R0b0tBadgr's page

Goblin Squad Member. 83 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey all, I just saw this video: and thought it would make as a pretty cool addition to the Guns & Gears book when it comes out. What I'm thinking is it's mechanically the same as a glaive or other polearm, but also can be used as a stand for a long-range firearm like a musket or arquebus with a single interact action.

So you could:
1) interact to place the bardiche
2) fire musket
3) move to another location or reload

I think placing the bardiche would mean you can't wield it like a weapon, so if you place then fire, you couldn't immediately attack as your hands aren't in the right place for that.

Maybe what I'm thinking is a bit too complicated, but I have a bit of a headache, so don't yell at me bro!

Anyway, take care and have fun pew pew-ing things!!!

This was originally going to be a question about jut the wakizashi, but now I'm curious about all 3. This is a traditional set used by samurai. The katana is of course the main weapon; the wakizashi is a smaller blade, being about half the length of the katana; and the tanto being dagger sized. My question is this:

The katana does 1d6
The wakizashi does 1d4
How much damage does a tanto do?

In PF2, daggers do 1d4 damage. They range in length from 6-18 inches (though 18 is more like a machete or short sword). The tanto is the about same size, so I would think that it would do the same damage (Wikipedia says 15-30cm; so 6-12 inches). If that is so, why does the wakizashi do 1d4? Shouldn't it - being a short sword - do 1d6? And following the logic, shouldn't the katana do 1d8 as it's effectively a longsword?

I do realize they have a *BUNCH* of cool traits, and they are "paying" for the traits with reduced dice size, but is this the only reason? Even if it is, it seems kinda silly and short-sighted IMO.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think most people have said some pretty helpful things, but I'm not sure you're starting out with character alignment on a good foot. I think you have your axioms wrong and thus I wrote a bunch, and you can read all of it below. I prefer a moral absolutism approach, but a relativistic approach can work, but IMHO you need to re-frame it.

tl;dr: you shouldn't base a character's alignment on how they think of their own actions but on how most other people think of their actions.

reductio ad absurdum: Making bank is fine, using all the laws to make bank is fine, making bank on drugs and slaves is fine - and Good - if you're a Denizen of Leng They should totally be LG in their stat block!

A note on how I run things, which you may find interesting or totally dismiss at your leisure:

I don't want to start a riot, but "Alignment as how the character rationalizes their actions to themselves" is very subjective, which is why in my games the alignments are fixed and mean a definite thing, but a characters alignment can change based on actions in relation to those definite, true things.

As in your example: Your character captures a criminal, collecting a sizable bounty.

* I could say that it is Good and I am Good that i have captured this criminal and personally profited from it.

* I can also be (in my setting, not yours) Evil and say that the community is safer because I have caught this criminal, thus I am Good. I beat them within an inch of their life when they offered up no resistance, but that is beside the point, the community is safer and I am doing my civic duty to catch criminals!

* I am upholding Law and - as an anarchist - each individual is the law unto themselves, thus the criminal stealing for his family is not a criminal at all, and I aid them in escaping, as I would a slave in Towny-mc-slavertown. Thus I am Lawful.

* I am Chaos incarnate, and capture the criminal, his family, and all neer-do-wells because - by statistics, probability and all that is random-clumping of data - they are probably all criminals and need to be hung for their crimes whether we or they know it! And I am Lawful as I am following mathematical laws of probability to catch criminals.

I realize that the Law-Chaos axis analogy is beginning to stretch a bit, but I highly doubt (insert reviled political figure here) ever thought they were "Evil" or "Unlawful".

Most of the time, how you see yourself is less informative than how others see you. How did you catch that criminal? How did you treat them while in captivity? Is the society they are being sentenced in and convicted in itself just?

There's a Pathfinder fiction from almost a year ago that shows this nicely. IIRC all Hellknights are Evil but I don't think Ulthor in this bit of fiction thinks of himself as "evil": Tales of Lost Omens: Rat Trap

Also, re-reading it, Hellknights are usually Lawful but apprehending an individual in a country not your own (Absalom isn't in Cheliax) and rando's in a bar accidentally getting in the way "Will be guilty of obstructing a lawful enforcement action." is not really following the law of the land - in this instance, Absalom. So he's not being particularly Lawful. Though, again, this axis is really hard to pin-down, without a concrete definition (and even then it can be fuzzy.

#BlackLivesMatter addendum:

I highly doubt that ANY of the cops who have killed anybody while on the job would label THEMSELVES as anything other than Lawful Good.

