Lolth

Rogue Eidolon's page

3,644 posts. Alias of Mark Seifter (Designer).


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,644 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

15 was chosen back when they believe that it was the average of 4d6 drop low. Mark Seifter (back when he was Rogue Eidolon) showed that 4d6 drop low is actually on average closer to 21 points than 15.

Seifter's calculation was predicated on the observation that "when actually rolling for stats, basically everybody rejects low rolls that would result in a hopeless character" (like a 6,7,10,12,9,11 array).

Sort of. I was analyzing the original math of 3.0/3.5 D&D 25 Point Buy (the equivalent to Pathfinder 15 Point Buy), where there actually were specific rules for a "hopeless character" that entitled you to a reroll. At the time, after someone was worried that throwing out the hopeless characters was the main cause of the finding, I also calculated without removing hopeless characters and it was a little lower, if I recall a little under 1 point, but still way higher than 25/15; there just weren't that many characters that were hopeless and they didn't affect the numbers that much on the low end as the characters with high stats did on the high end.


So the name Erasmus is shared with the iconic medium, which makes me think: You could have him be a medium (maybe storyteller archetype due to love for plays). It could give a group not as familiar with Occult Adventures a little taste of what the six medium legends can do before they become a big plot point in book 6.


Given that not even most people in the county were even aware of the fact that Caphridius Vort had set up the refugee New Towne, plus the exact area Vort controls doesn't match well, I am also assuming there's another more powerful Vort in play, like Blue Eyed Devil. Maybe the other Vort also loves the opera like Caphridius and Caphridius visits his relative to watch operas (not likely Meratt hosts many).

*****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could probably just ask the GM what terrain you're in (and to let you know if it changes), same as a ranger with several favored terrains who needs to know if she gets her bonus on initiative, Perception, Stealth, etc. Something like "Would you say the basement floor of this castle counts more as underground because of being a basement or urban for being in a castle in the middle of a city?"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You count all your uses of an ability during the day, even if you temporarily gain additional uses multiple times. Here's the relevant CRB FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Temporarily gaining abilities: If I temporarily gain an ability that is limited in its uses per day, am I limited in my overall uses of that ability if I can temporarily gain it more than once?

Yes. You are limited by the ability in the same way as a character that has that ability permanently. For example, if you have an ability that allows you to gain the Stunning Fist feat for a limited period of time and you use it 3 times. Those uses count against your total number of uses should you temporarily gain Stunning Fist again later that day. This limit also applies to abilities that grant additional uses of another ability (such as Extra Channel). Once used, they are consumed for the day, even if you gain the ability again.

*****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Hutchins wrote:
Egil Firehair wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


No. he is absolutely terrible. At his listed/obvious level of combat he is shooting at -8 for 1d10 damage every other round. He's out damaged by a core combat familiar.

Just because people mention power levels doesn't mean they expect an uber optimized whirl of death. There is a basic level of competency you need to meet to contribute effectively and Harsk is well below it.

Yoon doesn't meet the basic level of competency either. Taking Point Blank and Precise Shot isn't 'highly optimized', it's the first assumption of any ranged character.

It might be YOUR first assumption for any ranged character. But I've seen many player built characters, ray shooters and bombers (hey look both going against touch like yoon) that never get those feats. And I've seen archers not get precise shot feat until lv5.

If you run yoon through the DPR of the situations she's likely to be in you find out that she does okay, she meets the basic level of competency (now your basic level might not be the actual basic level by a higher benchmark and thus more things look bad but if so then your basic level is above that actual level needed to be worth helping and is too high). Because there are a number of times she'll have a clear shot on an enemy that's not in combat and have great accuracy, and then a number of times she has a clear shot and target is in melee where her accuracy is normal, and times when there's both and she's having difficulty but still better than a non-human archer that couldn't qualify for precise shot yet because of touch.

To add to this, Yoon's best-case scenario is actually to use fan of flames on several targets (particularly if you have to fight a swarm!), which won't benefit from either of those feats at all. At level 7, she adds eruption as a go-to, which also doesn't use those.


David knott 242 wrote:
Cytonus wrote:

I get a page saying I can't access the guide because it is in violation of the Terms of Service for google docs/drive.

Is this just me, or is anyone else having the same problem?

It is a really nasty bug in Google Docs that has made this file and many others unavailable to anyone, including their owners. It is apparently known to many people that no real Terms of Service violations have occurred, as I saw no discussion of that point before I brought it up a while back.

