same number of hand as you currently are wielding it in.

So technically the dagger requires one hand, the bastard sword requires 1 hand, and the two handed sword requires one hand.

The bastard sword requires 1 hand, even when you are wielding it with 2 hands and getting a benefit from that choice.

Simplest solution would creating a Greater Rune of Shifting, which has a prerequisite of being placed on a 1-h weapons that has a Two-handed property. And have the weapon be able to shift to any melee weapon that can be wielded with the same number of hands you are currently wielding it in.

I don't know that it is horribly broke to allow it to do as you said however, if your GM allows it, great. If your the GM and want to stick with more raw, I don't think it specifically is allowed, currently as written.

What might be a stranger edge case would be the Lance, which requires two hands to wield, so could shift into a two-handed sword. However, the lance when charging, mounted with a harness and moving at least 10' it can be wielded with 1 hand, reducing the damage die to d6. But it is certainly arguable then that it no longer requires 2 hands so during a charge, might be able to shift into a 1 handed weapon. Then the question for the corollary, of can a longsword or bastard sword shift into a lance during a charge? Or does the rune only operate based on the base nature of the weapon, not specific edge conditions?

Nope: The OP is talking about shifting his GRIP to two-handed, not shifting the weapon into a two-handed sword.

Reassuring to see someone else make the same misread I did...

Yeah shifting grip requires and action as far as I am aware.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Salamileg wrote:
Yup, you're correct. Keeping in mind that daggers and Bastard Swords are basically only effectively usable by completely different characters (one is a agile finesse simple weapon, the other is a big strength-based martial weapon) and two actions in combat is a lot just to switch your weapon around.

You can still use finesse weapons as strength based character. Although not always the best, for RP purposes I prefer always start the day with my deities preferred weapon.

Taja the Barbarian wrote:
Lord_Rachen wrote:

Question on the Shifting Property Rune. The Property Rune states:

"The weapon takes the shape of another melee weapon that requires the same number of hands to wield."

So if I have a Dagger with the Shifting Property Rune I can spend one action to change it to a Bastard Sword and then another to switch it to Two-Handed and then attack and now I have upgraded by damage die from 1d4 to 1d12 for as long as I keep it in Two-Handed mode.
Is this legit or am I missing something?

Reason I ask is because a I am playing a Level 3 Liberator Champion and with Blade Ally I now have access to the Shifting property on any of my weapons on prep. Its seems like a dramatic damage spike.

Never mind my initial response.

Yep, that works, though it would generally be better to just get an actual Bastard Sword...

True, but the main benefit is that I can use it with my current magic weapon instead and still get all the benefits.

Question on the Shifting Property Rune. The Property Rune states:

"The weapon takes the shape of another melee weapon that requires the same number of hands to wield."

So if I have a Dagger with the Shifting Property Rune I can spend one action to change it to a Bastard Sword and then another to switch it to Two-Handed and then attack and now I have upgraded by damage die from 1d4 to 1d12 for as long as I keep it in Two-Handed mode.
Is this legit or am I missing something?

Reason I ask is because a I am playing a Level 3 Liberator Champion and with Blade Ally I now have access to the Shifting property on any of my weapons on prep. Its seems like a dramatic damage spike.

Dragonborn3 wrote:
I love seeing stuff like this. MH and Pathfinder would be a fun game, I imagine. The only issue I see is that, if Pukei-Pukei and Anjanath, monsters you face pretty early in MHW, are CR 15 and 17... how will you handle creatures like Mergigante, Zorah Magdaros, or Deviljho without them being demigod level?

The reason they are that high atm is because the party I am playing with already are fairly high level.

So I created them at higher CR so when I plan to use them they still face a challenge. Of course you can always just scale them down.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So recently I have been slowly converting Monster Hunter Monsters into Pathfinder. I have a point in our current campaign where I will want to use them, just haven't got there yet.

So I was just looking for some input on some of the monsters I have created so far and see what other people think.



Do you plan on improving the crafting system in PF2E?

I have always found this one of the most intriguing part of RPGs and also have had many players who were interested in it, but the rules were always so convoluted and the times to create items so impractical that I have rarely had a player use the crafting system. And I don't blame them.

Do you plan on streamlining crafting and possible ways to make it useful in sessions that don't run in multiple in game months with alot of down time?

So I recently was setting up for a new campaign and one of my players wanted to play a monk based of the League of Legends character, Udry.(

After spending some time pondering which class to use and how to make it work I just decided to make my own custom class: The Hirana Spirit Walker Monk

I just wanted to throw it up here for some feedback and in case anyone else has been looking to play a character like this.

Its been play tested a little. In our current campaign its been going well currently level 8, so I can't say for sure how it holds up at later levels...we shall see.

I have also included a set of custom items I created specifically for this class if any GMs want to use it.

It should be noted that I do generally run a high fantasy game with a pretty quick leveling system. So if you run a game with less magical items and slower leveling I'm not sure how it will hold up there.

Please let me know if you have used the class, how it held up, and any issue you ran into.

See link below for the class:

Homebrewery Link.

Special thanks to Homebrewery for making my ideas look professional.

Please go check them out at Homebrewery its a pretty amazing tool.