And I bet almost everybody would totally disagree with them! (I sure as heck do!!!)

I'm not stating this to get anybody angry, or to bring politics into our past-time, just using something that most people are probably thinking in one way or another.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Assurance does nothing at all. It is completely useless! For instance, you can't use it to climb, force open, or do any of the other abilities using the Athletics skill because they all use athletics checks:

Climb: You move up, down, or across an incline. Unless it’s particularly easy, you must attempt an Athletics check. The GM determines the DC based on the nature of the incline and environmental circumstances. You’re flat-footed unless you have a climb Speed.

In order to make this Athletics check (and this applies to ALL checks) you need to roll:

When you’re actively using a skill, often by performing one of its actions, you might attempt a skill check: rolling a d20 and adding your skill modifier. To determine this modifier, add your ability modifier for the skill’s key ability, your proficiency bonus for the skill, and any other bonuses and penalties.

Thus Assurance does nothing for a feat and is completely useless as you need to roll for everything.

You must also roll to disbelieve this post ;-P

Tensor wrote:

As an aside comment, check this out ->

Yeah, I've seen that. It's not offline, and I personally have an aversion of using cloud technologies when I don't absolutely have to. And for most things, you don't absolutely have to.

Have you taken a look at the PF2e TeX thing yet? The more interest there is in it the more likely documentation (and updates) will be forthcoming.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I know a guy who's building this: it's a complete setup that supposedly is supposed to do all the things. I need to kick his butt a bit to make some documentation, but most everything you might need is there and available.

I think he needs to update it too...

And to all the command line haters: if there is a command line version available, it's usually 5-10x faster to do it there, as you don't have to manually point and click things with a dumb mouse. Typing is way fast, and having a thing render at a single {ENTER} is much faster than scrolling through drop-down menus and clicking a button, then clicking {OK}, then double-clicking {I ACCEPT} then triple-clicking {YES I REALLY WANT TO DO THIS} then right-clicking and selecting the {YES I REALLY WANT TO DO THE THING I JUST TOLD YOU TO DO} buttons...

GUIs really stink sometimes...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Yossarian wrote:
The new stuff looks awesome, and the obscene object oriented-ness of PF 2 is beautiful to behold. The modularity of it all makes me want to over indulge in archetypes until my character is optimised for dinner parties. Bring on the new book already!
That is the goal. Top-down, object-oriented modularity to make it so easy to plug and play, or to change something for your group without ripple effects. I have a personal goal to make players and GMs more comfortable with flexing their inner designers and houseruling and homebrewing things confidently, and our design for the game helps a lot with that.

I prefer immutable functional composition to the current object orientation everyone uses... just too many bad things can happen with shared references to mutable data in different threads running concurrently that you never know what might happen!

OH wait... this isn't a programming forum is it? :-P

(in all honesty, the comp. sci. ideas are being used extremely well in PF2!)

One thing you can do Norbert is come up with a few archetypes that are specific to your campaign. This way they probably have a better chance of surviving. Like some other people have said, it doesn't make the PCs significantly more powerful, but having an archetype that allows them to survive in the desert better might be cool.

Since you're playing in Dark Sun, you're probably already creating a bunch of stuff on your own anyway, so this shouldn't be a big deal (besides the fact that you have more stuff to create). Though getting some player input in the form of "what kind of archetype(s) do you think would be cool to have?" is always helpful.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sapient wrote:
Saedar wrote:

I think James Jacobs has said that this is something that is possible-but-exceedingly-rare.

In Nocticula's case, she went from Evil Demon Lord to Neutral Goddess. Changing alignment wasn't a decision, so much as something that happened. So, a devil or demon could potentially change alignments but doing so would be best modeled as an arc in an overarching story.

As for how PCs should approach that, it likely depends on the group/individuals and the situation where they encounter the being in question.

And of course Zon Kuthon became evil, with Shelyn believing/hoping he can return. Gods can always be exceptions, I suppose. But if beasts and gods can change, then maybe anything can. Characters have to consider how likely that really is, though.

I remember something James Jacobs (maybe not, could have been Amanda Hamon in this vid: said on one of the Pathfinder Friday streams, that Zon-Kuthon, in the previous version of reality, stowed away all of his memories and put it in a box in the far reaches of the universe. Then, in Golarion-reality-time, we have Dou-Bral getting angry at his sister Shelyn and running away to the dark places far away, eventually finding his lost memories, and then coming back as Zon-Kuthon. So, in short, he was always evil, just playing the "good son/brother".

