Mordecai Jehoshaphat's page

As the title says, I'm a bit unclear on a few of the gunslinger feats:

1. For the Munition Crafter feat, it says you gain an additional 4 formulas on top of the ones granted by Alchemical Crafting. Are these formulas limited to common formulas like the ones gained by Alchemical Crafting?

2. Can Sword and Pistol be used with unarmed attacks, or only those with melee weapons? I've seen it both ways and I don't know which one is correct.

3. Do the Alchemical Shot and Shattering Shot feats apply a bomb's secondary or non-damaging effect, or only damage? For example, if I tried to alchemical shot with a tanglefoot bag would it apply the speed penalty to the target or would it do nothing?

4. Does using Black Powder Boost require an action in addition to Leap, High Jump, or Long Jump, or is it considered part of said actions?

I should preface this by saying I've played PF 1E but not 2E yet, and all I have to go on thusfar is guides and trawling AoN and forums. I also do not have a group yet, but I'm working under the assumption that the rest of the party would be amenable to the concept. I'm also assuming that I will ever get to use snares, which, I will admit, I'm not 100% convinced on yet despite the forum posts I've read.

So, I've been wanting to play a kobold bard, and since kobolds and traps go together like peanut butter and beef, I was interested in taking the kobold snare feats as well as the Snarecrafter archetype. However, from what I have gathered, bards are supposed to be all support all the time and every +/-1 is crucial. Taking dedication feats would of course cut into that.

My question is, would a character like this be OK to play, or would they be a liability due to not being optimized? I'd be missing out on some class feats after all. I don't know just how optimized you need to be to not screw over your party. Not to mention, I wouldn't be able to use Powerful Snares, so I don't know if that renders the entire concept moot just on that hiccup alone.

I haven't played PFS in years, but since I moved and can't find any home games, so I thought I'd give it another shot. One of my characters is a summoner, before the ban on original APG summoner so he was grandfathered in shortly before I quit. I have the chronicles and character info to prove it, if it still matters.

My first question is is this character still legal to play or was there another ruling that forces me to convert? Secondly, if I do play OG summoner, would that be disruptive or unwelcome at a table? I know I got a lot of grumbles whenever I tried to play mine, and had at least one GM try to go out of his way to screw me over.

Thinking of running this again, and looking at Krune he seems competent. However, I am a terrible judge of difficulty, so I have to wonder how difficult he really is. How does he hold up against an optimized party? Have you guys had to buff or nerf him to provide a challenge, and if so how?

So I was reading through Kobolds of Golarion and thinking about it; kobolds are super subservient and suck up to dragons really easily, yeah? That's why any sort of chromatic who doesn't just eat the little things has them as underlings.

That's a common tale, but I have to wonder, do any metallic dragons take on tribes of kobolds? I mean, if a dragon is good (or just needs some underlings to take care of minor stuff he can't bother with) then wouldn't he want kobolds, either as servants or to actually try to redeem them with his draconic goodness? I mean, Apsu is a dragon god but there's nothing really established in the book that says any kobolds worship him, even though one of the creation myths presented credits Apsu with creating the kobold race from his dying draconic children after his war with Dahak.

So I'm wondering, is there any official instances of metallic dragons having kobolds? Do kobolds generally see metallics with disdain, or is it just too rare a circumstance?

I'm in a Reign of Winter game, but due to complications it was put on hiatus and is soon resuming. We're still level one, but a lot of stuff changed between when we started and now, and now I'm far less sure of how I want to build my character or whether he's salvagable. I am the only divine caster in the party of a ranger, arcanist, sorcerer, and a soon to be replaced druid. Deity is Cayden Caliean with travel domain (natch) and I was hoping to be a sort of support type character who could do a little backup damage--not as strong as others, but still something. Also being a face type with a good number of skills and able to give a few buffs.

My stats are:

8 STR
16 DEX
11 CON
12 INT
16 WIS
14 CHA

My plan originally was to get an agile rapier, but now my whole feat and purchase plan are in disarray. I'm kinda wondering the following things:

1. Would trying to get Fencing Grace be worth it? It would give me some damage earlier and cheaper than an agile rapier, but I'd need to eat two more feats (have weapon finesse) and I'm really wondering if it's worth it. I could dip a level of fighter to have it by 3, but that seems like it would really kill my caster level. Same with a dip in warpriest for weapon focus, but that seems like it would murder my BAB as well. Would it be worth it to wait?

2.On that note, since I have bow proficiency it seems like a waste to not use them, or at the very least have a ranged backup. Would it be worth it to grab Deadly Aim? I imagine it would help when I can't get close enough to an opponent. If so, at what level? I don't plan on investing a ton in archery.

