| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Xexys
Search Posts
This is based on what exactly? Why has the "SMASH!" first ask questions later character got more martial skill than the one with years of martial training?
As a GM: Being fluent in the setting and knowing your players is worth more than several hours of prep per session. With enough of the aforementioned, you can run a session with no more prep than a five word plotseed.
No APG Summoner.
I'm less interested in the faq, my friend and I both agree that it's not intended to gain a strength penalty to damage, and more the title as a general rule.
A friend and I had a discussion based on the Mystic Bolt faq, regarding whether it still gains a damage penalty from a strength penalty since we were told it mearely doesn't get strength bonus to damage. Examples of the title are few and far between, but if it's true then Agile Maneuvers feat would still add the user's strength penalty.
Ring of occasional Drench Occasionally, without user consent or control, the ring creates the effects of the Rare Cantrip Drench on the user.
I remember when bloodragers and rogues were the same class.
Anyone else disappointed with the Skirmisher? It gives up spells to gains a series of special abilities he can use a number of times per day based on his level and a mental stat... so you just got spells by another name.
Thanks for volunteering to GM.
I don't see an issue with this at all. Monk's are lawful because of the discipline required by their training, not out of respect for legal authority. It is perfectly reasonabler to say that the discipline a Monk puts into there martial training also extends to their card counting techniques. The monk can cheat as much as he wants and still be disciplined about it.This is stated in the rules where exactly? If any monk that continues to take monk levels (which represents the training) counts as being a trump-all lawful act like you suggest, then it's literally impossible for a monk to stop being lawful as long as they keep trying to take levels in monk, which runs contrary to the rules restricting non-lawful monks from taking more levels in monk as they would not exist if they were impossible. I'm not saying a monk can't do those things, I'm just questioning the interpretation that all monks are lawful because training. Rule zero is advice, not a rule. You're in a subforum about Rules Questions, actually say stuff that fits the subforum.
I don't see an issue with this at all. Monk's are lawful because of the discipline required by their training, not out of respect for legal authority. It is perfectly reasonabler to say that the discipline a Monk puts into there martial training also extends to their card counting techniques. The monk can cheat as much as he wants and still be disciplined about it. This is stated in the rules where exactly? If any monk that continues to take monk levels (which represents the training) counts as being a trump-all lawful act like you suggest, then it's literally impossible for a monk to stop being lawful as long as they keep trying to take levels in monk, which runs contrary to the rules restricting non-lawful monks from taking more levels in monk as they would not exist if they were impossible.
Player: I'm always worried I'll overstep my bounds and make stuff up that doesn't make sense in the setting. GM: I absolutely detest the player that "make[s] stuff up that doesn't make sense in the setting" or adds stuff that should give a mechanical benefit ("im teh eir 2 þe thrown") if it were true, or the low-level character whose backstory puts mid/high-level characters' actual achievements to shame.
When it comes to houseruled archetypes, isn't the usual assumption that the GM will come down hard on the player if they try to pull some sneaky rules loophole shenanigans with whatever they got? I think most GMs would slap down a player who tried to exploit houseruled content that way. It's easier just to write it in such a way that prevents the need for such a thing. Such as making it only work while wearing light or no armour.
I think two good saves for loss of armor proficiency h and m and shields is too generous personally. Even one good save is probably too good. In my experience, heavy armor isn't really all that much better than light armor, and can be even worse in several situations. A player who accepts it could/would just take a level in cavalier to get all those proficiencies back anyway.
I'm putting this here so that people who read your post can see how it actually works. That doesn't specifically say you count as your own ally in BWG. It says they generally do unless it would make no sense or be impossible. Any GM could reasonably say "It makes no sense and is impossible." and be completely within the rules. Try linking a faq or erata that specifically calls it out.
Could play e6/e8. Raise dead doesn't come around until 9th, and the only other source of coming back to life at those levels is reincarnate (which is pretty unreliable).
I usually hand-wave unimportant combats. ("After a few rounds, you've beaten up or chased off the thugs, you've taken one prisoner, and you're now asking questions. Make an Intimidate check, and take a +4 bonus.") I usually just have the bad guys run if the fight goes poorly for them.That's too railroady for my tastes, but to each their own. If it's a fight the PCs have no chance of losing, then it won't take 45 minutes. If they're so much stronger than them then they should be able to defeat an individual in a round or two and route the rest shortly after. Player agency and choice is the only thing Pathfinder has above video games, if I didn't care about it then I'd play skyrim or wow or whatever's popular now.