OTOH, you have Erinyes which were (in D&D/Pathfinder lore) angels who went down to hell to fight devils, and eventually became devils because... reasons. They're not "evil angels", they're something different. So can a Pit fiend become good? Sure. It wouldn't be a Pit fiend anymore though.

Also, it'd be one hell of a story!

Personally I like the alignment system, as a general guideline for PCs, and having some outsiders be physical embodiments of these primal forces, akin to the elements fire, water, earth & air. Thinking about things this way, if a fire elemental decided to not be firey anymore, then they would no longer be a fire elemental.

My best guess then is to follow krobrina's suggestion, and look into the Autocorrect menus.

This is honestly why I hate WYSIWYG interfaces for text & writing documents. I understand that it's the easiest thing for you to use, and I really wish it wasn't broken this way. I really hope you find a solution soon!

kripdenn wrote:
R0b0tBadgr wrote:

OTOH, it basically only outputs PDF files, so you go from text straight to PDF. There is probably a way to go from LaTeX to HTML & CSS to display on the web, but I haven't found a good way to do it yet (and I prefer outputting to PDF).

Have you tried using Pandoc to convert LaTeX to HTML?

Apparently it doesn't work 100% on everything. For instance, you need to use specific kinds of tables in LaTeX for it to carry over to HTML. And making your own commands doesn't play too nicely with Pandoc. This was actually his first method of doing things, but once he needed things to look all perdy it stopped working (I was his guinea pig).

krobrina wrote:

I am not a computer programmer.

I can write asciidoc and wikipedia markup, which have some arcane formatting codes to make tables.

My friend is trying to get his LaTeX stuff to the point where someone who is familiar with Markdown or asciidoc or the like would be able to use it fairly easily. I'm trying to convince him to work harder, and publish more, but he's lazy.


But that is not really what this thread is really about now is it?

After typing up a response, and then re-reading your problem I think I know a solution...

CobaltCrusader wrote:
I do have the font installed correctly and have used the same ligatures in MS word with no problems. I know I'm typing it out right because I'm literally copying and pasting from my MS word doc.

It may be Word converting a keyboard hyphen into a fancy unicode hyphen, which when you copy-paste into Publisher isn't actually a hyphen that you would type on your keyboard, but some other fancy unicode thing that looks EXACTLY like a hyphen when you're reading it. Here are some hyphens for you: The same thing happens if you type three dots in a row "..." you get "…". The first is 3 characters, the second is 1, which I copy-pasted from Word 2013 after typing in the 3 character sequence. (go ahead and try to select only the first period in that second set of ellipsis) There is probably a way to turn this off, but I know not what that way is.

So, instead of copy-pasting [one-action], simply type [one-action]. Or remove the hyphen-that-is-not-a-hyphen and re-insert it manually from your keyboard.

By the way, you can thank printing press era publishers for all of these weird quirks. And the fact that we dropped a handful of letters from the english language because they didn't want to make characters for them. And "Ye Olde Bookbinder" was pronounced "The Old Bookbinder" because blah blah blah reasons (Wikipedia it if you're interested).

krobrina wrote:
R0b0tBadgr wrote:
I'm using LaTeX
I've been told to try that but it seems hard to learn. How are you finding it? Can I see an example of the layout that's possible with it? Can it build a document that reflows on a phone?

If you are comfortable programming in any language, you should be fine. You have all the control you could possibly want, and more; or you can be supremely lazy, and do almost nothing and it will look good ("good" meaning "I can get this published in a science or math journal and everyone will accept it because it's readable").

OTOH, it basically only outputs PDF files, so you go from text straight to PDF. There is probably a way to go from LaTeX to HTML & CSS to display on the web, but I haven't found a good way to do it yet (and I prefer outputting to PDF).

As for styling, there is this GitHub repo that I've used to base my own stuff on: It seems that it hasn't been updated in a while, I'll have to get on them to update it. It's VERY rough right now, but works well enough.

I know the author of that, and I'll see if I can get them to link me an example PDF of what they are able to do, just so you can see the result.

I hope that helps a bit.

That's strange, if it works for one ligature, it should work for all in the same font. Are you sure that you're doing [one-action] [two-actions] [three-actions] [free-action] [reaction]??

Honestly I'm using LaTeX, but I don't think it should matter much if you've got the font installed correctly.

I have that. Unfortunately it doesn't say anything about how to convert a 1e DC to a 2e DC, just use the level chart. I mean, it's pretty easy if all I want to do is make all the challenges an "at-level challenge". But what if something was meant to be easier or harder? What do I need to do then??? If something was meant to be a static DC, and so would be hard at 1st level but easy at 4th level what number should I use? And if it's only printed later in a book should I bump it because the PCs might be 4th level by the time they get there? Or would it be better to leave it lower?

