Morain's page

I'm not sure how else to get the message across that I'm not interested in seeing more AP's with a big influence of technology/sci-fi.

So I guess the only way is voting with my wallet. I hope others do the same so we get as little as possible of this sort of thing in the future. It will be interesting to see how popular something like this is going to be.

To everyone looking forward to this, please don't take offense. I hope you have fun with it.

when I play munchkin I have to admit one thing. I recognize everything from our early games. We really used to play like that some 15+ years ago.

Nowadays when I introduce New players to the hobby it is all within the sober confines of the Paizo AP.

I still play in some purely homebrew games, but they never seem to get quite as outrageous as before.

Is everything done more sensibly nowadays? Or do people still have these wild games with things like on the munchkin cards happening?

I`m just a little worried that the new players I GM for will never love the game like I do because I'm not about to let the game I gm for get all munchkiny.

Munchkinism is a double edged sword. It's both awesome and horrible. I would never be without that phase, but i'm not willing to go back to it. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

I've played pen and paper rpg's for over 15 years now and i have to say that not for a long time have I been so excited about creating characters as I have for the last couple of years With Herolab.

I buy most pathfinder books in print, but for Herolab I buy everything. Not only is it cheaper to buy in herolab, but I find it gets more use there.

I buy the most important books in print/paper, and they are invaluable as references during gameplay, but these days we create most of our characters in Herolab, and I must say I do prefer it. It just goes so much faster and easier.

One Catch though is i've had to help some New players that I GM for make some characters that didn't have Herolab and I was surprised how fast my know how/skill at creating characters the old fashioned way on just paper had faded. It really is a skill that needs maintaining.

In conclusion I say that Herolab is great if you already know the basics of the game, but if you have access to herolab as you learn this game it might be a hinderance towards really Learning the rules. What say you all?

A character is turned into an undead (intelligent and free willed if it matters) and becomes evil. Will he become good again if the undead is destroyed and he is raised?

I missed it in the theatres, and I gotta say damn... This was awesome!

The ending made me cry like a baby, even though I don't usually do that.

I recommend it for everyone, and it totally deserves its academy award!

I heard this on the internet. Can anyone elaborate?

I need to make stats for Elvanna the queen of Irissen, but I need some advice.

What is known about her? Levels, Feats and so on?

If little is known I'd like some appropriate suggestions.

PS. She's not statted up in an official source is she?

If you have winds strong enough to make flying (natural or via spell) effectively impossible, will this also make it impossible to use air walk? Or is it different since you are walking?

I think this issue is going to come up in a game I'm going to GM later today.

I've had a few posts deleted in the past few weeks with the message "please revisit the messageboard rules".

I figured I was going to do that, because some of the times I'm truly not sure what I'm doing wrong. But I can't find them.

Wizards should get a general boost to many of their spells and powers, and maybe a few extra class features in order to make the game less balanced and more fun.

I suppose the easiest way to implement this would be to simply introduce new and more powerful spells, and new archetypes/prestige classes that are better than the base class.

First off yes, I admit it. I'm the kind of guy who don't like change.

I gotta say every time TSR/WotC brought out a new version of D&D I was annoyed at first. given time though I did think 3.0 was a great improvement over AD&D. It was quite revolutionary, I think most will agree.

When they came out with 3.5 though it was a slightly different story. Yes it was better overall, but it was too similar to be worth it imo. I really felt cheated having to rebuy all books again. Yes I know I can still play 3.0 or any other system for that matter, but that's not how it works. There is always the unexplainable need to stay current.

When WotC announced 4.0 I had had it. That was why me and all my friends changed to Pathfinder as soon as we heard about it. Although in theory 3.5 and Pathfinder was supposed to be compatible, we don't mix them anymore even if this was our reason for choosing Pathfinder. Still we're happy with going for Pathfinder since it is just so awesome.

Now WotC is going to do D&D 5.0 wich in my eyes shows they've lost and know it.

Yes Pathfinder 2.0 could fix some problems. It could also change some things for the worse in the eys of many of it's fans. Regardless, none of the changes/improvements/fixes I've ever seen anyone ever suggest in any forum post I've read would make a new edition of the game justified.

