Nocte ex Mortis's page

414 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 414 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, of all the Focus abilities in the game, the Monk doesn’t have a single bad one, they’re all pretty frigging good.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, out of curiosity, how many people in your group actually use Battle Medicine on the regular? In my group, I am literally the only one who has it anymore, due to the GM going with the ‘Healer’s kit, two hands, two actions,’ interpretation. I am the only character that actually CAN use Battle Medicine under such a ruling, as I play a Monk. It still takes my whole damn turn if I want to put my Healer’s Kit away, or do ANYTHING ELSE other than keep it in my two hands after I use it. Y’know, if I was lucky enough to actually start adjacent to the poor bastard who actually needs me to Battle Medicine. Otherwise, it’s my whole turn to get to them and use it, meaning I pretty much waste my entire turn and allow the gribblies to keep gribblieing my party members. Under that set of rules interpretations Battle Medicine is worse than a trap feat, it actively encourages you to never use it because you come out worse for doing so rather than letting your party member die.

There’s the too good to be true idea, but then there’s also the idea of ‘so actively terrible you can get teammates killed using this Feat under these rules’ idea. Battle Medicine isn’t supposed to set people up to get their group Merced because it takes your whole turn to use.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do believe that may be my favorite post in the thread James.

Personally, I don’t really have a dog in this fight, but the idea of playing a Serpentfolk descendant who could unlock parts of their heritage, up to and including the big-ass tail instead of legs, is neat.

As for viable, I dunno. Drow and a lot of the other races like them at least have the excuse that they’re known to interact with other races on a sometimes peaceful level. Serpentfolk... kinda don’t have that. Like, at all.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, I am 100% going to end up making a Fighter/Beastmaster. Yes, his name will be Dar. Fight me.

I kind of want to rebuild my monk I’m currently playing now, and use the Dhampir lineage as an addition to him. I mean, he’s Nidalese already...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, funny thing. Many years ago, my oldest brother got a chance to ask Gary Gygax about his thoughts on the ‘Outsiders can’t be raised from the dead’ thing in 3rd edition, and it does apparently stem from AD&D. Specifically, Elves and Dwarves. They didn’t have souls, they had spirits, which weren’t quite the same and were explained away by the fact that they weren’t creatures actually native to the Prime Material Plane. This got applied to anything not native to the Prime, and got ported over into 3e as something that Outsiders dealt with.

Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Helm caused it to explode from the radical shift in thought and viewpoint. It’s not so much that they’re evil because they’re so alien, it’s that they are fundamentally so different mentally and psychologically, that it’s a blue and orange mentality. They’re so mentally weird that they can’t comprehend compassion or empathy. I don’t think their physiology could take such a sudden shift.

My favorite thing beyond action economy and the ease of character creation is that the tag system more-or-less makes sense, and doesn’t bog everything down. What turned me off of Exalted 3E, for example, is that literally everything in the game has like three tags or more you have to cross-reference.

So, funnily enough my first thought with the dual-class variant was a Redeemonk. An unarmored Champion using Divine Weapon through his handwraps, with his reaction being the Redeemer’s ‘You don’t really want to do that, buddy. Find another way to live, or I’m going to have to stop you.’

Sure, the Legendary AC bonus doesn’t really matter here, as it’s going to be the same if he goes unarmored or in the beefiest of plate, but the imagery would be awesome.

I don’t think so. Both abilities require you to have an ability that gives you a Focus pool before you can take them. This is predicated on Ki Strike/Rush from the Monk Feats. While you could try and claim it that way, I don’t believe it would work. Also, Ki Strike isn’t exactly a terrible Feat to begin with, Positive, Negative, or Force damage for Monks is actually pretty hard to come by, and that’s on top of the +1 to hit that isn’t negated by your Handwraps. The extra damage is just gravy.

Anything that gives you a focus pool increases any existing pool that you have to a max of three.

The Monk could max out the Focus pool by level four, and have potentially every Focus power, or boost to focus regeneration, available to it. That puts it at level 20 with a Human Monk with 9 Focus powers and two Focus regen increases.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Unarmed is called out, multiple times, in the Core Rulebook as not being a weapon. No abilities or attributes of weapons effect Unarmed unless they specifically say so.

