M1k31's page

no, it's a Pooh

Yup. "Worst archetype" vs. "worst-edited archetype", basically. ^_^

one could argue the brute looks like both tbh... most of the drawbacks scream "well in order to counter all these size bonuses... we're gonna need this and this and this"... then someone went in and pretty much removed most of the size bonuses trying another approach to balance the same thing and then it looks like they just mashed it together thinking they worked as words in English... so they must be fine.

JiCi wrote:

Why not just slap the Throwing and Returning enhancements?

Because that allows you a single attack because a returning weapon doesn't come back to you until just before your next turn. This allows you to ricochet your rocket fist and hit as many opponents as you have attacks.

EDUT: I'm so doing this build, by the by.

I kinda want to see what kind of chaotic encounter this could be on a pack of Vindictive bastards... "our party was succeeding in it's goal of murderhoboing across the countryside until a pack of old ex-paladins fleeced us of everything we had..."

I'm not sure the latter technically works RAW outside an odd chicken/egg situation where you apply the feats in order then treat it as a shield and not a gauntlet as you attack, the former definitely works though... so you need:

1.Shield Gauntlet Style: allows you to treat your gauntlet as a buckler for feats
2.Upsetting Shield Style: then allows you to treat your "buckler" as a light shield for attacks/feats
which then allows 3.Shield Champion to allow you to throw and return the gauntlet "shield" as a returning weapon(using the Ex ability returning shield)

4.Shielded Gauntlet Attack (Combat)(pre-requisite for):

5.Shielded Gauntlet Master to make this trick work

Edit: 4. also let's you:"The style also allows you to take one attack of opportunity each round that does not count toward your maximum number of attacks of opportunity. This must be used to make an attack with your gauntlet (or spiked gauntlet), or a disarm or steal combat maneuver. You do not provoke an attack of opportunity for performing either combat maneuver, and you are able to attempt a steal combat maneuver with this attack of opportunity despite the maneuver normally requiring a standard action.", pretty sweet pre-requisite for those bonuses.

I still think the Geisha could make for an interesting leadership minion or an inter-party adventure(like lets say you have a party on an escort mission with players who can't consistently come and you have a 2-3 person Intrigue adventure every week people can't make it with vigilantes and a Geisha that helps the other party by throwing ceremonial tea ceremonies praying for their safety...)

There is so much more going on here than just a game and I really hope that you value your brother more than this game.

Put aside what he's done to your homebrew for now. You can come back to it later, or not.

Please talk to your brother....

I mean like you slept with his wife type wronging. I don't expect an explanation, but I just have a feeling that there is something terribly broken in your relationship with your brother and I hope you love him enough to want to fix that before anything else.

To me it sounds more like the brother really hated the campaign, and given the OP's seeming obsession with his world... it sounds like the OP of the thread may have unintentionally railroaded him into a corner, and instead of talking it out his brother decided to passive aggressively fight his way out, seeking not just to harm his brother but harm the world that may have been suppressing his "badwrongfun"... but again, they need to open communication and actually talk out their issues

If skeletons and zombies have little use for tavenrs, evil clerics and necromancers do.

LoL, now I really want to see or make an adventure where when you get to the lich's Basement you find a tavern with undead wait-staff that treat you as just customers for no apparent reason at all...

Does the party currently have the ability to face and defat the lich in combat?

If they did(and aren't playing PFS), I would probably BS an artifact/ritual(found in the town) that allows them to convert the lich's bound soul into a demi-plane they must then fight through and Purify before the Lich revives(as the demi-plane would run at a different speed from the real world).

Then, depending on how far they get, change the lich's disposition towards them/alignment, possibly even letting the PC's leave them there as a guardian for the city.

Graystone,

I do understand your point, but I can't really agree with it. The Dual Identity is the "Flaw" that is balanced out by all those socials that are based off of it. This is weakened because they chose not to spell out and emphasize the bad things that should happen when the identity is exposed to the bad guys.

There are some reasons for the light touch, one serious screw-up and your vigilante is potentially crippled forever.

How did he learn them? Point is that if he didn't learn them, he wouldn't be a vigilante. Vigilantes are those few that did learn to keep all those juggling balls up in the air. Those that failed are object lessons in why you don't mess with the bad guys.

That added tension, knowing that your failure will also harm your support network; your family, your info sources, your favorite crafters, et al, is an integral part of the class. I can see this being a bit much.

