Shimnimnim's page

Honestly it's way less about having flight be magic only and way more about how incredibly tough it is for people who can't fly to contribute when flying is involved.

An ogre can carry a longbow, sure. But then he goes from 2d8+7 damage to 2d6 damage (also 3 less to his attack bonus), and any increase in this damage with a +str bow means also increasing the hell out of the bow's cost. Most animals can't fight in the air at all, which is generally fine because they're animals and this should be expected. Maybe in your head it's okay for ogres too. The problem is this also extends to the cavalier. Without flight, he can't fight flying enemies all that well. He may have a bow but without the feat investment in ranged combat (and he doesn't have nearly enough feats for both), his attacks will be much worse in terms of what he has to go against. Similarly, his size and armor is pretty valueless when the flying enemies can literally fly over him. Some people have noted that flying won't be a huge benefit in some environments and situations, such as low ceilings. This is true, and I agree that some classes should thrive more in certain situations. The problem is less that "wizards do better in open spaces where they can fly freely" and more "non-flying melee types can't contribute at all even a little in such spaces."

I've actually found flying to be not that much of an issue for a single low level party member, especially if they're the party's "tank." Leaving your non-flying allies behind to take to the air is pretty damming to the poor pedestrians.

A flying mount is, when you get down to it, a staple of the traditional fantasy story at the high level. When you're fighting powerful evil demons and going into new planes of existence and the like, having a horse that can keep up with you is honestly sort of silly. Imagine a horse fighting and defeating a huge dragon in single combat and it is just bizarre. At that point in the story, a fantasy style mount is just natural, and that mount really should have some sort of fantastic movement. That this is incredibly difficult to get without huge feat investment is a huge disappointment in the main. Especially when you consider that natural flight, such as that of the griffon, is a lot worse than magical flight in general. Anyway hashtag free flying mounts.

Hey! Going to address some stuff real quick:

"Where is your campaign at?"

We literally just finished book one. I did very little differently than the book, but already I sort of regret how incompetent the hellknights came off as well as how evil tieflingy it all was. Everything from the sixfold trial and onwards is stuff I can afford to mess with.

"Just have the mayor go missing"

I guess my real concern is that I want to sort of see things dissolve into chaos here, but it's a bit tough. Actually, since the mayor doesn't do all that much anyway, maybe my real concern is there. The more I read through book 6 the less I like it. My group has a Halfling ex-slave, a paladin of Iomedae, and a tiefling mercenary, and a big part of me feels like the idea of "rallying the nobles, the same ones who rule over a country with slavery, so that they can restore the status quo just without shadow beasts" will not be cool with them. This is... it's a bigger issue than I realized. I admit I really like the idea of Andoran stepping in. We'll see how the group feels about everything when that time comes.

I'm not entirely sure if I really like the mayor just going missing without some sort of obvious reason behind it. I'm definitely thinking I need to make the Council's presence more known in general... I think I maybe don't like this campaign. This is really bad for my group. I may need to put a bit more thought into all this, I'll get back to y'all soon.

Hey everybody! (Hi Doctor Shimnimnim!)

So I am DMing this adventure Path. Let me tell you, this campaign is just causing me so much trouble right now, and there are a hundred reasons why to be completely honest. But this thread isn't about a hundred reasons, it's about just a couple. Since I write like an idiot every time I get on a forum board, I'll explain in a series of bullet points.

- I really like the Nessian Spiral bit. To me, it is the perfect culmination of the themes I saw in CoT. Ideally, I'd like the end the campaign with it, really.

- A lot of people out there have talked about doing the books in the order of 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 5/6 -> 4. this fits in perfectly with what I want to do.

- Really, what I want to do is take the Council of Thieves taking control and slow it way down, so that in a way that stuff happens less in books 5 and 6 and more like, throughout books 2 and 3 as well as in books 5 and 6.

- I can't figure out how people do it! People always suggest it but I can't figure out how to make it happen. The encounter modding is no issue at all, but what gets me is, specifically:

- How do you have the mayor go missing and the like without first having the catalyst of the manor exploding? How do you even lead to the manor exploding when the council is done for? How do you make the party care?

Discuss.

This is all sort of stuff the guys above me have said, but I sort of want to make a little guide of it, so I will:

MODIFYING ENCOUNTERS

Modifying an encounter is a great deal of fun and can really help a campaign. It allows you to add your own flavor to a particular scene, build enemies more suited to your group, and patch up less inspiring aspects of larger adventures. Yet, encounter modifying, like encounter building, often contains issues that need to be addressed. Consider the following:

• How Prepared is your group? Whenever exchanging a monster for another one, consider how capable your group is of defeating it. Consider for a moment the Rakshasa, a CR 10 monster. The Rakshasa isn't too much of a warrior, but does contain DR 15/good and piercing as well as 25 SR. If your group doesn't have a way to get past those defenses in your toolkit, you're looking at a very difficult fight. Keep in mind this works both ways: A Rakshasa only fights as a 7th level sorcerer and deals a surprisingly small amount of damage. He might not be able to fight the group any more than they're able to fight him.
  