Good guide, but I have to point out one small thing in it: Yes, Champions have to take Blade Ally to get crit specialization, but they’re not the only melee class that doesn’t get them. Monks don’t either, without taking Brawling Focus. Even then, to get specialization beyond brawling weapons, they have to take Monastic Weaponry as well. You might need to redo the grading on Blade Ally, or not, depending on how much you really rely on the crit bonus. Lord knows I don’t even notice it on my Monk.

Inspire Courage. All the Inspire Courage.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If your immediate response to a player going down, every time, is to finish them off, you are a bad GM. There is no arguing this, you are intentionally entering into a purely adversarial stance with your players. At that point, as a player, I would probably retire my character or become so defensively minded that it would effectively derail your campaign.

Before you even bring up Critical Role or Jason’s campaign, they both made it clear that it was an unusual circumstance that lead to the character dying without any chance of being saved. Molly did an incredibly stupid thing, and died because of it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If it’s got enough space on it by being a +2, yes.

I believe the general rule is ‘If this ability costs Focus to use, you get a Focus Point, until you hit three points.’

4 people marked this as a favorite.

The class feature is there to reinforce the role of Champion as, well, a Champion. You fight the Champion, or you suffer the consequences.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree with the MC’ing being pretty underwhelming in 2E, but I do understand it from a dev point of view as well. It makes it much harder to create an Archetype or multi class option that turns out to be hot garbage, or hilariously broken. Sadly, it also means that a lot of the fun is lost from them for me as well, like when trying to figure out how to leverage some minor, weak spellcasting into something truly tricksy hobbitses.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Tremaine wrote:
Seriously, best use of Paladins reaction is while hiding behind human shields...yea.

Any Paladin that used that 'optimal' tactic would no longer be a Paladin afterwards.

The goal of any champion should be that they never need to use their reactions, because that means the enemy is engaging them and not their allies.

Exactly! The Champion’s Reactions are structured to get the point across that if your enemy isn’t fighting him, they’re going to pay a terrible price.

I mean, even some of the later powers they can get spell it out bluntly: Every time your enemy decides they want to hit someone not you, the gods literally, not figuratively, not kinda-sorta maybe them, literally Divine Energy, BURNS THEM, and doesn’t stop until they engage you, and not your allies. How much cleaner can the message be?

19 people marked this as a favorite.

That’s because you are intentionally twisting them to fit your fairly blatant dislike, bordering on hatred, of the class.

To be absolutely blunt, if you intentionally go into looking at a class from the worst possible perspective, every single class in the book are rapists, murderers, con men, terrorists, Mengele-in-training, or world-ending monsters that should be put down.

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Ahh yes, the Paladin’s “You strike at my allies instead of facing me? Have at thee, varlet!”, the Liberator’s “Mike! Get out of there!!”, and the Redeemer’s “Are you really being the person Mr. Rogers thought you could be? No? Then I’m sorry friend, there’s a price to pay for villainy.”

Truly the height of vileness and evil.

It’s honestly not a a Conan game unless someone does an Ahnuld, James Earl Jones or Mako impression.

Starfinder has the unfortunate role of being the Star Wars: Saga Edition for Pathfinder 2E. A lot of good ideas, some uneven balancing issues, and the absolute worst enchanting for weapons and armor that I’ve ever had to use in a D&D-based system.

I honestly feel like Paizo went waaaay too far with the Bard. It’s the living embodiment of the whole jack of all trades quote, including the part “But better than a master of just one,” section. Sure, it’s not the best martial class, but it’s no slouch, and Inspire Heroics/Courage/Defense is a thing.

It’s a ten level caster.

Not the best at skills? Nope! But not any worse than any class not named Rogue or Investigator, and Inspire Competence is, again, a thing.

Hell, at really high levels Bards can do something that literally no other class can do using the Polymath feat line, and cast spells from potentially ANY power source.

So sure, Bards aren’t the best at any one thing, except for being able to do anything, and having a Cantrip Focus spell that doesn’t use Focus Points, to make them either really reaaaaaally good at it or just plain as good as the best when they need to be.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
I think we can all agree Gorbacz is weird though.