P.S. I apologize in advance for the inevitable typos, errors, and general English issues. I just threw my ideas down and I don't have an editor. :P

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:

At that point though, I'd rather be the bone trooper, as that necrohive's going to spend the rest of eternity floating randomly in the middle of absolutely nowhere. Not an especially appealing fate.

Unless he's lucky enough to end up as a spaceship bugsplat.

Seisho wrote:

Why would you wield a longsword as operative anyway?

besides that fact that dual wield works only with operative weapons and small arms, the same is true for trick attack and triple/quad attack

Wasn't going to use it on an operative. Was thinking a melee focused solarian or a melee soldier build.

Are there any rules for vehicle creation?

That's a shame?

Does anyone use any good homebrew rules in relation to dual wielding meele?

Still trying to wrap my self around starfinder rules. I don't know if this has been asked before but I did I quick search and could really only find posts focusing on small arms.

Does dual wielding two of the same melee weapons provide u with any benefit at all?

Like lets say I have a lvl 1 envoy that wants to dual wield two longswords that are exactly the same. Does this provide any benefit at all? Or would it just be flair?

Also if the answer is no, any cool house rules ideas for dual wielding two meeles?

Jader7777 wrote:
Some players might murder because you the GM telegraph everything as a combat encounter. Do you give players clear non-combat situations that won't trigger their hoboism?

I dont think im doing that.

For example they wanted to go vist a shop keeper to go buy some stuff. In the flavor text for the shop keeper he had an old hat that has been in his family for generations. So the occultist says to his companion hey I want that hat go kill that shop keeper...the chemyst chimes in and gives the fighter a potion to disguise himself as the sheriff...fighter goes in and murders the shop keeper...

I just gave them some flavor text of an old man wearing a larger leather hat and who told the PCs that the hat isnt for sale since it has been in his family for generations.

Calybos1 wrote:

They want the kind of game that you don't enjoy running.

Your enjoyment matters too.

Conclusion: It's somebody else's turn to run.

Yeah one other person voiced that he might want to try but he never seems to do it, and everyone else seems to want me to always do it cause they say I do it the best.

Wouldnt mind playing a PC from time to time tho. We shall see...

Ssalarn wrote:
Mark Carlson 255 wrote:

1) Shift their alignments to match their actions. And start enforcing what happens to those who do not shield their alignments by magic, ie paladins will detect you as evil, etc.

That actually leads me to ask- have you actually talked to your group about your feelings regarding their actions and the direction of the campaign? You mention they still think they're the heroes of the game, so it's possible they have a very different perspective on what's happening and what the repercussions of their actions should be. This might be a great time to just check in with your players and have a conversation about the tone of the game and how you believe their characters' actions would be perceived in the context of the game world. Maybe the "behind the screen" info that you have and they don't is leading to a schism in the narrative you're attempting to run and the narrative that they believe they're creating/participating in.

Yeah I already talked to them. The chaotic people say they like doing it just because and its fun to them, so I talked to some of the other players and they just say they dont mind. But even tho they say they dont mind it still seems like the chaotic players are starting to take over the campaign.

I'm pretty sure they are not chasing XP or anything because they are already lvl 11 and I've always run a pretty fast lvling game anyway. I dont think its boredom or burn out cause we only play like once ever 2 weeks sometimes every week.

I'm not too bent on running my version of a narative either I generally build a world that exists and progresses regardless of if the PC follow the ques and do the quests.

I'm just concerned im not running a proper campaign to encompase everyone or what the PCs want to do and I want to make sure everyone has fun. That why I was thinking of running a campaign where the PCs play monsters but im just not sure if that is the right route.

RedDingo wrote:
Why did they kidnap kids?

No real reason just cause, chemist wanted to feed the kid potions and stuff.

Well they all started out as either N or CN characters. They all initially had a plan but then just went to shit for no reason. One plays and insane person so he uses that to justify any action. Another plays a master chemyst who just mixes in potions into anything he can find and trys to get every person he meets to drink them. The rest of the party is less into RPing and enjoy more of a combat focus so they just join into murdering when the occasion comes.

Right after the first session everyone just decided to kidnap a bunch of kids and got magical cages to lock them up, they used disguise person to impersonate the sheriff and murder a shop keeper. So the town in in chaos right now and they have an orc army marching on the city and it will arrive in a few days.

I did create a NPC party to oppose them which is working ok.

My real concern is that while most seem to be having fun; the whole chaos of the campaign its been leaving other plays out since they are not too into the RP and dont really know what to do within all the chaos. If I confront them tho they all say its ok they dont mind. It just suks when ur at the table and only have 2 people playing and the rest just sitting there watching the chaos and not doing anything aside from the occasional murdering.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So my group is turning into a bunch of "Murder Hobos" that think they still are the heros of the campaign...they are not anymore...and I was thinking of some ideas for a new campaign because things are probaly gonna go south for them soon...

Was thinking about just doing a goblin or monster campaign for them so they can just go full murder hobos...

Sooo wanted to get some input on the differences of running an evil PC campaign vs monster campaign.

So I know this is a lot to ask but...

Can you use racial HD advancement on a monster that normally only uses class levels?

Ex: adding racial HD to an Orc


Can someone give me an example of how to add racial HD to a monster using the monster advancement rules? I have read the rules multiple times now and I just dont understand it. Ive tried to advance some monsters for my campaign but they end up all jank cause I dont understand the monster advancement rules.