Search Posts
Here's covers of a few newer songs that I enjoy. CHVRCHES - Do I Wanna Know (Arctic Monkeys Cover)
And who could forget,
edit: Okay one more,
This sounds like a 2E rule that your DM is still using. You're right it doesn't make sense, and was replaced in the rules with the -4 to hit penalty instead of having a chance of hitting your allies for good reason.
He does have a good point. It looks like casters will never get to cast more than one 8th, and one 9th level spell per day. The spell recovery mechanic doesn't work on those slots, and even at max level the spell casting chart only lists "1" for 8-9. Not sure I'm a fan of it being limited that much.
Important feats for tripping:
Also, any feats to give you plus to hit are nice since that translates directly to higher CMB. Like Weapon Focus and Outflank. Tripping Strike is decent, but I don't think it's as important as pumping your +hit bonus. I considered taking it on my fighter, but decided that anything which was trippable I would just be going straight for the trip CMB from the beginning anyways, so why bother?
I may be able to offer some insight in this question. I played a trip focused fighter up to level 18 in a Kingmaker campaign that actually just ended a few weeks ago. As a fighter I was able to use a reach weapon, which helped the tripping schtick quite a bit. If you have any way of getting access to enlarge person to gain the 10' reach on your monk that would be ideal. From the perspective of my fighter, in the earlier levels (say level 1-5) I was reasonably effective, but often got outclassed in combat by the party Barbarian and Synthesist. Those characters were focused more on raw damage and were putting out obscene amounts of DPS in the lower levels. To the point where they were dropping foes just by reducing them to zero hit points faster than I could consider bothering with wasting an action using a CMB attack on something. What's the point when everything just dies in one round from the pouncing synth and power attacking barb? However, after level 6 the trip tactic came into its own. Other members of the party started picking up the Outflank teamwork feat, and Improved Trip offered attacks of opportunity to everyone in melee range when a trip went off. Our tactic of fighter/barb flanking started to become *extremely* effective around this level, and it never dropped off the whole campaign. Any monster we could set up a flank against would get demolished. Trip was a big part of that combo, along with high crit range weapons and Outflank being the other part. At the higher levels it is true that you more often will run into opponents who fly or who are too large to be tripped. So you do need to have other ways to be effective in combat. Make sure your monk can still put out reasonable damage with just normal attacks for the times when tripping is impossible. For reference, at level 18 my character had a unbuffed +49 to Trip CMB.
Is this feat legal for Pathfinder Society?
I have been extremely dubious of 5th edition. Pathfinder is great and I feel like I would be happy playing it as my RPG of choice for many more years. Back in '07 I got on the 4E hype train early on but was hugely let down when the books came out. What I saw of the first 5E playtest packet didn't really excite me, and I was already prepared for another crap D&D product so didn't pay the playtest much attention after that. However, after seeing the basic rules and checking out the sneak peeks/spoilers that are going around the web, I think my mind has been changed. 5E is looking great. The game mechanics seem to have a more familiar D&D feel to them that 4E lacked. I love what they are doing with advantage/disadvantage, concentration buff spells, and keeping hit/save bonuses reigned in with the rather modest proficiency stat. I am officially on the 5E hype train now!
I like that idea the most for a houserule. Each caster only being able to keep one buff spell up at a time is great and should solve the "stack 10 buffs on everyone" problem that high level 3.X games have. But having their one buff easily disrupted just by being hit in combat seems way too harsh. Especially with how difficult it looks like the DC to keep the spell going will be.
Holy cow this prediction was SPOT ON. How could you know all this back in 2007!?If by "spot on" you mean "off by two whole years", sure. What I read from his post was "the buzz of 5th edition leaks and within a few months it is announced at the 2012 Gen Con." So that's an announcement that he predicted coming in 2012, not the full release. Wasn't this exactly accurate? I also remember in the early convention panels with the 5th edition dev team they were all about how modular 5th edition was going to be and how you could play it to be similar to any of the previous editions just by choosing which rules to incorporate in your game. Again, exactly as the original poster here predicted. Maybe WotC has gone back on that idea over the course of the playtest, but they definitely were saying that about the game in 2012.
Holy cow this prediction was SPOT ON. How could you know all this back in 2007!?
