Aqueous Orb + Summoning an Aquatic monster/animal/water elemental.
edit: I can't spell
Search Posts
You could just put a few levels in so that you could be the only character in the game that can get vicious on a ranged weapon.
I think I did a really awful job of arguing my point before. Normally a touch spell charges you with magical energy that you can discharge either into yourself, or into anything that you touch. you get a free touch attack from the spell to accomplish this. This held charge doesn't actually require your will to discharge though. If I cast shocking grasp and hold the charge, it goes off into the next thing that touches me or I touch. regardless if it is the enemy hitting me with a weapon, me attacking someone with a unarmed or natural attack, me touching a doorknob, or even the cleric trying to heal me. It just goes off. Also if I cast another spell, any other spell, the charge is lost. This is the rule that frostbite and chill touch ignores. The charge of these spells is not lost from the casting of other spells, and you can continue to make touch attempts in order to spend the charges. In theory they would continue to discharge all the other normal reason's as well. If this holds true, and you cast shocking grasp and make your touch attack, does frostbite go off?
There is a God of Justice that reqires no recognition only for Justice to be spread though the world. He chose the person with the strongest belief in justice to be his champion. Perhaps he has other followers and the character is just someone that caught his favor. The character doesn't have to know that it is a god that grants him his powers, they come from his faith and believe in the ideas that the god represents. Perhaps the god doesn't care if he is worshiped that mortal, or he thinks that the cause of justice is served best for it's own sake instead of for his.
But the point I was trying to make is that was the EFFECT of the spell. As I have read on the forums Frostbite and Chill touch are different. Shocking grasp is a touch spell with the effect of damage. Frost bite just says "Your touch attacks do this" as the effect. I've already read on the forums that frostbite and chill touch work differently with regards to charging the touch attack and durration, and preventing other spells from being cast. I can't see why it wouldn't go off from another touch attack. e: Adding link
Frostbite is a touch spell, but once you cast it it just gives your touch attack damage. It doesn't say that you have to make a specific touch attack, like other touch spells do. It says "Your melee touch attack deals 1d6 points of nonlethal cold damage + 1 point per level..." It also isn't a held charge much like Chill Touch, once you cast it it is an effect. Sorry, I should have liked the spell before.
There are always racial tensions in my campaigns. I allow pretty much any race but Svirfneblin. And I may allow them if a lesser version is ever made. But the more rare your race, the more people distrust you. And if you come from a race that others know nothing but hostilities from, you are going to have more problems. This includes forigners of the same race. Some people here have stated that people would be less inclined towards racism within their own race if they have other races to focus on instead. So color would mean less to humans when there were elves and dwarves around. This is a very modern assumption. The idea of race by just color is actually relatively recent. Look at how Irish imigrants were treated in the united states in the mid 1800's. While slavery and the civil war were both in full stride. A person didn't used to define themselves as white or black. They used to define themselves as Italian, German, Irish, Etc. A couple of world wars, and world wide communication and transportation network have changed this, but you can still see this in old writing and even some old movies. Actually watch Band of Brothers and look at how the characters treat eachother at the begining. They are all making assumptions of eachother based on race, and they are all white.
The spell frostbite makes your melee touch attacks deal 1d6+1/level cold/nonlethal damage. can this be done in addition to another touch attack? For instance if I cast shocking grasp does it go off? If I use flame blade does it go off? If I grapple or trip someone without a weapon does it go off?
you could just use the confused condition.
They see her as more of a misguided child that has been aflicted with a curse. which is what she is. She is only 11. And they are having a difficult time explaining to her when it is ok to kill and when it isn't. The characters were built off of a idea that I had to get interesting characters in which all characters were required to be good, but were aflicted with 2 deadly sins. They are all dealing with evil compulsions while at the same time trying to be heroic and do the right thing. This has obviously affected how those characters would see Jeva. However, specific situations aside, this can't be the first party that has decided not to kill Jeva, and I was wondering what solutions other parties came up with.
