Snoring Rock's page

I have an on-going campaign set in the Wilderlands of High Fantasy and I have been using my vast library of D20/3.5 published materials. I do however, own many of the original Judges Guild modules. I want to use them, but they were written for OD&D or AD&D.

Look, let's be frank; those system are very stat-light in comparison. I am a lazy GM. Does anyone here have much experience converting older system stuff on the fly? Is it a game-breaker? Is there a set method for easy/quick conversions?

Thanks,

Ok, so basically, the minimum CL to create the item is what I use as the CL when a character tries to identify the item using identify or detect magic. If they roll under that (plus all modifiers) then they fail to identify the item. Do I have the right? Gee it has been a long time. Thanks,

Ok, it has been a long time since I played Pathfinder. When identifying magic items, do you set the CR to the level needed to create the item? Help?

On the subject of Judges Guild and the Wilderlands, I will be running a Pathfinder adventure based on the Dwarven King taking his home back from the great red wyrm, Analegorn and his young, at GenCon 2014. Look for it!

I am the Dwarven King!

Considering everything, that is very good of you. Wish you guys could work together on projects like this. Hail King of Thunderhold!

Thanks!

The rage power states that while raging the barbarian grows a pair of horns and gains a gore attack. This attack is a primary attack (unless the barbarian id using weapons in which it becomes a secondary attack) and is made at the barbarians full attack base bonus (-5 if it is a secondary attack).

Does that mean that after an attack with a weapon and a cleave, that the barbarians still gets an additional gore attack the same round?

So in the core rules there is a barbarian rage power called animal fury. Can that be used in the same round with cleave? In effect the barbarian would attack with a weapon and if the land the blow, get to strike again with the cleave. Then as a third attack they use animal fury bite attack for another 1d4.

Is it the same for using lesser fiend totem but 1d8 from the APG?

Bob III has been working very hard to make things happen. The stats will in fact be Pathfinder, but I would assume shortened for the most part. You have the choice of JG Universal format or Pathfinder. And, if you are a Tegel Manor fan, keep the faith. That could very well happen.

I run the Wilderland using Pathfinder and find that it is perfect. You can still get the out of print materials on PDF at Driverthru RPG.

The City State of the Invincible Overlord in Pathfinder, is up on Kickstarter. Find Judges Guild on face book, there is a link in the discussion. 13 days left. They are offering the city state written for Pathfinder and they are laying the maps out all over again in color.

It has been a long time! I have been playing C&C but have become dissatisfied. Too many inconsistencies in the rules. I want rules light but I want the rules to be coherent too. I have the GMG so I will give it a look. I agree about the NPC Guide having too many exotic PCs.

I think it is just matter of me being careful with the magic items and the crafting thing not getting out of hand. Either that or I will just have to up the magic level to match the general tenor of Pathfinder adventures, extra books, and paths. I hate to go through the book powering things down.

@Kolkoroni, I agree with you for the most part. I think free cantrips and channeling are power creep though. But the cleric needed fixing and Jason had to keep it backward compatible. All in all, you are right. I really dig your take on magic items. I want to use the name idea and how you make it a part of the character. Very cool ideas. I am feeling better about this possible return to PF.

What I miss from Paizo, since going to C&C, that you do not get from TLG is the sheer size of the peanut gallery of ideas and the excellent customer service. And well, the really cool buttons at GenCon.

Yes, you got it. I want all classes, wizards, clerics, druids, etc. I just got tired of magic items on every street corner. That came with 3.x not PF. Though in order to fix a few things, there was some power creep that PF added. The modules (3.x) just had a lot of them built in. I had players with one magic item, then finding a new one and then switching them out. Sure you will have that, but not that often. I want a campaign that has this flavor I give it, but within the bounds I set.

Oh, I love having potions and scrolls easily obtainable. There are all kinds of tricksters in the market place peddling cures and potions. You must have the witch hovel where some old warty crude wrinkle will brew you up some concoction or another. I just do not like the "Ye olde +4 sword maker".

Last time I played, that was kind of whre things were. I started looking for something more rules light. I love C&C but the rules have to be tweaked a great deal. I get tired of house-ruling everything. And when something does not work I end up looking to PF for the answer anyway. I get a headache thinking of all the feats and such, so I am easing myself back in. I want an easy game to run with consistency in rules. No one has done that yet, not in my estimation. So I am looking at PF again. There is rules consistence with PF.