• What's the monster's style/role? You might have gotten annoyed at me with my Rakshasa example. "But Shimnimnim," you'd begin. "Rakshasa aren't meant to fight the party directly! They're all about subterfuge!" And to that I'd say "sure maybe I don't know" because I back down hella fast when opposed. The point I'm trying to make is that you need to know what a monster does. That CR (if we assume it works, which we will even though it doesn't) is based on the idea that the monster is in circumstances that work for it. This is especially true in encounters with multiple units. If you take a fight with one high level bard/fighter and six low level barbarians, and you switch it to be one high level barbarian and six low level bard/fighters, you'll find that encounter suddenly is a lot easier and also what is going on why is everyone singing.
  
• Where are you? This is actually sort of easy to miss: Location is everything in encounter design. In an open room, an animate dream might be a CR 8 encounter. But let's say the party is fighting on a staircase, and that staircase is collapsing below them! The animate dream's confusion and deep slumber spells can suddenly cause a PC death in a single round! Its incorporeal aspect makes it immune to the environment! It is, in short, no longer a CR 8 encounter. A simpler example is the dire eagle in an underwater fight. Keep in mind how the environment will work against both the party and the enemies, and work from there.
  
• Beware templates/class levels Whenever applying a template to a monster to change its power level, take a good look at the monster. Did you make it any weaker or stronger? Young template is a pretty notable version of this: while animals and the like will feel their strength drop substantially, magic using monsters will be virtually unaffected. Be wary here.
  
• Does it really need to change? This one is sort of unrelated, but I often find when I'm reworking encounters that I went overboard, got too excited, until eventually the whole thing was coming down. The quality of a change goes down when you feel obligated to do it. Remember that every change you make is made for the better of your game, and don't try to force it.

Anyway that's all I got for now. I might come back to this one.

It seems rules legal, but you'd need spring attack: otherwise you won't be able to attack mid jump.

Silver Surfer wrote:

5) Appalling archetype options... IMO there isnt one that is worth sniffing at... and many are truly horrendous

I could go on.....

While I agree that the Archivist is definitely more of what I want from the basic divine caster than the cleric, I am going to have to disagree with you about the Cleric's usefulness. The Cleric is an awesome class mechanically, despite the boredom of its options compared to other casters.

Also, the Evangelist and the Divine Strategist are both amazing archetypes, so I disagree with you there for sure.

Yeah, the evangelist is maybe the best support class in the game by a decent margin.

Another thing I'm surprised no one mentioned: The Rakshasa.

Now I'm not saying there isn't roleplay potential. Or that these things are particularly strong. But that fighting them isn't particularly fun, which is odd given how popular they are as a creature.

Their spells are 3 levels behind and are a good deal evocation. Even with its high critical hit rate, its attacks are fairly disappointing. And it has DR good AND piercing, and 15 of it at that. And spell resistance. The thing is made to be insanely hard to kill (unless your party has access to bless weapon and good piercing weapons to enhance with it, and even then it's annoying) without having any real offensive options that take advantage of it. Figuring out an ally was a rakshasa all along should be terrifying, but instead it really just means an obnoxiously long fight with a creature that really can't be hurt by much of anything.

A lower CR thing is clerics. An evil cleric can fire off a ton of that channel negative energy. And while the damage might not seem like much, it adds up quickly, specially since medium armor is pretty good protection and the cleric probably isn't alone. Channel negative energy also runs the risk of killing already unconscious PCs who just so happen to be in range. And a cleric can use cure light wounds to heal herself, which is very frustrating in early game where weapons hit less than half the time.

So I've been wanting to insert the pendulous staircase for my group for a while now. I love the concept of the stairs falling apart as all sorts of mayhem goes on. I'm sticking an incorporeal monster on this staircase too, I think. There's only one small problem:

I don't really get how the staircase works. For the record, the official data for the trap is as such:

A sort of double trap, the pendulous staircase menaces those who tread too heavily upon its fragile steps, threatening to crush climbers like a gigantic pendulum, but also leaving them stranded amid whatever dungeon depth they seek to escape.

The Trap: A huge but loose length of chain supports this stairway. While it is strong enough to support the stairs and considerable additional burdens, the stairs maintain their position by relying upon fragile moorings fastened into the cylindrical well. As passersby tread upon the stairs, they potentially break these moorings, causing the stairs to sway. As the central column becomes less fixed in place, it crashes against the walls, crushing climbers or sending them careening into the depths.

How It Works: This spiral staircase consists of a central pillar in a 90-foot-deep shaft. Stone steps connect the central pillar to the walls of the shaft. These steps fit into shallow slots cut into the wall. Characters who descend the staircase to the bottom discover a gap between the last step and the floor of the lower chamber.
Among these stairs, spaced approximately 15 feet apart, are several steps deliberately designed to break. These false steps appear nearly identical to the solid steps, though a DC 25 Perception check notices the almost imperceptible cracks. A character who steps on a “breakaway stair” risks falling through the broken tread and falling down to the next twist of the spiral staircase.

Once a step had broken away, any contact with the stairs sets the whole central column swinging. Each round, all characters on the steps must make a Reflex save to avoid the “pendulous staircase.” The DC of this Reflex save increases by 1 for every one of the 14 breakaway stairs that is broken. If a character fails her Reflex save, roll 1d20 and add the number of stairs broken, then reference the Pendulous Staircase Effects chart to determine how the stairs’ movement imperils the character.

