Sloanzilla's page

462 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 462 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Direct damage: There are level ranges where the melee doesn't QUITE do enough damage to kill the mooks- but a direct damage spell + martial attacks is just enough to clear most of the board. I've seen direct damage spells put to good use multiple times.

Combat healing: My arguments have already been made- not optimal in general does not mean not used in many specific cases

Grease: Potential combat winner. Lots of things have low reflex saves and grease disarms.

Maybe it is a special ragequit avoidance house rule

Good module, btw, I've modified less than I've ever modified (toned down the weather just a tad, basically)

When did you guys let people buy more expensive items (plate armor, etc.) in the first two modules? Both towns have a 500 gp limit. I was thinking about Lady Argentina sending a runner to at least let them order some masterwork plate, etc., before they go through the portal. Or is the low shop availability part of the game's theme?

so roll a D6 then? lol thanks

running this tonight-
Does it snow the entire time they cross into the "snow line"? in Taldor? Or just now and then?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Vampire Touch just because it is often poorly used in Adventure Paths. There seems to be a tendency to give it to mid level BBEGs to use once they are losing in a combat. If a BBEG is vampire touching while outnumbered 4 to 1 he is prolonging the inevitable.

20 people marked this as a favorite.

Wait, silent image and enlarge person are being listed as "worthless spells"?

It is opposite day already? Why not throw in haste for good measure?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

stray goblin arrow :( he didn't get very far

Thanks- I guess that makes sense, since otherwise bards and rangers might count too for casting divine spells.

Specifically, does an antipaladin smiting a lawful good inquisitor get the double damage bonus for the first round?

They do not have "aura" so my thoughts are no.

The 2nd monster encounter of the entire Reign of Winter campaign has like a 50% chance of killing the party's arcane caster- so it gets my vote.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh yeah, and Vancian casting. In fact. That's the top one.

Alignment restriction
Class rules and restrictions
Unbalanced classes
Unbalanced races
Experience cost for crafting items
Experience penalties for multi-classing
Squishy wizards
Feat taxes
2 skill points per level
The 3.5 skill system
Healing in combat

Basically, anything in the opposite direction of the "everyone is great at everything" approach.

old school- yo

I'll follow the original instructions and not defend the alignment system, though I do like the alignment system (and even restrictions!)

Totally 100% agree on the natural armor thing. Natural armor seems to be based on level, not "how tough is your skin."

Armor class isn't really that important, so there's really no reason why armor has to match CR. You could have low AC stuff that is super powerful.

We tend to ignore encumbrance rules, keeping track of arrows rules, most material component rules. Lately we've been phoning in spellcraft/identify rules too. On, and we skip the -1 per five feet perception thing too, which does cause problems. I think we'll probably move into a houseruled -5 if kinda far, -10 if way far type rule.

But it is not a question of Good Act A and Evil Act B balancing each other out.

It's Good Result A being one byproduct of Evil Act B.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to triple down on the argument that it being "for the greater good" is a rationalization.

I'm still in the "it's evil" camp, but the argument that it is not significantly different than numerous other "not evil" actions such as charm person is a good one.

I also disagree with the statement that lots of little evil does not add up. In fact, lots of little evil implies a deliberate decision to do evil over a long period of time, which I believe to be very much as significant as one evil act of the moment.

Cool character concept, either way. I also don't fault the paladin for disliking it. Sounds like everyone is roleplaying well, and either an alignment switch or lack-of-alignment switch could be defended. (Though I still vote evil!)

Huge, huge fan of the inquisitor.

Not overpowered, but you always have something to do- be it a roleplay event, combat or skill/stealth event. You are not stuck to code like a paladin, but you can still make yourself fairly intense and memorable.

Judgments are kind of a fun dynamic that give you a little bit of versatility too- especially when you combine them with a decent spell set and bane.

Shrug, ghosts in Skyrim are constantly thanking me for freeing them from their corrupted mortal flesh, and Skyrim ain't exactly sparkly.

I like my damnation mythos to have some culpability, but I suppose in a world with true resurrection there needs to be some very high levels of bad stuff happens to you. Still, if a guy was mind-washed into evil, he isn't really evil.

Being a good god herald does seem like a poor job duty, however. You are just immortal enough to not be exempt from the "no direct messing with mortals" rule, but not immortal enough to be able to handle the big dudes. It's like beating up someone's baby brother.

I wonder if a fantasy world could have some sort of distinction between free-willed corruption and involuntary corruption.