This is why I hope and pray that Paizo will never need to release Pathfinder 2.0 in order to meet profit goals. And I do really mean NEVER! For many reasons. You can never make a perfect system. The current one has problems, but it is completely workable. No new system will ever be flawless anyway. My hope is that Paizo will keep being different and keep bringing out awesome books of all their awesome ranges. I already subscribe to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game range, and the Adventure Paths. I'm considering also Campaign Setting and Player Companion, and I think all these ranges of books have a lot of potantial for the future. The Only range I can see being a problem to keep going indefinately is the actual Pathfinder Roleplaying Game range of books. I have to admit I have recieved two dissapppinting shipments in that range (Beginner Box and Advanced Race Guide), but I much prefer the odd disappointment to having to rebuy absolutely everything.

Anyone interested in discussing this? At the very least I wanted to make this post as a contradiction to all the post I've seen calling for Pathfinder 2.0 throwing my 2 cents in.

Do these things even exist in Pathfinder?

Just feeling too lazy to search so I'm just popping this post in here....

When dualwielding do you get half your dex modifier to damage on the offhand just like with standard two weapon fighting, or full?

I've run Rise of the Runelords before, and at some point I'm going to run Shattered Star.

I've heard that Shattered Star assumes that Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne and Second Darkness have all taken place.

I have no idea what happens in those two AP's though, and I was wondering if anyone would be willing to give me a short summary of what happens in CotCT & SD to help me prepare for SS?

Hi all. I read quite a bit, and I'm considering picking up some of the Pathfinder Tales novels.

I was wondering though if there are any story arcs that span multiple books that I should be aware of so I don't start with the wrong books. Or are they all stand alone?

If it is just a matter of chronology I'm not that concerned, unless it has an impact on the story.

So when is the release date?

My players never went to the shrine of shelyn after the searching the burial ship of Snorri Stone Eye, instead they went to the rimerunner guildhall the next day. I suppose the figured since they didn't find Ulf on the ship there was no need to get to a safe house.

So does anyone have any suggestions for some other event other than fighting the elemental and helping the priest in the street that might persuade Helgarval to reveal himself?

By the way, the players are not generally acting very lawful or good so I'm struggling with this one, and I'm considering having the helm just fly off and abandoning the PC's.

So a friend of mine told me when I asked him if he was planning to play pathfinder online, that he didn't think it will ever make it as far as being released.

I have not been keeping my ear to the ground with thats going on with this game so I have no basis to have an opinion on this.

Does anyone else share his doubts?

My GM just told me he'll be introducing level 10 spells in his campaign, but there arent exactly a lot of those printed.

So doeas anyone have any cool ideas for things that could be a level 10 spell?

Also does anyone remember if any old books from previous editions of d&d might have any level 10 spells in them? We got tons of old books lying around.

I'll definately be memorizing some quickened Heal also, hehe

I started out in 2nd.ed AD&D after having first tried out the game on borrowed original D&D books, and decided we liked it.

I read through the AD&D book, but never really got into optimizing back then. I only did what the DM told me I could do basically

Towards the end of AD&D's lifetime though I was heavvily into min/maxing, and when 3rd ed. came out I went nuts. 3.0 was the best time I've ever had as a pen and paper tabletop rpg gamer. I like to be powerful I admit it.

We had the Epic Level Handbook, we had everything, we weren't just gods, we were better than gods. Travelling through time and planes killing gods and demon lords left and right. To me this is what I strive for. Every time I make a new character I want it to one day become the most powerful being that ever lived. Or at the very least I want for it to exist in a world where something like that is possible.

I don't want reality. I don't want to play in a world where man is man, and god is god. I want fantasy. I get enough realism in the the real world.

I don't have the book in front of me right now (I've archived it in my regular GM's rpg library I believe), but I think it said something along the lines of 9th level spells being supremely powerful reality altering magic in the beginning of the magic chapter of the AD&D players handbook. That always stuck with me...

In 3.0 it got to be a bit over the top even for me, I had literally dozens of spells(around 50) cast on me, that lasted days, weeks months, years, decades, even centuries. My conjuror was more powerful at meele with his greatsword than any fighter or barbarian. Better with his bow than any archer/ranger and still could cast two high level wizard spell each round. At this point my AC was around 75 fully buffed up with polymorph and everything. That's when my DM told me to stop, and I did.

