SunKing's page

176 posts. Alias of Alexander Watson.


1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lots of reading and re-reading stat blocs as bedside reading in the nights leading up to Thursday night’s game. No encounters are inevitable, so I like to cover a lot of different monsters/traps/NPCs/whatever. But the more comfortable I am with stat blocs, the more I can focus on narrative come game night…

caster4life wrote:
SunKing wrote:
caster4life wrote:
Awesome! I'll PM you about details.
Count me in.
Just saw this, my bad! But the discord link is above so feel free to come join us!


caster4life wrote:
Awesome! I'll PM you about details.

Count me in.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

These are all great. Thanks so much for the thoughtful advice. I’m going to have the black shuck attack them on boggy moorlands, and potentially chase them onto a menhir-covered hill where sceptres attack…

And to answer the question many of you asked: 7th level party.

1 person marked this as a favorite.


The PCs are headed north across rainy and foggy moorland. Such an evocative location deserves an equally evocative encounter. But for the life of me, my imagination tank runs dry and I’ve got nothing. Any assistance is appreciated…

Also, I would have liked another Unchained book, that maybe offered an optional stunt/challenge system, as per ‘Iron Heroes,’ by unknown developer Mike Mearls.

And - I’m a bit hesitant to say this in a game with an already complicated combat system, but I would have liked some playing around with combat options, maybe to include ideas that resembled ‘Elephant in the Room,’ or some of the interesting options posited on this site.

Dragon78 wrote:

Though at this point I would settle for a Bestiary 7.

-Reprints of all remaining 0HD races, planar dragons, Oni, Mountain Troll, all the remaining creatures from Kingmaker and Jade Regent APs, etc..
-Stats for all the remaining Kaiju.
-New Azura, Oni, and Rakshasa.
-More dragons from different cultures/myths.
-Giants based on myth, not terrain/element.
-Some unique legendary creatures like Cerberus and/or Fenrir.
-New types of Griffons, Sphinxes, and Unicorns.
-No demons/devils(we have enough).
-and much, much more.

All for this. I loved the Bestaries; they were all good. #6 was probably one of my favourites. They never ran out of monster ideas, as proven by some of the new monsters showing up in PF2 that weren’t in PF1.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Still playing PF1. We play Thursday nights via Zoom, minis, and customized battle mats.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rules Compendium, as I and others have said here and elsewhere. With really well-written rules that minimize confusion and broad interpretation…

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Patrick Curtin wrote:

My gaggle of 10th level misfits are getting closer to discovering where Orcus’ Wand is, and how to destroy it.

2e Planescape Module Dead Gods, originally a 3.5 conversion ported over to PF 1 as it evolved. Play by post, now the site’s oldest continual game (I think) - since 2008

Cool accomplishment!!

It’s a small thing, but if a player asks, I tell them whether or not a monster is ‘bloodied,’ a la 4e…

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So I’ve been GMing straight for 11 months, only 90 minutes to 2 hours a week, but long enough that I asked for a brief reprieve to recharge my imagination batteries. We’re going to play ‘Forbidden Lands’ via Foundry for a few weeks, taking us to our annual (albeit delayed by COVID) gaming weekend.

Then I’ll fire up the forges of my imagination again. I’m planning on using a weird mix of ‘Assault on Longshadow’ from ‘Ironfang Invasion,’ ‘Rebel’s Ransom,’ a great ole’ PFS scenario, and some of my own stuff.

End the campaign with a bang at about 10th level by Christmas? We’ll see…Work may get in the way of gaming from late October to mid-December…

However, I’m sure I’m not the only one who values brief breaks from GMing to let the imagination fire up again.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Algarik wrote:
SunKing wrote:
Azothath wrote:
SunKing wrote:
So I just made a dumb error ... erinyes could hover as a free action... {edited}
Erinyes: Fly +19, Hover DC 15, "A Fly check check doesn’t require an action". Not a Free Action but a roll. It might be something else.
Yeah - I think the hover check still has to be made as part of a move action…

After rechecking the rule, under Fly, it seems your first ruling was right.

Fly wrote:


None. A Fly check doesn’t require an action; it is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation.

It's said it's made as part of an action or as a reaction to a situation. Not moving is not an action, but failing to meet a requirement of flying by staying stationnary, making you at risk of falling should qualify.

Hover is only listed as a flying maneuver and does not specify an action, so i'd say it does not cost an action.

So now you totally gotta go back and redo that whole campaign, that player should have stayed dead at that moment! Gotta make sure you take your responsibility as a gamemaster! (Obvious joke)

Ha! Yep - time to retcon the entire campaign! However, at the risk of hijacking this thread, I think that hover would still require a move action. It simply says that ‘fly’ is not an action because multiple fly checks may be necessary as part of one move.

