Svartalfar

Shadowlords's page

Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber. Organized Play Member. 339 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Organized Play characters.


Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Joana wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Torag and Rovagug are both gone in the gap with Golarion. Every other deity from pathfinder is still active, although they are not all core.
Huh. This desperately makes me want to run a game in a duotheistic Golarion, wherever it's hiding.

See im picturing some kind of prison break on Rovagugs side, so all the gods did what they could to contain the beast. this involved making Golarion disappear, like putting the planet in some kind of prison plane of existence but a god needed to stay behind to slow the beast or keep fighting him so he doesnt escape and Torag stayed to fight him and now Rovagug and Torag are locked in a eternal battle on the world of Golarion. Good vs evil, Law vs Chaos.

Now insert factions of mortals still living on the planet in the middle of this eternal struggle and the only 2 gods in their existence is Torag and Rovagug.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Also a miniature that was produced for the cannon golem shows the cannon replaces an arm. all artwork from the adventure path the cannon golem appears in, to the bestiary, to the figure, to the comics and novels depict the cannon golem having its arm replaced. that doesn't mean you cant create your cannon golem to have a shoulder mounted cannon or a chest cannon.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Name of PC: Edward
Class/Level: Alchemist
Adventure: Book 1
Catalyst: Vargouille
Story: Got hit with the kiss of the vargouille when exploring the tunnels alone, fought it off then was embarrassed of the whole thing so he hid what actually happened from the party. Party finished the dungeon then went to sleep, he woke up the next day almost transformed and they rushed about trying to save him but ultimately failed. Edward's Head popped off and he was now a vargouille as well.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Just a Mort wrote:

I will disagree with you on animal companions. I've been trying PFS scenarios on gestalt, often I run into DR, or fail a willsave on animal companions. Gets even worse at higher levels.

Reincarnated druid does not have access to restoration so I don't know how you're removing neg levels from reincarnating.

Are divine spell casting services not a thing? scrolls? friendly neighborhood cleric you give a few thousand gold to.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

a key point here is to not tell the players how to solve the problem. they should have a firmer grasp on their characters abilities then you do and how to use them in this situation. They know were they are needing to go and have materials around to use to get there. If they dont figure it out in a timely manner or seem stuck, then throw the merfolks at them and either capture them or help them with the aquatic races, but they would "lose" their ship. its the way of life and adventure.

Last time i played a pirate game i lost over a dozen ships over the course of the campaign and at one point ever single item and gold piece i owned. yea it sucked and was annoying but its a game and the story progressed and it makes for a fun tale now of how i recovered and what i learned from the situation.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Claxon wrote:
Mysterious Stranger wrote:

One perfectly flat featureless planes with vegetation no more than an inch tall doesn’t occur naturally. Even flatland has some contours to them, and unless you are constantly mowing the field’s vegetation grows higher than a few inches, and then there are rocks and other thing to break up the plane. The other thing the rogue can hide behind is other party members. Wizards aren’t the only one who can use the BSF for their own benefit. And finally there are the items the rogue has with him. Maybe he uses his cloak to setup a draft that deflects the flame, or maybe he has a quarter staff spinning faster enough to act create a breeze just strong enough to deflect the flame. The rogue could also use some of his mundane gear to stop the attack. Does it really matter if your ordinary tunic gains the broken condition?

The only way I see it being a problem is if you are all alone, completely naked, carrying absolutely nothing, in a room with absolutely nothing. If that is the case why does anyone even get a save for half? This brings up my next point. Why do people not have a hard time with the idea that someone can save for half damage, but have problems with evasion? If there is no way to evade the flames why is anyone getting a save?

It's not relevant if it's natural or not. My point is that Evasion would work perfectly fine even if the rogue is naked in the middle of the plane of air floating in nothingness, save for the air. So explanations that rely on using something for cover, hiding in or behind something, etc are not acceptable because lacking all those things the ability works. If that's how you want to flavor it I really don't care, but none of those things actually matter. The ability just works. When you try to justify it by saying he hides behind his cloak or something else you are creating a premise that the rogue needs something to hide behind for the ability to work, and that is untrue.

