Monkerdoodle's page

30 posts. Alias of master_marshmallow.



Who remembers this thread?

I heard that marshmallow guy wrote his own revised version of it.

Some people like it.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

The thing I'm saying is that if there are people in the class that has the ability to fly, I won't put "there's a chasm there" for a thing for the party to figure out how to cross, since it's not interesting it's just "someone casts fly". If there has to be a chasm there, because it was previously mentioned, I'll just handwave how the party gets across it once they've all got the ability to fly. This is less "narrative power" and more "limiting creative space for GMs" since a problem you can solve simply with the application of a class ability or spell is not a very interesting problem. Giving the Wizard a hundred options to get from City A to City B doesn't make that class more interesting, since long before they had that many options the party was probably high enough level that nobody was likely to mess with them in transit.

So I'm not saying that the fighter has all sorts of class abilities that solve problems by themselves, since that's obviously not the case, I just don't think it's right to call that "narrative power." There's more narrative power (in the sense of a player's ability to influence the direction the narrative goes in) in just "deciding what is best to attempt next" and "roleplaying encounters with NPCs" than there is in 9 levels of wizard spells, IMO.

You stop that!!! Logical reasoning has no place here!!!!!

CBDunkerson wrote:
N N 959 wrote:


Have you found any Defending shields in the statblocks?

I just did a search. About a dozen defending weapons, but no shields.


(had to)

All of the books, all of the time, Bradbury.

To be fair, in order to get Jack of All Trades one must take 10 levels of bard.....

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't even know how to start here....


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I get the feeling this is going to be a fun thread.
Commence popping of the corn!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
alexd1976 wrote:
Monkerdoodle wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
I did say they may not have anticipated Mount + Alter Summoned Monster.
So... as mature adults... we might agree not to use it this way?

Mature.... adults


My bad, I made an assumption.

You may as well move us all to Communism, you red dog!!!!

3 people marked this as a favorite.
alexd1976 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
I did say they may not have anticipated Mount + Alter Summoned Monster.
So... as mature adults... we might agree not to use it this way?

Mature.... adults


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gnomes are to blame for the bad economy.

I guess I do disallow books that I haven't had a chance to read through. If something is in really high demand of my players I will at least give it a chance to read through, otherwise you basically become North Korea.

Stark_ wrote:
Obviously, we'll have to see what the class looks like when it arrives, but I can only judge from what we've seen, and from what we've seen, the Arcanist looks extremely strong.

Sure, but it's a full casting Arcane Class. It's going to be strong no matter what.

Had it not had the mechanic of Quick Study (which is still unusable in combat if you ask me) then nobody would play this class as it is inferior to a wizard, of that you can be sure, because to my knowledge, they cannot leave slots open to fill later like a wizard could.

Arguing that this one Exploit the class has breaks the game and makes the sky fall makes you seem very ignorant of actual game balance and game design. Also this back and forth is getting really annoying to read, neither of you have made any progress with the discussion.

I feel it is my civic duty to progress the discussion in way of Godwin's Law by saying that forcing all Arcanists to wait a whole 24 hour period in order to recall and change a spell prepared is basically Communism.

Disclaimer: This is a variant rule system taking from the material presented in Ultimate Campaigns sections on Character Background and Alignments. In my own games I often find myself in a bind when it comes to the behavior of my players. There are certain actions that my players will take and almost always when they do, we get into an argument about alignment, alignment changes, and how they affect a character's development and even access to powers in the case of clerics and paladins whose weight and impact can really show some significance. In an effort to shorten the amount of time wasted at the table literally arguing semantics I have adopted the Conflict System from the background generator of UCamp and I have expanded on it to show how much different types of actions can and do affect alignment changes, and in what way.

If you have read the section and mechanics on Alignments in the Ultimate Campaign Rulebook, you can skip this paragraph and move to the next one. For those who have not read the section on alignments, there are two axes: one that represents Law and Chaos and one that represents Good and Evil. On a nine point scale, each alignment has a range that they fall within of three numbers on a number line. The lower numbers representing Good and Law with the higher numbers representing Evil and Chaos. The conflict system has the player roll a d20, d12, or d4 to determine the type of conflict one has had in the past and how it affects their alignment prior to playing in game. Once you get to the alignment section, such actions and their weight on a PC's alignment are not mentioned again.