I feel kind of bad for the herald. There he was, doing his herald thing, but being a good herald in Pathfinder means that you have a huge target on your back, since it is an apparently acceptable way you can snub a god w/o breaking the rules. So he gets kidnapped and tortured and finally, after his heart gets ripped out, he turns evil.

Circumstances are pretty unforgiving in the Pathfinder world. His turning evil was not really his fault, but more the fault of extreme trauma and some magical dark ritual. Yet if he dies, he still gets the evil punishment. This is pretty common- there are all kinds of formerly-good Whispering Tyrant playthings that are doomed for eternity. This is not the same as a free-willed being opting to take evil actions due to his or her own interests.

Is that somehow a requirement of fantasy, or could you have a world where beings, upon death, are more or less absolved of evil actions that were not realistically their fault?

Oh for crying out loud. Do you also inform people that it technically is not actually raining cats and dogs? And really, two brony posts is, by any definition that matters, a fest.

My inquisitor with a greataxe and enlarge person loves it.

A second attack would be at -7 (-5 + -2 due to furious focus) and we fight a lot of midlevel hitpoint guys I can just take out with one good vital strike (flanking and using bane helps too). I'm sure it is not optimal if I do the math, but it is working well enough for me as a skirmishing scout character.

It probably has something to do with our current GM's type of encounter selection too.

but don't you think that optimization can narrow the options of roleplaying?

If every single inquisitor has the exact same build and stat array (complete with a 7 dump stat)- that is pretty heavily restricting the variance of what type of inquisitor you will see.

You certainly can have two characters with identical builds roleplay differently, but there is a little bit of stat ignoring to it (behold! I am the personable 7 charisma character!)

I certainly agree with you that it is not a spectrum with roleplaying on one end and optimization on the other, but I disagree that they never, ever, overlap.
At the very least, relaxing on the optimization side of things frees up additional roleplaying options.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
noretoc wrote:
Nox Aeterna wrote:

Well , as long as the guy made himself useful , i dont mind.

But if someone comes up with some crazy concept that does not help and wants to be protected during fights ... well , he better pray , cause there is 0% chance im risking myself for him.

Better dead and making a more useful char next time.

Here is my take. I want you to play what is going to be most fun. If I had to pick between two new players.. One with a fighter that kills everything in one round. (Oh look you got him again, yea we beat the bad guy and get the foozle) or a player playing a gnome chef with no redeeming combat or social value, but has everyone laughing their buts off all night, then good bye fighter. I'm not in it for the win. There are video games for that. I here for the good time with friends or strangers, and the person that is best at that gets to be at my table, even if they can't make a character that manages to tie his shoes right.

If your your playing a drunken paladin that drops his sword at the climax of a battle, but starts the whole sweaty palm joke that has us all almost off our chairs by the end of the night your good. no optimization needed. if all 40 hours I put into my character are like that I'm having an awesome time. Even if I have to go through 20 characters cause they keep dying.

Posting again because I love this post. Bring on the gnome chefs and have fun.

As other people have noted, I see overoptimization online (here) a lot more than I see it in actual games, though I don't do Pathfinder Society play.

Should I be nervous that the thread discussing an invasion of the demon infested Worldwound turned into a big old Brony fest?

Because Asmodeus is a smart dude and having an order "just" a breath from LE is more likely to draw in people and be a bit more subtle than going flat out card carrying evil?

I think LE sort of subverting LN would probably be very likely in a world where alignments actually existed.

Another vote here for inquisitor: Always something to do- in social settings, skill challenges and combat

Not overpowered at high levels, but certainly not underpowered

This thread wound up being a good read, and it is also unintentionally hilarious.

It feels kind of like someone bringing up a family divorce over Thanksgiving. You can practically sense people tensing up and waiting to pounce if they believe a line is crossed.

Since we are focusing on the good- a deal maker for me is that I really, really like Paizo's customer service. I had a question about the first AP I purchased and the guy who wrote the darn thing answered it within 30 minutes. I can't compare to every other customer services, but I can say that I've been pleased enough with what I've received that I'm inclined to stick around.

I'd probably suggest an overall more neutral party than good party.

immortality via dying and going to heaven is actually not true in the Pathfinder world. You become a petitioner and some of the risks of mortality are gone, but there is always the chance of some evil adventuring party or daemonic invasion or whatever.

Even if only .001 percent of good petitioners chillin in the happy afterlives are killed each year, they are still effectively mortal over time. Sticking with the system immortality is overrated.