There is a huge difference between killing something that is actively in combat and killing someone who is running away or standing there with their hands up and talking. Even if they previously did take a hostile action. Would I change a good aligned PC to neutral or evil for what he did here? No, not for only rare transgressions at least. But the Paladin code is much stricter than just "remain good aligned". Messing up even once when you are a paladin means it's atonement time. Even when you mess up on accident. This, however, wasn't an accident. It was just straight up blood thirst.
This character is 100% a warrior now. If he wants to become a Paladin again I think an atonement quest that teaches him why mercy and understanding are virtues to be strived towards should need to be completed. This is a good opportunity for a party adventure and character building for his PC. He can either come back into the light and rejoin the ranks of Paladin or become bitter and angry over what he feels are unjust judgements to his actions and become an Blackguard. Or just show his apathy about it all and probably reroll a new character (because, really, who wants to play a Warrior for the whole campaign). Paladins need uphold a strict code of conduct at all times. I would not let blatant evil actions like this slide.
inability to pump blood, or that the victim of paralysis is (if lucky) left behind by Golarion's orbital motion or (if unlucky) forced through the surface of the ground at 107,200 kilometers per hour (assuming Golarion's rotation around its sun is equivalent to Earth's around ours). Oh, and the electrons in your brain stopped because y'know, they're a part of you and you can't move 'em. I am going to be incorporating this interpretation of paralysis into all my upcoming games. Bring on the ghouls! Muahaha.
Here's a novel concept, give the players the choice. 4d6 drop the lowest, put them in any order you want, or 20 pt point buy. Choose one, and stick with it. What I did in the last game I ran was have everyone roll stats. If they were unhappy with their roll they could do a 20-point buy instead. This makes it so if someone has a character concept they are set on playing, but the dice don't fall their way they can just shrug and point buy instead. Or if the dice fall very badly and their stats are awful they can point buy instead. Point buy was like a safety net. It turns out in that game my dice rolling scheme was generous enough that no one needed to use the point buy. I like the idea of using it as a backup to mitigate bad rolling luck though. edit: I guess I should state the reason I like to use some kind of rolling method as default. I want characters that maybe have strengths and weaknesses in areas you don't expect, and no one would bother doing with the point buy limitations. With point buy every Wizard has a 18 INT and probably an 8 or maybe 10 str (or even lower). With rolling you might get a Wizard with a 15 strength, or a 17 Dexterity, or a 16 Wisdom. Just randomly. It doesn't make the character all that much more powerful but I just think it is cool to have characters with stats that look more organic than the point-buy default of:
Ever since hearing about something called the "Grid Method" I have wanted to play a game that used it for stat generation. It looks really fun. Too bad my DM likes to keep things strictly point buy. http://invisiblecastle.com/stats/help/grid/
Pokemon always tried to push the whole friendship angle, but it felled very forced Because if they didn't, then it would just be enforcing the "dog fighting" or "cock fighting" angle of the show. Which is really all it is. Disgusting.
All we need now is a feat to let you upright a prone target with an attack so they can be re-tripped again. Let the perma juggle combos begin.
kick from group, defriend on facebook. It's the only way to be sure.
The spell did deserve to be nerfed, it just nullified too many things for too long of a duration. Way too powerful in 3.5. However, the Pathfinder version is so much weaker that I would have probably lowered it to a 7th level spell as part of the nerf. I agree it feels a bit weak now to be 8th level.
The Roc can still attack with it's talons even when it isn't flying, you can flavor that any way you like. I like to pretend that it has martial arts training and is doing spinning talon kicks.
I'm more curious about the bag of salt...
Oh a reprinted Maw of Chaos Spell? Neat! That was my favorite nuke spell from D&D 3.5 The Pathfinder version here looks pretty fun, but being duration concentration and the fact that it has no effect until the start of your next turn is a pretty big downside, imo.
Ok, I was off on my timing by a few days, but here we are over a 100 posts with two entrenched sides battling away, with side skirmishes to boot! And with that, I bow out of this thread. Yes, I was quite happy with how this thread played out. I'll be seeing all ya'll around the next time this question is posted!
This brings up an interesting question. Is the "wield as a short sword" benefit of the Sunblade lost while inside a AMF or if the sword get hits with a targeted dispel?
This matters.
Well, another question is whether or not the increase to mobility is a property of the item's magic, or a quality of the unnamed special material it's made out of. That's important not just for determining if it's eligible to become mithral, but what happens to it within an anti-magic field. This is a good question. I wonder if posing the question "what, if any, parts of the celestial armor description function inside an antimagic field?" to the devs would help us get to the bottom of this mithril celestial question.