I see it as "The Dread Pirate Roberts" from the Princess bride when played through without really bothering with the second identity... are you using the second identity? sometimes. Are there consequences for being found out? a few, but the character isn't too worried, because worst-case he just needs his replacement to seriously step it up while he creates a new life with his loot.

In a sense Dual identity in such campaigns should be treated like a paladins code everyone agrees the DM shouldn't f#&+ with

Honestly I think people don't understand the alignments...

And that leads to another problem, "modern" as opposed to "medieval" morality... modern morality makes it increasingly less necessary to carry a weapon, there's no threats out there where you will need to kill something to defend yourself in most cases, fewer predators, more instances killing will get you in trouble rather than be considered "helpful", etc. But Pathfinder doesn't assume that morality, the world is dangerous and you'd at most want to check that weapon at the door rather than not own one at all... and you are expected to kill with it(at least 99% of the time) without worrying too much about your god taking your fancy powers away.

I think it's because Paladins have the most restrictive code of conduct, so anybody looking to be the biggest stick in the mud possible (this may be subconscious) gravitates to that class and hence LG.

But I have never personally found LG to be problematic in practice. It's definitely a lot less of a problem than CN, NE, or CE.

It's a problem because players end up playing the alignment rather than the character... because of the tied in mechanics. This then makes the character generated less of a unique character and more of a LG stick in the mud the same as the last...

So, brawlers can now flurry with basically anything melee (with the right investments), right? So, Flurry of Ladders is officially a thing?

So... play as a Down on his luck actor looking to find the right troupe to turn him into a star, with his trusty ladder by his side... Charlie Chaplin meets Jackie Chan Style?

Or go full Stuntman with a few Avenger/Stalker Vigilante levels?

It's probably all about sex. As Kileanna said, a large hoard is a status symbol, a sign of power. Thus dragons could select who they mate with on the basis of hoard size. The bigger the hoard = the more powerful the mate = the better the offspring.

Now I really want to make a dragon Vigilante Austin powers...

Normal regeneration does not work after you are killed. That section states that the tarrasque's regeneration does work after it has been killed. That is the important part. Cuup on his second post stated that “Nowhere in this entry does it state that if the Tarrasque is considered dead, does the Regeneration turn back on, and bring it back to life” I am simply point out that he was wrong on that. This would invalidate the arguments that the tarrasque's regeneration stop functioning after death.

But the regeneration does state a time limit: 3 turns after death... nowhere does it state what occurs after it is prevented from doing so for those 3 turns(assuming it can be suppressed, which as per the OP's argument can be 50/50)

The Trench Mist is a weird case; it's created by the death of lots of people in one place, and can create undead spawn of its own, but it's not actually undead. It's an aberration. Go figure.

Lol... that is indeed odd, the fact it's powers to animate Juju zombies and the other GE thread about the magical child archetype kinda makes me wonder what would happen if you made one of these a level 20 magical child as a boss...

A lot of people equivocate Magical Girls with Magical Girl Warriors, but they aren't necessarily the same thing. A Warlock might better represent the blasty nature of a Warrior, but the Magical Child archetype hews more to the themes of teamwork and magical friends.

It might be better if you can actually provide examples of such that the Archetype fulfills in popular media...

I mean you could say it's truer to the definition... but if the definition doesn't fit well in pathfinder or isn't what people who misconstrue what a magical girl is want... does it matter?

Apparently the shapeshifter will be a nature-themed paladin.

but the important question is; If a tree falls in the forest, does he fall?

So I've only read the first page so far, but I'm only really responding to the OP's issues:

1. First off: is conscription evil?

Sometimes... however it is ALWAYS also lawful, which means that for just about any paladin, who respects authority unless said authority is being explicitly evil, they should be taking it at face value that what they are talking about is the purely lawful good part... which is as good as calling farmer Fred over to help farmer George who he may not like save his barn from burning.

The road to hell may be paved with good intentions, but that doesn't mean the entire road is condemned or unusable...

2. Pathfinder doesn't follow modern morality; Pathfinder, while following a different set-up of good/evil in which both have physical manifestations and are somehow Absolute, follows morality from a gamist Crusades-era morality. Killing isn't just something paladins are allowed to do, they are given divine tools to go about it, as well as tools to know when to use it, and their judgement.

Conscription is not just a form of slavery, it is a call to action by a higher authority, which honestly is what any paladin going about there business would likely consider anything they ask of a citizen to be, indeed their own function is just conscription by a higher power...