That's an important lesson, when the GM tells you to do something......ACCEPT IT! That's how we managed to keep playing that campaign until the end of 3.0's lifespan. I did as I was told. The DM didn't have to nerf me or any of my abilities, I just stuck to spellcasting during combat, or fought with my bow with a minimum of buffs and all was good. I still like this edition of the rules best because I dont think the classes should be balanced. I think the magical and supernatural is inherently the most powerful force and should rule supreme. I also like to play non spellcasters so this opinion is not just a selfish one, but more of a way I want things to be in my ideal campaign world.

When 3.5 came I was a bit annoyed. It fixed the things we had already fixed by just listening to the DM, and ACCEPTING! But it was ok, it was going great, we still played the same game, I still played my most powerful characters imported from AD&D into epic levels just converted into 3.5, and other 3.0 characters converted to straight 3.5.

When 4.0 came out we didn't even wanna try it, it sounded horrendous. Thankfully Paizo saved the day with Pathfinder, and we were able to continue many old campaigns converted, and start many new ones.(Please don't make Pathifinder 2, it will force many of us to rethink if we want to stick at this hobby, and we can't afford to loose any players).

I guess my main point is that the only time I was ever truly able to break the game was under 3.0 rules, and even then imo the game didn't need fixing. The only thing needed was listening to the word of the allmighty DM and ACCEPTING!

Nothing in the pathfinder rules can be exploited to such an extent that the game itself is broken, not even in high levels. High levels is what this game needs. the entire game is too low power these days as far as I'm concerned. We need stats for gods, and we need the epic level rules to smite them into the dirt, that's hight adventure as far as I'm concerned.

PS. It may be noted that these days I don't optimize at all, I just play whatever character I want to based on the roleplaying aspect of the game. I long for a new dawn for level 20+ and god hunting though.

I'm preparing to GM a campaign again for the first time in a long while.

I'll be running Jade Regent, and I'm planning to skip xp and just level up the players at the suggested points throughout the adventure. Thus having one less thing to worry about.

As a substitute for handing out bonus xp when the players do good I was thinking about using the hero point system as rewards for various heroic feats. I'm thinking this could also help a bit with survivability as there are only 3 players, and they are all inexperienced first time players.

Has anybody got any experience negative or positive with either dropping xp, or using hero points? My worries is that dropping xp from the game will make doing things seem less rewarding, and with the hero points I'm a little worried they will never fail an important savingthrow.

this is a questions for D&D veterans (I only know D&D having just played D&D from 1st ed. through 3.5 and Pathfinder, and no other pen and paper rpg's).

Do you find you researh your own spells less and less lately?

I know I do. Even with the abundance of spells they had in AD&D ( I remember fondly the many volumes of both Priest's and Wizard's Spell compendiums published by TSR). I think in those days maybe half my memorized spells where reasearched by myself.

Nowadays though I never research spells. Is it just me getting lazy, or is this a trend other people see?

If you do have the same experience, any thoughts as to why?

When the beginner box showed up in the mail (I subscribe) I didn't know what to do with it at first. Certainly my usual group has no need for something like that.

So I gave it to a friend who has seemed interested in rpg's in the past, but never played as a christmas gift.

Well yesterday I was asked if I'd be willing to GM it, and I said yes. This will be a group of people who have never played any pen and paper games.

The thing is I'm at work now and tonight we play, I will have little or no time to prepare. Will that be ok? I seem to remember reading on the back of the box before I wrapped it you could start in 10 minutes of opening the box, is this true?

Hey all. I was hoping to get some insights, and hopefully the official answer to this question.

Can magical effects and feats that block critical hits like fortification on armor, or greater shield specialization prevent a vorpal weapon from cutting a head off?

I find arguments both for and against it when I study the text in the core rulebook.

" Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll the critical hit),the weapon severs the oponents head (if it has one)from its body." The part of this sentence about confirming the critical hit suggests to me it is a critical hit, and is subject to fortification effects etc.

"Others, such as golems and undead creatures other than vampires, are not affected by the loss of their heads." This on the other side suggests to me that the head is cut of regardless of immunity to critical hits or not. Just that those imune wouldn't die from it. Wouldn't it look rediculus if a fighter with full fortification armor lived on without his head, hehe.

So yeah, what do you guys think?