No way.
Here is my bug report, I have a feeling it is going to look similar to StarMartyrs because he is having the same exact issue. Bug Report::
See the end of this message for details on invoking just-in-time (JIT) debugging instead of this dialog box. ************** Exception Text **************
************** Loaded Assemblies **************
************** JIT Debugging **************
For example: <configuration>
When JIT debugging is enabled, any unhandled exception
My OS is Windows 7 64-bit (6.1 Build 7601)
Your house rules look good, I think I would enjoy playing in your game!
I feel that Monks, Rogues, and Fighters particularly could use a few boosts to their repertoire to keep the game interesting for them in all aspects of play. Monks and Rogues could use some combat improvements and Fighters could use some more tools to use out of combat.
Some bugs with it I am experiencing: When I first open the program a pop-up box asking me to select a race appears, but no matter which race I pick nothing happens. The pop-up box stays there it doesn't go away. I can bypass this by clicking on the task bar and closing that pop-up window to get to the programs main window. However, when I do anything in the program I get an "Unhandled Exception" error. It happens every time I type in a box or select from a dropdown menu. I can ignore the error and things seem to keep working, but it just keeps popping up over and over again every time I do an action.
If I were running the game, this is probably what I would do too. It doesn't seem that avoiding iterative attacks by purposefully failing a skill check is what was intended with this rule. For groups who play as close to RAW as possible though, this is something that should be accounted for anytime aerial combat is taking place (with winged creatures, of course). Strangely, it actually makes positioning yourself below an enemy before starting a full attack sequence more advantageous than being positioned above them (for the +1 higher ground bonus). If you are positioned below them you will be able to at least get two hits off before they fall out of your attack reach, while being positioned above them, or on the same altitude as them, they will fall out of reach after 1 hit. In addition, this opens up some clever tactics for a character using a polearm against opponents who are using regular melee weapons. The polearm wielder can fall away after being hit once, and then possibly threaten attacks of opportunity a second time if opponents try to close back in.
http://paizo.com/prd/skills/fly.html
Attacked While Flying: You are not considered flat-footed while flying. If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature's movement. It seems to me that when two creatures are engaged in aerial melee combat it would often be beneficial to take the 10' altitude loss for failing your flight check after being hit by damage in order to avoid full attacks. Is this something that is legal and works for creatures who are using wings to fly? This is basically being able to take a immediate free 10 foot step downwards anytime you are hit for damage just by choosing to fail the skill check. There is a multitude of uses you could come up with for this, but the most obvious one is avoiding iterative attacks.
ty guys for your comments. this was the first pc death in a campaign that has been running for over a year. Sounds like your game is too Player Character friendly if anything. It was about time someone died. As a player, I want my games to be dangerous and full of death. Winning each combat should feel like a real victory and not just a boring march towards the PCs inevitable triumph (which has been a real problem in a lot of the games I've played in). Especially once money/access to Raise Dead becomes available, if PCs aren't dying regularly then something is wrong with the difficulty level of their opponents. Keep killing them PCs!
For reference: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Combat-Maneuvers Earlier this year I read a post claiming this rule could be used as a tactic to escape from an ongoing grapple:
If grappled, one could theoretically ready a one-handed attack against the maintaning grappler to interrupt the maintain check. If the attack hits, the damage would be counted as a penalty to the maintain roll. At least, if I understand the rules correctly. This seems like a pretty powerful tool that some characters could use to escape from the almost unbeatable CMB/CMD that really large monsters have. In my games there have been plenty of times where a PC gets grappled and realized they have zero chance of breaking free by trying a CMB check. But for melee characters that can hit hard, readying an action to smack the creature for a lot of damage when it tries to maintain the hold next round could be a really effective way to get out of grapples. My question is does this actually work? Does readying an attack give you the damage it deals as a penalty to the grapplers maintain? Or is this a rule that *only* applies to attacks of opportunity that an unskilled grappler may provoke.
The Stealth skill doesn't say you must use bluff to distract. Bluff is an example - "such as". As long as the GM thinks the action is enough to momentarily distract, it should fly. This opens up so many possibilities! Now I want to see rules for an eye poke used to make a stealth roll! It could be an attack roll to allow a stealth check lol.
