That means you need a statue (or similarly appropriate golem form), but the manual has all the magic you need. The manual is spent in the process.
If you have a golem manual and you have an appropriate statue or form to use, it shouldn't take longer than a few minutes to burn the book and sprinkle the ashes on the golem.
Plenty of paladins won't have a problem at all with the Order of the God Claw. Their job is not to root out heresy, it's to inspire, encourage, lead, and protect mankind (or their own particular sophont race). A LG inquisitor might hate them for saying that Asmodeus has lawful virtues, but a paladin most certainly doesn't have to.
The order of the God Claw actually looks like a really good order for a paladin. As does the minor order of the pike.
Now a hellknight paladin might get put in between a rock and a hard place every now and then, but as long as he sticks to his principles, he'll do great.
We went with "The Order of the White Rose" or just "The White Rose" for short. This is in reference to the white roses of Westcrown that all turned black when Aroden died. Not coincidentally, this was when everything went horrible for the city, so there's a certain nostalgia to the white roses, at least for those who have long enough memories to know about them.
Sometimes dragons do ally with lesser creatures, though it is unusual.
Copper dragons often make temporary agreements with delving creatures (such as gnomes, dwarves, and humans) to exchange metals. Black dragons form agreements, sometimes even official ones, with the lizardfolk that inhabit their swamps. Bronze and silver dragons sometimes adventure with humans and humanoids, though this is seen as vulgar and crass by the majority of dragonkind. Brass dragons are chatty and social enough to form agreements, and blues often position themselves to rule humanoid cities.
Perhaps the most clever and prolific of the agreement-forming dragons is the green. They make agreements with forest-dwelling creatures, sometimes even elves or unicorns, for control over part of a forest. The dragon attempts to expand these borders while the other forest dwellers either attempt to contain the dragon or wait until they finally have sufficient force to oust it.
Reds typically do not form alliances with humanoids beyond tributary ones (i.e. "give me tribute or I'll slaughter you horribly"), and whites live in fairly uninhabited territory. They don't gain the brain power necessary to make alliances until they finally have enough strength to do without. Gold dragons might take humanoids as vassals, but they believe themselves above other dragons, which places them far, far above even the greatest of humanoids.
Generic Villain wrote:
Here's a fun misconception: the child's nursery rhyme "Ring Around the Rosie" is not about the Black Death/bubonic plague that swept Europe in the Middle Ages. The verse best-known in the US is just one of many variations, and it was only in the 20th century that people decided to connect that particular version with the Black Death.
Hmmm... that sounds tasty. Do you have some sauce for that dish?Er, I mean source. I must be hungry.
There's nothing wrong with having a player who picks Human as a favored enemy. It's the easiest thing in the world to justify, it usually comes up often, and it's not generally hard to put humans into a campaign when you weren't planning on having them show up.
That said, if you weren't planning on having humans in your game, you should probably say something. If you plan on never letting the players fight humans, you should probably say something.
If a session goes by without a single favored enemy, don't worry about it. If two sessions go by without a favored enemy, don't worry about it. But if three or four or five sessions go by without a single favored enemy for the ranger? Throw the guy a bone, or at least have a chat about his FE choices.
Didn't see this get full treatment, but the story of Jonah was quite clear. Jonah was, according to the book of Jonah, on a ship to Tarshish, which is out on the Iberian peninsula. This puts him right in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea, which does indeed have a lot of fish.
Dear Merisel Sillvari:
I am a well-established and distinguished dragon who has accumulated a moderately large hoard through trial, pain, effort, and great struggle on my behalf. Unfortunately, I find that no sooner have I established this hoard than pesky humanoid "adventurers" seek to steal it and slay me!
Even worse, I have a terrible infestation of duergar in my home, and the tunnels they dig are too small for me to enter, unless I alter my form to that of a man.
Anyway, to make a long story short, I need to leave my lair for a little while. Not long, really, just a few months. But I'm afraid that if I turn my back for even a day, those duergar and nasty little adventurers will steal my entire hoard! I'd come back to see my beautiful mansion vandalized, emptied, and probably collapsed just out of spite.
Could I please pay you to live inside my mansion filled with gold and stab things (that aren't me) with as many sharp, pointy knives as you can when they try to enter? It'll only be for a little while, I promise, and I'll come back as soon as possible.
If he's the kind of person to use murder as a first resort to solve his problems, chances are slim to none that he ever detected as good. A better example would be a neutral rogue who intends to deceive the party in some way or another. Deceit is evil, but the paladin's smite won't work because he's neutral.
I usually run the paladin detect slightly differently - a paladin who uses it gets to find out whether his smite will work. But that's not RAW.
Sure they don't lose them, but do they lose access to them? I don't see how they wouldn't be considered a level dependent variables after all.
Level dependent variables only exist in the spell. The fact that it states those variables are affected presumes that the spell can be cast in the first place.