This system has the same list of conflicts from UCamp, but disambiguated to show which axis any particular conflict falls on, and includes a second list of conflicts which shows antithetical actions to the original conflicts. PC's in evil campaigns, or evil NPC's who want to have richer backgrounds can use from this table to show a more complex and truly conflicted character.

This system is meant to be used in game to allow players and DMs to have a baseline rules set on the most basic level of actions taken that may in one way or another affect a player's alignment. They are here to help the game go more quickly and with less hassle when determining the significance of particular actions. Most of these actions are meant to be seen in game as actions that have significance in game play. Actions that really do not affect the character's life, such as not leaving a tip, or big enough tip at a tavern really aren't that offensive of alignment affecting, nor is leaving a very handsome tip a rewarding action. When applying these changes to alignment, it is important to know when it is time to judge the characters, because a constantly changing alignment could prove to be problematic for players not only because they are constantly being judged, but also because classes exist which may require the maintenance of a particular alignment and an ever fluctuating system punishes those players rather than rewards them for their character choice, and imposing such a rule set on them is generally considered bad form. As a general rule, alignment judgments should be applied whenever the party gains experience, and the DM and players can compare and contrast the actions taken leading up to this point of the game adding and subtracting the values of the actions to determine the net change in alignment (if any). Of course, the DM is the final arbiter of this system and can make judgments as they see fit on how much a particular action may affect an alignment change or if it would even affect an alignment change at all. Some actions change alignments differently based on context. Such actions usually involve influence with another character, be it receiving or giving, and can be subject to change based on the alignments being interacted with.



1 (1) Minor Failure (Evil): You failed a friend, family member, or loved one who depended on you to fulfill an important task.
2 (1) Petty Crime (Chaotic): You committed a minor crime, like vandalism, trespassing, or mischief.
3 (1) Told a Lie (Chaotic): You deliberately made someone believe something that was not true to further your own goals.
4 (1) Broke a Promise (Evil): You swore an oath or vow that was important to someone else, but you did not keep your promise.
5 (2) Humiliation (Evil): You publicly humiliated or scandalized someone with either true or slanderous information.
6 (2) Negligence (Evil): You caused someone else to suffer by your own inaction, disregard, or excessive recklessness.
7 (2) Minor Theft (Chaotic): You stole several small or inexpensive items that belonged to someone else.
8 (2) Seducer (Evil): You tempted or manipulated someone to act in accordance with your whim, careless of whether it was in their own best interests.
9 (3) Cheater (Chaotic): You broke a rule, law, contract, or agreement for your own gain.
10 (4) Betrayal (Evil): You betrayed someone who trusted you.
11 (4) Malign Associates (Chaotic/Evil): You allied with a destructive creature, organization, or individual.
12 (5) Destroyed a Reputation (Evil): You deliberately ruined the honor, reputation, or fortunes of another individual or group.
13 (5) Major Theft (Chaotic): You stole expensive items.
14 (6) Corrupted an Innocent (Chaotic/Evil): You counseled an otherwise innocent person who trusted you, toward adverse choices.
15 (6) Blackmailed (Chaotic): You used sensitive knowledge or threats to force someone’s cooperation.
16 (6) Destruction (Evil): You destroyed someone else’s property.
17 (6) Armed Robbery (Chaotic): You robbed someone with the threat of violence.
18 (7) Violence (Chaotic 3 Evil 4): You beat, assaulted, or mutilated someone.
19 (8) Murder (Evil): You killed someone without just or good cause.
20 (12) Mass Murder (Evil): You killed several sentient beings without just or good cause.