I e-mailed Google about my guides but no response. Pretty bummed :(


Verzen wrote:
Mark. I have a shifter guide almost done. When can i publish it?

I would say waiting at least for the public release of the book would be in good taste. However, as I've cautioned potential guide authors in the past, it might be better to wait just a bit longer anyway to get more data , trying out a few builds in play and finding synergies and the like.


You might consider having the kasatha carry one unwieldy weapon and one normal weapon for AoOs, full attacks, and the like. The great thing about four arms is the ability to diversify!


Varun Creed wrote:

(Improved) Hurry, I would rate blue myself. In the action economy of Starfinder this ability can mean the difference between a full attack or not. Or a different critical ability for your friend to use - or not. (If it would still be the Pathfinder action economy, I'd agree on it being green.)

I thought (Improved) Hurry was going to be green when analyzing the math on my own early on, and green is a good rating, but in actual play, it was definitely blue for reasons similar to the examples you give. The envoy was consistently getting surprisingly amazing benefits by trading her own standard for an ally's move action in clever and targeted ways. It might vary if your envoy is less creative or good at quickly coming up with combos with the group (ours first asked everyone if they thought they had a big use for a move coming up and then spent the round looking for other possibilities as well).


Our group uses individual initiative to avoid giant novas of everything acting together, but when there's a truly enormous number of the same thing, like 10, we sometimes assign them to roll all even numbers on initiative, so there's another one acting every 2 initiative counts.


W E Ray wrote:
I put one "4" one "3" and one "2" for each day for events that I liked. Then I put a "1" for a whole host of others figuring I could trade them for something I like. I got a couple of the "1"s and the 8-99 Solstice Scar. So I'm trying to trade. (And since word on the Boards suggests that doesn't work so well, I'm resorting to bribery.)

Trading I think varies depending on what you're willing to put into it. The year my friend Cedric went to the con, he was incredibly active on trading and managed to rack up a schedule with more lottery events than Linda and I got from the lottery in a few years combined, even though I think he only started with one event from the lottery. But the amount of work he put into to do so was pretty extreme and somewhat reminiscent of one of those Legend of Zelda quests where you keep trading things to the various NPCs around the world.


Personal experience from Paizocons as a fan: No lottery events is pretty normal, depending on what you sign up for. Linda and I only got two lottery events over all our Paizocons as fans, other than events that weren't full after the lottery (meaning everyone who got no events listed must have ranked all of those as priority 0). How many events you get will thus depend greatly on how many less popular events you rated non-zero. It would, however, be very surprising to get no events if you rated every single lottery event at least 1, since there's almost always an event somewhere with a space open after the lottery.


elcoderdude wrote:
skizzerz wrote:
If you can rebuild your deck for the task at hand, you lose out on the tough decisions of which cards to keep and whether or not to keep that powerful but niche card or the weaker general purpose card.
Unlike the Obsidian app, if really game it :)

You mean by creating a mule character to come grab some of your cards in a low level adventure and then don't bring them along except to grab them back when needed?


Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

Errrrmagurrd sleeves of many garments why didn't I think of that xD

@Rogue Eidolon I think I've made somewhere in the range of 4 full stated Dex based melee characters already I'm kind of burnt out on them, I don't really see this character getting his hands dirty anyway xD and by neglecting Dex I can start off with a tone of mental focus. conjuration seems like a good shout.

@avr So conjuration, enchantment and illusion with, Mage armour, charm person and silent image seem like good picks so far. Completely lacking any meaningful offence unfortantly but no weapons does that I guess xD. Maybe he can carry a sling and some copper coins xD

Makes perfect sense, I've just noticed it's fairly common to miss that possibility when analyzing the archetype since it seems like it's pushing you to be casty, so figured I'd mention it.

In terms of offense, sleep is pretty handy at 1st level; if you're thinking of using DC-based enchantments as a main means of offense, there's a genial gnome racial ability or something like that to swap illusion DC boost for enchantments. You could also pile plenty of focus in conjuration and rely on servitors (the base focus power) to do your dirty work for you without getting your hands dirty.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You don't even have to give up on melee or ranged combat if you don't want. In theory, if you're Dex-based melee, you're looking at the same stat loadout as the popular inspired blade swashbuckler archetype (which you could even dip in if you feel like it, it's already a somewhat-popular occultist dip) and you wouldn't get as much use from the armor anyway compared to mage armor (if you don't dip, you can grab rapier as a gnome by taking proficiency or by being an elf or even just use a simple finessable weapon; you can use legacy weapon for agile until you can grab Fencing/Slashing Grace). Meanwhile, you're grabbing major spells known and spells per day benefits over the equivalent occultist without the archetype. Not that it's bad for full casting occultist builds either, but you don't need to limit yourself to those builds; it's a powerful archetype, and it's going to be a good deal stronger for you in most cases other than Strength-based melee builds.