Assuming it works by the size change rules in monster advancement, from a venomroach->dragonroach that's +24 str, -2 dex, +12 con, +12 natural armor, -7 attack/ac, +7 cmb/cmd, -6 fly, -12 stealth, +7d8 hd. I feel like it should have an acid breath attack to give it a more 'dragon' feel.
I usually hand-wave unimportant combats. ("After a few rounds, you've beaten up or chased off the thugs, you've taken one prisoner, and you're now asking questions. Make an Intimidate check, and take a +4 bonus.") I usually just have the bad guys run if the fight goes poorly for them. That's too railroady for my tastes, but to each their own.
Is there a Dragonroach statblock somewhere or are we meant to extrapolate based on size change rules and smaller variety's stats?
I'd let a player who wants to become a lich/vampire/whatever know that I wouldn't allow a PC to be a lich/vampire/whatever unless they immediately became an npc in the same vein as if they retired their character due to them achieving their adventuring goals.
A five foot radius means it's single target for full fireball damage. A 5' radius would be 2x2 squares in gridded combat, no?
Besides, for every Gandalf that jumps on the chance to obtain Glamdring, there is an Aragorn that will fight with their chosen weapon while broken instead of using a replacement. But Aragorn had a fully formed Andúril from the time he left Rivendell...
I hate the guy who tries to "roleplay" his character as eloquent and suave even though he has a negative charisma and no ranks in any social skill. Especially when he expects to "just win coz meh rp". He's just a munchkin at best. If you don't have mechanical backing to your flavor/rp, then your flavor/rp is a lie.almost as much as I hate the guy who mutters a description of what he does under his breath, rolls the dice, and demands the social situation goes a he says because "hurr durr I rollz like a bozz". I mostly just hate that guy because he didn't say what he was doing, making his roll as meaningless as when I roll the random dice I have around my desk in the middle of the afternoon. Was his roll for an attack, climbing, doing a backflip, knowledge? No one knows. If he said "I roll diplomacy to improve [npc name]'s attitude towards me" his roll would've at least been valid.
...Why not? Combining the freedom to conceptualize a character however you want with the massive number of available class abilities creates an absolutely enormous opportunity for imaginative characters. Ever heard of m&m 3e? It's a pretty good points-based system and it has an srd. You might like it. I like it.
That's fine, and I agree with you, but that's when "that guy" gets mad at not being allowed to "just win coz meh rp".
I hate the guy who tries to "roleplay" his character as eloquent and suave even though he has a negative charisma and no ranks in any social skill. Especially when he expects to "just win coz meh rp". He's just a munchkin at best. If you don't have mechanical backing to your flavor/rp, then your flavor/rp is a lie.
Sorry to be the "but meh husrulz ken fix so it no prblm!" guy. But I just wanted to say that I've found giving halfBAB as a 'parry' bonus to AC (works like dodge, except it doesn't apply to CMD, rogues and monk treated as fullbab for parry bonus) seems to work fine.
Might be a difference in generation, but if you asked me to come up with something, I wouldn't know where to start. Premade material is so much easier for running, and I feel more fair on a whole. I find the trick is to be fluent in a setting. Then pick a believable problem to occur that the PCs could/should want to fix (orcs stole the baker). More than half the time it snowballs itself into more problems, or you've gotten enough time to think of more problems.
GM. More power than a wizard, half the bookkeeping.
I liked it in theory before I ran it, but the game was effectively dead before I got to the puzzles (puzzles are pretty hit or miss anyway). Maybe I'm just terrible with premade material. Not that it matters, it takes longer to read and understand a premade than to just make something up for a setting you know, in my experience anyway.
The Price of Immortality trilogy (Crypt of the Everflame... I just wanna say that Crypt of the Everflame was the most boring game I ever ran. As soon as you leave the town it's just non-stop combat, which is great if you're into that, but I'll play Skyrim when I want a fantasy game directed by Michael Bay.
Casters are too much bookkeeping and effort. Martials can't do anything. They both suck.
I've always wanted to try a houserule that says "attack bonus = STR + DEX, base AC = 11". I can't imagine anything terribly wrong with free Weapon Finesse. Building a high Str&Dex character might actually be worth it on something other than an archer.
I've been doing "Everyone who meets the prerequisites gains Power Attack, Piranha Strike, Deadly Aim and Weapon Finesse for free" as well as "No combat maneuver requires intelligence or Combat Expertise feat". Seems to make most martial builds come online sooner.
Drowning. Damn it is hard to drown. You can hold your breath for AGES Should be more things that can make you lose a round of breath. Maybe you need to make a concentration (or similar since that's a caster thing) check if there's something highly distracting going on else you lose a round of breath. |