1 (1) Minor Success (Good): You succeeded for a friend, family member, or loved one who depended on you to fulfill an important task.
2 (1) Prevented Crime (Lawful): You stopped a minor crime, like vandalism, trespassing, or mischief.
3 (1) Told the Truth (Lawful): You made someone believe something that was true whether or not it would further your own goals.
4 (1) Kept a Promise (Good): You swore an oath or vow that was important to someone else, and you kept your promise.
5 (2) Redemption (Good): You publicly redeemed or promoted someone with true information.
6 (2) Providence (Good): You prevented someone else's suffering by taking action, showing compassion, or being overly cautious of their situation.
7 (2) Prevented Theft (Lawful): You prevented the theft of or returned to their rightful owner small or inexpensive items that belonged to someone else.
8 (2) Partnership (Good): You teamed up someone to act in accordance with your needs, and made sure that it was in their own best interests.
9 (3) Compliance (Lawful): You complied with a rule, law, contract, or agreement even if it prevented your own gain.
10 (4) Amends (Good): You regained the trust of someone you betrayed, or gained the trust of someone who had a legitimate reason not to trust you.
11 (4) Benevolent Associates (Lawful/Good): You allied with a constructive creature, organization, or individual.
12 (5) Restored a Reputation (Good): You helped restore the honor, reputation, or fortunes of another individual or group.
13 (5) Prevented Larceny (Lawful): You prevented the theft of or returned to their rightful owner expensive items.
14 (6) Purified an Innocent (Lawful/Good): You counseled an otherwise innocent person toward positive choices.
15 (6) Adjudicate (Lawful): You used true, sensible, and logical information to gain someone’s cooperation who otherwise would not cooperate.
16 (6) Tangible Reparation (Good): You repaired someone else’s property that was damaged.
17 (6) Prevented Robbery (Lawful): You prevented someone from being robbed with the threat of violence.
18 (7) Prevented Violence (Lawful 3 Good 4): You stopped the beating, assault, or mutilation of someone.
19 (8) Restoration (Good): You helped restore the life and stability of someone who was either murdered or had their life ruined.
20 (12) Mass Restoration (Good): You helped restore the lives and stability of several who were either murdered or had their lives ruined.

Finally, some examples taken in game as to how I used this system and how it ultimately helped us to really get to ignore the weight of any particular action's significance while playing.

First Example: A neutral cleric creates an undead zombie out of a slain dragon's corpse and uses it in combat. The act of creating the undead can be seen as some form of destruction or taboo, which itself is worth six points in the direction of evil. Allying with it, as it is most certainly evil (at least in a Golarion setting, as in most games any created undead is usually considered to be evil), would be worth another four points towards evil on the scale. Arguably, using this evil creature to do a good act, such as defeating a monster, and restoring order to a community. Doing such is a good act and is worth five points back on the good scale. By the time experience is handed out, this player, while ultimately using his actions towards a greater goal may not have his means justified by the end as his alignment is still shifted five steps towards evil and thus changing his alignment after judging his alignment.

Second Example: A chaotic good barbarian has successfully slain a group of enemies. Once combat has ended he proceeds to use the dead bodies as puppets and mocks his former enemies. While highly disturbing, and very likely to get on the nerves of any DM which would provoke a very harsh change in alignment, such an act is merely chaotic in nature, and is only worth one step. Vandalism and mischief does not make one truly malicious, and the player's alignment does not change at all when he gains experience.

Naturally any group will have to define for themselves what each of these conflicts mean and how they affect their game. I encourage comments, retort, expansion, and usage of these variant rules and any others that may be developed of the course of this thread.

So I am working on redoing my own personal game world and remapping the entire world onto graph paper to represent hexes so if and when anything kingdom related happens in game, I already have it set up for it.

For anyone that cares, each square (1cmx1cm) represents nine hexes, which each contain 36 lots, meaning each square contains 324 lots to do things with kingdom wise.

Now, looking to create my legend for the map I scoured the book to find the exact size of a hex so I could extrapolate that number and figure out exactly how big this first continent and subsequent islands and landmarks were.

The book says that a hex is 12 miles from corner to corner, and just under 95 square miles. Great! Right? Wait....