EDIT: Ninjaed by Isabelle about panoplies.

*****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:
Pirate Rob wrote:

The Warrior Panoply allows an Occultist to get full BAB with a quite small investment.

Making it the only 6th level caster full BAB option.

Oh, I agree that it's nice. I just think the downside of basically delaying learning an implement school (to learn the panoply) is a nice balance. That 5th level Warrior Panoply may have a +5 BAB put he also only knows 1 first level abjuration, 1 first level transmutation, 1 2nd level abjuration, and 1 2nd level transmutation. Not that those are bad schools for a battle caster. As I mentioned above, I do think the two banned Panoplies are the "more powerful" of the Panoplies. I just don't see them as overpowering compared to other class builds.

** spoiler omitted **

It is what it is. In any event, I didn't have plans to make an Occultist :)

In fact, a panoply doesn't cost you any spells known: you actually get an extra spell known of each level that can come from any of the associated schools (so it's actually more flexible than taking a third implement school in terms of where you can place the spells known).


Fortune Hex wrote:
The witch can grant a creature within 30 feet a bit of good luck for 1 round. The target can call upon this good luck once per round, allowing him to reroll any ability check, attack roll, saving throw, or skill check, taking the better result. He must decide to use this ability before the first roll is made. At 8th level and 16th level, the duration of this hex is extended by 1 round. Once a creature has benefited from the fortune hex, it cannot benefit from it again for 24 hours.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

My experience with Bestiaries is that the A-D section is usually frontloaded with outsiders. Especially A and D themselves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The NPC wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
The NPC wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
The NPC wrote:
Would this product work if divorced from the Pathfinder system? For instance could I use it in other game systems?
Yes, easily. You'd merely need to replace the skill checks and their DCs with appropriate things for the new system and keep the scaling relationship ranks in place.

Thanks.

Knowing some of the inspirational material for this I thought it might be a good resource for a Persona game.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a better basic framework to use for P3 or P4 style social links in a Persona game.

And Persona 5 ;)

With that in mind, how to surprise my players. They are fans of the franchise, but I don't want to reveal its a Persona game until their shadows appear.

I don't have a PS4, but I have followed up on P5 enough to know that the system has changed but not enough to know how much it changed, so I didn't want to assert it worked for P5 without proof. If it does, even more awesome!


The NPC wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
The NPC wrote:
Would this product work if divorced from the Pathfinder system? For instance could I use it in other game systems?
Yes, easily. You'd merely need to replace the skill checks and their DCs with appropriate things for the new system and keep the scaling relationship ranks in place.

Thanks.

Knowing some of the inspirational material for this I thought it might be a good resource for a Persona game.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a better basic framework to use for P3 or P4 style social links in a Persona game.


The NPC wrote:
Would this product work if divorced from the Pathfinder system? For instance could I use it in other game systems?

Yes, easily. You'd merely need to replace the skill checks and their DCs with appropriate things for the new system and keep the scaling relationship ranks in place.

*****

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like people are looking at a logical implication in the reverse direction (in the sense of all squares are rectangles doesn't mean all rectangles are squares). Battle host says "At 1st level, a battle host forms a supernatural bond with a specific weapon, suit of armor, or shield. This selection is permanent and can never be changed. The bonded item is masterwork quality and the battle host begins play with it at no cost." But while adamantine items are masterwork, that doesn't mean that getting something masterwork means you can get something adamantine. If it did, a holy avenger or the axe of the dwarvish lords is also a masterwork weapon (all magic weapons must be masterwork), the same logic would allow you to start play with those weapons too (well, not the axe in PFS because as an artifact it isn't allowed in Additional Resources, but a +5 keen speed human bane falchion would be). The rules specify that "the bonded item is masterwork quality" so generally if it was going to allow for items beyond that (special materials, magic items, intelligent items, artifacts, etc) the archetype would tell you that in the text.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