As to the second point, I agree that its unintuitive that there is a...

you seem adamant about not wanting to hear a believable way one could avoid it. honestly read any high fantasy novel that deals with magic and lore the same way D&D does, and the authors spell it out clear as day how the characters avoid spells and traps and all manner of things our characters avoid every time we play.

"I really don't care, but none of those things actually matter."

honestly you seem angry at this fact and cynical at the game for being fantasy.

you seem to be looking at the game on a pure mechanical point and numbers and not trying to find flair and fantasy in a novelization of your actions and the story presented to you.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

The thread that questioned it back in 2011 ended pretty quickly with everyone agreeing that the ability works as we have said it does.
Bards can make all Knowledge (everything) skill checks untrained against any DC.

This is why bringing it up again is a non issue, as it has been discussed already and a conclusion has been made previously, and a conclusion has been made again in the multiple pages of this thread. you just fail to see it or dislike the conclusion or actively want to cause problems and start arguments.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

so i can take the individual pieces of adamantine full plate and use them as an improvised weapon to bypass DR but once i put a person in that full plate and start swinging that person around as an improvised weapon it no longer counts as adamantine for bypassing DR even though the striking surface and what you are actually getting hit with has not changed at all.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

You guys are probably putting more thought and effort into figuring out the anatomy of the golem then the original creators did.

Without doing an autopsy of the golem and a breakdown or weights and materials used i would assume that an Adamantine golem would be made mostly of Adamantine. that is not an absurd assumption.

With that said. if said golem used part of his body (His body being made of Adamantine) to attack or damage something then the quality of the material that is striking said object would apply, in the case bypassing hardness less then 20 and overcoming DR Adamantine.

We can then take this and apply it to every other conscturct or golem made of materials.

Mithral Golem
Cold Iron Golem
Adamantine Cobra
Mithral Cobra
Cold Iron Cobra (Ironically this is the only construct explicitly states it overcomes cold iron DR.... but that seems to be a habit with cold iron Creatures and such in general as they all say explicitly that they overcome cold iron DR...)

Now even though it is not stated explicitly for all other special material constructs (cold Iron excluded) it is a logical assumption that they can over come the DR they are stated to be made of.

Edit: To add
Lack of rules or absence of wording or clarification is not a rule in itself, just because it does not explicitly say it can do something does not mean that then the rule is that it cant possibly do that. It then comes down to reasonable conclusions that we can infer from the materials at hand.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

A shadow caller's shade remains stable while adjacent to the shadow caller, or while up to 5 feet away from the shadow caller for every 5 levels the shadow caller possesses. (so this means at level 20 the shade can be 20ft away without issue) If the shade moves beyond this distance, it is automatically dismissed back to the Shadow Plane (preventing the shade from being summoned back for 24 hours) unless the shadow caller concentrates as per the etheric tether ability. However, if both the shadow caller and shade are in areas of total darkness, the shade can move any distance from the shadow caller. If the shade is beyond its maximum distance and enters an area of dim or brighter illumination, it immediately returns to the Shadow Plane and cannot be summoned for 24 hours.

This ability replaces etheric tether.

So you have to make sure you and the shade close by depending on your level, adjecnt for the first 4 levels then within 1 square for level 5-9 then 2 squares levels 10-14 etc, unless you spend a full round action concentrating. so wile spending that full round action you are allowed a 5 ft step. and the first few levels you have to stagger your movements so you are just 5 foot stepping as well.

I cannot remember if you can ready an action to do a full movement or not so you can remain adjacent.

As a Dm i would consider allowing simultaneous movement just for ease of use, but i do not believe there is anything wrong with how it is now, it restricts how far and fast you can move per round while having your shade out which i think is a feature not a bug in the system, even if i would house rule simultaneous movement. again
this has never came up and i would have to see it in action myself.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

On one side of the table we have the argument:

The act of screaming, the muscle tension, the breath exhalation, the clenching fists and all the other physical aspects your body undergoes when it screams is enough to suite the requirements to negate the penalties of the spell. This is what they have based the logic of this side of the arrangement on, and weather or not the scream can be heard or not is irrelevant as long as all those other physical actions have been taken (as that move action) that would normally produce a scream, then the spell penalties are negated.