Or even a general kinda-fuzzy 1e per-level DC chart so I can make a 1e to 2e conversion chart?

I realize that there might really be a dozen or so, because things like saves and skill checks for 1e per level are wildly different (which makes life soooooo much harder in 1e). I've taken a look in my 1e Gamemastery Guide but I didn't find anything. Any help???

That's... kinda OP considering PF2e's tight math. It's a cool idea, though I'd probably cap it out at +2.

Themetricsystem wrote:
...Sorcerer Dedication...

How are you taking the sorcerer dedication at first level???

I built a sorcerer recently for a game I'm playing in, and I kind of went down a rabbit hole. For some reason I wanted to build a sorcerer (picked on a whim, but any spell casting class would do) that has access to the most number of different spells they can cast in a day. This is excluding items (though I don't think there are any items that a lvl 1 character can buy that grants them spells).

I found it to be dependent on getting more cantrips, as all of the spell casting classes have the same number of spells. This is what I came up with:

Gnome Ancestry;
Heritage - Wellspring Gnome: gains a cantrip from any tradition except primal
Ancestry feat - First World Magic: gains a primal cantrip

5 Cantrips + 3 1st lvl spells

Which grants a total of 7 cantrips and 3 first level spells. At level 2 you can boost that to 9 cantrips. And maybe more at higher levels...

Can anyone do any better?? I'm not looking to see how effective the character is, just how many different spells they can cast.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Kasoh wrote:
Ediwir wrote:
Kasoh wrote:
R0b0tBadgr wrote:
Cacophony (Noise Demon)
That is very neat. I'd probably make it a level 7+ monster, because silence doesn't effect other creatures unless heightened to 4th level.
You don't have to stick to that too strictly. You can have a lv5 monster cast 4th level spells if it fits the concept well. Like []Lovelorns[] (lv4 creature) being able to cast Crushing Despair (level 5 spell).
If you want a PC to exploit the weakness of the creature, they'd need to be able to cast silence at 4th level, is what I mean, so the monster should be powerful enough to appear in that level range, unless being able to use that weakness is a reward for leveling up and fighting a horde of them.

Thank you for your comments Kasoh & Ediwir. I was really building it as a proof-of-concept to show how easy it is to go from idea to monster. It took me like 2 hours while at work to put it all together...

As far as Zapp is concerned, from what I've read/heard these tables ARE what Paizo uses to build monsters, but in a generally nice format that is useful for the public to see and read, not an internal document that only really makes sense to those who work there. I could be wrong about that, but that is basically the impression I got from Lyz and Mark on a few of the streams before the GMG dropped. This was a few months ago, iirc, but i could just be recalling incorrectly.

17 people marked this as a favorite.

Cacophony (Noise Demon)

'What kind of sinners comprise this demon? Oh, I know, the people who don't silence their phones in theaters.'
- Kasoh

This creature is a conglomeration of souls of those who enjoy making noise in quiet places, like museums, libraries, and theaters. They are usually found in monasteries, peaceful glades, and other places where things are generally peaceful and quiet, doing all they can to disrupt the often times hard-won peace of the inhabitants. Incredibly intelligent and malicious, they wait for the perfect chance to cause the disruption.

Cacophony - Creature 5
CE - Medium - Demon - Fiend
Perception +12; darkvision, perfect hearing (precise) 30 feet
Languages Abyssal, Common
Skills Acrobatics +12, Athletics +12, Intimidation +13, Stealth +9
Str +2, Dex +3, Con +3, Int +6, Wis +2, Cha -1
Perfect Hearing a cacophony knows the location of everything within 30 feet of it that makes any kind of sound no matter how quiet, such as breathing, or a beating heart.
AC 21; Fort +9, Ref +9, Will +15
HP 77; Weaknesses cold iron 4, good 4; Resistances sonic 8

Silence Vulnerability Cacophony's are creatures of sound and noise, thus if they are ever caught in an area without sound - such as in the area of a silence spell - they are flat-footed, none of their special attacks work, and are frightened 2.
Speed 25
Melee [one-action] claw +13 (agile, evil, finesse, magical), Damage 2d6+4 slashing plus 1d6 evil
Ranged [one-action] targeted bark +15 (sonic, range 60 feet), Damage 2d8+7 sonic
Divine Innate Spells DC 26; +18 Spell Attack 3rd Hypnotic Pattern*; 2nd Telekinetic Maneuver** (at will), Shatter (at will), Sound Burst (at will); 1st Gust of Wind* (at-will), Bane**
Divine Rituals DC 26; Abyssal Pact