An AP:
The way it happened for us was: Suddenly with no warning, a thick wall (Perception DC increases by 10 per foot of thickness) collapses to the party's side, resulting in a surprise round for the enemies, but also in the entire party being in the radius of all three auras.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played in an AP that had this same fight (three seugathi and you're in all three auras the moment they appear) as a sort of almost random encounter on the way to a place. It was probably the hardest fight in the entire AP, including the ones the GM buffed a bunch (and the GM didn't buff the seugathi fight, naturally). We might have only avoided a TPK because the barbarian managed to save up to his first turn, and he moved where the seugathi were the nearest creatures, so the best they could do was make him hit himself and not make him full attack an ally). There was another seugathi fight where the party all rolled terribly on Will saves and became confused, but we managed to win only because the eccentric sorceress was taking a dip in a pool that casts a high caster-level dispel magic every round (and shredded her buffs) at the time the seugathi attacked, so the pool removed her confusion.

So yeah, they're really hard.

*****

6 people marked this as a favorite.

It's like how there are mythic spells on the spell lists of the occult classes. That doesn't mean they can cast them without being mythic; it just means that the classes came out after Mythic Adventures and so they needed to have the appropriate spells on their lists in case they were mythic. Similarly, the new classes have racial spells on their spell lists not because they ignore the racial restriction but instead because otherwise, if you played a character of that race, you would never be able to use your racial spells with new classes that came out after Advanced Race Guide since they wouldn't be on the new classes' lists. Does that make sense?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Guide to Korvosa has lots of detail on the city, like the OP mentioned. As a big fan of the lore in our books as what first drew me into Pathfinder (which ironically, I pretty much don't work on since I'm a designer) I feel that the new Qadira really has a ton of cool setting info as well, and it's the same length as Guide to Korvosa. True, it's a region with a much larger scope than Korvosa and it has more space for rules and bestiary than GtK did, but it still seemed packed with lore to me.

*****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
RSX Raver wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
As a note, that weapon and spell FAQ has in some cases been superseded by the more complete and more recent FAQ that is more expansive in what it handles than rays and is more nuanced than the final line in that FAQ. Most notably "Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies)."
It is interesting that he did not however weigh in on the subject of Armor of Bones and Magical Vestment...

We don't have a FAQ for that yet, so that's why. I'd need to weigh in on it as Rogue Eidolon because otherwise people sometimes mistake my posts for being official rulings.

EDIT: Talonhawke's got it :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
McBugman wrote:

I am very intrigued by the themes that sound like they're moving in to replace traits and to a small extent archtypes. With the new general archtypes on top, there sounds like there'll be a fair about of customization.

I'm sad to hear about the decrease in skills though, a lot of my favorite games are non-murdery and very skill savy. That said, what they were describing reminds me of the unchained skill variant which makes me think it'll just depend on the players creativity whether the smaller set is played well.

Having fewer skills doesn't necessarily mean you can't solve all the same situations with skills in the same ways. For instance PF Acrobatics being a combination of 3.5's Tumble, Jump, and Balance skills still kept the ability to do all three things, you just spent fewer ranks for it.

*****

Jeffrey Reed wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Apropos to nothing else in this discussion except the Bonekeep-money question, I happen to have had a case of running Bonekeep 1 where a rogue sneaked away and stole some of the other encounters' treasure after/while the rest of the party was dying, and after a thorough check of the scenario's wording, some of the rooms do say "if the party finds/acquires the XX, they gain XX gp" At the time, I felt bad for everybody else so I let that count, but it wasn't a sure thing to me; I can see the ambiguity there as well as both sides on it.
In some cases that is what the treasure line reads. Had that been this case for this particular section, I probably would have been more generous. This section, however, awarded treasure contingent on the defeat of the encounter. The encounter was ongoing at the time and was in the middle of making attacks when the time ran out.

Then in that case, I can only see your side now.

*****

Apropos to nothing else in this discussion except the Bonekeep-money question, I happen to have had a case of running Bonekeep 1 where a rogue sneaked away and stole some of the other encounters' treasure after/while the rest of the party was dying, and after a thorough check of the scenario's wording, some of the rooms do say "if the party finds/acquires the XX, they gain XX gp" At the time, I felt bad for everybody else so I let that count, but it wasn't a sure thing to me; I can see the ambiguity there as well as both sides on it.


My group tends to run it like Ravingdork does, but I do think it's a good question to get figured out one way or the other if someone wants to FAQ it.

