Sartin Nevets's page

My understanding of the rule is that, yes, the long spear wielding M size creature would be "defenseless". Without a feat, class ability or other means to attack, they would not threaten and thus not be able to attack an adjacent enemy.
Plenty of ways around this of course, one being another means to attack such as a "boot blade" or natural attack.

Are you as tired of prestige classes as I am?

Discuss.

I'm way tired of the prestige classes and would prefer expanding Class Options instead. More fighter feats, more Domain powers <not necessarily domains>, etc. Give the players the options they want without 100 different classes.... Just new feat/class ability trees

I think as we get more and more companions, chronicles and other articles on deities themselves we will get deity specific PrCs

Agreed... But please, not too deity specific as some of us ole timers, just won't give up Grey&%$# yet. Make them easy to convert to any "home-brew" or "pirated" campaign setting.

"One Flew Over the Migrus Chest"

1) I started w/ many ideas
2) I researched the "judges" and "hints" given on these message boards, to narrow it to 2.
3) Ran it past the people in my game and went with the one they thought had the most flavor.

This is almost more fun than playing... almost!

Madison, WI

minkscooter wrote:

You want to limit the PrC's appeal for the sake of role-playing? Which unappealing features make RP better? The current secrets lack more in RP than they do in power. I thought the ideas posted by Luke Granlund offered far more interesting ways to do scholarly things to help your group, and they didn't strike me as being all that powerful.

I'm thinking things in a larger context such as a networked Pathfinder Society game. Put in all the beanies that you'd want an the Pathfinder Society would be full of Loremasters. Perhaps you really understimate how good a Loremaster's knowledge checks would be for most modules.

The other thing is that PrCs should not be so much powerful than base classes that we return to the old days of single classing being suboptimal choices. a PrC should focus on aspects of a core class, maybe improve on one or two, but at enough of a cost that entering one should be a considered decision.

It's the nature of things that players generally always want more power for the classes they like. I tend to think of things from the GM's point of view who has to decide how to balance the new toys.

"Balance" being the key. A 10 Wizard / 10 Lore Master should be of equal strength. As of now a loremaster would end up being an NPC class exclusively. Sure it's got a lot of flavor and knowledge checks "could be" very useful but "how often" and how much more so than that of a 20th level Wizard w/ the same skill ranks? Players want the ability to be at least useful in combat & standing next to a wizard of equal level, the loremaster is not equal. Players need to be given well balanced options with which they can enjoy all facets of game play. If you create a class and/or prestige class, that seems to only excel in camp and/or town, label them an NPC class as you'll only be finding DM's running them. I love flavor and don't mind playing the side-kick but give me some useful options in combat. Increased DC's on spells read from scrolls, Int mod instead of Dex for initiative, anything really to allow the intellectual classes to have their moments in combat as well. We all read fantasy, is it that hard to tell which characters in these stories we love are PCs and which are NPCs? Isn't that what we're doing w/ our game? We are telling a story w/ the PCs as the lead characters, they are only visiting with the "Loremaster" to get advise on their quest.

Assassins have certainly been 'nerfed' by the removal of spells.

Assassin talents would go some way to redressing this. Perhaps the option of gaining +1 caster level (arcane or divine) for those who already have some spell casting talent could also be includied. This would allow for 'mundane' assassins, arcane assassins and holy assassin for followers of deities like Norgorber, Pyremius and Bhaal.

Assassin talent Options could be:

Arcane Killer: +1 level arcane spell casting (can be taken more than once)
Holy Slayer: +1 level divine spell casting (can be taken more than once)
Urban Tracking: Track in urban environments using either knowledge local or intimidate skill
Poison Expert: + 4 on victim’s DC when poisoned by the assassin
Master Sniper: Can death attack from a distance (30’ as per sneak attack?)
Practised Killer: +4 to DC of Death Attack
Rogue Training: Take any rogue talent

I like the "Assassin Talent" concept and I wouldn't mind seeing it extended to other classes (prestige classes) as well. The more balanced and appropriate PC options that can be given players the better. A few low level class abilities (Death Attack, Sneak Attack,etc) would be enough to distinguish classes. A PrC should be Prestigious after all...