The other side of the argument:

Regardless of the physical actions your body undergoes while producing a scream is relevant, it is the actual scream and that it is capable of being measured on some scale, that is the only way to meet the requirement of the spell.

The first argument is how a lot of people would rule it because that seems logical to most.

The second Argument is on the strict RaW side of things and looking for exact clauses, the spell says you must scream and make noise you have not met that requirement so you take penalties regardless of any attempt you have made

This ruling will change from table to table i seriously doubt any devs will weigh in on this

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

I have always thought the duel identity aspect of this book could be accomplished with good role playing. I have done it in the past with a druid / rogue, he was good at forging documents and hid his true identity from everyone and created a couple identities for himself for different situations. And once you have access to the thousands faces trait as a druid it becomes even easier.

Now as the druid i had a class mechanic to help with what i wanted but i could accomplish the same thing as any other class with some careful planning, role playing, and making it clear where, when, and how i go about switching my identities and hiding my true identity with a mask or some sort.

I have not read through the book yet but just the duel identity feature seems like adding rules and class feature to create a single class niche that i previously could accomplish with decent role play and planning with any class.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
And the most important rule makes it clear that you should discuss the application of fudging as well.

I would disagree with that interpretation of the rules but not necessarily the idea. While i don't think fudging is an issue needing to be discussed with my group, i realize it would be for others.

Core Rulebook pg 403 wrote:


Rolling Dice: Some GMs prefer to roll all of their dice in front of the players, letting the results fall where they may. Others prefer to make all rolls behind a screen, hiding the results from the PCs so that, if they need to, they can fudge the dice results to make the game do what they want. Neither way is the “correct” way; choose whichever you wish, or even mix and match as feels right for you.

The rules clearly state that fudging rolls in secret is well within the spirit of the game and that it is up to the GM to decided if they want to do it or not.

The most Important Rule wrote:


The rules presented are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters have a number of "house rules" that they use in their games. The Game Master and players should always discuss any rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt.

We are not changing any rules by fudging dice so, in no ways does this section mean you should talk to your players about dice fudging.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Trogdar wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:
Trogdar wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:
Trogdar wrote:


Arguing from bad faith.

Honestly do not know what you mean by that or are getting at.

i sated how i read his post so that if i did misinterpret what he said i want him to correct me.

either add something to the discussion or don't comment.

The first paragraph of your last post is preposterous on its face. Literally no one on these forums would come to that conclusion because to get there, you have to know nothing about the games mechanics.

You can't missenterpret on that scale by accident. Therefore, your arguing in bad faith.

Quite the opposite, i got there quite logically, He said non-spell DPR i took that to mean the wizard is casting no spells at all to increase or deal damage. i stated what i thought he meant clearly and voiced my thoughts on the matter, when presented with an alternative to what he said i then also voiced my thoughts on that matter.

When you argue in good faith, you interpret arguments in the best possible light. You already know that a wizard can't fight in melee without using spells. If you are arguing in good faith, then you discard that interpretation and move to the actual argument being made.

Just trying to keep the rhetoric on track.

Ah ok cool, i actually didn't know what arguing in good faith or bad faith actually meant, thank you for clarifying.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Trogdar wrote:


Arguing from bad faith.

Honestly do not know what you mean by that or are getting at.

i sated how i read his post so that if i did misinterpret what he said i want him to correct me.

either add something to the discussion or don't comment.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Quote from the dev James Jacobs.

James Jacobs wrote:
Run, Just Run wrote:
Do you have any plans on dealing with the martial/caster disparity in pathfinder or do you think it's not a wide enough gap to be worried about it?

I think the martial/caster disparity is mostly present in the view of folks who favor martial characters who are jealous of casters, or from the point of view of folks who favor caster characters who are jealous of martial characters.

AKA: I don't think its as big a deal as the internet makes it out to be. In my games, casters and non-casters tend to be equally valuable to the party, and equally dangerous in various situations as enemies. I've seen parties get into big trouble when their only strong spellcaster wasn't at the game, and I've seen them get into big trouble when their only strong non-spellcaster wasn't at the game.