Not to say your reasoning isn’t strong also…

Azothath wrote:
SunKing wrote:
So I just made a dumb error ... erinyes could hover as a free action... {edited}
Erinyes: Fly +19, Hover DC 15, "A Fly check check doesn’t require an action". Not a Free Action but a roll. It might be something else.

Yeah - I think the hover check still has to be made as part of a move action…

So I just made a dumb error that I’m a little embarrassed to admit here on this forum. But for some severely inexcusable reason, I thought an erinyes could hover as a free action, allowing it to attack with its bow as a full attack. There was no excuse for my error as a GM; the reason may have had to do with the four glasses of whisky I’d consumed.

In any event, I’ve apologized profusely to the player I killed (who survived through the use of hero points…), and I will severely retcon this one. My bad, entirely.

Yes. Have done, when the cleric figured out he actually could have saved the PC. Or another time where our house rule that lets PCs collate hero points was forgotten about.

Probably will again.

Scarletrose wrote:

I am currently running 2 campaigns.

One is a savage tide conversion, they just started Tides of Dread last session, went to the tar pits.

The other is more homemade.
Volstus did gather his army of giants and rampaged through the hold all the way to the border with Cheliax ehere they started to fight.
Cheliax is using an orb of Dragonkind of their own.
A draconic convocation gathered to discuss this world and resolved into a pandraconic alliance (minus the black) to stop them both.
This was secretly all engineered by a group of blue dragons (the blue council) who seek to create the precedent for draconic rule (one where they would always be the real power behind the throne) and get rid of Daralathyxl as a dangerous rival.

The father of the half-orc bloodrager pillaged Korvosa and he now wears the crown of fangs. He started to use the party to try and find the rest.
The son of Kazavon is actually behind all this as a member of the blue council.
The party is nowhere near to uncover what is happening and they are currently working for the kazavon possessed orc and alongside the dragons.
They are in Nirmanthas at the fringe of the war, trying to reclaim it from the giants.
Last session is the first time they impacted the giants seriously enough that they have taken notice.

This sounds amazing. I tip my hat.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:

-Max HP per HD/LV.

-15-20 point build is actually 15-20 points you can distribute to your base stats(all 10s) as you want.
-+1 ability point per level(from 1st to 20th).
-Max stats(20 +1/2lv)
-All skills are class skills.
-All classes have at least 4+Int mod skill points.
-Add 1/2 your level to your AC/touch AC/FF AC.
-+2 to base saves.
-No favored class bonuses.
-No traits.
-No full attack action, you can get all attacks even if you move.
-Anyone can use wands.
-Staves and wands have daily charges that recharge once each day.
-Wands use the user's level/casting stat like staves.
-Use AC instead of CMD.
-No amulets of natural armor, cloaks of resistance, rings of protection (or at least different versions).
-No stat increasing magic items(or different versions).
-Magic weapons/armor/shields are never just regular +# items, always have something(at will cantrip, detect specific monster type/subtype, turns green when near poison, can change into other item(s), etc.
-Monk-like AC option for any class that has armor prof. casters use their casting stat, martials(with no casting) and kineticist use Con.
-Force armor(Su)(constant mage armor that increases by +1 at level 6 and every 3 levels after) for Arcanist, Psychics, Sorcerers, Witches, and Wizards.
-Brawlers, Monks, and Shifters gained a an enhancement bonus(+1 at 3rd/4th an additional +1 every 4 levels after) to their unarmed strike/natural attacks.
-All caster classes have cantrips.
-Fighters get at least a few free exotic weapon prof.
-All spontaneous casters get 1 additional spell known per spell level.
-All casters get 3 extra 1st level spell slots.
-Rogues and Swashbucklers got Dex to damage.
-That combat maneuvers didn't provoke(if you have +1BAB).
-That power attack, power shot, and combat expertise was built into the combat rules, no feats needed.
-That the heal skill could heal some damage.
-Jump DCs were lower.
-More powerful alchemical items.
-All races got +2 to two set stats, no penalty(humans +2 to any two) with an...

I like how you’ve put so much thought into this, even if don’t agree with all of them.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Greylurker wrote:

Our GM is running two parallel games and I ended up with a character in each. For the one I play a Dwarf Scholar (Spheres of Might) working with a Halfling Monk, couple of Human Rogues and a Witch investigating murders and diabalism in a Dwarf stronghold. In the other I am a Symbiat (Spheres of Power) working with a Werebear Monk, Changeling Witch, Ranger, Magus and Cleric of Calistria and we are looking into some giants gathering an army to make a mess of the region.

Both of my characters just about died from poison in the same week.