Admitedly this is partially a situation outside the scope of the modules intent. The PC "Monster Lady" is a changling unarmed fighter that has the claws racial trait. So the character pretty much just tears enemies appart with her bare hands. The party was in a hard encounter with some bug bears soon after finding jeva, with half the party left unconcious and the fighter defeating the bug bears mostly on her own. The Unarmed fighter was the player that took the most interest in Jeva, and whom was kind of simular to jeva in the sense of being a violent pyschopath. So given the fact that Jeva would have slaughtered the entire party had she attacked then (being a level 2 expert/level 2 rogue), I decided she would hold off and follow the interesting PC for a while. This went on for several days and encounters. I played Jeva like a child. She was somewhat naieve and didn't always understand what the characters were doing. She was also extreemly violent, several times coup-de-grasing villians that the party wanted to keep alive and question. And very visibly enjoyed combat and killing things. She ate the corpse of a halfling, without even trying to hide it. (she essentially got told by the party that it was bad, so she hides her tendency to eat people now. Although one of the party members is secretly a cannibal and helps her.) She if fully psychotic and I don't play her otherwise. The adoption is pretty much under the assumption that they are better able to guide her and teach her to control her evil side than anyone else.
I am running a campaign and starting with the Crown of the Kobold King module. One of the NPC's in the module is a child with Lycanthropy named Jeva. The problem with the encounter as it is written in the module is that it seems to assume that the party will kill Jeva. My party has taken a liking to the child, and Jeva has taken a liking to a clawed changling PC in the party that that she has taken to calling "monster lady" and sees as kind of a maternal figure. So they don't want to kill Jeva, but letting her run free is out of the question. They don't want to imprision the child, even though they can pretty well assume her previous crimes. They can't just drop her off at some orphanage. They feel that they are being pidgeon holed into having to adopt the child (especially monster lady who is slowly becoming the girls mother), and I'm not sure that they are wrong as I can't see another solution to this. We can't be the first party that decided not to kill the little girl. What solutions did other people come with for this module?
Any Good-aligned character should have serious issues with this course of action, not just paladins.All that needs to be said. I don't see how this is evil. The most that has been proven is that it could be considered chaotic.
How is that inherintly a "better" decision than arresting him and forcing him to pay. Really a blockade is likely to end in many more innocent deaths than going in with a percise strike to extract the leader. This also could take months with the mercenaries still not paid, which won't help with any of their immediate problems.
Paladins and Adventuring parties in general wander around dispatching justice all the time assuming they are the best ones for the job. And calling any paladin in any campaign a vigilante wouldn't be inappropriate unless the entire campaigin is about following orders from a king all day. A Paladin is not powerless to act unless there is a lawful authority behind him. In most campaigns he will be the best man for the job because there is nobody better, or just nobody else around. As far as execution being dispropotionate, that depends. So far it sounds like the lord just decided not to pay because he didn't feel like it. The Lord continuing that after being arrested would be something to get executed for. You have a army of hundreds of merceneries that came to the town to kill his enemies because of promises he broke. Many of these soldiers are supporting families that won't be able to eat this winter. Him not paying is a death sentence for them. A death sentence for the crime is proportionate given the situation, and it is under the assumption that he still refuses to pay after being arrested. Other information could come up later that could make it much less so.
That makes it a unlawful act, not a evil one. The paladin was only working for the town leader because he was hired by a mercenery, by lawful contract. That the leader failed to hold his end of the bargain on. I don't think that being a leader of a town makes you immune to the conditions of your own laws. While the action is unlawful because he is acting against a legal authority. It's only mildly so because it is that exact legal authority that broke his own lawful contract. And ruling that a paladin can never break any law regardless of the circomstances and must never act against a legal authority ever is well beyond the scope of the lawful alignment. I never said that this is the most good, and noble action that could ever be done, I simply said that it was legitimate and wouldn't break alignment if done correctly.
I'm going to be the Devil's Advocate here and say that it is totally legitimate for the Paladin to do this. You aren't "Kidnapping" anybody. You are "arresting" him. He ripped you off. If somebody broke a contract and was arrested by the paladin and forced to pay up, it would be legitimate if the paladin were acting on the part of a third party, it is legitimate here. Yes the commando thing is mildly dishonorable. But it just needs pointed out to the Paladin that any more direct method will lead to much greater innocent casulties, and just make sure you do your best not to kill anybody. You have the resources of the Mercenary army at your disposal, the party should be able to equip itself for the situation. It's not ransom. You have arrested him, and you are holding him until he pays his debt. Put this into perspective. If you were to do this to anybody else, for the same reason it would be legitimate. Let's create a simular story. A merchant rips off his supplier and refuses to pay on delivery of goods. So the supplier approaches the paladin to get his money. The paladin arrests the Merchant and forces him to honor the contract or be hung. The merchant being arrested has no real power to do this, so it will fall upon his family to pay the paladin the money in order to secure the release of the merchant. All of this is perfectly acceptable behavior for the paladin. But, if you look at it out of context it is kidnapping and ransom.