Breakaway Stair CR 3
Type mechanical; Perception DC 25; Disable Device DC 25
EFFECTS
Trigger location Reset none
Effect 15-ft. fall to steps below (1d6 falling damage); DC 20 Reflex avoids

Pendulous Staircase CR 10
Type mechanical; Perception DC 26; Disable Device DC 30
EFFECTS
Trigger location Reset none
Effect swinging stairs (roll 1d20 + number of broken stairs; reference swinging stairs effect chart); DC (15 + number of broken stairs) Reflex avoids; multiple targets

Table: Pendulous Staircase Effects
Steps Broken
2–4 The stairs wobble, but create no hazardous effect.
5–8 The PCs are bounced against the wall, taking 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage.
9–12 A DC 12 Acrobatics check is required to move. More steps become unstable, and 1d4 –2 breakaway stairs snap out of place.
13–16 The PCs are struck by the pillar or slammed against the wall, taking 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage.
17–20 The PCs are thrown from the stairs, taking 1d6 points of damage for every 10 feet fallen.
21–24 The PCs are struck violently by the pillar or smashed against the wall, taking 4d6 points of bludgeoning damage.
25–28 A DC 20 Acrobatics check is required to move. More steps become unstable, and 1d4 breakaway stairs snap out of place.
29–32 The PCs are clobbered by the pillar, taking 8d6 points of bludgeoning damage.
33–34 The stairs collapse. The PCs fall from the stairs, taking 1d6 points of damage for ever 10 feet fallen. In addition, falling debris causes all PCs to take 8d6 points of damage (DC 15 Reflex save for half)

What I don't get is how these effects can happen, or any of it can, really. The steps seem to be connected to both the wall and the pillar, meaning it would theoretically hold up even if stairs were missing? How can the pillar slam against someone while it's attached to stairs they're on? How can it rock at all without breaking all the stairs on that side?

While the flavor of this trap really intrigues me, I just can't wrap my head around the specifics. Which is hugely problematic for running it, really. I was hoping one/some of you could shed some light on this thing? I guess I'd also accept other, equally wacky spiral stair based traps and hazards.

And does the conversation not matter? Like if I am screaming or just talking normally? Is the evangelist the only person who can yell?

So here's the thing. The evangelist (cleric archetype) has an ability called "Public Speaking", which reads as such:

"An evangelist gains Perform as a class skill. In addition, she is trained to project her voice with great skill and effect; the DC to hear her speak in difficult conditions is reduced by an amount equal to her class level plus her Charisma modifier (minimum 0)."

But I can't find any evidence that this check ever existed in the first place! So I'm looking to find two answers:

1) What's the DC for being heard in different situations?
2) Is this the only modifier that exists? Do you roll to yell or does the recipient roll to hear?

Short version: Can a creature mount a creature that is already mounted?

Long version: "Undersized mount" allows a creature to ride a mount of the same size as the rider. "Gang Up" allows a creature to be considered flanking as long as they are threatened by 3+ creatures with the feat. I'm looking to combine these, and do that thing from the little rascals, having three gnomes stacked on top of each other who all have sneak attack. Please tell me this is a possibility. I know it's possible to do it with just two ratfolk, but that can't be taken to the pathfinder society. Alternate idea: do it with wayang, who have no strength penalty. Maybe dwarf->wayang->halfling.

I think that Anti-paladins always win in terms of the scariest character possible due to aura of cowardice. An anti-paladin is apparently so scary that even creatures without the capability of fear are afraid of them. Oozes? Terrified out of their non-existent minds. Zombies, skeletons, and other non-sentient undead? Outa there. Adamantine golem? Considered its legs freshly oiled. Paladins? Pansies before the terrible, terrible aura of an anti-paladin. It's hard to get scarier than a being who can terrify a being incapable of fear.

While this is very true, the OP mentioned this being a Pathfinder Society character, so it might not be feasible. Which is too bad, because the antipaladin is just extremely cool.

As was mentioned before, Inquisitors and dirge bards have some very good options for intimidating. On that note, make sure you pick up "blistering invective", which allows you to intimidate all opponents within 30 ft.

I'm less sure how address the fact that scheming serpent folk disappear from the adventure path till about book 5. I guess what makes the most sense is to have serpent folk infiltrate some of the rivals in Racing to Ruin and then work at cross purposes with the PC's while they are in Saventh-Yhi.

Now, you have some options here! The first thing to mention is that there are serpentfolk in the center island in Savanth-Yhi. Sort of. There are degenerate serpentfolk left over from the conquest. They're being led by a rakshasa at the moment, but before that were being led by a Serpentfolk enchanter, who's the final encounter of book 2. It might be easiest to replace that rakshasa with another pureblood serpentfolk, who is perhaps leading his people to victory.

Another way to handle it is to have Serpentfolk replace the Maka Hika. In particular, to have a serpentfolk mind control fellow replace the intellect devourer. Perhaps his mind control is so powerful that it over time turns the victim's brain to ooze. He could be on his way to Ilmuria too, but perhaps he finds it easier to simply force them out of the hands of the party.

it seems like the best way to make the Saventh-Yhi portion fun is to play up the element of competition/rivalry with the other factions, so I'll make sure to emphasize that.