To a large extent as well the responsibility to keep things fair and fun for all involved lands on the GM's shoulders. If every single fight is against flying creatures that use ranged attacks, the characters who focused on melee stuff are going to be cranky. Likewise, if every single fight is against golems or high SR foes, the spellcasters are going to be cranky.

It's a balancing act.

From Fergie's Page, he has alot of good stuff on it about this issue.

Fergie wrote:

The most important part of dealing with the Caster Martial disparity, is understanding how it affects YOUR game. Once you see what the effects are, determine which effects are benign, and which are problems. This determination is best done in an honest and open discussion (NOT argument or debate) with the players and GM. Once the problem aspects are defined (for me personally, action-denial magic is the worst culprit), decide as a group what can be altered by the GM, and what needs to be house ruled. If your group can agree to allow the GM control of the character generation method and magic item economy and remove a few spells from the game you have fixed most of the problems.

Finally, there will always be imbalances and issues that need fixing. If players and GM agree to work towards a game that is fun for everyone, and not disrupt the balance, that will do more to promote fun then any rule or house rule. The game can be broken and rules can be abused - so DON'T break the game or abuse the rules.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

In all honesty what is the point of this?
If your goal is to somehow get the devs to balanced the game the way you want it to be, they would have to remake of the entire game and a build a new system all together.

that's not going to happen...

the majority of what i see here are people complaining about the system. I'm not trying to complain about a system I thoroughly enjoy playing. Especially at this level were you are advocating removing half the material.

Some people have offered solutions like taking away the core book but i really do not understand that. that is almost half the materials for the game. others say take away full casters from the game, that's a little more reasonable and would be a fun game to play, i would classify that as a mid to low magic style game though. and would not enjoy playing that every single game.

I am playing devils advocate and saying it does not need to be balanced, but you seem to not like hearing from people who disagree with you. If anything i apologize for my "joke" as that seemed to get a couple of you up in arms really quick. and if i did misread or misunderstand what you said then i also apologize.

I in fact do think that every class has strengths and that every class has weaknesses. I do not think there is a single class in the game that has no weakness and is able to do everything every other class can do and better.

I have seen the builds of wizards, druids or sorcerers that have soloed entire modules alone but i have also seen builds of monks, fighters, paladins, and rogues soloing the same module.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:
then have everyone play the same class. Boom, Balanced.
Are you even reading what is being said to you?

I am listening, thank you for understanding the joke. This was a stab at the comment saying that every class should have the same strengths and weaknesses and not being better or worse at different citations.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:

Since when did the game need to be balanced....[...]

if [...] one person is taking the spot light it is your job as the DM to "balance" the game.

Under what other circumstances is this kind of nonsense acceptable?

If I go to the dentist and he drills the wrong tooth, it's not my job to fill the cavities he missed.

If I go to the mechanic and he forgets to re-attach the cylinder head, it's not my job to put it back on.

If I go to a restaurant and get served raw chicken, it's not my job to go back into the kitchen and cook it all the way through.

If I get onto an airplane and the pilot doesn't know how to find San Bernadino, it's not my job to navigate.

If I hire a carpenter and he forgets the fourth leg of my table, it's not my job to work the lathe.

Lol, well seeing as how every single example you used was an actual job and this is in fact a game we are playing for fun and kicks i take all of that with a grain of salt and not as you put it "acceptable nonsense"

Now sticking with your examples the DM is the dentist, the cook, the mechanic, the pilot and the carpenter all in one. He is taking the materials he is given and making them work for him to create a finished product if you have issues with what that product is talk to the DM not the raw chicken or the metal in the drill.

You are advocating for Paizo to be all those things, which is impossible, to create a "balanced" pen and paper role playing / story telling game... when in reality there is no need for it to be balanced...

first: it is a game
Second: who cares if the druid is stronger then the wizard or the wizard is stronger then the fighter ect ect we are all on the same team and work together to overcome the challenges the story throws at us, sometimes certain classes are better at certain situation but every class has their strengths and weaknesses.
third: this is not a competitive game with ladders or leagues so "balance" does not matter. you are not competing with the other players to be better then them...
forth: if you have a problem at your table and feel like certain players are making you feel inferior then talk with your DM about changing up the encounters so that you can have your spot to shine, that is purely a table issue and not a system problem.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Since when did the game need to be balanced.... this is not designed as a pvp game were every class must be balanced with each other so they can match up 1v1 and it be a fair fight....

this is a group role playing game and if your group is destroying your encounters or one person is taking the spot light it is your job as the DM to "balance" the game and make it challenging.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

So lets take a look at the relevant spells.