3. Falling is a rather important plot device, this greatly affects the Paladin and should never be done if they haven't made the choice to fall, so the other player springing this after the fact is being a jerk, and should be called out on it. Springing a redemption arc on a paladin is not a fun quest hook... and unless he wants to spend 4 sessions just watching the paladin earn back his class abilities they should just sit down, shut up and play their own character

It seems to me that the issue with most materials is either they are too niche use, or the bonuses they have are offset by always on drawbacks... not much of an issue for single use NPC's, but Adventurers expecting a certain CR challenge x times a day knowing that going in they have an issue... they have a problem.

Le Petite Mort wrote:

Paizo developers are actually Pathfinder field agents establishing their first interplanetary lodge after Aram Zey finally got to 17th level and could cast interplanetary teleport. This is my canon now.

Does this mean some of us will be taught REAL magic if we prove we "have the personality for it?"

I have two 10th-level Pathfinders now, a Summoner and a Witch. Elfstar only needed to reach level 8....

It means the scene from "the gamers" could come true... always push the door open civilly and attempt a diplomacy check lest your PC's slaughter your players....

TxSam88 wrote:

I agree, so how do you handle it when half the players build flavorful characters and the other half go for total optimization?

Cut off half the players.

but which half?

So what you're saying is that "Your princess is in another castle" and you wish she'd stay there so you can kick some Koopa butt on your own terms?

Weirdo wrote:

I'm seeing a lot of "you can't have a promiscuous good outsider" on here...

Because a lot of people would presume that Paladins (and similarly-bound Celestial beings) who slum the streets being a(n) [obvious expletive goes here] are certainly not behaving within the codes of their patron deity or their Paladinhood.

Maybe it's a pre-conceived notion, but there is a lot more evidence, both historical and fantastical, that creatures akin to Succubi, even with the intentions of "Good," are still more along the lines of sinful entities, than being servants of Good.

This isn't true just of a subject as sex, but also with other "controversial" concepts, such as murder or slavery.

Thinking further on this subject, I suppose a celestial of fertility (whose idea of spreading good is through proper and healthy procreation) can be plausible; as you've pointed out, there are deities who have sex as part of their portfolio, so a celestial such as I've described prior is certainly within reason.

But again, you'd have to be very creative in how you'd execute such things, as a popular belief, both in fantasy and real life, is that concepts such as this falls more along the realms of sin and evil, than of virtue and good, and failure of such proper execution results in an observer unable to read between the lines, and as such, draws an improper or premature conclusion. Yes, pun intended.

**EDIT** Engrish is hard.

After reading this and many other posts I wonder if a GA Succubus might be essentially a "redemption temptress"

Essentially going around to evil or negative energy infused, (otherwise)chaste beings offering redemption, then when the offer is taken they have sex with the subject, absorbing it and it's evil essence into themselves, making them pregnant and dissolving the evil entity complexly(as energy drain).

Then within a week(keeping it within reason for gameplay, otherwise a few months) the celestial succubus dissolves and the entity is reborn in her place, as a Celestial succubus(gender neutral), with this as a race and a geas to convert a willing evil(which once they resolve causes their own demise as it did the succubus that raised them, and they are then reborn again x days later to the nearest chaste, willing good aligned entity of any race, similar to a druid's resurrection).

Throw on a "fall" mechanic that costs them their powers(and resurrection) if they otherwise engage in evil acts and an ability to draw in any energy(that they are in range of, regardless of negative/positive) channeled to harm and convert it into healing energy she can release as a touch attack.

It sounds like an interesting concept to throw into a campaign to me.

Is Mad Martigan even playable? I seem to recall a character whose defining characteristics were mobility in combat(and out of it), variety of attacks, high Charisma, and skills, not massive damage and stand-still full attack.

^I think you missed the mark on pretty much everything... you have close approximations on some of them, but others I don't think you understood the exact flavors the person was looking for...

So my understanding is that the real issue which is being argued isn't that the fluff-gates exist, but that DM's really need to know WHY they exist for players to expect they can alter them, which can be a real problem when said DM's don't play within the setting of Golarian.

In other words, "will this break my game?, hmmm... why is this blocked?" needs to be far easier to spot check than buying the full resource and going through all the setting info the DM may or may not have just to find that it is irrelevant in their situation.

Really, all classes are just specialized versions of the medium.

does that make the Bard "medium loud"?