As awesome as it would be to let enervation and similar effects take away a caster's strongest spells, they don't. In fact, they pretty much don't interact in any direct way except that negative levels do lower your caster level.
So a 5th-level caster who takes two negative levels can cast a fireball for 3d6 damage.
Negative levels really are nasty enough as they are.
Yeah, treat it exactly like critical hit damage, because it's applied the same. Weapons braced against a charge are the same way.
A fighter who specializes in polearms, power attacking with a paladin's Aura of Justice and a Ranger's Hunter's Bond against an evil creature that happens to be the Ranger's favored enemy... can rack up a LOT of damage.
Scott Betts wrote:
So? Why is he running around in circles? Why doesn't he realize that he can do something more effective like pull out a bow and shoot you?Or publicly assassinate your character, now that you're proven to be a coward?
Or look around to see what trap you're trying to set up?
Or chug a potion of haste?
Or... yeah. Why is he just chasing like an idiot?
Apes are technically not humanoid according to the rules. So while your DM is free to rule differently, an ape's armor should be animal armor, not humanoid armor, by default. And because they move differently, I think it should stay animal armor. You can't just modify human armor to get ape armor; you have to get different plates and articulate them differently.
Scott Betts wrote:
Terminology is only exclusionary if it is used in an exclusionary manner. In most cases where MMO (or whatever) lingo appears in a tabletop game, it's because that lingo accurately describes the scenario in fewer words (it's easier to say "kite" than "run around in circles while the bad guy chases you").
But... why is the bad guy chasing you in circles in the first place? There's a whole set of assumptions here that can't get explained, but are common to MMO experiences.
All that's needed for effective communication is an understanding of the idea being expressed by the other person. If you know what somebody means when they say "tank" but refuse to acknowledge it, you are the barrier to effective communication.
That's a great idea! I'm going to be as rude as I possibly can, and then blame people for not acknowledging the things that I arrogantly tell them to do because they are clearly the barrier to communication! Obviously, it can't possibly be me. I'm saying words that we all understand. They're just rude and obnoxious, that's all. Thanks for telling me how to communicate more effectively.[/sarcasm]
Oh wait. That doesn't work.
Remember that while Cheliax and Westcrown are full of Asmodeus worshippers and it is the state religion, not everyone's really into it. Cheliax is Asmodean in the same way that the US and UK are protestant; perhaps a little more so, but only a little.
Still, tips on binding devils sounds good, and you might have multiple newspapers: one from the hellknights that's really religious and another, more secular paper that is printed by the nobility.
Personally, I do get annoyed at the use of MMO vocabulary in a tabletop game. Not actually angry, unless they're clearly persisting to piss me off after I've asked them to stop, but annoyed.
I'm annoyed that "tank" doesn't mean "the guy who is both armored and dangerous" but rather now means "someone who sacrifices offense completely for defense, then has to somehow hold the attention of monsters". That's not a tank. That's an APC. I'm also mildly annoyed when it's used as a verb to mean "holding the attention of monsters".
I'm annoyed at both the misuse and mispronunciation of 'mob' to mean the monsters that I control as a DM. My monsters are monsters. Or NPC's. Critters. Creatures. Not mobile objects.
And the use of 'toon' is just silly. I can't take folks seriously when they use that term.
I think the root of this is MMO players who expect a tabletop RPG to conform to their MMO experience. Or such players who think that MMO experience makes them great tabletop gamers. (Pro-tip: It won't, and it doesn't.)
Level 5 and level 10? A wizard who focuses on SoS effects is viable at those levels. They also do great as Battle Wizards, or as buffers of melee dudes.
Rangers do nasty, nasty damage, particularly if you know what race your opponent will be (or just take Ranger's Focus as a Guide). Take a druid as a buddy and you'll do fine.
Fighters are amazing at killing things, but work best in tandem with a caster (such as a cleric or wizard) who can help him hit consistently.
In fact, anything can do well. The question is really: how do you want to kill your foes?
"Light weapons" is a category that makes more sense if you've ever fought or played around with weapons like these. It has to do more with moment of inertia and rotational momentum than actual mass, but small weapons with little mass tend to be "light weapons".
A mithral longsword still swings like a steel longsword, so you can't use it in a grapple, you can't draw it while grappled, and it would be difficult to use in the off-hand.
That's why it's not a "light weapon" in spite of its light weight.
Right. And there's a lot of people who don't want to spend that much time making decisions about feats, hit points, and weapon abilities. Or for whom the process takes longer and is therefore much more frustrating. Or they just hate spending time on the game outside of the game.
For these people, Pathfinder looks like work, not like fun.
Well, that's silly. :-p
You don't have to be a fighter, cavalier, or paladin to be a knight. You could be a cleric, wizard, magus, or bard and make a fine knight, especially if we're talking about the religious knight orders like Eagle Knights and Hellknights.
The Hellknight Order of the Gate, for example, is made of mostly spellcasters and is led by a spellcaster.