Search Posts
Well, I'd love to play, but I'm in Brussels, so it's not too likely that I'd be able to make it all the way up there during the week. We'll see though; I've really, really been wanting to actually play some PFS. Funny, I got my society # the day the project was announced, but life has conspired against me and I've never managed to get a game in.
All I know is that my group in Savage Tide captured the huecuva in the first adventure, controlled it, and it is still with them as they're approaching the Isle of Dread. That DR 10/Silver is a formidable defense for most monsters to penetrate. (not to mention PCs. I think it's a pretty frustrating monster to fight for this reason).
Sorry I haven't read the Beta recently, but is there actually something in the rules that allows anything with an enhancement bonus to Armor AC to have other armor type enchantments? If there is no change from 3.5 in this regard, then I don't interpret bracers of armor as being able to hold armor enchantments. (they are wondrous items, not armor) That being said, yeah, if they can hold enchantments then they do stack (except for the AC). (and of course, your second example of the padded armor +1 and heavy fort and the bracers +8 works just fine as is) My current wizard loves running around with a pair of +1 Mithral Bucklers loaded with a heap of fun shield enchantments. And of course an augment crystal for each, please.
yeah, I agree that it works by RAW. But I would never let a player pull that. Or at the very least I would describe "I ready an action to move up next to him if he starts casting" as "you fix your gaze intently on the spellcaster and crouch, ready to leap towards him at the slightest provocation". He sure as hell would know to cast defensively. This is just yet another example of where non-simultaneous combat breaks down.
I have to opine that the the success or lack thereof of a high level module does not necessarily reflect the desire of players to game at high levels. Modules have the unfortunate trait that there is nothing tying in a partys' previous experiences. A well written AP, on the other hand, will build on the previous accomplishments of the players and reward them for long work. I would be much much more interested in playing at 15th-17th level if I had been working towards it from 1st level, developing a character that interacted with the metaplot, than I would be just playing a 15th-17th level adventure with no ties to previous deeds. Furthermore, I find that many modules are played by creating characters explicitly for that module and running it, rather than incorporating it into an ongoing campaign (ymmv of course). And a character pulled for the air at 15th level is much less interesting than one grown organically from humble beginnings. In that light, I can see the situation where stand-alone high level modules would not fair as well as APs that ended to high level.
I know that personally I would be much less interested in the APs if the supplemental material were removed. This extra information gives options for DMs when players go off the rails and expands the game world in a way that directly supports play of the AP. Without this supplemental material, I feel there would be very little ambience in the APs. It would simply be completing one task after another. (Though I recognize that DMs can flesh out a world on their own, I am a sucker for Canon).
Alright, is three players enough for a Society adventure? Or shall we try to grab on to a couple more? I think based on past Paizo products 3 players would get slaughtered in most scenarios (though I haven't read any so maybe I'm wrong). I should also note that when I said 'play/DM' above I would not want to only DM. Some sort of rotating DM system would be ideal, so everyone gets a chance to play most adventures. Anyway, I'll keep an eye here in case more people show up.
I think something like 2a would be ideal. I dislike the way option 1 works, where you have to carefully calculate your rage expenditure on a round by round basis. It just seems antithetical to the concept of a barbarian. But using rage points just to track rounds of rage sounds great. Better than rages/day. Greater and Mighty rage definately must cost the same (actually just replace) regular rage. I like the "often as you like" i.e. "just turn it on and smash" idea of 2a.
I vastly prefer opposed rolls. In fact, the only difference in time is the time it takes to add the result of a d20 and your CMB. If that is adding significant time to your gaming sessions, I am sorry for your math skills. Any modifiers that might apply would have to be added to a static DC anyway, so there is no time savings there. I feel that opposed rolls much better simulate the chaos of combat. In fact, I think I'm going to change Tumble to an opposed roll vs. a reflex save next time I run my game.
How do they know what the DC is? Surely you don't tell the player what number he needs to beat before he decides whether to make the action? Or maybe he looked at the MM. In which case he should be smacked.
yeah, wow! awesome customer service! I wasn't really expecting any sort of action. Before you go sending a replacement, let me just confirm that what I think is broken, is in fact broken. Basically, my entire book is unglued from the spine. I assume this is not right, compared to other similarly bound RPG hardcovers. But I thought I should confirm that this is indeed wrong. And yeah, if there is anything I can do to help with the replacement, let me know.