Some great idea's Jason, you are a Superstar! I must to concur and confess my love for your ideas of what be added/changed to my favorite Pathfinder class concept.

I use the "because you like your butt to not be sore" Chits. I find I don't run out of those.

This fails to satisfy them once they're larger than you are. They incorrectly believe they can take you then. Of course, they have no idea my belt is +4 with the vorpal ability added for good measure.

Personally, I love daggers. My current Halfling cleric/rogue uses them as his primary weapon(s). With 2-weapon style, rapid shot, quick draw, etc, I am throwing 3 per round. Add in his bonuses and sneak damage and it's extremely effective as well as versatile. The small long sword would only do a couple more points of damage and I couldn't throw it, hide it as well or fight w/ one in my off hand.

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Or better yet, a pair of spiked gauntlets (note, just the gauntlets, not any form of real armor)

That way we don't have to worry about all the hassles involved with trying to give monks ways of enchanting their unarmed strikes.

I don't mind Monks having unarmed strikes that can be enchanted by Magic Weapon or Magic Fang. I'm just wondering why using a sword is a no-no.

I love using a feat to add a weapon to a monk's list.... 3.5 did that in a supplement, Dragon or something, for polearms and a couple others. I totally LOVED the polearm monks and their BIG damage with a high strength and overhand chop. It might be a little overbalanced though. Start throwing Ki flurries at opponents 10' away, then AoO when opponents are moving in close to you, etc... they're very powerful, cool but powerful!!

This is going to ROCK!
Now, if we could have had a pre-Christmas release.... my wife could have bought it for me!! Ties again this year I guess....

The NEW Clerics ROCK and I love playing them now.... A few ideas to give those reluctant players who are having a hard time choosing to play the cleric.
DOMAIN POWERS: Take a good look the new domain powers, Dimension door, Chaos touch, Levitate, Arcane Hand.... a TON of awesome powers that when fitted together can add a lot of fun & flavor. My favorite is the levitating cleric using her arcane hand & smacking the bad guys with the mace of disruption. Who needs heavy armor?
PARTY LEADER: It's funny how the rest of the party comes around when you start putting "behavior contingencies" on your god granted healing. "Olidammara only allows me to heal those with spunk, especially the mightily drunk".
EVERIS CALE: A must read for those clerics of the roguish deities.

My son wanted to play a battle ax wielding ranger, I didn't have a good enough reason to turn him down on the overhand chop feat in place of a 2-weapon style feat. I used up my monthly parental allotment of "because I said so" chits and preferred not to use more on a game. A House rule that probably shouldn't have needed to be.

Make several styles, based on "things" found in nature, for example.
Bear Ranger = Grappling and unarmed attack feat tree.
Wolf Ranger = Combat expertise tree
Rabbit Ranger = movement feats like dodge, mobility, etc.
Forest Ranger = Brachiation, etc.

I am not proposing anything too big, something like the Rogue tricks or fighter feats... offering a greater selection of "styles" to your ranger. It was cool when they were the only ones but now... lost some touch w/ the original purpose to equalize the fighter and ranger a little bit.

PC Options = Happy Players = Good DM

I'm concerned there'd be a lot of stupid.

Ever notice that a gamer is smarter than average, whioe a group of gamers gets dumber, and kind of lazy? I've enevr understood that, but it's empirical!

Gamers are like the opposite of cranium rats!

Teaching through negative consequenses for stupidity worked for my parents, well, almost worked....

Steven T. Helt wrote:

I like the OP plan. Selling the synergy to the DM rewards versatile and creative characters. Also, it might actually be helpful in an encounter. If I take the first example and request Knowledge (Nobility) help me reveal embarrassing dirt to get an edge, maybe the DM ruling against the synergy can help me sniff the duke out as an imposter, or maybe the DM helps me avoid blowing my Diplomacy check by throwing a touchy past in his face.

I like this plan a lot.