Cacophonous Roar [three-actions] (divine, evocation, sonic) The cacophony bursts out with a well-timed shout, roar, or just some unexpected noise that disrupts concentration. All creatures within 15 feet of the cacophony take 4d8 sonic damage and must attempt a DC 22 Fortitude save.
Critical Success - The creature is unaffected.
Success - The creature takes half damage and is flat-footed for 1 round.
Failure - The creature takes full damage, and stunned 2.
Critical Failure - The creature takes double damage, and is stunned 2 for 2d4 rounds.

Jarring Ring [two-actions] (attack, sonic) The cacophony attempts to weaken a creature. Make a strike, on a success the creature must make a DC 22 Will save with the following effects:
Critical Success - The creature is unaffected
Success - The creature is stunned 1
Failure - The creature is stunned 2 and flat-footed for 1 round
Critical Failure - The creature is stunned 3, they also gain weakness 3 to sonic damage for 2d4 rounds

* Has the Auditory trait instead of the visual trait
** Adds the sonic trait

On building this thing:
I had some time, so I wrote this up. Most of the numbers are not the EXACT numbers one would find when using the monster creation rules, but they are relatively close, and I think fit with this concept. Thank you very much to Kasoh for the idea.

Creative Commons Attribution: for the demon itself; Paizo's community license for all the rules.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kasoh wrote:

If you're making a demon, you might ask yourself, 'What kind of sinners comprise this demon? Oh, I know, the people who don't silence their phones in theaters.' And you give it a weakness, like 'all damage done by a silenced character' or something.

I now need to make a demon based on this...

First of all, I think DC 20 for a decent castle is to be expected. So he's got you there.

As for the "smooth, wet, crumbling old stones" you would be able to see that easily, so poo-poo on them for not saying as much. The stones being "smooth" and "crumbling" contradict each other; choose one. Them being "old" would make it easier, not harder (more hand holds) unless they were "crumbling", but then not "smooth". Being "wet" does complicate things, but unless it's actively raining or has a stream pouring over it, it wouldn't be that bad.

This is what I would rule:

if it was old, crumbling, and wet: DC 17 (DC 20 for expert, -5 for old and crumbling, +2 for wet)

if it was smooth and wet: DC 25 (DC 20 expert, +5 poor conditions) though it would have been explained to be such, as - unless your character is blind - they would be able to see these things before the attempt was made.

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Charging $5 a player to choose 1 of 5 backgrounds, possibly get a few of the 3 alchemical items, maybe 1 of the 2 ranger feats, maybe a cool cat, a ring or 6, and possibly a few other things is quite a bit of money!

I'm currently playing Fall of Plaguestone so I don't want to read too much of what's in it, but it honestly doesn't take much to copy/pasta that info into some proper data structures and load it into a program. I know this because I am a programmer. An experienced programmer, who hears these gripes, and wishes to do some good in this world...

Honestly this makes no sense to me, other than there aren't any monsters of those types at a lower level. But that's not true when the lowest level dragon in the bestiary is a fairy dragon which is level 2, well within the grasp of a 3rd level Summon Animal/Construct/Fey/Plant spell (if it wasn't a dragon).

I kind of want this for some lower-level cultists, to be able to summon really low-level aberrations or the like, but RAW I can't. I just want to know if there was a specific reason why this is the case. It just seems odd to me. I mean, a level -1 Giant also seems odd, but whatever.

(Since I'm the GM in my home games, I can change whatever. It is also house ruled that all the Summon * spells work like Summon Animal, but for the given creature type. But this isn't going to help my mildly-crazy occult sorcerer who likes to summon ABERRATIONS when she can only summon FEY in Society play. ugh...)

Honestly, I'm not sure if the "problem" people are having with too few hero points is because they haven't looked at RAW. I mean, from the core rulebook p507:

In a typical game, you’ll hand out about 1 Hero Point during each hour of play after the first (for example, 3 extra points in a 4-hour session). If you want a more over-the-top game, or if your group is up against incredible odds and showing immense bravery, you might give them out at a faster rate, like 1 every 30 minutes (6 over a 4-hour session). Try to ensure each PC has opportunities to earn Hero Points, and avoid granting all of the Hero Points to a single character.