So your GM is running two totally different games at the same time, from what appears to be mostly homebrew? That’s impressive.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
SunKing wrote:
Let me hear about your current PF1 campaign. I’m currently playing via Zoom every week, with actual minis on a variety of actual battle maps. Just hit 7th level after finishing a heavily-modified version of ‘City of Golden Death.’

We’re swinging in and out of the underlying plot to ‘Ironfang Invasion.’ I intend to cleave pretty closely to the plot of ‘Assault on Longshadow’ soon, once they’re the appropriate level. I have a slayer (heavily-amended iconic Zadim); cleric (heavily-amended iconic Kyra); a fighter focused on combat manoeuvres; and a well-rounded party-animal arcanist. It’s a great group of both players and characters, and it makes for a great 90 minutes or 2 hours every Thursday night.

Last night night, the fighter tried to toe-to-toe with an erinyes, and got brought down by a barrage of arrows. The party used a house rule we have whereby players can gift hero points at 2-for-1, and brought him back from the brink…

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let me hear about your current PF1 campaign. I’m currently playing via Zoom every week, with actual minis on a variety of actual battle maps. Just hit 7th level after finishing a heavily-modified version of ‘City of Golden Death.’

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Power Attack.

There; I said it.

6 people marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
I guess I'd like a Rules Compendium where they do a last pass on classes, items and rules and which incorporates all the errate over the years. I kinda hate that all my first printing books I got immediately when they came out were basically beta releases to what ended up as the real ruleset.

I’ve said this elsewhere but it merits saying again: I’d have loved to have seen a ‘Rules Compendium.’

Ahhh…makes sense. Thanks.

Guys - I should know this. But I can’t find a historic thread for this question.

Does a monster attract an attack of opportunity if it uses ‘Awesome Blow’?

Thanks all.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I lurk: I check in at least once a day but rarely post. I’m sure there are plenty like me.

I think you’ve got it. And explained it very clearly!

There of course won’t be any more books, but if there were, I’d like a ‘Rules Compendium.’ Like the 3.5 version, that contains all the rules minus skills, feats, etc. Could do a great job at clarifying those niggling rules (Do you still flank when you’re grappling? If you’ve got a BAB of +1 or higher can you draw a potion? Etc...).

Ryze Kuja wrote:

lvl 13-18.

This is your first taste of level 7-9 spells and late game class features, as well as feats like spell perfection and greater vital strike, etc., but most builds will be fully fleshed out by lvl 10-13ish, so these 13-18 levels are done with "fully realized" characters. This is both fun to play as a PC because your character has their entire "kit" available, but this is also pretty fun as a GM, because you can really crank up the heat for Encounter Difficulty. There's less penalties for GM overreach too, because most groups will have Resurrection, Wish, Miracle, all kinds of stuff to counter whatever you can throw at them.

I admire that you’re willing and able to play/GM at such a high level. I’m intimidated by it, both as a player and a GM.

In some ways, I think 5th level is best: PCs aren’t shackled with the ‘tyranny’ of the full attack yet...

I like 1-5, but maybe that’s from the GM perspective. It’s just easier to GM at those levels. My PCs seem to like that classic ‘sweet spot’ of 5-10th level...

Thanks, all. Great stuff.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This side of the forums has become a lot more open and supportive since PF2 arrived and the overzealous crew moved with them. But I’m still a little hesitant to post on the homebrew forum...I still get the sense there are ambush predators waiting to tear down my scribbles. Sure - I should be tougher - heck, I’m in Airborne Ranger in real life. But if good supportive criticism is not forthcoming, why bother?

Looking for the stats of some elven rangers, maybe 2nd to 4th level. The 1st level ranger in the ‘NPC Codex’ is close to what I’m looking for, just too low a level...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

‘Carrion Hill’ was great. I really enjoyed playing through it. It doesn’t seem to get the credit it merits.

That the rogue never quite got the ‘striker’ role down in a way that was satisfying; that seemed to go to the slayer. But it would have been helpful, I think, to give the rogue the chance to do bigger damage in certain situations - IE sneak attack. Other systems, including PF2, have managed this.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We were already fans of all the Paizo Dungeon and Game Mastery products. I remember playing the PF1 playtest in Spring 2008. Moving to PF was completely logical. Have enjoyed PFS, and playing with my original group. The latter crew still gets together for PF1 over Zoom every Thursday night. Absent a TPK, we’ll keep going ad infinitum...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Appreciate the OP’s analysis here. Thanks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Chaotic good. He fights for ‘good’ but has difficulty adhering to the law.

This likely means the thread should be moved to the 3PP forum, but can anyone recommend quality third-party products that touch on what many of you have suggested (above and beyond that which is in the CRB, as many of you have reminded me)?

Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

Sounds like you are looking for the Ironfang Invasion AP, where hobgoblins invade and the PCs start off in a woodsy area fighting guerilla raids against them. Can't remember how they handled the woods, though.