I concur and this is one of my biggest issues with the current Pathfinder rule set.

A simple, DM discretionary / player-initiated / flat modifier for a using a related skill would be awesome. In some case, as explained on other posts, this could result in a (-) modifier (if the Duke doesn't take kindly to being blackmailed or the player guesses incorrectly on what will "help"), should be quick if the DMs on top of his/her game. We can never have enough reasons to reward ingenuity in players.
As a matter of fact, I like it A LOT and would like to see similar bonuses added (as guidelines) for the combat "shocking move" modifiers. Diving off the table to head but the enemy in a bar fight, "Ok.. take the -'s to hit but no AoO as they're too shocked at your surprising move to react quickly.
Magic Item synergy - I read in some 3rd party publication about "regalia" or Magic Items that add powers when combined with other magic items. Cloak & Boots of Elvenkind worn in conjunction, flaming and cold weapons used in two-weapon fighting giving bonus damage if both hit, etc... I just thought it was awesome!!

Me again, even mixing them all into a DM guideline for player creativity would work for me. Just something for the DM to use without disrupting game balance:

I like the OP plan. Selling the synergy to the DM rewards versatile and creative characters. Also, it might actually be helpful in an encounter. If I take the first example and request Knowledge (Nobility) help me reveal embarrassing dirt to get an edge, maybe the DM ruling against the synergy can help me sniff the duke out as an imposter, or maybe the DM helps me avoid blowing my Diplomacy check by throwing a touchy past in his face.

I like this plan a lot.

I concur and this is one of my biggest issues with the current Pathfinder rule set.

A simple, DM discretionary / player-initiated / flat modifier for a using a related skill would be awesome. In some case, as explained on other posts, this could result in a (-) modifier (if the Duke doesn't take kindly to being blackmailed or the player guesses incorrectly on what will "help"), should be quick if the DMs on top of his/her game. We can never have enough reasons to reward ingenuity in players.
As a matter of fact, I like it A LOT and would like to see similar bonuses added (as guidelines) for the combat "shocking move" modifiers. Diving off the table to head but the enemy in a bar fight, "Ok.. take the -'s to hit but no AoO as they're too shocked at your surprising move to react quickly.
Magic Item synergy - I read in some 3rd party publication about "regalia" or Magic Items that add powers when combined with other magic items. Cloak & Boots of Elvenkind worn in conjunction, flaming and cold weapons used in two-weapon fighting giving bonus damage if both hit, etc... I just thought it was awesome!!

I would have hard time denying any class to a player due to alignment. I just want to here his/her reasoning.
"You want to play the Anti-Paladin, cool!!"
"Why?"
"Oh, you're a holy warrior of the God of Tyranny, serving his church since a child and trained by it's clerics to do battle with and lead an evil army against their enemies, very cool!!"
"You channel negative energy & swap Lawful and/or good for chaotic and/or evil everywhere in the text of the class description".
There would be a few more possibly, Aura of Resolve to Aura of Fear? Remove Disease to Cause Disease? Change a couple descriptive terms/names in the text and walla.... some "work" for the DM and Player but not a Tensorian task. I mostly want the PC to explain, just to ensure we're on the same page as far as what it means to be a certain alignment (Still grossly misunderstood) and have sufficient back story to make it all fit into the campaign w/out making it seem ridiculous or disrupting game balance.
Player Options = Happy Players = Good DMing.....

The art gallery* is on the to-do list. But it's not that far up.

Luckily, since you have those PDFs, it's not all lost.

*I'd prefer a an art database, with search and filter functions. Databases are good!

That would be a brilliant idea though, providing it's not a costly endeavor... I too am a fan of some of the fantastic artists and their creations. Access = Success!

Arakhor wrote:

Druidic is a magical language, as far as I'm concerned. The Ogham runes protect its scripts from being deciphered with comprehend languages and the druidic oaths prevent it being taught to anyone else. It is the language of druidic spells and thus cannot be just "learnt" without druidic training.

Thank you.