Point of order, people who have died of old age cannot be raised. the only loophole to this is "killing" the old person days/hours/minutes before he dies of natural causes and casting reincarnate on him to put him in a new young body.

Rest Eternal
1 round cast time - Level 4 spell
Vial of holy or unholy water - Curse the body to bar it from returning to life

simple and cheap spell that can be cast on a body after an execution to help bar it from being resurrected. a higher level caster could easily get past this with remove curse or a high enough caster check but again its a simple cheap insurance policy

Reincarnate
10 minute cast time - level 4 spell
1,000 gp - only a part of the body is needed and condition is not a factor, can be no older then 1 week deceased.

Needs a druid to cast so fairly rare for most common folk. the body is a new young adult humanoid that could be of an entirely different race as he previously was so executors will have a hard time proving it is the man they sentenced to death and inheritors would not be willing to listen unless specified in the will

Breath of life
1 standard action - level 5 spell
No cost - need whole body and can not be more then 1 round old.

really only useful if casts 6 seconds after death..

Raise Dead
1 minute Cast time - level 5 spell
5,000 gp, a whole intact body to be raised. no older then 1/day a level deceased so max of 20 days

This is the most accessible and "cheapest" means available to the general population, but 5,000 gp is still a decent amount of gold for your commoner. Executions could stipulate that the bodies are held for 20 days in a secure location before being destroyed or buried. Burning/destroying the body might also be common practice in execution cases to prevent raise dead and resurrection and also to prevent evil spirits and such.

Resurrection
10 minute Cast time - level 7 spell
10,000 gp, condition of the body is not a factor only a part of it needs to be present. can be 10 years per caster level deceased so a max of 200 years.

Next most accessible but it still requires a high level cleric (13th) and a decent amount of gold. most people could not afford this outside of adventurers and nobles. Holding the body becomes not feasible the only method is destroying the body to prevent the resurrection. i would not count ashes as a "part of the body" to be resurrected.

True Resurrection
10 minute cast time - level 9 spell
25,000 gp does not need the body only a name or description of the deceased. still only 10 years per caster level.

If you have a 17th level cleric in your corner and 25,000 gp to expend on a spell i say you made some good decisions in life and at this point no one can stop your coming back to life even if they wish to execute you again. if the people who sentenced you to death find you alive and try to prosecute you again well then you need to try to avoid them better.

Now i primarily focused on the executions point but inheritance is a little more complicated, if by the time you come back all your belongings have been spread out among your family or followed by your will there is not much you can do but if you come back before all of that then you might be able to make a case to put it on hold and gain your estate and possessions back. If someone is bringing you back with your money or theirs they certainly have a good reason to look after your well being since they went through all the trouble instead of just taking off with the money. so they might be willing or liable to looking after you until you get in a stable position again.

Going back to "world building" if i was running a town or city in a world of magic and monsters. my laws / stipulations on the matter would be:

All dead are burned and the ashes entombed in the graveyard. this is to mainly prevent the bodies from being raised as undead and to keep spirits of the dead from appearing and haunting the place.

The executed bodies are also burned but the bodies and ashes are held in a secure location for at least 20 days.

in regards to inheritance any person that dies unless it is in their will or they have a "DNR" (do not resurrect) then a portion of their estate is used on a resurrection attempt before anything else.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Ring of Substance
Wizard / Druid Level 13 Gestalt
Illusionist wizard, Reincarnating Druid.

game over.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

So in my reading i have come across this Wizard.

Eziah - Male Human - True Neutral - level 16 Wizard
Eziah is a most-reclusive wizard who dwells in his multi-storied tower on the sun known as the Silent Sanctum. He relocated there to be left alone after growing tired of Golarion's petty politics.

So how does a level 16 wizard survive on the sun indefinitely.

There are many dangers on the sun beside the pure heat and gravity. There are Fire Elementals and portals to the plane of fire all over the place.