3. Are judgement surge and instant judgement any good? Judgement surge seems cool but it's only one a day, and I don't quite get the appeal of instant judgement--aren't I still eating swift actions anyway?

4. Would Divine Protection be a good pick at level 5, or would that be too cheesey? I thought it might help with my lackluster fort and reflex save, especially since I pumped cha for dumb reasons, but...

5. And finally, armor? I was planning on getting celestial armor at some point, but don't know if I would be able to do the weight even with half weight. Not to mention a buckler, which I planned on using magic vestment on eventually, but I don't know if that's a good idea.

Kind of rambling, but yeah, I have no idea how to plan this out.

Let's say you're doing a point buy campaign. How low are you willing to put a stat and how high are you willing to raise a stat? Does it depend on the stat in question, or the class?

In general, I don't bother raising any main stat above 18 post-racial, and don't like having WIS below 10 ever, even with a good will save.

I'm interested in one day running a pathfinder Gestalt game and I wanted to give it a sort of test run. However, since I'm lazy/suck at making good PF scenarios, I wanted to try using a module. I know I'll have to do some upscaling and editing, but I was hoping to have a base I wouldn't have to completely rewrite.

In any case, I know that the system--at least the 3.5 info I found--speaks of characters having more resources to go through the day, so I want to run something that is as un-15-minute-workday as possible, or, if the encounters are scattered, can be linked together with few rest periods between. Was hoping to find something that runs between levels 5 at minimum and 13 at most. What would you guys recommend?

Maybe it's the WotR kick I've been on, but in my game I've become interested in the idea of redeeming at least a few of the goblins. Now, OoC, I've read the AP beforehand because I planned on running it and I know the idea is more or less impossible, but IC, my character would be interested in attempting it, his rationale being that if the goblins were organized for ill, perhaps some could be organized for good to keep them from ever hurting anyone in town ever again (also he is Taldan and loathes the Taldan nobility's goblin hunts for a variety of reasons, but that's a story for another time). He doesn't plan to redeem all of them, and will not hesitate to take out any that are beyond help (especially the goblin leaders) but wants to try at least a few. Doesn't help that he's only got 8 CHA, but whatever.

We have talked to Shalaelu and are just about to do the glassworks, and so far he's learned mostly about the goblin's childlike tendancies, their love of food, and that they like to fashion things (mostly weapons) from glass, so he's considering taking some ranks in profession cook and craft glassware to have something to teach them to divert their destructive tendencies into something productive as a preliminary plan, but he'll figure out more later.

Regardless, I'm curious if anyone has ever done anything like this, or if the GM even allowed you to do anything like this. I know I'll fail miserably but it would be fun to try. What's you guys' experience?

So I thought I'd make a Grippli ranger for a game I'll never get to play, and I saw this feat:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/racial-feats/agile-tongue-grippli

And, personally, it looks really cool, but I'm wondering what all can be done with it. I at first thought delivering toxic skin poison, but the fort save is butts, and I probably wouldn't have the feats or BAB to be good at stealing or disarming. But is there anything else cool to do with it? I notice it allows Sleight of Hand; does that mean I can retrieve items with it or do other things? What is the limit?

I'm just curious if this feat is even worth it for a ranger, and if so, what would I need to make it good? Has anyone ever used this feat at all and done cool things with it?

I've been reading up on them more and they seem cool; I've always been a fan of psychic powers in fiction anyway. How often do people use them, if ever?

Alright, maybe I just am not getting it, but it's something that bothers me. In all the magus guides I read, they really espouse arcana like Arcane Accuracy and Empowered Magic and stuff--basically "spend a point to get a bonus" and "once a day metamagic" things. And that seems cool.

But what I don't understand is, don't these things burn through your arcane pool lickety split? I mean arcane accuracy is nice, but if you're spending arcane points to enhance your weapon at the start of battle, then arcane points for spell recall (if you have it), then arcane accuracy and stuff...it seems like you'd run out super fast. Also, the metamagic arcana, blowing an arcana on something that you can use only once a day no way to increase it doesn't seem all that appealing, especially if you're facing multiple fights and enemies throughout the day. It all seems very 15-minute workday to me.

So can someone explain to me as if I'm an idiot why these particular arcana (arcane accuracy, arcane edge, the metamagic arcana, etc) are so highly suggested? Am I not understanding something, or is there a way to manage the resources well?

Do people tend to run APs from the box with minimal adjustment, or do people tailor them to the party more often? Both in mechanics and story.