To each their own, I guess.... Although, I think someone w/ Druidic training has been posting the no longer secret alphabet of Ogham on Wiki.... Let's hunt the blasphemous traitor down and save a tree!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogham

I like the new cleave a LOT more than the 3.5 version. As mentioned, you can use it even against foes that will take several rounds to drop. While the old cleave you would get the use of once every 3 rounds perhaps after low levels.

However, I don't find the new Great Cleave a big improvement over the 3.5 version. There are too few circumstances at higher levels where you're able to use it against more than 2 foes, and even then, whirlwind attack is just as good, if not better.

What I'd rather see for Great Cleave is that it will allow you to make 2 attacks on each foe, and therefore you'd be able to get more use out of it than Cleave, even when faced with only 2 foes.

Cleave is a "full round" action so when you take your multiple attacks at higher level (also a full round action) you can't use cleave anyway.

Whirlwind attack IS a better feat, requiring more pre-req's (Dodge, Mobility & Spring Attack as opposed to power attack) so that makes sense to me.

2 attacks on same character isn't cleave, it's called 2 weapon fighting or a 6+ BAB.

Why does everyone want nerf the rogue? No rogue would be any equal match for a fighter in a straight up fight anyway but no rogue would be caught dead in a fair fight anyway. Flanking, 2 vs one = Not a fair fight and perfect for the rogue to take his shot at combat usefulness.
Keep the sneak attack and everything else just as you have it now. All the characters should be diverse enough to be some good in most all situations. Why should a fighter get uncanny dodge as a class ability? Just to take away the rogue's ability to be useful in combat? Maybe something like was mentioned earlier, such as "Disregard Flanker" as a feat, allowing the meat shield, err fighter to ignore one enemy and focus their attention on their most dangerous opponent, while giving the other a flanker a bonus (AoO and/or no dex).
It seems some would like to re-relegate the thief to checking for traps, opening locks and fetching your wizard a drink. It would be akin to the old "carry along cleric", who's only purpose is too buff the fighters before combat, healing everyone after and staying the heck out of the fighters way when things get a little rough.
May as well take away a woman's right to vote while you're at it... Send em back to the kitchen, barefoot and prego. Finally the DM doesn't need to run NPC clerics and rogues with every party because no one wants to play them. Equality amongst the classes has been a long time coming.

A member of the party says that since the loremaster says he can learn any language as a class ability he can learn druidc without being a druid? Can some please tell me if this is possble? If it's a secret language how can he learn? And while he's in the runeforge he should have no way to learn ANY laguages anyway! Is Paizo going to do something about this or are druids getting screwed here?

The "rules" wouldn't generally allow it but....

Does it fit your campaign? Does he have an explanation to how he learned it that would not be world altering ((ie learned it in college)? Any other players playing a druid or affected in other ways?
In other words, if he wants it and no one else cares, fit it in. Personally, I would ensure he was aware the consequences of knowing a "secret" language and have fun with it. As the DM you should certainly enjoy the 2 NPC Druids who hunt the loremaster through adventure after adventure seeking to protect their religion's compromised secret language by permanently silencing the heretic, non-believer who somehow broke the code.

Cato Novus wrote:

Gurubabaramalamaswami wrote:

Moff Rimmer wrote:

Mad Guru wrote:

Looking just at PHB II classes as a comparison (especially the duskblade), would it be all that unreasonable to allow monks good BAB with unarmed strikes, special monk weapons, and combat maneuvers?

Be careful. Flurry of blows with a higher BAB alone could be a bit overpowering. Also, are there any other classes whose weapon damage increases with their level like a monk? Those are two things that could be issues with giving a monk a fighter's BAB.

Well, their damage increase is only for unarmed strikes. It wouldn't apply to monk weapons. Most higher level fighters are picking up things like flaming weapons that increase their damage output.

As always, testing it in play will show what fruit it bears.

Simple solution to allow a Monk to deal Fire damage unarmed.

Step 1: Have the Sorcerer/Wizard cast Energy Resistance(Fire) on the Monk.