I have parsed through the wizard spell list and nothing completely sticks out to me as this with this will allow you to survive.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

In my research it has become clear to me that the D&D 3.0 decision to move curing spells from necromancy to conjuration was in fact a mistake. With the exception of Abjuration (magical boundaries), Divination (ley lines), and Conjuration (the Astral plane), schools of magic are clearly influenced by the extant Inner Planes. That healing magic should have to come on a circuitous route from the Positive Energy Plane, to the Astral plane, and then to the Material plane while Necromancy can make a direct route from the Negative Energy plane to the Material makes no sense. Additionally, Evocation makes an argument for a school to connect to all planes of a particular theme, and this change covers all the Inner Planes in this fashion.

Abjuration -- Magical Boundaries
Conjuration -- Astral
Divination -- Ley Lines
Enchantment -- First World
Evocation -- Elemental Conjunction
Illusion -- Shadow
Necromancy -- Positive and Negative
Transmutation -- Ethereal
Universal -- Pure Magic

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Beholders...

Because pathfinder does not have any...

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

He is useing the druids of uskwood as an example of Druids can torture animals and inflict pain and suffering upon them without losing their powers or not revering nature.

The druids of uskwood only do this against intruders, but that is a second point and irrelevant of the fact that they can and will torture animals and not break the druid code.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

It is not confusing because all those touch spells that grant a free touch attack in the spell description say range touch and the target is a creature or object as part of the spell. Produce flame does not have those descriptors so people trying to add them because its similar is trying to game the system and get more then they should out of their turn

This spell is not like shocking grasp or chill touch, it is more like flame blade and gozreh trident, if you are using those spells like shocking grasp then you are also doing it wrong

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Honestly the title drew my interest to this thread, i just came to applaud your clever title and its actual relevance to the post. Well done good sir.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:

High level campaigns deal with PC being able to travel fast (or even instsntly). It comes with the territory.

Lord of the Rings is an adventure from lvl 1 to 5 in PF rules. It deals with orcs, goblins, trolls, dire Wolves, 9 CR5 wraiths, and an ogre spider. Beyond lvl 5, PF isn't really a good option to model that kind of Adventure. I suggest looking for another ruleset, or play variations like Epic6, where maximum level is 6, to avoid the use of higher level stuff.

This all of this, finally someone who sees things as i do, i have mentioned this before and just got all kinds of flak on the boards, i was beginning to think i was the only one....

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

OP did, He also marked it as a favorite, the FAQ i think was a mis-click on his part...

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

DM_Blake, at this point you are just being cynical and rude to the other people in this forum.

We all agree that the spellcraft rules and counterspell rules do not really work as written with "must see the spell" so we all add fluff or change it for our games. in your second example you add a type of visible energy that can be used to identify it. Alexd does something else for it, i personally use the "visual" compenents of the spell itself for identification. so in my example a wizard who went through the trouble of getting a still and silent spell with eschew materials (that's a spell 2 levels higher then normal) then he deserves to be able to cast that spell without anyone being able to ID it (again i am changing the part in counterspell as well to accommodate this house rule. I am not saying this is how the rules should work or do work, but that with the rules as written it does not make sense. so i made it work for me and my group in the most logical and easiest way.

in your first example of how you think "half of us run it" you are calling us all ...keeping this PG, a donkey's rear, as your example DM is rude and mean towards his players.

Mage: Why not.
GM: Because I say so. That's fair you know; I'm the GM.
Mage: Care to cite a rule?
GM: Rule 0. That's all you need.

Really??! that is extremely a GM on a power trip and a different issue on it own.

in my game the players all know the changes to the rules and why, there's no surprise, oh you cant do that because i say so or the rules are inconsistent or incomplete

GM: you can tell hes casting a spell, he dropped his guard and looks like hes concentrating, but you are unable to ID it because he is not making movements or chanting, you may cast a dispel magic to try to disrupt or counterspell his spell.

By RAW counterspell and spellcraft ID does not work except on spells that specifically say they generate some visual effect before the spell goes off

By RAI
maybe they meant the V, S, and M components of the spell
Maybe all spells visually have some effect they create before the spell goes off
Maybe a thousand other things who knows

Again, everything at this point is in house rule territory.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

Weirdo and LazarX is right, you seems to be useing 3.x rules by mistake

I have 2 docs that are super helpful for druids, some info is homebrew on the docs but nothing is taken away from RAW just added some stuff.