I'll have to disagree here. Of the 5 factions, I sort of forgot about two of them until it was too late to implement them, and the others just honestly haven't been too major. While the faction war is cool, I definitely suggest moving the focus to the inhabitants of the spears. They're much odder, and they really show off that idea of exploration. I personally took away the aspects that made it impossible to form alliances. My PCs are currently allied with the boggards and also the charau-ka.

The other big stumbling block from a plot point of view is how to motivate parts 4 and 5 without having the pathfinders already in Ilmuria. The PC's only find out about the portal because a pathfinders stumbles out of it and book 5 is all about rescuing a pathfinder.

Now, book 4 it turns out is pretty easy to deal with. Juliver explains everything, but if you open a door to a crazy underground section of the city, I guarantee the PCs will go in. And if you reveal there's a door and that the PCs have a small part (but not all parts) of the key to get through it, they'll do whatever it takes to find it. Especially since it was so heavily guarded. I gave the PCs a map that said "Ilmuria" on it before they entered there first vault (actually the vault of silence). And then I put "Ilmuria" on the door. They have no idea what Ilmuria actually is, but that's more than enough.

Now, the whole Endo Kline thing: Well, you saw my post. I have no idea how to do this without him. Here's what I have so far:

Have the Serpentfolk capture an NPC. It could be anyone, really. But preferably someone the PCs have grown to care about. It's not about book 5 being a rescue mission, but about book 5 being about rescuing someone who is arguably more important than the PCs ... Okay so I forgot about this post, but while I was walking around I came up with some ideas: Endo Kline could be a morlok. You could have the PCs discover that he needs rescuing halfway through the journey through Ilmuria. I'm revealing the Serpentfolk plan to revive Ydersius before they even make it to Ilmuria. Then, rescuing him would be of obvious importance, as he's the only one who knows the details to defeating them.

PS On a side note, I'm changing my morloks to svirfneblin, to contrast with my friend's gnome character.

Trip is a fun maneuver against anything with two legs, if you ask me. And there are lots of ways to stack bonuses for it (the hyena spirit skin comes to mind).

I haven't looked at the class since yesterday, but you can get mutagen access? mutagens are, if it's the same thing as the alchemist one, extremely powerful and useful.

Can you use martial versatility to pick up the powerful and situational mounted combat feats (I don't remember how it works)? Or the style feats? Improved critical with any weapon? Actually, any of the critical focus feats? Maybe proficiency with things like the net or bolas? Bludgeoneer?

Like I said, maybe I don't get how the power works, but I feel like it could be pretty cool and versatile. Or maybe not because I can't see it.

Maneuver training seems pretty fun to me. Tripping is great against anything with two legs. Sundering a wand or spell component pouch can be a life saver. Yes, situational, I know. But I mean, I feel like complaining about maneuver training is like complaining about jack of all trades. Sure it's not a good ability, but it's not like having it necessarily hurts you.

If you have a picture of the city, you can honestly just use the transparent paste tool in paint to put a grid in there (I just looked up hex grid online). I want to show an example but actually for some reason it is not working for me. Computers are dumb.

Ilmurea is already revealed. But what it is is still up for debate.

The more I read through the AP, the less I care for the Endo Kline subplot. To sum it up in bullet points:

• Discovery seems to be one of the biggest themes of the AP. From a deserted island to an ancient lost city to an even more ancient city located a thousand feet below, it seems like the whole thing is about the party being explorers in a foreign land.
• But then Juliver shows up at the end of Book 3, and reveals to the party that it's actually not about them, but about this guy Endo Kline, who found this even more ancient city. From here on out, it's about finding the gems to get into the vaults ASAP.
• When you do find the gems and go to Ilmurea, you end up needing to rescue Endo Kline. Which essentially means you no longer get to explore Ilmurea, because you're on a mission. It's this wonderful looking map, but it's not for the party, really.
• Once you rescue him, he reveals every detail about the city, including its hidden purpose, and the purpose of the villains, who you guys maybe didn't recognize as the villains yet, but they're important. After that the party doesn't really have even the illusion of agency. It almost feels like they're accesories rather than heroes.

Those are my gripes, really. And I figure the best way to handle it is to remove Endo Kline's subplot entirely. This has actually worked out so far! The group is collecting the crystals, even though they have no idea what they are for yet (they have one so far, but the one in the temple district). So removing Juliver has been a success so far.

But soon I'll be in trouble, because once they get into Ilmurea, I have no idea how to proceed. I figure they'll want to look around. I can't imagine them rushing in to save a figure they know nothing about. And skipping book 5 seems out of the question because it's neat and fun.

I've read reviews of people back in book 3 who just HATED that there was that Pathfinder who somehow found Saventh-Yhi before the PCs. I figure those people were at least as bugged about the Endo Kline arc, and I'm curious to hear how they pulled these things off in their own campaign.

Other things worth mentioning:

• I have a gnome prophecy, which a new member of our team will have. It's not complete yet, but it will specify some of the PCs roles while still being vague.
• That serpentfolk from book 2 technically survived, though I haven't touched him since. They know nothing of his goal, so he could theoretically be of use.