Certainly a few Improved Familiar options that came out in B5 would need similar clarifying wording if the ruling is the opposite; the chuspiki is on that list too.


Possible answer:
chopswil wrote:

p. 32 ORC IMMOLATOR and ORC PYRO

where does the Resist fire 6 come from?

Fire Adaptation (Ex) doesn't kick in until level 10 for resist fire.

also shouldn't Fire Adaptation (Ex) give them "+4 bonus on all saving throws against fire and heat spells and effects" starting at level 2?

Resist 6, huh; are they pyrokineticists with the heat adaptation utility talent and 3 current burn?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
What is the steel one? I can't think of which that one is referring to.

It's going to be the shield other one, tales of twisting steel.

*****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Minna Hiltula wrote:
- Jamila al-Shafah would be a fairly thematic NPC for this season to make a comeback.

Or has she already?


Majuba wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
The language of Ghost Touch says that you can attack incorporeal creatures normally. Which would include precision damage of all kinds (criticals, sneak attacks, etc.).
PRD wrote:
An incorporeal creature is immune to critical hits and precision-based damage (such as sneak attack damage) unless the attacks are made using a weapon with the ghost touch special weapon quality.
So you definitely can with ghost touch. Weirdly this is found in the subtype instead of the much longer special quality.

Ghost Salt doesn't convey the ghost touch special property however:

Ghost-Salt wrote:
The blanching gives the weapon the ability to do full damage to incorporeal creatures, even if the weapon itself is nonmagical.
So full damage, but still no precision-damage or critting.

Agreed, that's why I mentioned ghost touch.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:
GM Bold Strider wrote:

Ghost Salt on 10 bolts for 200 GP.

You would need to fire more than 400 bolts to equal getting a +1 Ghost Bolts package (which is 50 bolts) so the blanch is far more effective.

In addition, this should let you crit the ghost, which you cannot do with a mere magical weapon.*

*-This is still up for debate, but several GMs have allowed it. I would allow it. However, be warned that your mileage may vary.

While I agree there may still be some question on this, I really don't think there should be.

The language of Ghost Touch says that you can attack incorporeal creatures normally. Which would include precision damage of all kinds (criticals, sneak attacks, etc.).

PRD wrote:
An incorporeal creature is immune to critical hits and precision-based damage (such as sneak attack damage) unless the attacks are made using a weapon with the ghost touch special weapon quality.

So you definitely can with ghost touch. Weirdly this is found in the subtype instead of the much longer special quality.


djones wrote:

I found this a delight to run and my players seemed to really enjoy it; it took a fair bit of time for the first couple of events but by the 4th or fifth everyone was comfortable enough that they were already planning their actions ahead and ready with their choices when it was there turn.

And then when ** spoiler omitted **

Thanks, Thursty...this was really awesome.

If I had to give feedback:

** spoiler omitted **

Nice review! Consider leaving the same post in the review section as well to increase visibility for others planning on running it.

***** Designer

pH unbalanced wrote:
Kurald Galain wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Its seems like too small of a bonus. Unless your 5 charisma dwarf can't even make the check on a 20, (The odds of making the check X the odds that the diplomancer needs exactly a +2 bonus to make their check) were less than 1/20 chance you had of just making the check yourself.
This is only the case if there's no penalty for failure. And in terms of diplomacy, offending the person you're speaking with is not usually a good idea.

Failing by 5 meant you could not influence the same NPC with the same skill for the rest of the game. Failing by 10 meant you couldn't influence that NPC with any skill. Succeeding by 5+ gives a free discovery, succeeding by 10+ counts as two successes.

Making a discovery check to give your best influencer a situational +4 can often give a better chance of getting an extra success via succeeding by 10+ then your chances of getting a success on your own. At least early in the scenario. Totally depends on the situational math.

Agreed; discoveries didn't used to be as effective in some of the earlier influence scenarios, but in the UI version, they've become a strong early-game tactic. Heck, discovery of influence checks might even be giving effective bonuses of +10 (or more, if you have a character better at the easiest influence skill than they are at Diplomacy) due to the lower DC, which means if you would have succeeded without the discovery, you're guaranteed to get two successes with the discovery, causing it to pay for itself.

***** Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Kevin Willis wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Can't say I'm happy that my alchemist has to ditch his lesser ring of inner fortitude.
I'm not sure I'm going to ditch it off mine. I take the penalties for the cognatogen now, but several times I've been completely unscathed by things that drain 1 ability point per hit thanks to that ring.