I have been out of circulation for awhile. I played Pathfinder during the playtest and then ran a campaign in the Judges Guild Wilderlands setting until 2010. The Wilderlands and Pathfinder are a good coupling. Anyway, I was at GenCon in 2010 and stumbled upon Castles and Crusades. It is a rules light system and runs very smoothly even at high levels. I have had a 3-year long run with a great gaming group however, one is taking a job and is moving, and another is moving across the country for other pursuits. A third player, who is a younger guy, plays with us because his buddy does, but he would prefer Pathfinder. I believe we will lose him as soon as his friend leaves. That is cutting my group down to two players.

The trouble is, there are few gamers out there who play C&C. Most of them are playing Pathfinder and getting them to try something else is difficult. They feel like they are losing options. Anyway, that puts me in the position of having to find new players and in order to do that I may have to go back to Pathfinder.

I am what you would call old school. I have been playing D&D since 1978. My campaigns are mostly low to medium magic. I do not like having magic stores and places in town for buying magic items and I do not like the crafting skills in 3.x or Pathfinder. It makes magic way too accessible; almost no longer a rare thing.

Has anyone here run similar games with Pathfinder and is there an easier way to come up with NPC’s that are balanced and level appropriate without many hours of work? The NPC Guide, is it worth the price? Will it fill in the gaps? Can you run a low magic game with Pathfinder?

I ordered a bunch of PDF's, which I am already enjoying. I also ordered a hard copy NPC Codex. Can I cancel the NPC Codex?

What system did you convert to?

We went to Castles & Crusades (Troll Lord Games). It is rules lite and ytou can add back in feats, skills, or whatever you like. It is what Gary may have designed had he based it all on d20. You should check it out.

Yikes, I may get tarred and feathered for posting this. I will do it anyway. I had a great gaming group as well. I GM'ed for years. What I found was that as you approach 9th level or so in 3.x or Pathfinder, the NPC's get more cumbersome and time-consuming to create. To make them high quality, you have to put in the time on stats, feats, skills, etc. I also found that combat became slower and took much longer to resolve. I got tired of spending so much time, so I resigned as GM and handed if off. The next GM just quit too. He said it took too much time.

Anyway, long story, short; we tried a more "rules-lite" game and we have been very happy. That may not be the problem you are having, so it may not be worth much. If it were easier to run, maybe more folks would be willing to run it. Thats the problem we ran into, this system is a bit top-heavy as you increase in level so we aonly enjoyed low level games.

It was crazy. My group got all upset, but when I passed the torch they just got more upset. Seems they thought I had lots of time to prepare, but they did not.

Well its settled, I was "spouting" a reasonable interpretation of the accurate intent of the "melee" feat. Cool.

Spouting? Well, I guess this ends this civil and insightfully intelligent discussion. I am convinced now that it is indeed a ranged weapon feat, no doubt about it now.

True, it does not have to follow a pattern, but let me make two observations. One, this is no longer 3.5 which became bloated with broken feats and other broken rules. Siting a string of mistakes in 3.5 wont cary any weight with me, at least for sake of argument. Different author; different game at this point. Pathfinder, so much as I can tell, has remained true to keeping that balance.

Second, part of this discussion, since the feat did not specify, was trying to determine the intent. My basic logic here, following the "gang-up" on one opponent approach, is that it follows a logical path to a conclusion. In this case it is a matter of perception and interpretation. I will play and call it the way I see it in my game. You will do so in yours. For the sake of this discussion, again, it was deciphering the intent of the author. Using the lead-up to the feat and the next step, to me, seems like a reasonable path to finding the original intent. I dont think the intent was for the application of ranged combat, but for melee only.

Taking it as worded, by itself, ranged weapons seem ok as it is written. Taking it as a whole, in proper context, it was not meant for ranged weapons. But I suppose we will find out eventually. Sooner or later the author will chime in....I hope.

Snoring Rock wrote:

Poor choice of words. Shouldhave lft off "threatened". Point is, the feat says regardless of positioning.

Still doesn't work. There has to be a pre-existing flank for this feat to function. Since you normally cannot flank with ranged weapons, and cannot flank from 30 feet away (again, unless you're Huge or larger with a reach weapon), you cannot have three archers use this feat and get the benefit all by themselves.