Hey all you guys, going into book 4: Did you guys have what's her name come out and tell the PCs the plot they missed? I didn't have her come up at all, I didn't like the idea that it took the PCs so out of their role as story-tellers, to be honest.

But this leaves me a little lost as to how to get everything moving. I'm wondering what you guys are doing, and how people are responding.

My group is currently in the beginnings of book 4. It's been a long time, maybe even 2 years or so. But when we started, I was the only player who knew the rules. Things have changed since then, obviously.

To be completely honest, late AP stuff is pretty hard and I'm losing steam fast. My group, once extremely excited for each new week, is getting a little bit flustered. It's perhaps my fault, but it's hard to say? Hopefully I can get them back into the spirit of things. Who knows?

I thought I had one I'd personally made, but the reality is I can't find it, and also it's so heavily modified from the original (I customize a lot of my encounters) that it might be useless. It's also in a hideous format.

Now me, I thought the vegepygmy area was just crying out for big, lumbering herds of giant basidironds. For some reason my players find it hilarious when their characters hallucinate; and why not?

I think the game needs a way bigger hallucination chart for them, with lots of different effects. The way it is currently the novelty will wear off after repeat effects start becoming really common.

That said, basidironds are amazing, especially when used to support more dangerous foes.

Lol I'm actually in the middle of building a Kephri warpriest for pfs who uses a sling staff. The problem is that you can't take rapid reload or juggle load for the thing and for some reason the halfling warslinger trait doesn't include the slingstaff. That last one in particular annoys me to NO END.

I was disappointed by this ruling as well. The way I've sort of been feeling better about it is that I've been imagining it as a melee weapon with a cool special ranged attack, rather than the other way around. I'm convinced that being able to do the switch hitter thing without sacrificing melee (all that much) is an excellent thing no matter what.

I once saw a guy who made a free-runner rogue in D&D 3.5. Had a decent set up of skills and feats that increased his movement. Let him jump really high and far, tumble and balance anywhere at all. Whoo!

But it's a game where people can fly. And his combat ability was basically null. Poor guy.

I've always thought that the Dorn-Dergar looked kind of cool. I think playing a Stonelord Paladin with one of them would be pretty neat.

Dorn-Dergar is also maybe one of the few exotic weapons that might be worth the feat. A reach weapon that can also hit adjacent foes. And with an additional feat (maybe worth it for fighters?) you can make it a one-handed weapon. The only one-handed reach weapon, if I remember correctly.

I haven't seen the halfling sling-staff in use either, but I suspect that's due to the low number of halfling warrior-types in most campaigns.

Sling-staff is also a pretty solid weapon. Probably not worth the feat, but it's not bad at all. One handed ranged weapon... You load it with a move action like a crossbow, but if you're a strength person, it deals far more damage. Feats like weapon focus apply to your melee options (you're essentially using a club) AND your ranged options. Plus weapon enhancements on the weapon would apply to both so long as it's a legal enhancement. Hell, I'm going to say it: On a fighter, I'd consider the sling-staff well worth the feat. The versatility gained is rad and good.

There was once a time where brass knuckles dealt the damage dice of a monk's fists.

That time has passed and they no longer work that way.

A monk with brass knuckles deals 1d3 just like a fighter using brass knuckles. It's the latter of your two options.

Why use brass knuckles? Things like unarmed strike and particular damage reductions, mainly. That said, the temple sword is a monk weapon that deals 1d8 and is far superior for any of these purposes.

In Pathfinder, the archer who repeatedly steps 5 feet away from a fighter gets to fire just as many arrows as his foe gets to punch him.

The 5-foot step is inherently really weird and nonsensical. There's a spell that lets a spellcaster 5-foot step twice, implying it's not about the distance of movement at all but the inherent type of motion.

If I'm a gnome monk flanked by two goblins with daggers, and I flurry, I can attack both of them. a gnome's armspan is in no way the 10-15 feet I'd need to reach both squares. Therefor I have to assume the gnome is moving his body to make both attacks. He may not be leaving his square, but he's certainly moving by necessity. Probably as much as 5 ft. Can he five foot step after this?

I'm a colossal titan, and I'm fighting an ant. I can attack two times because of my sword and two slams. The ant also can because it has a bite and a slam or something. I can full attack if I move 5 feet but not if I move 10. I'm 100 ft tall, and stepping only 5 would look look really silly. The ant actually has this same restriction of 5 ft, but it takes the ant 20 seconds just to make that 5 ft. of movement, the equivalent of 3 rounds.

The 5-foot step is a tactical idea, and not a logical combat thing. It's designed to give ranged attackers and spellcasters a way out of the reach of the melee types, allow melee types to gain limited mobility while still dealing optimal damage, and make flanking and maneuvering around obstacles more ideal.

There will never be a real agreement on this argument in anything but RAW because the 5-foot step is nonsense.

I have a confession to make:

When my current group first started playing, none of them were familiar with the stats and how they interacted. They hadn't looked online to see the best ways to optimize stats.

So I told them, "order your stats from most important to least important" and told them what each stat did for their particular characters.

I then used the elite array. And honestly I think it's sort of been a godsend. The monk's stat grouping is a little less than ideal for him, but they're roughly balanced. The wizard had to work to get a really high int score. The difference between MAD and SAD became immediately less apparent when people weren't able to point buy their stats into the ideal places. It's true that builds got more similar, but when it's your first character you don't have any comparison points and really don't notice.