Except that you don't get a choice about it affecting cognatogens or mutagens, meaning you can't gain the benefits of either while wearing even the lesser ring.

Yeah, the protection from the drain is nice, but it completely nullifies a class feature.

It looks like it's preventative (mentions "prevents" and "the wearer takes") and doesn't retroactively remove penalties, damage, and drain (like you can't pass it around the party to negate penalties and ability damage after the fact) so I think you should be able to remove, drink, replace.

I realize that's an alias talking but that's even more lenient than what I was thinking. My thoughts were:

I don't walk around under the effects of my cognatogen all the time. In fact I personally usually make the decision to drink it when I intend to *start* an encounter. It's worth it to me to keep the ring on until then in case I run into - a wraith, for example.

Also I was thinking I could put it back on just prior to the cognatogen ending, preventing the damage from occurring when it did run out (cognatogen is a bit more harsh at the end than a mutagen).

Saying it's not retroactive while the ring is off is more lenient for this combination, but it's less lenient for a character who wanted to remove->replace->remove->replace->remove->replace the ring in order to successively recover all their ability damage and drain (or pass it around the party and remove everything). Being preventative also seems like how it's meant to work to me based on the wording of the ring.

*****

3 people marked this as a favorite.
SCPRedMage wrote:
Kevin Willis wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
Can't say I'm happy that my alchemist has to ditch his lesser ring of inner fortitude.
I'm not sure I'm going to ditch it off mine. I take the penalties for the cognatogen now, but several times I've been completely unscathed by things that drain 1 ability point per hit thanks to that ring.

Except that you don't get a choice about it affecting cognatogens or mutagens, meaning you can't gain the benefits of either while wearing even the lesser ring.

Yeah, the protection from the drain is nice, but it completely nullifies a class feature.

It looks like it's preventative (mentions "prevents" and "the wearer takes") and doesn't retroactively remove penalties, damage, and drain (like you can't pass it around the party to negate penalties and ability damage after the fact) so I think you should be able to remove, drink, replace.


A good rule of thumb I've found is that if you're in the experimentation phase and looking to stack two archetypes / replacement options and you have to ask yourself which order to apply the two because that would change things, you've definitely selected two options that alter the same feature and don't stack (that's not the only way to figure it out, but it's something that's helped me notice that's what I was doing in the past). This is generally more clearcut when you are trying to add an extra layer to this mix that also replaces speak with animals of its kind (for instance, Improved Familiar); with all three in the mix, it definitely doesn't work.


Awesome! The kitsune emissary and the intelligent katana that upgrades as you progress the relationship should both be a lot of fun, and I'm guessing the latter will be super useful for GMs who want to use it as a prototype to create their own intelligent items that upgrade their power based on relationship ranks!


Eric Hinkle wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Swashbucklersdc wrote:
With your Winter AP line starting up (two products, anxiously waiting on more...), any updates on the possibility/timeline for a Winter Relationships book...

I will say that, if we do find a way to keep doing these, two of the NPCs in my archives, while I wrote them for my Far Eastern home game, are perfect for a Winter AP

** spoiler omitted **

Oh I would love to see the one about ** spoiler omitted **. Especially if they're based on the one from what I still think of as 'the Baba Yaga AP'. I liked that one and I long hoped someone among the 3rd party publishers would do more with the character.

You could definitely use it there, but you'd need to add in a plot element to cover the source of the malaise.


Ragadolf wrote:
Hannibal_pjv wrote:
Bill Dunn wrote:

It's a bit crashy on my iPad 2, but it may be pushing the little thing pretty hard. Fortunately, I'll be upgrading soon.

I did find one possible bug in rule implementation. The reroll for Darts is supposed to let you discard to reroll the dice if you fail the combat check. When I used it, it just rerolled the d4 for the Dart card. That was a much worse result than I had initially gotten - I had missed the roll by only 1 or 2, after the reroll, I missed by 8. That simply can't be the card's intent.

If you reroll you take the new result, even it would be worse. So it does work like in real version.
Yes, But I think he meant that you are supposed to reroll ALL of the dice for the combat check? Not just the one d4 for the darts?

It seems to me that if you miss by 1 or 2, then reroll only a d4, the worst you could do is missing by 4 or 5 (if the d4 was a 4 and then became a 1 on the reroll), so if it decreased to missing by 8, it must have rerolled everything. Unless he's saying that on the reroll, it rolled just the d4 and then ignored his other dice altogether.