And "look at the prereq feat and the next feat in the chain" really doesn't mean much. No one is saying that Gang Up is a ranged only feat, so pointing out that related feats are melee doesn't change anything.

Awwww, dont dismiss me out of hand here, it is not appreciated. Drop the ranged example of mine; it sucked.

The feat tree does in fact matter. I dont see any feat trees focused on magic for instance, suddenly having a combat related feat thrown in the middle. The feat may be inadequately worded, so a few players will take it and use it to their liking, but the point remains that it is surrounded by melee type feats and therefore makes no sense to be thrown in at random. I am not saying it was for ranged ONLY. It is arranged with melee feats, in the middle of a melee feat progession. It stands to reason that it was intended as a melee feat. I think it was just poorly worded. Upon further review, I would expect to see a clarification in the errata.

Poor choice of words. Shouldhave lft off "threatened". Point is, the feat says regardless of positioning. I just dont see this as a ranged weapon feat. Again, I harken back to the prereq's and the next feat in the tree.

Well, the prerequisite for this feat is that you have Combat Expertise. That is a feat for melee combat. Why would a melee combat feat be a prerequisite for a ranged attack feat?

Also, in each example I see here, the allies are in melee configurations. If then: if at least two of your allies are threatening that opponenet; couldnt they also be threatening with melee weapons as well, and ranged? Why cant three archers threaten an opponent, each from 30 feet, and be able to use this feat? It was not intended to be used this way.

Last of all, the nexdt step up the feat tree is "Team Up"....clearly a melee feat again.

I understand how it is written but looking at the prequisites and then the next intended feat in this tree, it seems clear that this is not intended for use with ranged attacks. The true intent shows up when you folow the feat tree prior to and after having this feat.

Mmmhhh...the original owner was a 1/2-elven rogue. The new owner is a 1/2-ling cleric, so he is not proficient with this martial weapon. But as you say, the description does in fact say "possession" not "wielding".

And yes, it take no time at all for the treasure amount to get out of hand when the characters keep taking the stuff of those who die. Kind of wild-west-esque huh?

The dead character was a fugitive from an empire to the west, family unknown. So no heirs. The cleric I think would want it returned to the family if they could be contacted, or perhaps bury him with his goods.

Ok, so this character has a Luck Blade short sword. He meets a horribly swift and untimely death. The party then decided to split up their friend's collection, including the Luck Blade. No one really wants it. So the halfling cleric of Odin takes it. Why? Well the "possessor" gets +1 to all saves and gets to re-roll a miss of any kind once per day. So....does he have to "wield" it or just "possess" it in order to gain from the effects of the magic luck? Remember, he is small, the weapon is medium, and he is not proficient with martial weapons. He just carries it for "luck".

As a DM how would you rule on this one?

A week early? Woohoo! So does htat mean the Amazon will ship a week early too?

An old-timer here, but with an idea that has been around a long time. In the Wilderlands of High Fantasy, there is dwarven city. Out side it is a system of caverns; part of which is ruled by a minotaur high priest and his gnoll followers. I like the gnolls. They are mean and savage enough to fend off most who threaten the minotaur's territory, but controlable enough for the minotaur to handle.

Agreed, that was my interpretation. I just had to get a second, and third, and forth set of opinions....

Ok, so this Inquisitor has the ability to cast "Bane" on his weapon, therefore giving him a bonus to hit a certain creature type. Is the weapon (during the duration of the spell) considered a magic weapon now for such things as striking an incoporeal undead creature?

Hi,

I am sorry to say I need to cancel my modules subscription...

Cool, I am taking everyones advice and getting the guide. I never knew that one was out there. I missed that little gem...

Ok, looks like I need the Stronghold Builder's Guide. Quick questions; does it contain only the out of the ordinary kind of thing, or does it also contain standard walls, towers, etc? On many occasions I have found the "guides" to go so far outside the box as to not be useful for me.

This is old school, but I have a party on the verge of taking out an orcish keep. They are considering keeping the tower and adding to it, and then pledging felty to the local Overlord. This means they would have a stronghold of their own and will want to begin some construction projects of their own. I am not seeing construction times/cost for walls, buildings, etc. I assume I am forced to go to my old DMG for this?

D'oh!

Thank you! In my rush, I missed the "special" size modifier. I was using the standard size modifier.

Color me stupid....I decided to take my Tome Of Horrors and figure CMB and CMD for each monster and pencil it in. I use these monsters so I thought, I would save time.