I remember a thread here a while back where someone had compiled a timeline for Sea Wyvern's Wake. It was a really nice breakdown of what happened various days of the voyage, including when Rowyn would perform mischief, random monster encounters, bad weather, etc. I've tried searching the archives for it, but no luck. Does anyone happen to recall this and where I could find it? Thanks!
stuff about not being able to do anything in a grapple... Check out this text from Improved Grab: The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the improved grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on grapple checks, but is not considered grappled itself; the creature does not lose its Dexterity bonus to AC, still threatens an area, and can use its remaining attacks against other opponents. A huge or larger creature can get access to this through the Snatch feat: The creature can choose to start a grapple when it hits with a claw or bite attack, as though it had the improved grab special attack. I think this should fix your problem nicely. Should still be easy for something really big to grapple something puny. For example, I've had great fun using this with a Great Red Wyrm. Just hold one guy automatically in his mouth (something like +55 grapple after the -20) and lay waste to everyone else. When it's time for the breath weapon, well that guy in the mouth is toast.
We finished up The Bullywug Gambit last week, and the characters are now enjoying some downtime. So, here are some thoughts on how the assault on the manor runs, and some amusing things my players have gotten up to. The players hit the manor at full health and at Level 4. And it was dicey. I really liked the fact that they HAD to keep going. But Power Attack is just a killer. No one died, but there were some close calls. If the Jade Ravens hadn't been around to absorb hits from Drevoraz, it could have been bad. I had Bua-Gorg summon a Dretch, which then proceeded to nauseate about 3/4 of the party. That was pretty nasty. He was then going to rebuke some of the necromancer's pets, but the Monk got to him first and that was the end of that. Grappling monks are nasty. Chief Lorpth would have killed some people if Liamae hadn't gotten off her Charm Person. As it was, he was distracted for several rounds, but then they fought him anyway, once his minions were gone. The players got a kick out of the huntress and her cigar-smoking frog lips. In fact, she is now a zombie named Frogger. So now, the necromancer has quite a menagerie. Skeletor (i.e. Veldimar Krund, the invincible bone shield), Frogger the bullywug zombie, and Pet, the skeletal rust monster. There was an amusing sequence when he was trying to extract them from the Vanderboren manor. He ended up using Disguise Undead, to turn the rust monster into... a giant riding Ant. After Lavinia managed to get him past the guards cleanign up the mess in the manor, he paraded through the festive streets, a small olman shaman, riding a giant ant, flanked by 2 mute men. all covered in tattered cloaks. People gave him a wide berth. Then we have another character who is a Courtesan. (we have great fun telling her all the time that she's just a fancy whore). She wanted to investigate the Lotus Dragon hideout again, to try to find proof of Heldrath Kellanis involvement. But, the Taxidermist's has been boarded up by the Sunrise Watch. So, she finds a guardsmen off duty, gets him drunk, and starts flirting with him. She is flailing about verbally, trying to think of a way to have him let her into the Taxidermist's. He wants to take her down to the docks, but she says "that sounds peacful. and sometimes thats nice. but I feel wild. like an animal". She eventually gets him into the Taxidermist's and proceeds to have sex with him in the middle of the showroom before heading off to check out the tunnels after he's passed out. Later on she gets a custom made Heward's Handy Oversized Purse, because the standard model won't match her ladylike appearance.
When Alpha 1 was first released and I saw the catrips/orisons at will bit, I immediately went through all the 0th level spells in the SRD to look for problems. Originally I agreed with you that things like Resistance and Virtue would be problematic. But if you remember that the duration of the spell is only 1 minute, it fixes itself. Can you honestly see a realistic party of 4 spending 2/5 of its adventuring day having the cleric bless them? Bless for 24 seconds, walk for 36 seconds. repeat. I think the short durations of these spells actually mean they won't be used on the whole party, but rather on one member before a known combat. Or something like that. Most other cantrips I've looked at similarly work out. But there are a few that need changing. It is not ok to be able to create infinite Light, Dancing Lights, Create Water, or Purify Food/Water effects. I would suggest a rule that only one instance of a cantrip / orison can be in existance at a time. In addition, the 0th level creation effects need to be limited in uses / day.
As far as I (and seemingly others) understand it, this ability just increases the control pool you get from Animate Dead. The ability does not itself grant you control, just capacity. You need to get the Undead under your control somehow else. (i.e. through Animate Dead). Which then raises the point, why does my 1st level necromancer have a signature ability that can't be used till level 7? As far as I know, this hasn't been addressed.
Yeah, this was the case in Alpha 1 as well. Hopefully it gets added in some time.
Yeah, I hope this is an oversight as well. I have the feeling that in the compressing of skills and copying of text from the SRD, some things were unintentionally emitted.
This used to be a special feature of Tumble in 3.5. So, yeah, anyone who has ranks in Acrobatics gains this, I would presume.
What you're suggesting doesn't work in 3.5. Grappling Combatants only lose their Dex bonus to those outside the grapple. They retain their Dex bonus against those they are grappling with. That being said, the party I'm DMing at the moment has the following standing strategy. Monk grapples someone. Everyone else surrounds and sneak attacks the hell out of it.