EDIT: Ninjaed by Keith.


Endzeitgeist wrote:
If the current format of sample relationships doesn't pan out...well, as an alternative, what about general relationship toolkits for themes? Milestones, boons, etc. for piratey, viking, far eastern, varisian, urban, horror, kingdom building campaigns, for example (with, perhaps, nods to when in Skull & Shackles they'd be appropriate). You know, thematic expansions? They'd still retain usefulness for APs and have a broader appeal for people not using APs? Since the base system sells well, perhaps taking the focus from the particular into the broad may be an option. Just an idea, of course!

Hmm. That's an interesting idea. Off-hand, I don't think that would work. Each character is different based on that character's story and personality, and so I don't think generic milestones without characters in mind would be fully possible. You could list a skill and a DC, but UR itself tells you how to calculate those DCs, and the main thing is you couldn't really have the character bio information and breakthroughs. I try to write products that I would be excited to use for my games, and it's the human element of these NPCs that really make me excited about the ones I've written so far. It's probably not surprising that the base system is going to have to sell at least somewhat better than the products that use it (since you need the base system to use them, so it has to be more), and part of it might simply be a factor of rules systems and subsystems selling more than worked-out examples because not as many GMs are confident that they can create a new system from scratch as are confident they can use the system to create stuff themselves. It's interesting, and it does show that splitting Ultimate and Imperial Relationships (at one point way way back it was a single product, and back even before that when I first imagined it, before I worked at Paizo or had the idea picked up by Legendary, I even had the insane idea to have the whole UR line as one enormous compilation product with the rules and the 50+ relationships) was a really good idea, even though it leaves UR without any worked-out examples.


Chemlak wrote:

Always a pleasure, Mark, and as I've said elsewhere, each one of these NPCs gives me great ideas for NPCs in my home campaign, which is probably why I'm constantly harping on about generic NPC UltRel write-ups (if only it wasn't so hard to persuade my players to have their characters get to know NPCs, but that's another matter entirely). I'm also hugely aware of the effort involved, and you'd need compelling characters, background, and a whole host of other things before even getting to the UltRel stuff.

I really want this to be a going concern as a product line, because it provides something for GMs that can be tough to manage at times: good, developing relationships with NPCs.

A few of the NPCs I made up for my home game of a Far Eastern AP would be even more generically useful, though I believe that all three relationship singles in the Ultimate Relationships line so far are usable in a wide range of games (the least generically usable is probably the Viking Shieldmaiden, even though she isn't actually a Far Eastern character herself).


Chemlak wrote:

Reviewed!

So. Damn. Good.

Oh man, thanks for the great review!

Of note for anyone wondering (I was, for instance), I checked and Imperial Relationships is considered part of the Ultimate Relationships family of products for the 50% off sale on Legendary's site!

Designer

Swashbucklersdc wrote:
With your Winter AP line starting up (two products, anxiously waiting on more...), any updates on the possibility/timeline for a Winter Relationships book...

I will say that, if we do find a way to keep doing these, two of the NPCs in my archives, while I wrote them for my Far Eastern home game, are perfect for a Winter AP

Very Mild Spoilers for both APs and/or spoilers of possible future relationships:
A huldra masquerade reveler struggling with the idea of mortality after murdering someone she loved expecting they would come back like in Faerie and a winter wolf trapped in human form by magical experimentation who thus has identity disphoria.

Designer

Chemlak wrote:

Ah, I wasn't sure which pay method LG used (should have guessed, though). Thanks for the insight, Mark.

I am, as you might have guessed, hugely enthusiastic about these rules, and want to see more examples (I think it's fair to say that the rank-ups you've generated are an order of magnitude more thoughtful and creative than my own ideas).

If it's not too much to ask, where does Imperial Relationships fit into this discussion? It's superb, and raises the question of singles versus compilations (with a side-order of DO NOT BURN YOURSELF OUT for good measure).

Imperial is in between, but considering it released alongside UltRel as the only source of UltRel-style NPC write-ups at the time, I'd expect it to have a bump. It also involved four NPCs that people would be extremely likely to want to use with relationship rules and had some other differences.

Thanks so much for the kind words and for the review of ImpRel (I'll probably talk about it more in the ImpRel thread)!

1 to 50 of 3,644 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>