First is a word doc with all the rules you need for Wild Shape

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CA2j2SM5WRLW6UrZkGOKYJXTUBnZZcCe7pxo2kk nxS8/edit

Second is an excel doc i created that should auto fill in all the stats you need if you fill in base creature stats, The google doc version doesn't work like that, the macros didn't copy over but it can still be useful

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_uWH9d7b9vQQzG6ukZvpieH8QiIX5jj2nLB rVzcsAkA/edit#gid=0

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Shadowlords wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bacondale wrote:

My group's been playing CRB only for the past year or so and now want to expand our ruleset.

I've seen reference to the "core 4" books. What are they?

Path of War

Path of War Expanded

Psionics Unleashed

Psionics Expanded

Reference the PRD [or CRB if you have it] for core mechanics.

these arent even paizo books... they are all 3rd party...
Yes, and your point is?

That when some one is asking for "core" books they are looking for paizo published and authorized books for home games and or society play. while thouse books might be "core" for you and your group and they might have some great material in them, it is a far stretch to calling them core for a group just moving on from The Core Rule Book and looking for more books from paizo. And what other people consider paizos published core books.

I have some great 3rd party books, but if i was joining another group who said they were using only the core pathfinder books i would in no way think to bring my 3rd party books and say "these are core"...

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder LO Special Edition, PF Special Edition Subscriber

This is the item I designed. I also added a little flavor text to the creation of it to limit the items availability. Let me know what you guys Think.

Everlasting Fruit Vine
CL 1, Faint Conjuration / Transmutation, Slot Less, 2 Lbs. – 360 Gp
Looking like a small cluster of grapes cut from the vine, these uniquely colored grapes each taste and feel like a different random fruit but are no bigger or shaped differently than a normal grape without seeds.
The Stem has enough spots for 8 berries to grow and once picked will be replaced 24hours later as a new piece at a rate of 2d4 berries a day. These Magical Berries each provides nourishment (Food + Water) as if it were a normal meal for a Medium creature. The berry also cures 1 point of damage when eaten, subject to a maximum of 8 points of such curing in any 24-hour period. The Berries Last for 24 Hours once picked before losing their magical quality. To remove one berry from the Vine and eat it takes a Move action.
Construction Requirements: CL 1, Goodberry, 180 Gp
Spell Level (1) x Caster Level (1) x 1800gp (Use Activated) /5 (for number of charges per day = 1) = 360 Gp
(Slot Less Items Should Double the Price but for a non-Combat Item / doesn’t provide a passive buff or effect on Player Characters so I didn’t include that)

To grow this unique item a druid must gather up seeds from all the fruit plants that it wishes the berries to taste like, at least 4 different seeds need to be used, as well as 180gp worth of unique soils and fertilizer. Growing takes 5 days and during that time the druid must water it and cast Abstemiousness, Goodberry, and Plant Growth, every day on the plant and tend to it for 4 hours a day. During this 4 hours a druid must attempt a Nature check DC 20 every day or the plant dies and all materials are lost and must start again, at the end of the 5 days the druid must carefully cut the fruit cluster from the plant. Once cut the rest of the plant dies in a matter of hours but the cluster of fruit will forever remain ripe. It is possible to grow larger fruit clusters, in increments of 8 and that grow an additional 2d4 berries per day, for each additional increment it takes an additional 5 days and an additional 180 Gp.

I want to increase the price 180gp -> 250gp and 360gp -> 500gp seems a bit more reasonable but we will see.

A druid or ranger always knows what type of fruit a berry is duplicating. If a berry is planted in the ground it will grow into the plant that grows that fruit, the plant will grow more quickly and be more bountiful and last longer than normal for that type of plant.

The item can be easily destroyed by fire and the berries can be crushed, although not as easily as normal berries or grapes, the stems cannot be broken or cut easily so accidently destroying the item is not possible.

//This item is a very common item for Druids, Rangers, Hunters, and Shamans, it is quite difficult to come across for anyone else and are greatly sought after