... This raises the question: do you keep the school power progression if you PrC out? ...Of course not, otherwise the nice progression of abilities for staying in the wizard class is pointless. Most spellcasting PrCs will state something like "you gain spellcasting progression, but no other abilities". And now wizards actually have abilities to lose if you PrC out. Right. I agree. I just wanted some sort of confirmation / clarification on this. For example, you could go with the argument that in 3.5, a specialist does continue to get the extra spell/level/day when he PrCs out, so the same should apply here. (I don't think it should work that way, just saying you could argue it). I think I'm still comparing the pRPG wizard to the 3.5 wizard too much. I'm stuck thinking of everything in terms of those extra specialist spells /day.
I'm running Savage Tide, and we decided to incorporate some of the pRPG Alpha rules to see how they fare. I'll post separate threads to talk about each aspect of the rules we are testing. Arcane Schools - Necromancy - We have a necromancer in the party. He was excited to see the School Powers (and has decided not to go for a PrC because of them). This raises the question: do you keep the school power progression if you PrC out? If so, then there is still no reason to stay Wizard past level 5. This needs to be clarified. (Same with Domain Powers for Clerics) He doesn't like the Spell-like ability saves being Cha based at all, but since the necro powers don't have many saves, he is ok. This particular instance of the playtest is a bit of an odd duck, since the powers that Jason chose for necromancy just about perfectly fit this particular character. Hence the player's excitement. I think if he were another type of specialist, the enthusiasm would have been significantly less. Losing 1 spell/level/day of your choice is a HUGE hit. Aside: Any suggestions on how Focused Specialist from Complete Mage would work with the new specialist? --Grave Touch I misread this as a spell-like rather than a supernatural ability. We decided to let him try using it with Spectral Hand. Big Mistake! Way too good. But this shouldn't be possible with a supernatural ability, so no problem. I told him it won't be possible to use it that way next session. We'll see if he still likes it when he has to be in melee to use it. (Could you use spectral hand on it if it were a spell-like? We weren't sure). --Ray of Enfeeblement This was perfect for the character. He already uses it alot on a wand, so having some more, free, uses is great. Enchantment - I have a Psion(Telepath) in the party, so I made an Alpha version of the class, and ended up incorporating the Dazing Touch ability from the Enchantment School. The player thinks it is totally worthless. He would much much rather continue to plink away with his crossbow than get in melee in order to Daze something for a single round. Not sure if I agree with him or not. Of course, he also just blew all his Power Points with several encounters yet to go before he can rest, so it may see some use next session.
This suggestion is made of win! Awesome. Though I don't know how far I will take the Bullywug tactics. The party is, shall we say, unoptimized. And without a cleric of their own. I don't want to totally screw them. But definitely rebuking!
This is awsome. how come Ripclaw could deal 25 to the pc, but not get over 10 on the heucuva? I think ALL bullywugs carry silver though, or at least they would in my STAP. how often does the heucuva need to save to resist the command? I think having it in the party is going to unbalance things, but if it gets washed overboard while you are out to see, whose to worry? just to cps. Ripclaw gets 5 attacks on a pounce. Each deals less than 10 damage, but added up they are a lot. The huecuva would get a save every CL days. so 3 or 4 right now. However, once commanded, he can just be ordered to not resist any spells cast on him. But don't worry, I'll get rid of him soon enough.
I had a party of 5 1st level characters in the tunnels and it very nearly resulted in a TPK. However, they had no cleric among them, and only piercing weapons. (and one character with a dagger). It ended up with the monk grappling the zombies one by one, pinning them, and lots of low damage poking. It was very dicey whenever they had to face off against multiple opponents. Also, if they don't find the silver dagger, and they don't have a cleric, Veldimar Krund is nasty. They ended up grappling him and tossing him into the bottom of a tidal pool (And later recruiting him with command undead.
I was already planning on buying that one. I guess I'll just have to wait as patiently as I can for the others. Since it seems like you're doing about 2 deities per AP, who's next? Cayden Cailean and Calistria are scheduled for Second Darkness, if I remember correctly. Zon Kuthon is the other one for Curse of the Crimson Throne
I did break one rule though, that Rogue Talents cannot be be selected more than once. I would suggest that Combat Trick, Minor/Major Magic and Weapon Training be available multiple times. Interestingly enough, I feel that Combat Trick and Minor/Major Magic are exactly the talents that should not be available multiple times. Getting combat trick more than once really impinges on the fighter's bonus feats schtick. And having a lot of magic in a straight rogue just doesn't feel right to me. But thats just my opinion on the subject. Nice to see that you were able to create some interesting characters though!