In an upcoming game I'd like to GM I'm planning on having gnolls as a playable race. However, stat arrays for gnolls on d20 are kinda...sparse, so I thought I'd try my hand at making things more flavorful. To that end I wanted to make some racial archetypes that I hoped would be flavorful and effective for gnolls, with a primary theme focusing on being monstrous, intimidating, and all that good stuff (not necessarily evil, but not pleasant either). So far I have an archetype for rangers based on intimidation, one for barbarians based on eating things (or people) to gain their powers (or just 'cause they're tasty), and a monk based upon natural attacks and animalistic fighting; still working on the witch one, since I can't find a good way to incorporate hyena folklore into that.

Seeing as I have no idea what I'm doing, I'd like to ask you guys's opinions. These are probably super OP right now, but I'm still trying to get the hang of making something useful and something flavorful. If you've suggestions I'd like to hear them.

Relentless Hunter the Ranger Archetype. Trades out spellcasting and animal companion for a bunch of intimidate related things. I wanted to go for a sort of intimidation/pack hunt theme with this, but I fear I overdid it.

Devourer the barbarian archetype, based upon eating people since, y'know, gnolls are big on eating people. I feel like it doesn't trade out enough useful stuff, however, and am considering trading out DR. I don't know if the bonuses of Bloody Feast make up for it.

Beast Born the monk archetype. I wanted a sort of bestial monk with this one, with a strong animal theme that encourages risk taking, so I used the grit pool feature for inspiration for the ki pool replacement. I'm told by a friend this one is problematic just by its very premise, so I don't even know how to deal with it.

I've not gotten the chance to playtest any of these yet, but thought perhaps I could get some feedback? Still haven't come up for anything good for the witch.

When I say cinematic vs subdued, I mean more like where on the spectrum do you prefer your games. By cinematic I mean more geared towards more improvisational, rule of cool type things whereas subdued is more akin to pragmatic and planned stuff, relying on tried but true.

For example, cinematic stuff would be akin to what you might see in a movie or other media; players try experimental or risky approaches to problems and so do the npcs. There's less emphasis on tactics and more on improvisation. You can have stuff like villains giving their hammy speeches and not getting surprised round while doing so, or the inclusion of challenges and whatnot which are non-standard or don't have preset DCs, or perhaps bending rules in certain circumstances for the sake of narrative.

In contrast, subdued is more pragmatic. PCs and npcs tend to stick with things that work reliably well, and forethought and planning are not only encouraged but required to win. It tends to stay closer to the rules and common sense.

I am probably explaining this wrong, but when you play pathfinder, where on the spectrum do you usually lie? And note that I don't mean cinematic is all crazy all the time and subdued is staunchly conservative no matter what, but rather the themes of them. Do you think the system better supports one end of the spectrum over the other?

I recently got invited to a PF game and the gm ok'd me to play a goblin alchemist, so I made Kukgud, Master Chef and Slayer of Dogs. It's a 28 point buy game (yes, seriously) and the stats I ended up with after racial adjustments were 12 STR 18 DEX 14 CON 17 INT 10 WIS 8 CHA. To that end, I went with the Grenadier archetype (although I have no idea what martial weapon to get), took the weapon familiarity racial to get proficiency with dogslicer and horsechopper (which I'm reflavoring as a chef knife and a large meathook, respectively), and took the traits Pragmatic Activator and Goblin Foolhardiness because I liked the flavor.

However, I've never really build a melee-oriented alchemist, and am at somewhat of a loss as to how I should build this character, especially since the last alchemist I made ended up absolutely terrible. I know that, thematically, I want to:

1. Use infusions to help buff allies (cooking magic food for them)
2. Play really risky. I generally like playing in a way that is up close and personal and relies on putting myself in harms way. This is partly why I don't want to take longbow as my martial proficiency--too long range for my liking and doesn't seem very goblin. If I am gonna hit something with ranged attacks, I want them to be close enough to hit me.
3. Switch hit. I don't know if this is feasible, but I want to be decent at both throwing things (especially bombs, but also knives because I like them) and chopping people up, probably in the sense of "throw things then run in and kill things". I had hoped mutagen would help with this.
4. Use bombs for support and setting things on fire. Because what goblin would give up the opportunity to use fire-based weapons?

So given that, I'm trying to decide mainly whether or not my ideas are even feasible, what feats to take, what weapon to take for martial proficiency, and anything else that would make him more goblin. I was toying with snagging weapon finesse to capitalize on his high dex, as well as two-weapon fighting--I figured I'd try that since I could use it with fast bombs and knife throwing (I think) while still being able to run in flailing dogslicers all over the place, but I dunno if it's a good idea.

Does anyone have any experience with this sort of thing, any recommendations or warnings? For what it's worth, I don't know what the rest of the party is yet and the GM ain't telling me.