(AoN link:

Also, in the sidebar on "Off-Session Gaming" there's a note about awarding hero points for things players do off-screen (AoN link: and to keep things simple for myself, I typically award 2 hero points for most players at the start, because they usually help out in some way off-screen. One player regularly starts with 3 hero points, mostly because he buys all the food & snacks (though if someone else brought more snacks to share, they would also start with 3).

This is kind of normal in my group. If someone is extra funny, or brave, they get a hero point. Occasionally, if it was something awesome at the end of a session, I'll let that one roll over to the next session if they don't use it, because it would suck to get one, to just have it go away in the next 10 minutes of play.

Also, birthdays get special hero points, that keep. Those simply boost the degree of success to a Success, or a Critical Success if it was already a Success. And no this isn't RAW, but it's fun, so it stays.

Niche or not, I now know a bit of what I'm running my players through on Christmas... Nicely done!!!

Just a note Ediwir, a few people mentioned Assurance and being wary about that. If you go by the DC's by level, instead of the Easy DC table, Assurance won't cut it for any level - even for maxed out skills - except for level 7 & 8 (7 is the earliest you could get master; 6+7=13; the level DC is 23=13+10).

Just letting you know. Take care!

I know they're not campaign traits anymore, it would be backgrounds. Having not played the AP, and not wanting to spoil anything for myself (and making less work for my wife who I hope will run this for me), I was wondering if anyone has converted the campaign traits into backgrounds that would be similarly useful for this AP.

I've looked through the Players Guide for Strange Aeons, and thought about the name and what stat bonus, skill, skill feat, and lore to possibly give, but I'm kind of at a loss. Any suggestions would be nice!!

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would like the stats on the sword cane so we can see how OP hiding a SWORD in your walking stick is, surprising everyone when you pull it out and accuse the magistrate of being corrupt...

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I *require* my players to use pencil and paper, for two reasons:

1. Creating a character for the first time, and having to level it up manually means you actually had to go look up the ability and write it down, and not just check a box. More than once I've had players not know what they can do because they had a tool put everything together automagically.

2. Phones, tablets, computers, game boys, iPods, Commodore 64s, and Babbage machines are not allowed at my table, nor are things like them. It's too easy to get distracted, and I'm not just talking about during combat. During role play interactions where the party is talking to Someone Important, inevitably I have to repeat myself because someone was playing on their Atari 2600 and not paying attention!!!

I realize this may seem Draconian to some, but I'm the Dragon Master!!! And these are my friends. If I was running Pathfinder Society stuff then I'd just roll more nat 20's against someone who wasn't paying attention :-P (not really, but I might threaten it)

From my experience, you need neither a twitch account, nor do you need to watch it live to see it on twitch. At least the stuff from Paizo. Other channels may vary. I actually have no internet access in my burrow, so I go to the community watering hole and download it via mystical means and watch it home with my burrow-mate and pup.

Strange, as the first time i tried the forum goblins ate my post.

My question was, how much damage do the mantis claws do? It has the mandible attack, but the scary claws that are mentioned in the description aren't mentioned in the info block. That is what I want to know.

Maybe the author of this tome was afraid to include such information... Or the scribes didn't copy it faithfully... Who knows???

As a badger, I need to keep an eye out for creatures that may infiltrate my burrows. As such, I am going through the tome of beasts looking for other burrowing creatures and have found the Ankhrav! This is a very scary beast indeed, but what is worse is the hive mother!!! Unfortunately, while it says that the ankhrav hive mother has a pair of razor-sharp mantis-like claws, the tome has no information on just how dangerous such creatures are. I desire to know, so I may better defend my burrows, and possibly help you humanfolk also...

Yeah, after the second or third item broke I would have asked my GM for a perception check to see WTF is happening. Cast iron doesn't just break... -_-

The passivity of the group is mildly annoying. The rest of the stream is highly entertaining, so it only bothers me once in a while. Like Mykah (sp?) could say that she's going to check out that key every morning, until she figures the damn thing out. I love them but yes, I do want to scream advice to the players sometimes... :,(

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

And I'm kind of hoping we get some sort of grit/panache/stamina fluffed non-magical alternative to focus either in a new class or class option somewhere down the road here.

I don't think that focus in and of itself needs to be wholly re-flavored to be nonmagical for purely marital classes. For instance, the monks focus is called 'ki', and does 'ki' stuff. I don't know what the sorcerer stuff is called, but it's not 'ki'. So for a fighter getting focus powers and then calling it 'stamina' you have the nonmagical flavor, and can take feats that generally improve focus powers, like getting more focus points, and the devs don't have to write a feat for each class to give that class more focus points (though I think they did this anyway...).