The only valid choice for a bonded option is either a ring or amulet that you wear and you don't have to carry. Reason being that you have to have your bonded item in your hand whenever you cast a spell. So unless you want to walk around with your dagger out at all times you don't want it to be any kind of weapon. A staff would still be OK, but what if for some reason you have to pull something else out of your bag such as a wand or rod, now you can't cast spells with somatic components or material components because you don't have a free hand.
And as I was saying, It doesn't matter where the role playing is. I'm not saying there SHOULD be a complete magic mart where everything that you can afford is available, I'm just saying if you want to emphasize role playing in your game it will happen regardless. Just because he has that +4 cold iron dragon bane great axe doesn't mean that there isn't roll playing in the game, it doesn't mean that he didn't go on great adventures and get great and interesting treasure in the process. There are plenty of things that are hand waived by a DM so that the group can move on to what they see as more important aspects of the game, and some groups consider equipment shopping for equipment to fall in that list. Some DMs or Groups may consider progressing the story to be more important that shopping for magic items. I don't see why that means they don't roll play, or removes the importance of treasure, or makes magic less rare. Dragons, Titans, Demigods, and powerful outsiders are also incredibly rare in the world, but these are still things that a higher level party will be running across fairly consistently. That is what separates Adventurers from Commoners, they have a life that keeps them involved in things constantly that chances are a Commoner can go their entire life without seeing. And magical items are the same.
If you find that either crafting, buying, or finding items makes them more interesting than the other two it is because you are biased to the point that you are deliberatly ignoring the others. The party is going to go on great adventures, kill horrible monsters, and do heroic things thoughout the campaign, that is what the campaign is. Magic items serving as plot hooks, or quest items is great for the campaign and the players. However, it really doesn't matter if the party pries the "Sword of Ogre Decapitation" grasp of a dead lich they have slain, or if they find that they lich had a hidden horde of gemstones that allows them to buy the sword, Or if it they find the pieces of a ancient blade that needs to be put together by a DC 25 Blacksmithing check in the heart of an ancient volcano. It is still achieving the exact thing, and it is how the DM's and player play out the scene that makes the difference, not specifically how they get the item. Also there is nothing wrong with pulling "common" magic items off of the corpses of enemies, especially humanoid ones. If your party is facing humanoids and other weapon weilding enemies often, after a certain level those items should be frequently minor magic items. Otherwise how could they go against this party of adventurers and the magic items that they have. It's understandable that the world might be full of monsters that are naturally stronger and tougher than the party, but they shouldn't be rutinely be coming across humanoids that can equal them and their one of a kind dwarven blade quenched in the blood of a fallen god with their shortsword that they bought at the local blacksmith.
You can still finish flurry of blows, you don't make iterative attacks necessarially with fists and it isn't limited by the weapon in your hand if you chose not to use it. Just finish him off with your other fist, your elbows, knees, feet, tentacles, whatever.
sounds like a gunslinger would be a great option as it would be the only available class that could consistently do touch attacks. With those abilities, you might also want to try playing a monk.
Given that it is an NPC just for fun, you might want to try this.
I agree that pregens make a great option for new players. For instance if there were a "key skill" list that newer players could use, and instead of picking and choosing their skill points could just use their level to determine a skill check. Or even if there were feat "tracks" to accomplish basic goals for each class(2 weapon fighting, archer, etc). I do this with new players anyways alot of the time, asking them what their goals are and giving them a basic outline of how to achive them. However this should always be a optional path, I should always be able to leave it and choose some other way to spend my skill points or feats.
trap that turns it's target invisibile and mute, and replaces him with illusionary double controlled by BBEG.
I had a nice ranch designed where a retired rancher kept herds of venomous animals such as giant wasps, centipeeds, and spiders, to harvest poisons to sell. This was kind of an espionioge encounter where the rance was owned by the government, and where one of the ranchers was a spy from a rival nation trying to both steal poisons and sobotage the operation so that the poisons couldn't be used against them.