I'll be honest, I friggin' love kobolds, and it seems a lot of people do as well. I was wondering, have any of you had experience playing a kobold in pathfinder, or being in a party with one? What kind of character was it? Did your GM use the standard stat arrays or use homebrew ones? How did the party respond? Did it mess with your verisimilitude or anything?

Fleet Warrior is probably my favorite mythic ability ever, and made combat a lot of fun for me. I've been wondering what would be a good way to make it non-mythic, or, if I did just make it non-mythic, what kind of effect it would have on the game. I like it thematically, at the very least for slippery and fast classes like monks and maybe rogues to be able to dart around the battlefield laying waste to people. Besides, I prefer it over five-foot full attack each round.

Mythic Weapon Finesse, well, I just think more weapons than scimitars should get dex to damage without blowing like 8k gp. I figure it would help out TWF rogues and dex-based monks and whatnot. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to implement these, or if doing so would be a bad idea?

I'm thinking about running Rise of the Runelords for some online peeps because I suck at making coherent homebrew campaigns but I've never run an AP before. I was curious if it was...I'm not sure if disingenuous is the right word, but if it was bad to change things about the AP. I don't mean just buffing enemies or throwing in optional encounters, I mean like adding or removing NPCs, changing demographics, or altering NPC motivations or story elements to better tie in with PC motivations.

Like for example, I've been toying with the fact of changing demographics in the places PCs go after knowing the party composition, so that they don't seem so out of place or something. Someone plays a tengu? Tengu enemies and commoners and stuff show up sometimes. Play a fetchling? You'll run into a community of fetchlings sooner or later. Nagaji? Expect them to show up sporadically when you fight enemies or go to taverns or whatnot. Goblin? I'd change things around so that you're not lynched on sight (although people may not like you). Not only that, I'd change things depending on backstory. Your character was nobility? Someone of a rival house is working with the bad guys. Mercenary? Run into merc buddies in your adventures. Basically, trying to help mold the AP so that it seems more...personal?

The reason I am concerned is because, while I would have no problem doing this in a home game, it seems that there's some expectations and lore attached to APs, and I don't know if I'd be doing players a disservice if I changed things thematically. Also, I'm afraid I'll accidentally screw myself over like 5 books later by changing a minor thing in book 1. Any thoughts?

Maybe I should just run a homebrew campaign.

I'm curious as to how other people have gained notoriety in book four in order to gain an audience with Nocitula. Our party just did, but apparently did it in a way that was completely off the rails: our interpretation of "notoriety" was "make them know us and fear us", so we went about crushing the slave market by assassinating those with a good share of it (apparently NPCs we were supposed to help or something...), abducting and freeing slaves, and shutting down gates to other planes in order to throw the market into chaos. Apparently it was so off the rails that the GM, while saying it was a good plan, literally had no idea how to prep it all because it was wildly different from what the AP suggests, I think.

So I am just curious as to what other people did to gain their audience. Did you go along with what the AP suggested, and if so, how did you know what to do? If you did something different, how did you come up with your plan and how did it go?

Awhile ago in a game our party was talking with the GM on ways he could make things more challenging for us, and I suggested that, since I'm a gunslinger who is always in melee, the GM should try to exploit my lower CMD when he AoOs my character instead of my higher AC.

Another player countered that, since I had Snap Shot, their attempting to disarm or trip or whatever me on the AoO would in turn provoke an AoO from me, but I can't wrap my head around that. In addition, it seems like doing this would give me more attacks on my turn in addition to my full attack, and the whole thing just seems weird; it seems like leaving myself open suddenly lets me fire off an extra shot if they try to knock my gun out of my hands, but not if they try to whack me on the head.

So, my question is, if someone does an action that provokes an attack of opportunity, and the enemy tries to do a CMB AoO without the proper feat, does the character that originally did the provoking action get to take an attack on opportunity on the opponent? If so, in what order are the AoOs resolved?

So I mentioned in another thread, I was trying to revive my magus/monk, and I thought, "You know what would be cool? If I could grapple people and electrocute them." Can't flurry with spell combat and can't really trip or disarm well without reach, so I figured why not.

I was planning to get greater grapple so I could maintain grapples as a move, allowing me to do unarmed strike and cast a spell while I have someone held, and even thought of taking Maneuver Master so as to have a pretty good grapple check. My problem came when I looked at the concentration DCs--DC 10+opponent CMB+spell level seems, well, like a helluva lot, especially considering the average CMB of enemies is around 18 when I can first pull off the combo.

It's such a cool idea, but I have no idea how it works. It seems outside of eating a bunch of metamagic (still+empower really eats into slots) or spending a lot of money on a ring of freedom of movement there's not much to do. Am I missing something?