Step 2: Douse Monk in lantern oil.

Step 3: Set Monk on Fire.

Step 4: Have Monk attack unarmed.

Step 5: Extinguish Flames just before Energy Resistance wears off.

I play a Monk and I would seriously consider doing this.

Well, it even kinda sorta has precedence, considering what certain monks did during Vietnam as a protest. Except, they didn't do so much kung fu... and didn't say much about their experiences later....

Actually tried something similar, kind of... Our party discovered a 3rd level cleric spell from Renegade Cleric, "Elemental Shape", where unarmed attacks do an extra 1d6 fire damage per round. Worked great in a grapple, especially when our 20 Strength 1/2 orc monk was grappling more than 1 opponent.

The burning oil would only last 2 rounds, correct?

Do away with prestige classes and go the feat tree route. This allows for more variety in character builds w/o pinning R/P restrictions on the players....

1) Properly flavor the goblin jerky your party has been using as rations the last 2 weeks.
2) Impress the saucy bar wench with your sparkling 1/2 orc smile.
3) "I always wanted to be a blond."
4) While lacking sufficient power to enable "fire breathing", burping smoke is pretty close.
5) Have you ever seen a paladin swinging a pink sword? I have!!

I would allow it so long as a sufficient justification (story) is produced by the player. I would allow most ANY variation which is backed up by a story so long as game balance isn't effected.... but then I am a player. One exapmple of similar justification I tried to slip past my DM follows (and this one breaks rules, a good cleric casting a spell with an evil descriptor):
Good elven cleric of Sehanine Moonbow w/ the Death & Travel domains being allowed to cast all divine necro spells regardless of alignment descriptor. I attempted to justify this by claiming , "he suffers the nightmares of his people so they might recall only their pleasent memories during reverie. This great service to his people leaves him with a different outlook on life than his fellow elves (NG) and as a reward for this great service, his goddess allows him to bargain with the souls of the deceased, the services of the dead's remains in exchange for the safe passage of their souls to the plane of their patron diety". I don't immediately see any game balance issues (although I may be missing one) and I feel it's fairly well explained, so I would see why anyone would take issue with it but I am sure they're soon to follow.... and I can't wait to hear my DM sigh loudly while shaking his head.

I think I would like to see more options and greater diversity of of the core classes. I wouldn't mind seeing it stop there, with a few core classes and a ton of options. Several domain trees per domain, several class power trees to chose from, more weapon style options, etc., etc. Do away with the prestige classes and give us enough options with the core classes that we can build our character powers as we see fit. I don't like the way prestige classes seem to tell you how and why your character is how he is, that's the fun to role playing, finding your role. I always seem to either find the prestige class that has the perfect skill/power options for me only to be disappointed to find I am the wrong race, alignment, etc to chose it. Either that or I find the perfect prestige class profile, only to find it lame skill and power wise. Give me balanced powers, feats, skills, etc and I will tell you why I got them.
Cleric
Fighter
Magic User
Rogue
That's all we need, if you want a bard, there should be skill and power trees for you to grab from a core class, giving you the power tree you like. Maybe a fighter bard tree, wizard bard tree, cleric bard tree, etc, etc.... Why do rangers excel at either 2-weapon fighting or ranged weapons? No rangers excel at spears? Why are druids and clerics separate classes? Divine spellcasters, with different abilities could easily be the same core class with different power trees... Anyway, I am sure you all get the gist. I do want it simplified but less restrictive. I can handle a ton of options, that's 1/2 the fun, but make them fairly simple& easy to understand. Half the fun in building a character is finding those useful combinations of classes, feats and other powers that make your character powerful, unique and 100% what you envision.
Thanks for reading and I oh so look forward to being blown out of the blog!!