I've always wanted to actually read the tunnels and trolls material, I only remember one video game

good picks

I'm also a fan of calcific touch, but only if you can get reach.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

lol, Order Of The Stick fan? Me too!

AD: I agree that the MMO comparison has been frequently used as a negative, but I don't think it needs to be. But if that comparison has been corrupted, then so be it. Point being, 4.0's attempt to draw a new audience while keeping the gaming system's core audience loyal had mixed results, to say the least. An actual market/business review of what went well and what backfired would be an interesting read.

Sebastian: My discussion is no more or less "edition skirmishish" than every other aspect of this thread.

um, someone asked me a question, which I answered, in a way, I might note, that specifically said I don't consider the difference to be a positive or negative

I don't see the assertion that it appears they were trying to reach a broader video game market to be at all a bad thing. In fact, it would be a very logical decision on their part.

I have no way of proving this assertion to be true. It was an opinion I formed after reviewing the game, based on the creation of things like elite monsters and minions, rechargeable powers, healing surges, set classes (and a focus on balancing those classes with matching mechanics) and so forth. It (the similarity between 4.0 and MMOs) IS a commonly expressed opinion held by people who fall on all points of the 3.X/4.0 spectrum (including those who love 4.0).

I disagree that such an assertion would even require evidence of a deliberate attempt (ex: a quote from publisher specifically saying to make the game more MMO friendly) but creativity does not take place in a void. Any new game system is going to consider what works and what does not work in previous game systems, so it is very likely (and, in fact, even probable) had some MMO concepts in their heads while creating the game.

Again, I'm not presenting this as an accusation. In fact, I would consider introducing a pen and paper game with elements that MMO players would find familiar to be a very reasonable design move on someone attempting to broaden their customer base.

I do think there is significant evidence to say that the style of 4.0 certainly feels (to most people) to be MMO inspired, without there being evidence as to whether that was a deliberate or simply a subconscious intent.

The introduction of 4.0 WOULD actually be an interesting topic for a paper about product marketing.

You have a niche hobby (gaming) and you want to expand that niche hobby by simplifying and introducing elements that might appeal to people associated with a broader (but associated) niche hobby (video gaming).

I'd love to sometime read a clinical, objective analysis of 4.0 related to balancing efforts to preserve your core customers while reaching out to new customers, and what variables are involved. (For example, you could argue that gaming customers are comparatively loyal/stubborn about certain elements).

I WANT to derail this thread into 4.0 bashing, but you guys have already said not to do that :(, so I won't

ahh thanks, had a group dispute that there was a difference between identifying something and knowing details about it.

It's not related to monster lore, but I could almost see a wizard not really knowing what X monster is by sight, but once you tell him it is X monster he could tell you all sorts of stuff about it.

Is the monster lore bonus included in the actual act of identifying a creature, or just in identifying the creature's strengths and weaknesses once you know what it is?

For example, a bearded devil pops up. Does an inquisitor get a monster lore bonus to a knowledge planes roll to actually figure out it is a bearded devil, or does he/she only get the bonus if the party knows it is a bearded devil and is trying to figure out that it is immune to fire, etc.?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I did a home brew monster called a "beerholder" once. Everyone correctly agreed that was a really lame idea.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

when I rule the universe I'm going to say nuts to copyright law and let them have beholders and stuff

1 person marked this as a favorite.

don't forget Djinn Mustard

First books of Kingmaker and Wrath probably ARE bad examples. Both of those modules have specific plot/mechanical motivations for making the first few levels easy.

I was not aware of Wrath being 20 point buy- thought it was still 15.

Serpent's Skull, Carrion Crown and the everything is cold APs are all not especially kind to low level guys.

The Denziens of Leng seem sort of Gith like as well.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

this is clearly an issue of the crossbow industry needing better lobbyists

serpentfolk are so very yuan-ti-like that our group sometimes forgets to call them serpentfolk.

First go after the casters does not prove they are overpowered, it proves that you use cavalry to take out artillery.

I'm assuming the baggage mules thing was a joke and not a horrible attempt of logic. Four people (and no baggage mules) are attempting to kill you. You logically go after the one who is best at killing you (or crowd-controlling you) and easiest to kill.

The actual fair counter to this argument is that a mirror-imaged, stoneskinned arcane caster is not the easiest of the group to kill.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It makes no sense, but I really want to say "I've got your giant gulf in system mastery right here!"- so I did

still iconic as heck though. Plus, gauth!

mind flayers are a close second. Aboleth are not cutting the mustard for me as a replacement. Too fishy.

1 to 50 of 462 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>