Whenever I did 4d6 minus lowest d6, I ended up feeling bad for players and letting them reroll if their stats ended up too low. Inevitably, everyone's stats ended up ridiculous. This was problematic and limiting.

My own first rolled stat character was a mystic theurge to be who had 17 15 10 10 10 8 as stats (no racial modifiers). The point buy here ended up at 27. Apparently near average, but it was a nightmare. My stats really limited my options at the low level we played the game at.

I see the value of the roll system, especially for shorter, laid back games. There's a whimsy to it, and it's fun to run high stats and sometimes fun to run bad stats. However, I find any dice roll that effects your character concept in a permanent manner is something that sort of puts me on edge and seems unnecessarily punishing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frdHMla551A&feature=youtu.be

One thing about NPCs playing smart is that it forces PCs to play smart too. And not just smart, but calculating and cold. People are motivated by more than victory, but by emotions, beliefs (false or otherwise), inhibitions, etc. There is a large camp of people who believe that roleplaying shouldn't end once battle starts, to put it one way. There are a couple articles I found a while back that talk about it:

http://www.giantitp.com/articles/XbsQgS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html

http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307KmEm4H9k6efFP.html

I used zen archer for a wisdom based arcane archer once. Zen Archer and empyreal sorcerer. Was a good time in theory.

So there's something that's been irking me about the familiar, and mostly it has to do with its skill ranks. Let me be more specific:

My group has 4 individuals, including a half-elf gunslinger with full ranks in perception and skill focus in it. It also has a monk with full ranks in stealth, and a bard with decent ranks in intelligence skills. The party also has a human witch with a faerie dragon familiar, who's invested a tiny bit in all of these.

When it comes to perception, the faerie dragon has a higher score than the gunslinger, without as much investment into it. What's more, the witch, by virtue of playing both human and dragon, can roll perception twice when situations arise. Because of this, the witch virtually always gets the higher roll.

This is true for stealth for sure, where the familiar completely outclasses the monk in a lot of ways.

On knowledge, the bard is doing pretty good still. But he's focused on it. Even then, the witch tends to do better from time to time simply by virtue of getting to roll twice on account of being two dudes.

I feel like I'm doing something wrong. I've never seen familiars addressed as a "must have" for knowledge builds, or for a good perception or good stealthy character. But here, it strikes me as the best possible tool for any skill based on receiving info (ie appraise, sense motive, knowledge, perception, spellcraft).

Am I doing something wrong, or have I just underestimated the value of the familiar? Or am I exaggerating, and this isn't as big a deal as I thought?

I'm a big fan of Council of Thieves. It's an urban campaign, which is cool. It has some very oddball scenarios to roleplay through. The Pathfinder Lodge is a really cool dungeon.

Well, closing your eyes is always a start. Simply averting your gaze is also a good start. But, keep in mind these medusa vulnerabilities:

- Gaze attacks work off fortitude. Do you have any ways to boost your fortitude saves? If so, utilize them. Remember that anything that boosts constitution boosts fort saves.

- Gaze works with a range of 30 ft. Chances are, wizard Medusa can fly with magic, but if not, simply keeping in the air elimiinates her chance to use the gaze at all. This said, keep outside of 30 ft however possible. Consider spells such as shadow anchor and entangle. The simple items like the net and tanglefoot bag might even see some use here, though it's not recommended.

- Lowering Medusa's charisma score will lower the power of her gaze attack as well.

- Blind grappling isn't the worst idea in the world.

The gloomblade is the real overpriced weapon. A +2 short sword costs 500 less gp. And sure the gloomblade gives blind-fight in deeper darkness, but it's a nonmagical 1d6 weapon whenever the sun blade does its thing.

Keep in mind the sunblade is a +4 weapon vs evil and slices through the undead like a knife through undead butter. There's a good chance your player will keep that sunblade for a looong, long time, but that he'll switch out the gloomblade pretty early on, maybe keeping it whenever he really needs access to blindfight.

Vivisectionist just seems right. You've got mutagens to boost your strength or dexterity score.

And while this may sound odd, you have enlarge person. This incredibly non-rogue power grants you an additional +2 to your grapples AND increases your reach, a surprisingly useful grappling skill.

Savage maw gives you a bite attack while grappling.

Animal Aspect (gorilla) gives you a +4 to grapple checks.

You can always grapple with access to "defensive shock".

There are plenty of polymorph spells that will aid your grappling. Alter self and giant form I will allow you to carry a weapon still for that grapple bonus. Form of the beast has some obvious forms of up to huge size.

I think I'd take this opportunity to focus on roleplay opportunities. You still have plenty of time to mess up your build, after all.

If you're that overpowered, it's time to start giving back, is what I mean. Start taking suboptimal skill ranks, unusual feats; be the character you never had the leg room in your build to create.

Give the loot to your allies, lower that power gap! Consider taking future levels in something like fighter, delaying the power of your summons for a little while. Perhaps because you do not use them so often they grow more fragile?

I figure so long as touch attacks count your shield as a part of you, your boots should count as a part of you as well.