So to figure out the overall area of my map, I decided to figure the side length of a hex, meaning that I divide the square hex into two congruent isosceles right triangles, knowing that the hypotenuse is 12 miles per the book. Then using prior knowledge that I have with isosceles right triangles I know that if I divide that hypotenuse by the square root of 2 (1.414) I can calculate the side length of the hex pretty easily.

This is where things get dumb, I get about 8.486. Now, when I take that 8.486 and square it, I should get just under 95 square miles, right?

Okay, I get 72.021. Wait, what? There's about 23 square miles missing from my kingdoms per hex, multiply by a whole continent and I have a disaster.

Checking my work, I decided to take the sqaure root of 95, and got 9.746, and when I multiply by 1.414 I get 13.781 miles across a hex from corner to corner.

Now my question is: which number is right? The difference comes in about 1.75 miles across the hex. Should I be using the 95 square miles and multiplying that by the number of hexes on my continent to obtain the total area on my world, or should I use the 12 miles and end up with less area overall? Should I use both numbers knowing that the math is wrong because that's RAW? Is this a case where RAW should not be applied in game?

Also, what happens to the nations in Golarion when players start claiming hexes and establishing kingdoms? Do the other nations just let it go, or do they go to war? Is there a lot of unclaimed land I don't know about? How should I handle international policy in my tabletop RPG?

Godwin's Law be DAMNED!!!!

Depends entirely on the races in question.

A lot of people (especially on these forums) dog on Aasimars because they have the Flexible Ability score distribution instead of the standard, and for that alone feel the need to punish the player and I think that's a joke.

You need to look at the actual abilities the race has and see what applications they have in game that could be detrimental to your game's balance. If allowing flight at 1st level is too much, then don't allow it. Also ban witches.

The things to watch out for are straight up immunities, SLA's that allow access to shenanigans like Prestige Classing early, and uninhibited mobility.

Mostly, anything 20 RP and under will auto balance with everything else, and everything in the Featured Races section is pretty well balanced.

Elf Conjuerer 5

Traits: Warrior of Old; Focused Mind
Arcane Bond: Item (Ring)
*If and only if a Compsognathus, Dodo, or Greensting Scorpion is not available as a familiar
Opposed Schools: Enchantment; Necromancy

1) Improved Initiative; Scribe Scroll
3) Toughness
5) Combat Casting; Extend Spell

DEX 18
CON 12
INT 22
WIS 10

Being Core only, I tried to make this as vanilla of a spellcaster as possible, Conjuration is simply the best school, I avoided going the Augment Summoning route because you said this was for new players and summoning is a very complicated and confusing process, so I won't even include the summoning spells in the spellbook.

Spellboook (38/100 pages used)


  • Resistance
  • Acid Splash
  • Detect Magic
  • Detect Poison
  • Read Magic
  • Dancing Lights
  • Flare
  • Light
  • Ray of Frost
  • Ghost SoundTra[list]
  • Mage Hand
  • Mending
  • Message
  • Open/Close
  • Arcane Mark
  • Prestidigitation

  • Shield
  • Grease
  • Mage Armor
  • Unseen Servant
  • Detect Secret Doors
  • Identify
  • Magic Missle
  • Color Spray
  • Enlarge Person
  • Expeditious Retreat

  • Glitterdust
  • Web
  • Invisibility
  • Rope Trick

  • Stinking Cloud
  • Haste(or Fly)

Spells Prepared:
CANTRIPS (4/day): Detect Magic; Light; Prestidigitation; Resistance
LEVEL ONE (5+1/day): Grease(2); Mage Armor; Color Spray; Shield; Magic Missle
LEVEL TWO (4+1/day): Glitterdust (2); Web; Invisibility
LEVEL THREE (2+1/day): Stinking Cloud; Haste (2)


  • Handy Haversack (1,000)
  • +2 Headband of Vast Intellect (4,000)
  • Lesser Rod of Extend Spell (3,000)
  • Pearl of Power (1st)(1,000)

Also price out and purchase all of the items listed in this wizard's kit and have around 900 gp left over for Scroll Scribing and Spell Purchasing.