The only resourse you really get out of more weaker Ediolons is actions. So focus on using as many actions as possible. You can also have them swarm a single enemy aiding eachother, or have them all aid you so you can stuff. They can be used as effective distractions and should make great scouts. They can work together man heavy equipment such as ships, wagons turned into DaVinci Tanks, or seige equipment. However I wouldn't say they would be effective if you were trying to use them in any traditional way.
When traveling use Knowledge Local as a kind of "street smarts". While not necessarially the direct knowledge of the locality, so much as knowing how things generally work in simular locations, or your ability to pay attention and notice details about a area. Kind of like knowlege nature works in the desert even if the ranger with it has never lived outside of a forest.
Hide in bushes
A touch spell once cast can be stored indefinitely until the caster touches someone to discharge it or somebody or something else touches the caster. should the caster choose to discharge it into someone else it requires a standard action(And a touch attack if target isn't willing) OK, my question is what if the caster wanted to discharge it into themselves? would it still be a standard action to just touch themselves? I would think such a simple action would be fairly quick and not need a standard action, although perhaps it should still be a standard action for balance reasons?
on a related note, what if you hold a touch spell such as Cat's Grace and discharged it on yourself at the begining of combat. What would be the action required to discharge it on yourself. Would it be a standard action to touch yourself, or a free action? Logically I would think you could touch yourself as a free action, but you might not want to allow that as it would then give them their full turn to do anything else. But you might not want to allow someone to walk around charged with say Invisibility and discharge it on themselves freely at any time. Alternately it would be fun if they were the first one hit in combat and the attacker suddenly became invisible.
assuming level 20
taking 10 with a staff of animate dead you can emulate a class level of 10+20(ranks)+20(fav class)+7(cha)+3(trained)+6(skill focus)+4(magical aplitude)+1(dangerously curious)
If you aren't stuck on the wizard idea, How about a master chymist with each personality covering a different aspect of Nethys.
It is at the very least a very questionable act. A paladin may not decide to kill you for that alone, he would have to take into account your other actions, and how often you do it. Is this something you do occasionally when other healing isn't available, or is it something that you do at the end of every combat so that you savor the victory. There are a lot of ways to play, for instance what if it is an ability you use only in the most dire of emergencies, and you find it disgusting as a sign of your corrupt heritage. You could always be the brooding antihero constantly fighting off your darker hungers, like Blade but able to cast spells. Assuming this is the one flaw in a otherwise good person, he would still feel the need to try to stop you probably. Either by hosting an intervention with the rest of the party, or perhaps just burning corpses at the end of every combat.
Honestly, other than the occasional person that wants to be chaotic neutral to get away with anything, I don't find alignment that much of an issue. Really most of my player's don't even know their alignment. Because there is no reason for them to, it's just another part of the game that I keep track of in the background. The only ones that care about alignment are paladins and others religious persons. And I don't want a player ever trying to justify an character action because of alignment. Players actions should be based on what their character WOULD do, not based on what a person of X alignment SHOULD do. Character's and therefore player's don't need to know alignments, and shouldn't worry about them any more than you should worry if your actions change your alignment.
If you want to use the ballista rules and shrink them down, which I guess looking at it a Ballista is just crossbow rules scaled up. A Heavy crossbow for a large creature is the same as a ballista for a small creature. 2d8 damage. so a medium creature could reload it as a full round action, reaim as zero(part of the fire action), and fire as a standard action with a -2 penalty for size. Exactly the same as a heavy crossbow, although I would have to say it couldn't be used with 1 hand just because of size, not many people can just aim a 64 lb weapon from the shoulder and fire it, let alone one handed. You would need a Rambo Character to be able to do that. So the question is do you require the Exotic Weapon Proficiency in order to do this Also enlarge person doesn't work for ranged weapons, as soon as the ammo leaves you it shrinks to it's normal size dealing normal damage. Edit: It's worth mentioning that if you go the ballista route, you gain the benefits of bypassing damage reduction of objects. and with the Master Seige Engineer Feat you can fire just as fast.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies. So if a creature is attacking with a crossbow that is 1 size category too big he is getting -2 to his attack roll. If he is enlarged then picks up the same crossbow he has a -2 to dex, and a -1 to attack rolls for being large. This means that the penalties for a large character with a large crossbow are the same as a medium character with a large crossbow. Am I looking at this wrong here?
At the start of every session I ask every player to roll 5 perception checks and initiative checks. It is easy enough to roll initiative on enemies when preparing the encounter.