Tequila Sunrise wrote:

there's a general overall tendency for DMs to treat the core options as standard, stock, foundational, game touchstones, etc.

Never understood that kind of thinking. to me it ever was more the social pressure by the players not to disallow anything in the CRB...

which is understandable, considering that asking players to read a multipage manifesto about what you allow within 5-15 different books they may not have heard of let alone read is rather difficult if they are pressed for time, and if you cut out their character options last minute it doesn't exactly give them hope of realizing their character concept...

so it is much more helpful to say what is allowed by book and page rather than limiting core options and allowing 10-15 items from other books.

21. A druid performing a ritual of watering a shubery with a grail.

bonus points if the grail is "holey"

Angel Hunter D wrote:

I'd be less in favour of a reboot, I love a lot of options. But a big revision cycle of the core rule books (core, ultimate x, etc.) seems called for. Between new things like spell manifestations and old issues like feat confusion (I'm looking at you, shield master) to straight up typos and poor wording/organization (kineticist...) it makes me think a cycle of errata and reprints would be healthier for the game than a new edition. And it should avoid the problems of a new edition as well.

I strongly agree

Personally I think the problem lies with "just errata"...

I mean at what point does it stop being helpful playing "errata roulette"?

If you have 15 different printings of a CRB and often play with 5+ players, that could be 3 games in a row where playing with random players ends up without a single book in common... sure you could use the forums to make up the difference, but only the player with the most recent edition will even know the others need to make adjustments... and that's assuming the GM has the newest copy and follows its errata.

If on the other hand you make an entirely new edition that essentially IS errata... it allows everyone to know that their rules need to be tweaked.

I may actually be one of the only people on these boards who doesn't max perception :P

I usually only max it because I'm playing a class that has the extra skill points or I'm playing the class that should max it because the other players aren't.

I'm not sure if I have Bingo in this thread just yet...

First column down and Center row across the "free space"... I think you're close to a blackout.

Old FAQ thread for whether manipulating material components requires a free hand.

I don't see an FAQ Answer on that page... was it answered at all?

In the case of extended drug use, I'd make an arguement for the paladin becoming psychologically dependant.

I see a new "Paladin falls" thread in the making...

Take 10 keys off a keyring, put them in a pouch in your pocket, jangle it around as though you've been moving around for a while. Now pick out a specific key while saying your ABC's within 6 seconds. Do the same when you can open the pouch and glance inside then reask that question.

Except isn't that what you do with spell preparation? divide your components into nice little ready to cast objects?

In such a case it would be more like an IRL blind man picking colored socks out of a drawer... he can do so because he prepared them to do so... Wizards are intelligent, this should be part of any spell preparation.

love the store idea M1k31, but make it a China Shop with Bull's as the Shopkeepers pets.

Druid cat followers with bull familiars with the feat that allows them to squeeze?

It might also be interesting to describe the rooms layout like a store with each shelf containing some item of interest(claiming an outrageous sale) only truly discernable while standing nearby... while also being a trap/hazard/haunt... it would be cool to have the players scramble to figure out how to loot the room rather than all piling on the guy 1 vs 5 or 4.

why not use a mirror?

I consider it a "GM's tool/Players price"... It's far easier to justify the BBEG spying on your party and protecting himself than it is to waste Party resources making your entire group scrye-proof, So the GM can keep you on the rails easier.

Then as mentioned, there's the zygomind. That thing is scary. Even if you kill one, you can never tell if you actually killed it or are trapped in it's dream world. I've been toying with the idea of a campaign centered around the party spending the first 6 or 7 levels trapped in a zygomind's dream world, only to wake up weak, near death, and years younger then they think after a party of high level adventurers kill the creature.

Why not just go all the way(or as close as you feel you want to run) to 18, have the PC's fight a Zygomind, then(win or lose) have them wake up in the same situation?

Even better, reduce them to 1 hit die(and lvl 1 stats/skills) and have them level back up to level 7 as NPC classes gestalted with their "dream" class, using minimal "adventurer" type encounters as though they were characters in an idealistic sit-com type(or a reality show) world instead of adventurers, with any cosmic source they tap for information referencing their "dream" character while everyone else just pretends(or has no knowledge) of them, finally unravelling their "too perfect" world however you like(either pulling "your princess is in another castle" with another Zygomind or changing it up with something else capable of world altering.

...Thing is, ultimate wild would not need to be just survival. You can include nature based variations of classes: for example some people have wanted a Druid equivalent of a full caster. ...