Tactics: At the beginning of each day, cast a Mage Armor, extended by the Rod to last 10 hours, and have a scroll written up every night while out adventuring for an Extended Rope Trick to last 10 hours (it will be a 3rd level scroll).

In combat, hopefully going first will let you open by casting Haste on your allies before you start controlling the battlefield, then combinations of Grease and Color Spray will shut the enemies down.

Weirdo wrote:

I have zero problem with characters spending multiple item slots rather than extra gold on improving multiple ability scores. They just have to make sense (eg Gloves of Dex allowed, but not a Headband of Dex).

Monkerdoodle wrote:
They also streamlined the pricing on improving multiple stats with Physical Might belts and Mental Prowess headbands, whose price is significantly lower than their prices would have been using the guidelines from magic item creation.

They're not lower, they're exactly what the magic item creation guidelines say they should cost: the cost of the first enhancement, plus 1.5x the cost of every additional enhancement.

A belt of physical prowess +2 costs 10K, which is 1x 4K (belt of one stat +2) + 1.5x 4K(belt of second stat +2)

A belt of physical perfection +2 costs 16K, which is 1x 4K (belt of one stat +2) + 1.5x 4K(belt of second stat +2) + 1.5x 4K(belt of third stat +2)

Pattern holds true for +4 and +6 versions.

My math was off, my bad.

Also it turns out there are two different Ioun Stones for each stat, with the stacking ones being 24K and the not stacking ones being 8K.

I feel as though I should resign from this thread.

In 3.5 it was common to have multiple item slots eaten up by stat boosting items. Typically, everyone wanted to end up with a CON item, some kind of STR or DEX item (or both in the case of pure martial builds) and usually a WIS item, along with either a CHA or an INT item based on class needs. Because of this, 4 body slots usually got taken up being dedicated solely to improving stats. Pathfinder aimed to remedy this by having all physical stat items be placed into the belt slot, and invented a headband slot specifically for mental stat items. They also streamlined the pricing on improving multiple stats with Physical Might belts and Mental Prowess headbands, whose price is significantly lower than their prices would have been using the guidelines from magic item creation.

This being done means you typically need to improve more than one stat at a time, and pay for it. If you want to use your belt/headband slot for one item, and have another stat boosted, I would suggest an Ioun Stone for it, as they usually run about 8k a piece, but they stack with each other up to +6. 24k to get that +6 enhancement bonus is actually cheaper than the 36k for a single belt or headband.

72K for 3 full sets of ioun stones is less than the 144k it takes for a belt of +6 perfection or a +6 headband of mental superiority.

Except CON, get a belt for CON.

And those don't take up slots.

That said, making a ring would probably cost you roughly the same as an Ioun Stone to start (since ring is a much more versatile slot, and it leaves your other slot available) and would progress to undesirable cost levels for higher grade rings of stat items.

Typically, a two handed weapon is mechanically more sound for multiple reasons.

One: The only real feat you need to invest in to get the damage going is Power Attack, anything after that is cake.

Two: The 1.5 damage you get going from one swing is a lot more than you get from one swing off of TWF. This is important when mobility and the availability of full attacks becomes increasingly important.

Three: Enchanting one weapon is a lot cheaper than enchanting two.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The big thing I noticed in my own games is I asked for Perception checks too often for things that really didn't matter.

I tried to limit the actual usage of the skill to only the really mechanical uses in game. The scout is looking for enemies ahead, or looking for traps.

When it comes to details about things in game, rather than saying "roll a perception" I have trained myself to just give them details on things, rather than expect them to have to roll play noticing the details on things that I wanted to just say anyway, and I haven't looked back.

I haven't used a Search skill in a long time, instead I would rather actually prod my player's brains to actually search a room.

Example: In the first dungeon of my game I included a very simple puzzle involving doors marked with numbers, and keys being hidden somewhere in the room. Rather than having them roll a search check and saying "you hit the DC! you find some keys behind the desk." I actually expected the players to look behind the desk and when they did I said "you found some keys" and it was much more satisfying for both my players and for me.