I was going about resurrecting a monk/magus character I had once played for another game, because I found the character quite fun, but when doing so someone mentioned that I'd be able to flurry and spell combat in the same turn, which I had assumed I'd not be able to do.

However I'm unsure about this. His argument is that flurry is a full-attack action and spell combat is a full-round action that gives a full attack, but I'm unsure what the difference is. I just want to clarify if Flurry can be done with Spell Combat or not. If so, it would make the character a lot stronger...assuming I could actually hit anything with all those penalties.

More of a thought experiment than anything, but ever since I got Kobolds of Golarion, I've been wanting to try out the Scaled Disciple feat. I mean, the flavor and stuff sounds great, and inquisitors seem cool.

But the more I look at it, the more I have to wonder, how the heck would that even work? The guides keep saying how good Scaled Disciple is for prestiging into DD but I can't figure out why. I mean, people tell me natural attacking build, so I was thinking Agile AoMF because that -4 STR, but the only natural attacks you can get before your first level of DD are a bite and a tail slap (which sucks 'cause secondary), and then you don't get to use your claws for very long since you probably don't have tons of CHA to begin with. Not to mention, the damage seemed...pretty terrible.

So I thought ranged, but that took too many feats and DD didn't seem to help, especially since it's 3/4th BAB. The STR boosts don't seem enough to bring you up to any respectable STR, since you gotta eat so many points to even get a 14 STR to start with...I don't know, every possibility I think up doesn't seem to work.

Not to mention, I'm not entirely sure how blood of dragons even works with Inquisitor levels. Do you get sorcerer spells? Do you only get the bonus spells? Also, am I mistaken, or are none of the Scalykind spells on the inquisitor or oracle spell list aside from poison, thus rendering the +1 to CL thing moot?

Anyone have any experience with building a character like this? There must be something I'm missing here. And no I don't wanna do any racial heritage shenanigans.

Forgive me if the topic title is vague, or if I appear to be rambling, but this has been a point of curiosity for me for quite awhile. Basically, I am wondering what people think of a setting that has humans in it, but humans are "just another race" so to speak--not the most populous, not the most special, but just a part of it, with other fantastic races in equal or even greater number? A setting in which humans are not anything special, or, if they are special, not in the way that the world revolves around them? Note that I am not saying a setting in which humans do not exist or a setting in which humans are seen as too puny or too powerful; humans would have to be a legit player character race.

Now, to further explain where I'm coming from, there are two things that have caused me to wonder this. Firstly, I've noticed in about any game in which humans are playable characters and not put into the weak or ignorant or cthulu category, humans are always the special can-do anything race. I mean look at Pathfinder: humans have next to no restrictions, have the most fluid points, can get more skills than other races, etc etc. Or take something like FantasyCraft: every race has race traits, except human, who gets to pick from a plethora of different traits instead. In short, Humans are always presented as the "do anything, be anything" race, with the most diversity in skill and culture and beliefs, yadda yadda yadda.

Secondly, I had been looking at some posts in another thread about exotic races and the pros and cons of the "party of freaks". I noticed one common thread of thought in the anti-exotic race camp was that such parties stretched verisimilitude since the setting, itself, is human-centric, with humans being the dominant and most populous race, with the other exotic races being really rare or even so rare many people might not even know one exists.

So this got me to thinking, what happens when you have a setting in which humans are just as common as any other race, or even if humans /are/ the exotic race? That is to say, in the grand scheme of things they're not anymore important than any other race and things don't revolve around them. A setting where multiple races being in contact with each other an intermingling was seen as pretty normal? A setting where humans have things they're good at, but aren't the "do anything" race, or at the very least, other races have as much diversity as humans do?

Would such a setting work for you? Would it stretch suspension of disbelief, or be difficult to relate to? I know one person I mentioned this to noted that the trope of humans being the dominant, multi-faceted race was probably rooted in humans being the most relatable choice (since we're, y'know, humans) and thus is better for anchoring the player. Another consideration could be possibly by making humans not special, it makes the non-human races not-special in turn, removing the incentive to play them? I don't know.

I wanna hear people's thoughts on this. There has to be a reason for this, if this is such an engendered trope in fantasy.

Since the mythic abilities Blowback and Uncanny Grapple let you forcefully reposition enemies, is it possible that they can take attacks of opportunities from the movement if you send them through allies' threatened squares? I think if so, it would make the abilities a lot more useful.

I'm playing a Gulch Gunner in our party's Wrath of the Righteous campaign and I'm the only character with a halfway decent disable device skill (get it as a class skill with the archetype). I don't mind being party skill monkey, but I'd like to free up some skill points for other things, so I'm wondering just how high my disable device even has to be, or if I have to put a point into it every level for it to even keep up.