I'm going to suggest you have a backup plan for if this will save does fail. There are three more individuals in this group at least, no? Figure out a worst case scenario as a group now rather than later.

A merciful amulet of mighty fists would be an interesting way to do this. Turn weretiger, suddenly your attacks are nonlethal.

I find time the worst mystery. I couldn't find anything on it particularly good.

That said, I could be wrong! Can someone enlighten me on this one?

If you aren't planning on being a mounted paladin, I suggest oracle of battle. Yes it's boring, but you get surprising charge, which allows you to move your speed as an immediate action.

Now if you're a mounted paladin, don't forget the paladin mount is one of the strongest companions around. Try and get some "self" oracle spells and throw them on your horse. Righteous Might sticks out to me right now. If you could get alter self or something of the sort, your horse could theoretically be a humanoid fighter with you.

There are size restrictions on some specific things, including the fast mount/dismount action, and for what constitutes a "suitable mount" for the purposes of avoiding a -5 penalty to Ride checks. I don't know of any rule that prohibits a Medium creature from mounting another Medium creature. *deliberate pause*

Of course, if that's a problem, the wizard could be a halfling.

Edit: If you insist on using a bull rush, there's the complication that you need the actual outcome of the roll to adjudicate a bull rush, not just whether it exceeded the target's CMD. For lack of a better mechanic, I'd treat the allied target as helpless (Dex = 0, +4 bonus to melee attack rolls against) against the bull rush but still require a roll; that should keep things running pretty smoothly.

The main benefit I see to bull rush rather than mounting or picking up is that :

- picking something up is a move action, meaning you can't move (or charge) to the target, pick him up, and move him in the same round like you could theoretically do with bull rush.

- Mounting requires ride checks to stay on, and DC 20 ride checks to quickly mount or dismount. The benefit I see to bull rush is that it spends the monk's actions but not the wizards actions. Also, with the required move action mounting, the monk would have to wait a second turn to actually move. This is good for faster movement, but it's not really helpful if you need movement immediately.

I'm imagining the scene where the kid is in traffic and the adult runs in and pushes him out of the way at the last second. By displacing the child, the life is spared, and it's dramatic and instantaneous.

On that note, you could combine this with surprising charge to devastating effect, I imagine.

Brf wrote:

Have the monk pick up and carry the wizard.

This.

Alternately, have the wizard mount the monk.

Wait wait wait. How does this work? I thought you needed to be a higher size category to do this?

Fair enough. New scenario: The situation is reversed. The monk needs to move just the slightest bit and the wizard needs to do it. The wizard probably has the strength to shove the monk forward a bit. In real life, it'd probably knock the monk prone. But the wizard does not have the strength necessary to lift the monk up.

So, scenario: The wizard needs to move a certain amount this turn. He takes all his movement but it's still not enough. My monk has a higher strength score, and sees that the wizard needs to move a little bit still. So my monk suggests bull rushing or repositioning the wizard with his monk action. I can't see why this wouldn't be possible. Someone pushing a more vulnerable person out of the way of an oncoming attack is a common thing in media.

But what rules resolve it? Do we need to use the wizard's CMD, therefor assuming the wizard is resisting and pushing back? Can Combat Maneuver defense be an automatic failure just as saves or AC can?

Taking away the magic shop and the item creation feats work wonders for any group. If you really want to go low magic, you can also ban the wizard, cleric, sorcerer, oracle, druid, summoner and witch classes (I think that's all the full casters?) It might seem like this kills any magic at all, but the bard, inquisitor, and magus are splendid casters in their own right and can handle the role of the wizard or cleric just fine, is the way I see it.

NPCs aren't honestly too difficult to make: I suggest the following ->

Make a human NPC of each of the 4 basic archetypes (fighter, mage, healer, rogue). When your group fights NPCs, these are the guys they're fighting. If you're running elves? Remember elves are immune to sleep effects and ghoul paralysis. Fighting against some orcs? Play up their aggressive attitudes. Call their weapons different things even though they're stated the same. Most people will never realize anything has happened.

I've found monsters are generally more interesting for PC battles than high class level NPCs. Many will disagree with me, but... PCs are made with abilities that will never serve them on the battlefield. Bardic knowledge, for instance. It's rough keeping track of all the completely worthless information, and monsters don't really have that flaw. They also come with pre-written CRs, so it's never too difficult to make encounters.

If you're not against spending money, Hero Lab isn't the worst way to make NPC generation simpler. Often enough you can use that program, select a monster, and, if it isn't tough enough, add on extra hit dice or the "advanced" template until it is.

Within my group is a generally unspoken agreement (though it was at one point spoken) that team players will be more likely to see things happen for them. If a player hordes items, they should expect to see those items fall into the hands of people who are more likely to share, etc etc. If he can't handle not getting the lion's share, there's a possibility your group needs to learn to handle loot differently. "Finders keepers" isn't a good method of dealing with loot in the RPG world, I've found.

But it's not enough to tell your player to play nice, and it's definitely not enough to take experience from him. If he gets mad at you, it's likely because he feels he DESERVES the experience and loot. If you take it from him, he'll resent you for it, and feel you're personally against him. If the other players agree with your assessment, they're ganging up on him, as far as he will see it. In game punishment won't work, and out of game punishment won't work either short of kicking him out.