I personally like the 'general mechanic that is re-flavored per class' as opposed to making more mechanics that are slightly different but are only different in ways you need to look up in a book in the middle of a session. 3.5 did this really well: 10,000 mechanics, each doing one different thing and not doing it very well.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing to note: if item bonuses are a thing (like for the aforementioned +1 lock pick kit) then we can definitely have epic dwarven smiths who have been smithing for hundreds of years and who come from a long line of epic smiths who were smiths for hundreds of years granting a +1/+2/+3 item bonus that would stack with a +1/+2/+3 magic bonus. I really hope this is a thing...

I do realize that one of the things the devs wanted to do was reduce the number of stackable bonuses. Because having a magic bonus, an item bonus, a conditional bonus, a class bonus, a weapon bonus, a status bonus, an awesome bonus, a bonus bonus, a fractal number bonus and a few untyped bonuses leads to insanity. And you don't even have to add in your unworldly extradimensional Cthulhu bonus!!! O_o

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, I think it may have been in one of the spoilers or somewhere else I saw: you get your base ancestry languages +Int Mod additional languages IIRC.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've really wanted to play Strange Aeons, and assuming i get to play for once in my life, I'm going to play a human wizard, probably transmutation or conjuration specialist. I may multiclass into cleric to get more healing, or even occult sorcerer to get that... I'll have to see my options.

And yes, i know it's a 1e AP. We mostly do homebrew stuff but I've always liked the Cthulhu cosmic horror genre. Now i just have to convince my wife and help teach her how to convert 1e to 2e...

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
@R0b0tBadgr You heard a mix of different things. There in fact will be archetypes in core, but they will be of the "dedication feat" style. Level 1 archetypes will have rules in core, but there won't be any examples.

I'm still half awake and coming off of being very, very ill. What you said is mostly what I meant. Being able to take a pirate archetype or cavalier archetype or drider-riding drow archetype at level 1 is what i'm looking for; not fighter/wizard multiclassing dedication thingy at level 1.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Roswynn wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:

We actually do know that level 1 archetypes are going to be a thing; rules for how they work are confirmed to be in the core rulebook. However, it's also confirmed that no actual level 1 archetypes will be in core.

And evidence suggests that level 1 archetypes are going to be in the style of PF1e archetypes - replacing the basic class features of a certain class, instead of being a dedication feat.

Level 1 archetypes?!!

For real??

Link? I believe you, but I totally missed this!

Also, this is great news!!

+1 on wanting a link. I knew that rules for archetypes would be in the core, and that there wouldn't be any in the core unfortunately, but I didn't hear anything about them being available at level 1. If this is true, it's exactly what I'm looking for!!!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was more thinking, if you come from a culture, and everyone from this culture had the ability to get some cool thing. Now, because you left home to go adventuring, you don't necessarily have the chance to go back home to get the cool thing when you reach 2nd level. Especially if it is a *thing* you need to physically acquire.

The cavalier is a good example, as you get a mount. What if you're like a drider riding drow or something crazy. If you're in the middle of slaughtering halflings on the surface, how are you to get your cool drider mount when you reach second level? Why couldn't you get it at first? (Assuming everything is level-scaled) This way you could have your band of drider riding drow go up to the surface in their first adventure slinging spells, singing songs, stabbing swords, and stealthily shanking all in their path, all at first level.

At the moment, I'm making it a general ancestry feat & class feat... But that's just me abusing the system as a system abusing GM.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Doktor Weasel wrote:
I am having a hard time seeing how a champion fits in though, I'd think their who concept of crusading for justice seems to conflict with a life in the circus. But I'm sure it can be done with some creativity.

"Hi, I'm Bob, strongman and paladin of Iomede. Let me tell you about how awesome Iomede is while I impress you all with my impressive feats of strength! They would be more impressive but I needed a high CHA so I would be a better performer so I could tell you how wonderful Iomede is. Oh look! A fight, I'll be right back after I break it up..."

I think that would work perfectly!! :-D

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I kinda like the ritualist idea, but IMO what I think of is someone taking a LONG time to cast a spell, that has major consequences for those it is cast on. I'm thinking between 3-9 actions, need not be consecutive, but can't try and cast something in between, so like attacking once or moving would be fine.

Though I may just build this for my setting...

I know none of the dedications in the playtest core rulebook can be taken until at least 2nd level, as they're marked as such. Though I was wondering if anyone has seen or heard (or wants to leak) anything about whether or not there will be dedications that can be taken at first level.