Right now I'm sitting on +10 at level 3 (+12 really, since masterwork thieves tools), which should beat any non-magical trap we run across with a take ten...I think. Magical traps will be a pain, although fortunately I do have a workable UMD and the GM okay'd us buying those one scrolls that give trapfinding at half the character's level for the duration of the spell. I also plan on picking up the Goggles of Minute Seeing or whatever those one goggles are that give you +5 Disable Device.

Since I have mental problems I'm tossing around a gunslinger/monk backup character in a campaign I'm playing. Since I'd be using the gulch gunner archetype, which is literally melee gunslinging, I was wondering if the empty-hand monk archetype could let you do unarmed strike in a round and shoot, or even if you could use rapid shot to unarmed strike, pistol whip, then shoot.

I just want to know if it's even possible or not before I waste my time trying to figure out the logistics of building such a character.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/arg-feats/tunnel-rat-ratfolk

Ok, just to make sure I'm understanding this feat correctly...

1. With this feat, would I not incur any penalties for moving into or attacking a square that was 2.5-5sqft large?

1a. Along that lines, I would only need to make an escape artist check for moving through a square that was 1.25 sqft or less?

2. Do I incur movement penalties when going past squares of medium sized creatures?

3. If a tiny sized creature can inhabit the square of a medium sized creature, would my character be able to inhabit another creature's square? I've gotten mixed responses on this one.

3a. If so, do I take penalties to attacking when in an allies' square?

So I'm making a gulch gunner and I had planned to do a lot of being in melee, so I was planning to pump my Acrobatics and Escape Artist skills so I can tumble easily (I'd want to provoke when I shoot them, not trying to get in range of shooting them) and get out of grapples, since being a small character with 10 STR constantly in melee means that grab attacks could really screw me over.

However, when a friend linked me a spreadsheet containing the average and most common enemy stats by CR, I was dismayed to find how CMD scaled. From the looks of it, even if I pumped the skills every level (with a high DEX and class skills on both to boot), I'd only be able to succeed on the checks about 50% or less of the time, which seems way too unreliable and would just get me killed more often than not. Are these skills even worth investing in, or do they just require more things to be effective, such as feats, items, etc? Has anyone here built a tumbling or escape artist oriented character? How has it worked?

I'm going to be playing a gunslinger in an upcoming WotR game, and I've been looking at ways to make money during downtime since I'm going to require a /lot/ of money for stuff (like seriously). I was looking at the Gunsmithing feat and it mentioned I could make guns at half price at 1,000gp/day without a craft check, so I was thinking of trying to make pistols and selling them.

I asked my GM and he gave me the go ahead, but I've never actually played a game where I could craft and sell things, so I had some questions:

1. Do you think selling pistols would be profitable at all, since they've got a sell value of 1k GP? It seems like the most efficient weapon to produce. I had heard something about only being able to sell at half price, but I can't find where it says that.

2. What do you think would be the best way to go about drumming up business? I don't expect to make a lot unless I'm in a rich settlement since they're expensive. Would I need ranks in appraise? I was hoping to team up with a fellow party member with a high diplomacy to help drum up business, and do stuff like give demonstrations, lessons on how to use the guns, etc etc since I expect I'll have to do some work to actually make people interested and get a decent profit out of them.

3. Do you think such a system would be cheesy? Assuming it works like I think it works, I could conceivably make a net profit of 3500 gp in a week's worth. I would need a fair amount of money to get started, but I think that once I start I should be able to keep it up. Again, I want to have a stable income, but I don't want to break things and I don't know if doing such a thing might break the game since I've never done this before.

Out of all the normally available races, which do you think is the least popular? I, personally, play two tengu characters, but have never been in a game with anyone else playing one (in fact, I've had more than one person comment I'm the only person they've ever seen play a tengu). I also rarely see dwarves, halflings, elves, and gnomes. I have seen a lot of humans, half-orcs, half-elfs, aasimar, and tiefling, though.

Dunno if my experience is off or not. Out of all the non-boon races, which ones have you seen the most of and which have you seen the least of?

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/antagonize

I have a guy who I regularly play with and GM for who uses this feat nearly every game. Since the text says that it doesn't work on creatures that don't understand you, I thought that it would fail on opponents who don't understand the language the Antagonizer is using, but the player argues that verbal communication isn't necessary, and that threatening and rude gestures are enough to get the point across.

Does Antagonize rely on language, or is language unnecessary?