The only way this will work is to handle rewards in an entirely different manner. Of note, it sounds like you reward different gold and XP to different players for different characters? Maybe based on performance? Personally I'd consider splitting those rewards evenly. Unevenly split exp causes all sorts problems, I've found. Most people who play want to be the hero, and it sucks when a single player falls behind or ahead for everyone else involved. I've found in my experience that it breeds more arguments than anything other than direct backstabbing. And since exp is abstract and meta, it'll feel a lot more personal than exp or a roll of the dice. Be careful about it!

Hey Mr. McCreary, so I told you I'd show you my finished Grugonoth Project, and so, here I did!

He stares the group down. Later on he'd end up punching one unconscious and throwing another at a third player.

A somewhat more sensible angle.

Contrary to some opinions, book 3 has been my favorite thus far. A huge collection of awesome ideas and potential for reinterpretations, loose enough to really let the players be the proper stars.

It's been a long time since anyone's talked about this book, it seems. Well never fear, Shimnimnim's here to give it a look!

The Gorilla King

• Someone mentioned that the Gorilla King should be stronger, given his legendary status. I agree with this wholeheartedly. Therefor, I'm replacing his battle with that of a champion, like so many others have. Luckily for me, I have this guy still ready. Grugonoth survived my last game and escaped, and as such I'll level him up and let the party go at him. It doesn't quite seem right to have this section of the game be one on one, if only because it will maybe take longer than is fun.
• I took Endo Kline out of the campaign. I didn't like that it took away the discovery aspect of the story. So I'm allowing the PCs to figure things out on their own. Luckily for me, I've got a bard super scholar, a follower of a somewhat cult-like vision of Old-Mage Jatembe, and a huge city and 7 vaults to fill with clues
• Clearly the location of the First Vault is pretty important because it contains the entrance to Ilmurea. But I feel like the other vault locations aren't as big a deal! I realized recently I can move the location of the other vaults without saying anything or losing anything, really.

I have players roll every dice roll, with the exception of rolls the PCs are unaware of, particularly opposed skill checks.

For instance, my PCs take 10 away from their AC, and I add 10 to my attack rolls. Whenever my NPC attacks the PC, the player rolls a d20 and adds it to their new AC. Likewise, I add 10 to NPC saves and the PCs subtract 10 and add d20 to their save DCs.

The pros to this is that the players feel like they're more actively involved in defense. Especially for our defensively focused monk. The other pro is that a player rolling a 1 (the equivalent of the opponent rolling a 20), doesn't feel like they had no choice in this scenario (even though it's the same choice.)

The con is that all the dice are in the open, and also that effects like poison, with effects that last more than a single turn, get sort of confusing.

There is a description of sightless

Quote:

Sightless (Ex) A sea anemone is blind and is not affected by any effect that relies on sight, such as gaze attacks or blindness.

-- Bestiary 3 page 238

This is the only creature in the game that has the sightless quality.

If this is the case, then the argument for sightless referring to a defined condition would have two implications.

- The writers designed a spell to be immune to a specific ability and not the option of being unable to see. They wrote sightless but not naturally sightless, after all.

- They then proceeded to give this ability to only the sea anemone. The Riptide Horror is, according to its description, also sightless, but this creature does not have the special quality either, and was not given it in any errata. In fact, no creature, no matter how blind, was given the condition.

- The Giant anemone was written two years after the core rulebook was.

- If it refers to the creature condition of sightless, we have to assume the writers were referring to a condition that at the time did not exist, and then only really think it was useful for the sea anemone. Sightless creature can still refer to a creature without sight. No where does it say naturally sightless and it seems silly to suggest it does anywhere.

When considering the matter, you must keep in mind the principal of Argumentum ad Absurdum. If the blindness caused by the spell causes you to no longer be subject to the spell, it breaks the spell. Given that there are alternate explanations that adequately cover the topic, this cannot be the correct interpretation because it fundamentally causes the spell to not work.

If I'm reading this correctly, the spell is instantaneous, and the "see text" refers to "look, the effects of the spell have durations."

Here's the thing. If you look at the sightless descriptor attached to the sea anemone, it states:

A sea anemone is blind and is not affected by any effect that relies on sight, such as gaze attacks or blindness.

So according to the descriptor, the sea anemone is immune to blindness and is also blind. This seems like a paradox, but it isn't necessarily. The sea anemone is immune to blindness because you can't blind something that is blind.

To put it another way, if I eat a sandwhich, the sandwich is suddenly immune to being eaten because there's no longer a sandwich to eat; no matter how hard I try I cannot eat that sandwich again. This sandwich's newfound immunity to being eaten does not put it back on my plate.

A blind person could be immune to the blast of color spray because he was already blind. But becoming blind doesn't retroactively take away the things you have seen and the effects they had. If you drop your weapon because someone used "heat metal", you are suddenly not holding a metal object. This does not make you immune. You can't retroactively gain immunity to a previous effect.

I know this is a little different because the spell's effects have a duration other than instantaneous, but the color burst that caused it IS gone. No one's arguing that blindness makes you immune to the effects of the spell. People are arguing that blindness makes you immune to the actual trigger that causes these effects in the first place.