Cavalier is a good one that could have been taken at first level, but it was made for second+. I know there are some kinda core class features that people get at first level that might leave a class hamstrung if they don't have it. At least that's how it is in the playtest rules.

I'm working on some things for some of my players and it would be nice if they could take a dedication at first level and not horribly unbalance everything.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Gregg Reece wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Aww.. shucks folks. I am just happy to have the opportunity to share my stories with all of you. This really is the first chance I have ever had to tell a long-form story and share it with a wide audience. And I really have to give credit to all of the great players I have had a chance to play with over the years, and this group is no exception. Great players make GMs better!
You're saying having an evil lich inviting hero parties into his dungeon and having his hapless minions (ie: the players) setup traps so that he can impress the vampress two dungeons over isn't long-form story-telling? ;)
Well.. I mean, other than that one!

Wait what??? What is this other one??? Where is it??? Where can I find it????? I NEED MORE JASON BULMAHN IN MY LIFE!!!!!! Once a week isn't enough for me... :'(

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
I don't think you can just take a random soldier or commoner and have them do 100 push ups, 100 situps, and 100 squats EVERY SINGLE DAY and expect them to hit 20th level.

You forgot the 10km run and not using AC the whole time to train your mind :-P

That's actually a perfect example for a PC. Saitama (aka One Punch Man) did a workout that is, for the most part, totally normal. And yet, after doing that workout for 3 years he is the most powerful hero on the planet, stronger even than hero's that have been doing it for years, decades even.

So no, not everyone in Golarion (or any other world you play in) can become a 20th level whatever. Heck, most probably won't break second level. The people running the towns that have a 5th level write up are pretty exceptional themselves...

3 people marked this as a favorite.
scary harpy wrote:
Roswynn wrote:

I do wonder about hags. They're among the monsters I like the least, because they so obviously come from a place of misogyny... and they have no male equivalent. In folklore I guess that would be ogres, with "ogress" just another word for hag, probably, but in Lost Omens/Golarion? If a hag is an evil fey tied to spell-like powers and nature who always looks, in her true form, like a horrible old woman, what *male* fey is the missing piece of the puzzle here?

B/c I hope there is one.

I always thought that the mad scientist was the male equivalent to the witch. An old man wearing a long white lad coat in a lab with bubbling potions in beakers who laughs while creating montrosities and weapons.

The Teson is a fearsome fey creature in some ways very much like the Hag, but in others very different. The Teson are universally male, and are infatuated with magic, especially transmutation magics. Hiding in the deepest parts of the forest, they work on their experiments. One of their favorite past times is finding and capturing vain young women, and altering them in ways to make them grotesque, though not always on the outside. One of the worst things they like to do is mess with the victims brain in such a way that they always perceive themselves to be ugly and unlovable. They are also incredible creators, and some seek a Teson out in order to have them make unique and powerful items.

The Teson reproduce very systematically, creating their child in the lab, before eventually switching their child for someone else's. They also implant a desire to protect the child in the parents that is so strong they end up sheltering the child from all harm, stifling their growth. This leads the child, who wants to expand and explore, to despise their parents. This will quite often, in a moment of anger, lead them to kill their parents. The anger and hate will quite often lead the child to do horrible things to his mother and father - things I dare not speak of on a PG-rated forum.

It is said they're are no female Teson because any offspring that show female traits are kept by the Teson. As they hate women they probably torture the fetus, eventually killing it painfully... Or worse.

(Thank you scary harpy for the seed of an idea. Also, if anyone wonders as to where the name "Teson" comes from, it's Tesla and Edison smashed together. I think this is way more interesting than "hags can sometimes be guys"!)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm in the middle of building some supplements for second edition, and I want to know the status of making things like the Pathfinder logo community use. Also things like the action symbols and such would be nice too, as I'm currently using some that I've made by tracing the ones in the rulebook, but I don't want a cease-and-desist because a lawyer got sue-happy (I honestly don't think this would be an issue, but I do want to play by the rules).

I would really like to have at least this much pre-launch, as it's just two-people working on some cool supplements. I would love to be able to preview the rules so everything can be up to spec on launch day, but I highly doubt we qualify for that kind of access.

Thank you.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing I am curious about, some of the players mentioned a questionnaire that Jason had them fill out to get them thinking about their character. I was wondering if we could get a copy of that questionnaire because I'm very interested in using something like that for my next game.

Thanks!! And it was an awesome stream!!

1 to 50 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>