I'd like to play this scenario one day, and it's being hosted today, but I'm not sure if I should go for it--from all the horror stories I've heard, your character needs to be MASSIVELY optimized (and have banked enough for a true resurrection, it seems) to even have a shot and my character, well...isn't.

I don't need examples or spoilers or anything like that, I just need a good idea of the level of quality of PC one needs to bring in order to succeed at this sort of thing, or at least not die horribly. I'm not a stranger to high level play but this seems above and beyond.

Title says it all. In the vein of the infamous Skippy's list, post hilarious/outrageous things you have done or would like to do that have or probably will make your GM say, "c'mon dude honestly." Preferably stuff that is not in malicious taste, just kinda off the wall. In character or out of character, don't really care.

If I can ride an Eidolon as a mount and I have the Ferocious Mount rage power, could I grant the Eidolon the benefit of my rage while riding it or adjacent to it?

I played Bonekeep at Gencon, and even though it was blast and no one died in my games (well, no one /stayed/ dead in my games), I am a bit worried about the antiboons I got, as it seems that they carry over into other scenarios and are completely unavoidable. Is there any way we can possibly remove the antiboons or are we just SOL?

I'm interested in the gulch gunner class, as the idea of getting up close and personal with enemies and shooting them in the face is pretty cool, and brings to mind gun-fu fights with a high-risk, high-reward mechanic.

But the more I think about it, how do you not, y'know, die immediately? Since the gulch gunner provokes AoOs from shooting adjacent targets and you need to be adjacent to get the most of your damage, I'd imagine you'll be taking a lot. However, I've never made a defensive character and I have literally no idea how you make a character that is supposed to survive being in melee range all the time. What's the standard way of going about increasing your survivability? Magical armor, certain potions, feats, or is it just a playstyle thing?

I was reading through the young character creation rules, and particular how classes are limited to only NPC classes due to inexperience and not having the opportunity to have the training the other classes require. Which is all well and good, but then I got kinda curious; if a character needs training and years of experience to use their abilities, then how do spontaneous casters work, in universe?

The way I had understood it, spontaneous casters like sorcerers and oracles, and even stuff like summoners and witches (even though they're not spontaneous) got their abilities from outside sources beyond their control. But the only magic-using class available to young characters is the adept, which prepares spells based off wisdom which none of those classes use. So I'm unsure how the classes that receive their power from outside sources work, canon wise. Do gods not give revelations to potential oracles until they come of age? Do the other powers just not manifesto until a certain age or something? I suppose it's a flavor thing to be worked out on a case by case basis but I just wondered how people figured it worked.

How do other GMs feel when players use spells like speak with the dead or Commune or interrogation or whatever? How do you handle it?

For some backstory, last night I was playing Halls of Dwarven Lore with my bones oracle, and I had just gotten the revelation Voice of the Grave to allow me to speak with dead bodies. I was excited to try it out, but I felt bad because it immediately became obvious that I had put the GM on the spot in trying to do so--the second time I tried it against another corpse we found the GM basically said "this guy wouldn't know anything useful for you" when I asked if the body had a jaw intact. I know that scenarios don't include information on this sorta thing like...ever, so I'm unsure if it's a jerk move or not.

When using the Bones Oracle's Raise the Dead revelation, does the summoned creature's Hit Dice equal the oracle's level regardless of any modifiers or does it mean an oracle can only summon a creature up to his level in Hit Dice?

For example, if an oracle is level 7 and wanted to summon a fast zombie of some sort, would the fast zombie he summoned have 7 HD regardless of the bonus HD granted by zombie size modifiers, or would the creature have to have no more than 7 HD after he summoned it (i.e. he can summon a large creature with a base HD of 5, then add on the 2 bonus HD from large, but he can't summon a medium creature of 7 HD because the bonus HD would put it at 8 HD)?

Basically, are the HD limits a lose excess sort of thing, or a hard cap after modifiers?

When a Holy Gun paladin has a double-barreled weapon, can they fire both barrels at once when performing the smiting shot deed? Also, if the target is evil, does the bonus damage apply twice or only once?

In addition, if a Holy Gun takes a level in gunslinger before paladin, do they immediately get to change Amateur Gunslinger for Extra Grit or do they have to take Holy Gun first and then the gunslinger class in order to exchange it? The text says "If you gain levels in a class that grants the grit class feature," but I'm not sure if that means you can have the levels BEFORE taking the feat, as well as the prereq of not having Grit class feature.

In addition, would you be able to swap out the second gunsmithing for anything, or do you just get nothing?

Currently fooling around with a paladin with a mysterious stranger dip and I'm really trying to find ways for it to not suck.