I suggest not arcane bonding a weapon or any other item that you hold in your hand. Primary problem being is you always have to be wielding that item in order to cast spells, which gives you 1 free hand to cast spells with somatic components. If you pull out a metamagic rod you can't actually use it on any spell requiring somatic components because you don't have a free hand. There used to be a feat in some 3.5 book allowing you to cast spells with somatic components while holding a light weapon such as a dagger, but unless your GM allows you access to that feat going for an item that you wear is the best bet, keep your hand free.
You have given a class an unlimited use healing touch attack for free. Some groups would always have someone dip 1 level into this class just for that. It should be limited to a number of times per day at the very least.
I would allow you to bring back you lost familiar only. This is more for spellbook than anything, as if you lost your familiar as a witch you lose your whole spellbook as well. I would allow a player a way of resurecting his familiar and make up some fluff about it being because of the magical bond that exists between them, this is just a choice I made as a DM, not by RAW. However if summoning a new familiar, a normal version of the animal must exist somewhere near by to summon.
You can summon any type of familiar that is available to you
You get the first one for free, just like a 1st level wizard or witch always does. You may want to make up a plot device to explain where it came from or something, but it shouldn't "cost" anything.
Normally drawing an item is a move action. Drawing an item from the sash requires opening it first(a move action) then drawing it(a move action). I would say that having it open was the only way to quick draw from it. Actually I can't really see the point of the item unless your DM is in love with sending pick-pockets after you.
It doesn't say "human" or even "sentient creature" hand. If it came into question I would say that it was a monkey's and not let it interfere with the flow of the game.
Isn't crafting cost defined as 50% of the base market price?
I don't completely understand. I mean yes I see your point that if these benefits are supposed to be obtained throughout the course of the game, they can just as easily be handed out during the leveling process. However, characters are also supposed to gain gold as they level at a certain rate. If you called gold "points" instead it would accomplish the exact same thing you are trying to do. "Points" are handed out at the end of every encounter, or just added up and given at the time of leveling, and spent on items, it accomplishes the same thing. Also the system fails to calculate for all the other things that some characters might spend wealth on but others don't. While a fighter may spend most of their money on armor and weapons, the wizard might split their money across meta-magic rods, starves, wands, and spend less on AC, and ability scores not directly related to casting. Creating an entire new purchasing system for everything in the game seems kind of like reinventing the wheel to me. If you are looking for a specific flavor it can be done much easier just by changing the context of the rules rather than the actual rules themselves. Also, does adoption of this system mean that you hand out much less gold, or no gold? Are magic items still available? Do they stack with the benefits of leveling, or are they separate? Adopting this system instead of magic items entirely just makes me ask what I am supposed to do with all that gold.
Hitpoints and skills both, you gain a minimum of 1 every level. You cannot level up and gain zero or loose either one.
I didn't mean to say so much that you can trip them in a moment of vulnerability as soon as they are finished standing, so much as I meant that you can trip to prevent them from getting up. Seems to me that smacking someone in the knee while they are standing up will be as effective for keeping them down as it was to knock them down in the first place. It is not so much to do with a stack of events resolving as does it make sense that you should be able to prevent the action. In the situation such as disarm, couldn't a disarm attack when someone is picking up their sword off the ground just as easily be seen as you kicking the sword out of their reach? For Trip can't it just be that you push them down as they try to stand up? I don't see the need for an exact stack of events that happen one after another for these cases.
I would have to say that if you are already readily aware of the weaknesses or rogues and your players aren't you haven't actually introduced them. You should send provide your next encounter with a few anti-rogue elements in order for them to understand that there are weakness for rogues. Also, perhaps enemies shouldn't be so easy to flank, maintaining tight formations when necessary.
The discussion here mostly assumes that there are two states during the action of standing up. At some point you start prone, and then you are in a standing position, and the attack happens somewhere in those to phases. I am in the position that there is an in-between situation when the person is attacked when half way though standing up. I would allow players to do it. However, as a DM, this is a kind of a cruel move because unless all the PC's are built to withstand trip attacks it can easily lead to TPK. I mean I can throw a party of 5 against a party of higher level fighters specializing in trip, using a strategy that gets them a surprise round, and TPK in no time.
yeah, pretty much. proficiency, moral, magic effects, curses, poisons, low ground, wearing armor, any other penalty that might be there.
|