You can't 5 foot step and then do other movement in the same round. If you are going to do a withdraw action (as a full round action) just moving straight back or diagonally back from the opponent is still the best way to get out of their threatened range. After that you could start moving vertically with the levitate I suppose.
He would still get an attack of opportunity. Withdraw only makes your first square not provoke. Your second square 5' up would still be within the opponents threaten range diagonally (most likely).
Couldn't you say the same thing about critical hits? They just waste time at the table and have the potential to one-shot characters when monsters get them.
So you want a feat that lets you 5' step away from someone as an immediate action? That sounds just a little bit too powerful.
Are you saying that paralyze and antimagic field only show up in 0.0001% of games? I will admit they probably don't get thrown around every session, but that is still a very low estimate.
Is there a reason why this matters? About the only way I can see this making a difference is in an Anti-Magic field. Antimagic field is an important reason. Also, the fly skill itself has some checks that natural flight has to make (taking damage, collision) but magical flight doesn't. Plus I would think status effects like paralyze work differently between the two modes of flying. It seems like a pretty important point of information and it's absurd if looking at the artwork really is the only way to tell whether a monster has Ex or Su flight. Is it not possible that there are some monsters that have wings just for show, but actually move around with Su flight? Or are there monsters whose wings are folded up and non-visible in the artwork, but when they fly they unfurl them and go? How are you supposed to know these things without it saying somewhere in the stat block or the text?
Flight (Ex or Su) A creature with this ability can cease or resume flight as a free action. If the ability is supernatural, it becomes ineffective in an antimagic field, and the creature loses its ability to fly for as long as the antimagic effect persists. When looking at the bestiary how do you know whether a creatures flight is Ex or Su? It doesn't seem to specify in the stat block. Is just looking at the artwork of the monster and making a ruling based on if that picture has wings or not the only way?
That isn't a problem at all. It just means a new type of bonus was created for this spell. The Natural bonus. I have already started creating custom magic items with +Natural to AC and +Natural to saves and +Natural to ability scores. It really amps up the power level of my character!
Maybe lack of announcements means that Pathfinder 2 is next and they are just waiting for Gencon to reveal it!
If grappled, one could theoretically ready a one-handed attack against the maintaning grappler to interrupt the maintain check. If the attack hits, the damage would be counted as a penalty to the maintain roll. At least, if I understand the rules correctly. Oh wow, if this is true it makes grappling a lot worse, I think. Seems a much better strategy than trying to escape from the grapple of an opponent you know you can't reliably make the CMB check against. But toss in an extra +20 (or whatever your damage per hit is) to that check from the big readied-action attack when they try to maintain it, and it suddenly becomes a lot easier to break free.
I like to keep things simple. I usually just browse through one of the "Campaign Smashers" threads and then pick whichever one of those builds strikes my fancy at the time. Btw, are there any groups out there looking for another player to join their table? The groups I'm playing in keep falling apart...
Oh man, imagine how mad your players would be if every dragon (or other epic encounter) they fought had already spent most of its hoard to retrain hit points. Not only is the fight way more difficult, but there would be almost no treasure reward at the end. The dragon already spent it!
As a resident of Washington State I am ecstatic to see so many new Pathfinder games in my area!
They are also asking because the weapon enhancement to.hit and damage only adds to trip cmb if the weapon has the trip property from what we read It did work like you say originally, but there was some errata/clarification by the developers and now you can use any weapon to trip and get its attack bonuses to your CMB. As others have said, the trip quality just lets you drop the weapon when you fail horribly.
Have a Hello Kitty/My Little Pony crossover mystery about who stole the cupcakes.I would totally play in this campaign. So would I!! tend to find that most of the time doing a one on one game for new players tends to be both a good and bad thing. It does give them a small sample of how it works, but at the same time it gives them, in a lot of ways, the wrong sample of how the game plays, teaching them that the DM will go easy on them from the start Yeah well... I was teaching a friend to play D&D back in the 3.0 days and ran a game for him one on one. He was dead within a couple hours of starting. How was I supposed to know he would roll amazing on his Survival check at level 1 multiple times in a row to be able to track some gnolls all the way back to their mountain cave den. And he would roll really well on stealth. Well enough to get him all the way to the den entrance without anything noticing him. Then he would want explore into the cave. And he would continue to roll well on stealth to get him all the way in the tunnels up to the point where his low-light vision finally would stop working and he couldn't see any deeper in. And then he wanted to light a torch.
Sigh...
|