Does the attack roll penalty for the blackened curse only apply to melee attack rolls, melee and ranged attack rolls, or for all attack rolls (throwing weapons, shooting ray spells, combat maneuvers, etc)?

Everyone always talks about powergamers here and people trampling encounters there and various complaints of PCs outshining others, etc etc. It makes me wonder, what makes you feel useful when you actually play PFS? Do you need to kill things in combat, or make a skill check, or keep everyone alive, or what?

Personally I've kinda gotten used to not being able to do much in combat before my teammates kill everything, no matter what class I play, so I guess I feel useful when I can do a skill check no one else can or something that makes things easier for the party. I'm used to playing support anyway.

More of a thought experiment than anything, but I was wondering what the best way to convert the races and classes in Pathfinder to Fantasy Craft would be (I had originally thought the other way around until I realized that PF -> FC would probably be a helluva lot simpler).

Now there are some really easy things, what with dwarves and elves and orcs and halflings already being there, but I wondered how one would transfer the favored class bonuses, or even if one should bother doing that at all (iconic classes seems more like a balancing thing than anything). The other racial traits seem more straightforward, if requiring some tweaking.

My other question was how exactly to handle the classes. It seems like instead of classes the abilities would be feats, with different specialties representing different archetypes similar to the classes, but it seems like it would lose out on a lot of abilities inherent in PF. On the other hand, none of the classes seem...I dunno, skeleton enough to make classes in FC, if that makes any sense.

So, I'll admit, I'm still relatively new to tabletop rpgs, but there are a lot I would love to play. Problem is, I can never seem to convince my tabletop gaming and roleplaying friends to give them a shot. Usually they simply say they're not interested or don't even consider giving it a try. Best case scenario, I end up trying to run a game only to find it collapse because the people who said they were interested were just feigning interest to "be polite."

I would like to play more systems at some point, but it seems like at best I'd only get to GM them with people I don't know, not play them myself, and it's a bit of a crapshoot if it'll actually take. Is there any way to get friends interested in new systems at all, or to at least get them to consider trying it out? So far all the advice I've heard on the subject is, "it's impossible."

Let's say you get to make a PFS character and you can play anything you want: no race, class, archetype, or alignment restrictions. Let's also say, for the sake of argument, that you will also have the time to actually play said character and you won't be yelled at by other players or GMs no matter what.

What kind of character would you play?

Here's the deal: I'm running a bones oracle in PFS. Full caster, like playing him, but there's one big problem: I can't take on swarms or monsters with crazy DR for crap.

Now I know people will say you can easily buy items for this and such, but the problem is, because my oracle is haunted, using items in combat is super risky business because it will take two turns at least. I found this out the hard way when I played a scenario that involved a swarm of bats, and even though I had a torch and alchemist fires it didn't matter because the swarm got to me before I could use them and kept nauseating my character so I could do nothing but fall out of the boat and hope they went away.

Then there's the problem of dealing with creatures with DR. You see, my guy really isn't much for melee combat and while I can use weapons, I can't really do much damage, especially compared to the people I usually play with. I don't really have access to any blasting spells either; most of my DPR comes from the skeletons I summon with Raise the Dead, which, of course, can't pierce DR, unless I were to use a scroll of magic fang on them or something, which would take three rounds to do.

Some of my friends suggest using scrolls of Gust of Wind for the swarms, but I'm still hesitant even though I have a pretty good UMD score, if only for the fact that it would take two rounds at best, and apparently Scrollboxes don't help with this. This seems to be the general problem with all item-use scenarios, and it really bugs me given PFS's whole "you have no one to rely upon but yourself" thing (a bit of an exaggeration, but that's the feel it exudes, especially when you don't know who will end up in your party).

The other day I was in a discussion with some other players and GMs and someone mentioned how it's not a good idea to heal people who are downed in combat unless they're in immediate danger of dying because they'll just get immediately downed again, and I started thinking, shouldn't one get a chance to play dead in a situation like this?

I mean, here's my reasoning: wouldn't it make sense if a player gets downed but is brought back to consciousness to get a bluff check to pretend they're still down? They've just been brought down after all, and even if the enemy knows that they've received healing, that doesn't necessarily mean that they know the character is conscious or even alive, since it can take more than one healing to bring the character back to consciousness.

I figure that the risk involved would be firstly whether or not the enemy in question believes you, also whether or not the creature would care, such as certain mindless enemies who just keep attacking no matter what. I figure that inherent risk would make it balanced enough so that it can't just be constantly abused.

Also, what if the character gets non-fatally hit? Can they just fall over as an immediate action or something? I mean, it would seem kinda silly if you get hit by a huge fireball, but you're not allowed to fall over from the explosion until 6 seconds later, or something. I dunno.