Actual Perception checks in my games are limited to scenarios where there are actual DCs that matter, limiting its use significantly and making it one of those skills that only one person in the party needs maxed rather than all of them.

I have been campaigning for an overhaul of the Point-Buy system (either changing the standard of how many points are allowed, or changing the system entirely) for as long as I've been on these boards.

Point buy is always going to favor SAD classes over MAD ones, which despite your proclaimed perfect balance can offer, doesn't really fix this problem.

I either want to see different classes receive different point buys, allowing for the MAD classes to have access to more above average stats to make their class abilities actually viable, OR changing the point buy system entirely to allow characters multiple good stats.

What it comes down to is this: a game where a wizard player can get two 18's is better than a game where a generalist cleric is unplayable.

I find point buy comparisons and standardization to be horridly misleading when it comes to terms of balance.

A paladin player with a stat array with a CON above 14 and a WIS above 8 ends up with a Point Buy value in the mid to high 30's, but god forbid he have a +1 or +2 for his will save at level 1 instead of a 0. Or an extra hit point that is worth 5 points in point buy for some reason.

The actual in game application of stats only really matters early game, once leveling and class progressions equal it, then dwarf it, then you realize that stats aren't really that important.

One cannot introduce a point buy system and also not expect stat dumping. It's simply not how the system was intended to work, if it was, then stat dumping would not be possible in the first place.

I've read it, and I understand that it's cool to have a guy under your command, but is that really the extent of it?

Is it like a spell version of Leadership where I can create a spellcaster that can cast spells and do crazy things for me?

How do people generally abuse this spell? Do they make copies of themselves?

I'm considering a BBEG that does something similar to this, where they kill what they think is the BBEG, and it turns out it's just his Simulacrum.

Is there a way to enhance it so it has more than half the levels?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zhayne wrote:
Monkerdoodle wrote:
It's basically Communism.
Is that close enough to Godwinning to call it?

Nazi's are overplayed, I feel we should start irrationally comparing things to Soviet Communism more often.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Once you get past about 4th or 5th level, stats really stop mattering because once you get to a certain point, bonuses from leveling overshadow even really good stats.

Personally I would rock an 18 STR and a 19 CHA for more balance on my character sheet.

It's not that bad of a character because you are playing a paladin, high STR and CHA are expected, you will have a few extra skill ranks and a will save that is 2 points higher than most point buy builds. When you look at the actual practicality of those stats vs what you would have in a point buy, there really isn't that much issue here.

Pathfinder's Point Buy system is extremely flawed, and forcing every player in every game to adhere to it is an atrocity imo. It's basically Communism.

Imbicatus wrote:

I would keep stats as they are, but move the human bonus from dex to wis. 18 is plenty for hitting things, and the wisdom bonus will be useful for will saves.

That would make stats

You will want to get clustered shots pretty quickly as well to help with DR issues. I am also a fan of Hammer the Gap on archers.

Also a wand of Instant Enemy is a VERY good item as it will let you treat anyone as a favored enemy.

And pick Gnolls!!!! With Gnoll Killer and ALL GNOLLS MUST DIE!!!!! Also pick Gnolls as your favored enemy.

There are plenty of interesting ranger archetypes, it all depends on what you want to play.
Those stats all look like you need to go fro archery which it looks like you have.

STR 12
DEX 18 (20)
CON 14
INT 11
WIS 14
CHA 10

For the most part I agree with everything rorek55 said, but I would recommend looking at Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes as well.

Going into higher levels I would recommend actually keeping Weapon Focus since you would need it for Point Blank Master, and I would also recommend finishing the Snap Shot chain.

Alternatively you could make a very decent Switch Hitter using these stats.

STR 18
DEX 16
CON 12
INT 11
WIS 14
CHA 10

Picking up Power Attack and Quickdraw at lvl 1, and Precise Shot at lvl 3, with Deadly Aim at lvl 5, otherwise leaving the build mostly the same (Many shot would have to be at 6th).