What? I thought a druid was a full caster....

A haversack IS a type of backpack. The big difference is that a haversack has only one shoulder strap.

but "type of" has never meant anything in the rules at that level... you could say many swords or weapons as described are a "type of" another kind of weapon... but you wouldn't suggest allowing a two-hander as a one handed weapon because it is just an "English longsword"(except as possibly a houserule) because it isn't explicitly spelled out in RAW that they are the same item

Kitty Catoblepas wrote:

Woah. Never thought of of this until this moment:

Since magic items must be masterwork, a Handy Haversack increases your carrying capacity by 1 str in addition to it's other benefits.

No it doesn't. Only armor, weapons, and shields have to be masterwork before you can enchant them. No other item type has that requirement.

Also, the masterwork backpack didn't even exist when the handy haversack was created. Assuming the haversack includes the masterwork backpacks bonus is wrong on multiple levels.

Even if that wasn't true... could you really say that the handy haversack was a backpack and therefor must be a masterwork backpack?

Unless there is a "general storage equipment" rule that makes any kind of storage item that is masterwork give the bonus, only a true backpack would use the +1 anyway... which the handy haversack doesn't need to be.

... or Musical Adventures:)

So.... High school musical(or any musical): Pathfinder edition?

"Antipunk" - futuristic technology that accomplishes LESS than present technology

isn't that basically regular pathfinder non-magical crafting at high levels?

Cole Deschain wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Sure, here's a 11th level build using Unchained Rogue, 20 point-buy, and PC wealth:

** spoiler omitted **...

What does your ideal Courtier have that this guy can't do?

Little Birds.

Vigilante Social Talent-ish ways to float information he wants out there.
Systematized means of squashing rumors. That sort of thing.

EDIT: The funny part, though, is that you DID build someone who can swing most of what Lady Kaede did, so I'm 100% WRONG on that one...

That version was more Littlefinger than Varys. :)

That said, for a more spymaster version, you can swap out a few Rogue Talents for Rumormonger and Gossip Collector (plus maybe some Reputation Talents) and wind up doing most of what you suggest. Maybe throw on Leadership for an actual spy network.

I can't help but think it would be funny to give them an "Oddjob" or "Kato" vigilante minion with "little birds".

that was the only reason

edit: and for tons of throw aways/weight reduction....

If it were a "roll stats, create a character" type situation... and you were going for unique... I would probably do something incredibly stupid... like give a rabbit from the bestiary gestalt Paladin/monk/fighter or Paladin/monk/barbarian levels(at the same advancement as your PC) and then throw vampire and/or werewolf templates on there.... then tell the GM approximately what I want out of the character(like Fleet as the only feats the NPC gains, or this is why this monster travels with my PC) and then have the GM actually play it.

M1k31 wrote:

Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance there isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.

Cosmic balance? In a horror game?

Oh, you poor, innocent soul.

:P

In EVIL campaigns... would not the best Horror be that Grog, destroyer of kingdoms, kicker of puppies and his necromancer friend Steven encounter a purple dinosaur that sings of friendship and hugs and will not die, while Grog becomes something closer to Mr. Rogers... or that Steven becomes the Lich he always dreamed of after being touched by powerful undead?

M1k31 wrote:

Is evil the only kind of corruption? it seems odd with the Good/evil Cosmic balance. There isn't a way to make an antipaladin into a loving cat person instead of a puppy kicker... it seems like a disappointingly narrow field for the corruption rules if they only go towards evil.

Sorry for the double post, but that is a redemption story that would not fit within the current corruptions, since they are mostly fluffed as unwilling transformations that force the character into an alignment that Good by nature would not do, as that would violate free will. Redemptions should be a choice made by free will

I wasn't saying good would cause it necessarily, nor was I talking about a natural redemption... I was referring to a Zygomind/stepford wife kind of transformation for Evil campaigns to pitfall into.

HyperMissingno wrote:

Buri Reborn wrote:

this thread is about feat bloat

Really? I thought it was about how feats were poor in the strength department, not about the number.

That still doesn't make the logical response to start comparing feats to spells. It's an apples and oranges comparison. As I said, if you want to look at feats to accomplish the same task, regardless of its method, then that's a different response.

with what else can one compare them?

I can only think of 3 things:

1.Class abilities

2.Skills

3.Spells
a.SLA's

2. & 3. both fall under 1., so unless Skills are the comparison Spells are a perfectly applicable thing to compare.