My first GenCon after 25 years of gaming.... and I am from WI, now that's a wasteful shame. We got up on Sunday morning at 2am, drove straight through and were exhausted upon arrival. As we had to leave Indy by 6pm, I only played 1 game and was rushed (due to my own ignorance) into making a character while surrounded by a party full of Chelaxians, breathing, "Are you done yet?", down my neck. Are you kidding? I HAD A BLAST!
Lilith, I was very impressed, with both the GMing and the cookies. I wish I had been better prepared.
"While I obtained my faction reward, I was out played by the Chelaxian horde. I'm afraid this ole Taldor lord was weak, while the demon slaves roared. Take my word, I almost fell on my sword!!!"
Seriously, had a blast and those Chelaxians better watch out next year!! Who says, an ole Taldorian can't learn a few new tricks?

Remember this my Pathfinder friends, Taldor's light shall shine again. Neither shall our honor be lent nor our will be bent. The weakness you sense, is merely a dent, not all our ancient power has been spent. We're a new generation of Taldorian might, looking ahead to a future so bright you shall not be want'n to pick yer'selves a fight. So join our side, where modern time heroes reside. History has spoken and it never has lied, "Nothing can contain this Taldorian tide".

It was Jason B and he actually spoke with my DM at GenCon, not me. No way my DM was lieing BUT he may have led Jason a bit. I am also guessing Jason may have been a little mentally drained by Sunday afternoon and quite possibly errored in his answering of the question. Thanks for the imput... As always, it'll end up being my DM's call regardless but your assesment would be more in line with my thinking.
You reading this DoorMat?
What else could DM possibly stand for? ;-)

How about "touch of chaos". At first glance, I thought it to be lame, until my cleric/rogue, fighting w/ 2 weapon style (and quick draw), started fighting with dagger in one hand, chaos touch in the other and then drawing a hidden blade after applying the touch attack. Now I learn from our Paizo experts, it's a standard action to "charge it" and then a "touch attack" to deliver. That's 2 rounds, for a neat trick that unfortunately is all looks and no real game impact as it can only effect a target once and for very a limited duration. It's just gone from part of my normal attack routine (I would just as soon get the d4 +4 points of damage from a dagger) to another seldom used "chaos domain" power. C'mon, even a rogue rarely has uses for Prot. from Law. Perhaps it can be delivered secretly, giving me an interesting an previously unexplored use. Any thoughts?
Paizo, please rephrase or clarify the wording below. I saw the part about supernatural powers being a standard action unless otherwise stated but I read "imbue a target with chaos as a melee touch attack", as a "melee touch attack", not standard action, then a melee touch attack. Sorry if I am an idiot and this is something obvious to everyone else!! Otherwise, I do love the Pathfinder concept, give me a few more class powers options (trees or whatever, anything to ensure not all priests of whomever are the same) and I will be happy.
Thank you!!
Embrace the Anarchy!!

Touch of Chaos (Su): You may imbue a target with
chaos as a melee touch attack. For the next 3 rounds,
any time the target rolls a d20, he must roll twice
and take the less favorable result. This effect fades
after 3 rounds or when the target fails an attack roll,
save, skill, or ability check. Once a target has been
affected by the touch of chaos, he is immune to its
effects for 1 day.]

While true the Taldor faction lacks in numbers as our mighty empire appears to slumber. We will not allow ourselves be denied, every Taldorian birthright, to walk with honor, strength and pride. We serve no demon nor naive ideal, we're a mighty empire quietly waiting to heal. We have learned what our ancestors taught, an ancient truth, which can't be bought. So if we're forced to swallow our pride, the size of which can't be denied. I am willing to do what's needed, my lessons learned and ancient warnings heeded. Let the other factions help us we must, though I do not advocate trust. They're tools to our end, aiding our once mighty empire to mend.

My friends and fellow Taldan pathfinders, our Chelaxian brothers only send us reminders. Of a long ago and distant day, when we too had lost our way. They're given to fits of childish boasting, for which we shouldn't be angry but instead be toasting. While they're rants may seem arrogant and annoying, the sounds I hear are nothing but demon slaves rowing. They're not like us, they lack heart or true purpose, other than that they're granted by Asmodeous. So remember the truth of the matter, while listening to they're endless chatter. Their time spent trying to make you grouch or madder, is time I use to make my belt pouch fatter!!