Well, I mean, he is a sentient bag of devouring... which gives me a great idea for a NPC. How would one deal with a NG Bag of Devouring...

It’s the former.

Those are decent Raving, but the exercise, at least the one which I’m familiar with, is ‘how does that cause said person to carry themselves? What effect would that have on their bearing and mien? What would you notice about them if they were to walk into a room that would give you a clue about their history or personality?

Not three words, guys. Three descriptive sentences. What would someone immediately notice about your character if they walked into a room?

Nidalese male human Monk

Has large claw marks across his face from an encounter with a Chain Devil when he was a boy,

Maintains his uniform not so much in a meticulously clean way, as a professionally altered fashion.

Always carries a small pouch of herbs around his waist. It was a gift from his Druid parents.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Feat answers your question right there. You are in both Stances simultaneously, they just get a neat new name you get to come up with. Any powers or a abilities that require you to be in one of the two Stances will work just fine.

In short, it’s never a bad idea to have a Monk in a Stance, and they are overall really good.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vlorax wrote:
Meh, the last game I played with crafting had multiple different sets of experience for tracking crafting of different things. That was tedious.

I love the feel of Exalted, but their craft system is hot garbage.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It’s part of the level-up process. You can no more save it than you can save getting your hit points or proficiency-by-level increase.

Yes and no. You get a roll every turn at the end of your turn to end the damage, but it’s not a ‘condition’ condition.

Seeing as you only get a total of five Ancestry Feats, six if you sacrifice a General Feat for it, they should be pretty darn potent.

Garde Manger Guy wrote:

Also, can you be taken seriously as a wrestler if you have a bard do your intro music?

Ahem: Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions!

No, actually, what makes a Monk weapon a Monk weapon is a weapon that Monks are noted as being trained in. There's actually quite a few weapons out there that have the 'Monk' tag on them, that Monks have no weapon proficiency with.

Guess where they end up almost all going? The Fighter Monk Weapon group.
Which, oddly, has vastly more weapons than the actual Monk does.

No, because Kyton Style's bonus only applies while using the Style, and it's not in the Monk Fighter weapon group to begin with.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You know, the funny thing is, according to Quintain's rather pants-on-head view of Lawful Good Paladins, the greatest thing they could do, to save the souls of everyone in the universe, and starve evil forever, would be to commit mass genocide.

As long as, of course, they could get a warrant for it.

No. A Paladin is beholden to no laws other than their Code. A Paladin of Torag, for example, in an Evil, Hobgoblin run nation, would be fully empowered by his god and his code to go on a spree of smiting the likes of which we can only dream about. It wouldn't matter whether or not the law of the land said 'Paladins of Torag and/or Dwarves are illegal in this nation, punishable by death," the Paladin doesn't give a toss about them.

Paladins respect legitimate authority, which generally means the authorities that they themselves recognize in their view as legitimate. This is WHY you have Paladins leading wars against kings and nations when things are going wrong.

Flat-out tell them 'no'. Anything based off of a character from Medaka Box, even Zenkichi, is not really going to work in a D&D/Pathfinder game, due to the fact that the entire series is based around characters that literally annihilate the laws of reality, on a casual and constant basis.

I'm disappointed, all of this final fighter talk, and not a single picture or thought for Mike Haggar..

Well, the magic weapon/armor is much more negligible as a caster, leaving you more money to pump into your headband and belt.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

No. The arrows are now technically 'part' of him/his gear. No dice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you serious, or was that a 'this is my prediction'?

Rysky wrote:
Nocte ex Mortis wrote:

So, you're saying that the ability to negate a crit, once ever, is equivalent in value to Resurrection, Limited Wish, or Simulacrum?

Edit: Scratch that, at 3k, it's MORE VALUABLE than those. For a one-time-ever use.


The jingasa of the fortunate soldier is 5,000 gold.

The crit negation is apparently worth around 3,000 of that. With your earlier statement that potion makers, alchemists, and scroll makers would like to have a word with someone about 'useless one-shot items,' I pointed out that you are valuing a one-time-ever ability above the cost of a scroll of Resurrection, Limited Wish, or Simulacrum.

1 to 50 of 414 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>