CMB = Base Attack Bonus + Strength Bonus + Size Modifier.

So I did about 10 pages and then got to wondering....so I got out my trusty Paizo Pathfinder Bestiary. I calculated a few and found that what the bestiary had, was different than what I had come up with.

I dont get what I am doing wrong...or is the Bestiary wrong?

Example: Quasit: Size Tiny (+4)
Base Attack Bonus (+3)
Srength Bonus (-1)

I get +6
The Bestiary gives +0

Most of the time I get an answer that appears to be as though I used the opposite size modifier. This one is just way off. Can someone help me?

Closed the thread.....someone sure does not want Pathfinder discussed as a game that is an incarnation of D&D. Reading what was there, you could feel the tension building. I dont visit EnWorld much, and that is why.

Ok, so Clark, we are sure happy to have you playing Pathfinder.

You gonna write anything?

Oh.....my joy is almost full. Now announce that JG and NG are doing Tegel Manor for Pathfinder. Do'h, just slap me and I will wake up. Welcome aboard Clark!

I have gone to My Downloads and the site will not allow me to download any of my PDFs. Whats up with that? When do you expect to have that fixed?

Snoring Rock wrote:

Holy cow folks, I went by my FLGS and they had just one copy left. They originally ordered 10 copies. I asked why they did not order 20 like they did with 4e. They said the book was too pricy at 49.99 and did not think they would sell them all. The shelf has 5 copies of 4e on it. No PFRPG....sold out. They will have to re-order. Gotta love it!

I have players in need of books too, so I am continuing to struggle with Amazon. I may give up the fight and order them here.

This is a real pain....but its good news for Paizo. This is success. I was fortunate enough to meet Lisa, Vic, Jeff, James, and Erik at GenCon. They are great folks that genuinly love the game and are real easy to talk too. Thanks Paizo!

You were at GenCon and didn't take the books there?

Oh, I had one with me at GenCon. I ordered my group's books on Amazon to save on the price.

Holy cow folks, I went by my FLGS and they had just one copy left. They originally ordered 10 copies. I asked why they did not order 20 like they did with 4e. They said the book was too pricy at 49.99 and did not think they would sell them all. The shelf has 5 copies of 4e on it. No PFRPG....sold out. They will have to re-order. Gotta love it!

I have players in need of books too, so I am continuing to struggle with Amazon. I may give up the fight and order them here.

This is a real pain....but its good news for Paizo. This is success. I was fortunate enough to meet Lisa, Vic, Jeff, James, and Erik at GenCon. They are great folks that genuinly love the game and are real easy to talk too. Thanks Paizo!

DM there is no escaping you. You are stalking me, I know it. I have the last copy at my FLGS on hold and will go pick it up tonight. I am cancelling the Amazon order.

Update: I sent another unhappy-gram to them asking what the hold up was. I wanted to know if they had taken orders for more than they were getting or if the distibution was slow or what; and they answered with go look in your account, we have given a new delivery date. The date for expected delivery is now August 27. So lets see, I was told the 16th then the 19th, then the 24th, than the 26.....now the 27th.

Am I as stupid as my avatar depicts? I think I will cancel. I have one on reserve at my FLGS....it was the last one on the shelf. I have to pat cover price, but better then chancing ever getting one from Amazon. I have learned a lesson here.

So...is Paizo sold out? I dont see that posted here anywhere. If I order on here will it be in the November reprint?

This is not good. I pre-ordered from Amazon and got an August 29th date that changed to a 24-26 date. It still has not shipped. I emailed them and received a prmpt answer yesterday sayig they would ship it today and that I would receive an email notice. I got a notice just like the one above. It has not shipped and they ave no idea when and if it ever will. Gotta run.....off to call my FLGS...

I ordered mine through Amazon. You just know what my next question is.....will I get mine?

So, they will ship, it on Wednesday? That stinks. I wont get it until like another week later. Makes me want to pay the extra $$ to get it earlier. Maybe I will check with my FLGS. Doh....

I know this may have already been discussed somewhere, but please humor this farm-boy. I pre-ordered my copy of the PFRPG rulebook from Amazon. They have a little post on the order stating that it is expected to arrive August 19. Well now, is that true? I know that it is released all official like as of August 13. I understand distributors have it already, or will have it by the 13th for release on time. So....is Amazon not a part of that?