Yes - I’ve been stealing liberally from ‘Ironfang...’ for my current campaign. My only problem is that the encounters seem to just ‘happen’ to PCs. How good they are in the woods doesn’t seem to matter. There is no discussion, for example, of what happens when the party screws up a Survival roll and gets lost.

1 person marked this as a favorite.


So I’m in the midst of running a campaign right now that has had elements of wilderness. And I was recently telling one of the players in that campaign that I have come to the conclusion that PF1 just doesn’t do wilderness well.

But now I’ve got this idea in my head to run a one-shot where the PCs are all rangers (well, actually a mix of a ranger or two, a hunter, maybe a wilderness-centric rogue...) fighting a guerrilla war against an incursion of hobgoblins.

I want to really stress-test the game a bit, and prove myself wrong.

Help me - guide me - inspire me. What products, Paizo or third-party, should I be looking at? What concepts and rules should I be playing with? Are there specific builds that will help tell this story and prove PF1 can do wilderness well?

I want chases through woods, LotR-style. I want fear of dark woods. I want players rewarded for using the terrain well.

PS - Incidentally, I’ve gone through ‘Ultimate Wilderness, and it is of limited utility...

DeathlessOne wrote:

I've adopted a number of rules from the Unchained book and made my own tweaks to Cantrips/caster level scaling that bear some resemblance to D&D 5e, to the point that I think I've settled on a favorite way to play PF1.

Some highlights:
Cantrips works similarly to PF2/5E. They scale in damage as the character levels.
Caster levels stack (up to character level) and opens up a single spell slot of higher level if your caster level is high enough to cast that level of spell, but you don't learn any new spells for that level. No high ability bonus spell slot for this spell level unless your class level is high enough. This lets you make use of metamagic (or a magic item that grants a spell known for that level).
3-action economy fairly similar to PF2. I've kept swift actions (with some tweaks) and changed AoO/Immediate actions to Reactions. Quicken spells are one action. Lay on Hands remains a swift action. BAB does not determine number of attacks available to the character, only the stacking penalty for each.

The result? The game is more dynamic, combat seems to run faster, and battles are more mobile.

This is really admirable work. A credit to you, sir!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:

I'll just say, as someone who has happily made the jump to PF2, that there are things I miss about PF1.

Not enough to switch back- running and teaching PF2 is far easier, and that's despite my not having more than a decade's experience with it!- but I can understand people who are happy with what they've got.

So, I hope everybody here continues to have a good time bouncing ideas off of each other and creating whatever new content is desired for a beloved system.

I own PF2 and I’ve tried it twice. They were pretty tentative attempts; I need more exposure. If I weren’t so lacking in energy to learn a new system (IE lazy), I’m sure I’d make the switch as a GM also.

But PF1 it is for now, and for the foreseeable future...

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:

Personally I like using the acrobatics to tumble. I just want to the DCs to be a little more reasonable like 15+creature CR(maybe + size mod). Without that the skill is almost useless especially with jump DCs so high.

Also was hoping you guys would get rid of CMD and just use AC as the base DC.

I do feel that a lot of things I have seen have added more complexity then was needed instead of streamlining things. If you change too much then it will no longer be usable with old 1e Pathfinder materials.

Yeah - I gotta say I was initially very keen on the tightening and clarifying of PF1 rules. But the apparent addition of lots more rules has made me more hesitant...

It’s just me, but I was more hoping for that aforementioned ‘tightening’ of a pre-existing rule set. I’m not sure I have the energy or motivation to learn what looks more and more like a completely new rule set. Again, though - that’s just me. I can understand the desire to tear it down to the studs to build a dream product.

I always assumed that if you were the one doing the pinning, you merely retained the grappled condition...

It’s admitted flaw in my character that this annoys me so much, and that I obsess over rule confusion/grey areas/vagueness as much as I do. This question was in my head off and on today. 20 year-old underlying chassis system / 11 years of CMB/CMD. And no answer from on high, as we do our best to struggle through poorly-written text.

That’s actually what I was hoping for in PF2: a rulebook where grey areas and poorly-explained rules were made tighter (not watertight - that’s impossible, I get it), but closer to that Platonic ideal of a perfectly comprehensible rule system.

I’m going to rule that loss of Dex while pinned does NOT affect CMD. But I’m not ruling that way from trying to discern the text; I’m going to rule that way because it favours the PCs, and they get pinned more than any single monster. And where rules are vague I believe ruling in favour of the PCs.

But everything said above is very compelling also. And I remain annoyed that it is so poorly explained in the CRB...

Thanks all. Seriously - have a great holiday. This a great community.

Any time during your turn! Ok - thanks!

1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>