Well, I wouldn't say no use. Celestial monkeys are great for springing traps and scouting rooms. spiders are great form tremorsense. etc. These uses of SMI are much nicer when you have many uses/day. but yeah, I would much much much rather have grease 10/day. Or something else more on par with the power of 10 ray of enfeeblements
Are you honestly suggesting it would be a bad thing if Pathfinder nudged wizards downward a bit, powerwise? I wasn't trying to imply whether it was a good or bad decision. I'm just saying what I would rather have as the player of a wizard. But yes, in general, I don't like do see things get nerfed. Just personal preference there. For example, I like the new grapple rules, but I won't implement them in my current campaign because they would screw my grapple-focused monk player. She is having a blast dominating combats right now and I don't want to take that away from her.
My point earlier was that, as a player, I would much rather have the choice of those bonus spells every odd level than a fixed SLA at even levels. I totally agree that it is just a balanced/"powerful" now, but I would prefer to be able to customize my specialist a bit more. For example, a conjuration specialist may well not summon monsters at all. I would much rather have that extra grease than any number of summon monster I s. Anyway, I think the at-will specialist abilities are just fine as written
Umm... the idea of this ability is to essentially replace the wizard using the crossbow or simple melee weapon in combat and as such it does so fairly well.The ability to have a flavorful replacement for a light crossbow is in no way also a replacement for having an extra spell of your highest level for low level characters. So your argument is actually that the specialist abilities do not make up for the loss of the 3.5 'extra spell per level per day' ? On that point, I would tend to agree. While 3.p specialists are much more flavorful, as a player I would much rather plink away with my crossbow, and have the extra spell/level (of my choice, as soon as I get that level of spell), rather than a flavorful at-will attack and preselected spells/day (not of my choice, not optimal, and only the level after I get that level of spell) Frank, I'm curious where you are getting 2d6 for an acid flask? The SRD clearly lists them as 1d6. Is there something I missed? Plus, this is an entirely useless method of combat, as it costs 10gp per attack. Cost prohibitive for 1st level characters.
Yes, that would be the point--evokers ought to blast better. But all the 1st level powers need to be balanced. Evokers DO blast better, but by using their spells. (or by using their 1st level power to get around resistances) I thought the same thing at first before thinking about it for a little bit.
I think the intent is that these at-will powers have less effect than a spell. Otherwise, why would you not just use them all the time instead of casting? I think the idea is to have something to do every round, then when you need the Big Guns, throw out that magic missile, or whatever. Upping the damge to d6 or d8 is a problem, because then, all of a sudden, you have a caster who is a much more effective archer than your archer. (1d8+x every round, touch attack) vs. (1d8+y, regular attack). x is likely to be >= y. This is similar to the warlock problem.
well, at higher levels, spending your standard action to do 1d4+x or 1d6+x is a waste of your action, even if you can get by resistances. I see these 1st level specialist powers as ways for wizards to contribute at low levels. As such, I think it is probably good the way it is now. The evoker can pretty much always reliably do his damage, while the conjurer has to hope for things without resistance. (though at low levels, is there much with resistance) Adding the evoker's specialist bonus would be bad, because then all of a sudden, one specialist has a much more powerful at-will ability than the others.
I agree. I think the point is that a Fighter should have an easy time hitting most things reliably in combat. It's the only thing they're good for, after all. I especially agree that this change shores up the low end of the iterative attack spectrum.
actually, as written, it is 1d4 at 1st level, 1d4+1 at second level, 1d4+2 at 4th level, up to 1d4+10 at 20th level. 1d4 base, and add an additional point of damage for each 2 caster levels. That is interesting. For some reason, Evocation sucks at at-will blasting compared to Conjuration? How does that make any sense?
count me in as well. will think on a race/class combo
3. The a question is the cap on cross-class or what bonus goes to using class skills? I agree that pulling the the 2 points per 1 rank would make tracking skill point use much easier. An idea would be to keep the 1/2( Level +3) max rank in cross class and allow PCs to Save their skill points for use at later levels. This gives a total pool of skill points to work when you make a high level character. While such a pool (an every class you have giving you class skills) can make unorganic characters, what's organic about characters starting at high levels anyways? ooh, I like this. Keeps the CC/class distinction, but allows for ease of creation. Then characters who want to "break the mold" can do so, but will still not be as good as those who have the skill on their class list. I think I'm going to try implementing this along with Kirth Gerson's ideas for my current campaign and see how it works out.
Lots of good stuff... Kirth's system FTW! Thoughts on other problems. 1) skills challenges appropriate to the whole party. I think it is GOOD that you can make challenges that only some of the party can overcome. This encourages the use of other solutions, like tying members together with a harness in the above balancing example, or just towing them across with a rope. or things like that. For a lot of skills, check with high DCs SHOULD be near impossible for people who haven't put a lot of training (skill points) into. This is just my opinion on the matter though. 2) skills that must be leveled vs. skills that die out. Tumble is the real culprit here. I think they need to rework how tumbling in combat works to have it similar to the Bluff rules. Enemies BAB or CMB or whatever should definately come into play here. I think this is a change that could be implemented while easily retaining backwards compatibility.
|
