Eldran Tesh

Tancred of Hauteville's page

RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 168 posts. No reviews. 1 list. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 168 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
Your GM knows your table's preferences better than we do, after all. I don't understand why so many GMs are so quick to declare that they don't need published adventures because their adventures are better, but at the same time don't seem confident enough to make rulings as appropriate for their own table. Seems like a double standard to me.

If I may chip in with my personal experience, the reason is that GMs are much more rarely challenged by their players regarding the adventures they come up with than they are challenged regarding rules adjudication.

Rules are perceived by most players as "objective", so they feel that they can (and should) point out when their GM is doing something "wrong" (in particular if they feel damaged by a particular rule interpretation).

Don't you feel that this (mis)perception might be the source of that "double standard"?

Obviously a sensible approach to the issue would be for GMs to consult with players regarding the most tricky issues and try to come up with some sort of consensus, and for players to then respect their GMs rulings. However, I found out that it can be surprisingly difficult to find a group where all people involved are that reasonable (since often it takes just a mildly antagonizing or attention-seeking person to generate mayhem).

Finally, as someone who asked a rule question more than 13 months ago and is still waiting for an answer, let me ask this: would it be possible for Paizo to accelerate somewhat the rate of FAQ-answering during 2015?

I remember that back in 2005 or 2006, WotC had a customer service that you could contact by email (or maybe some form) with your rules questions and they would respond via email within a short timescale. What would take for Paizo to organize something like that? I understand that you are somewhat understaffed, but I believe that many people (including myself) would be ok paying (e.g.) a small subscription fee to have priority access to such a useful service.

Thanks a lot for keeping this thread open, and happy holidays.

T.

Liberty's Edge

Nobody else ever had experience with this?

I am surprised, it seems to (potentially) be able to provide some form of protection from banishment/dismissal.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hi, I would like to understand how does dimensional anchor interact with the banishment/dismissal spell:

- Can a called outsider that is under the effect of dimensional anchor still be banished/dismissed?

- What about a summoned outsider (in case it makes any difference)?

It would be really great if this could be answered and added to the FAQs... this question keeps coming up in both the campaign I play and the one I GM! :)
Thanks a lot.

PS: adding to my befuddlement is the fact that dismissal has a 20% side effect chance of sending the dismissed creature to a plane other than its own... so it really looks like a form of planar travel.

Liberty's Edge

Hi James,

how does dimensional anchor interact with banishment/dismissal?

Can an "anchored" outsider still be banished?

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Given its description, shouldn't it be called "reactive" or some such?
It's a common trait and every time I see it I am puzzled why some many PCs need to be ultraconservative in order to get a +2 bonus to Initiative.

Or am I missing something?

Liberty's Edge

Hello James,

I am about to start GMing a new campaign with my group and we wanted to try something a bit unconventional this time.
It's going to be set in a quasi-historical scenario in XI century Byzantine Empire, so I went through the class, spell and feat lists and pruned out a lot of stuff that is (IMO) a bit too flashy for the intended flavor. The players seem to be cool with the concept and the limitations (so far!). I've done some reading on the subject (although I am by no means an historian) and spent a week in Istanbul during the summer holidays to familiarize with the setting.

Have you ever GMed/played in a (semi)-historical setting? Do you have any suggestions or words of wisdom? Or do you think it is madness to try this with the Pathfinder ruleset and I should opt for a different game system altogether? :D

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:


The game has absolute evils and absolute goods, unlike the real world. It's one of the game's strengths, in my opinion.

Hey James,

why do you think that having absolute goods and evils is one of the game's strengths?

Personally I have mixed feelings about it, and I have also tested playing without alignments (although it is a lot of work, since the concept is embedded into so many powers and spells, which makes sense given the premises), so I would be interested in hearing more about your point of view.

Liberty's Edge

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
We already are putting things into place to increase the number of FAQ responses and make them happen on a regular basis.

That sounds like great news. Thank you.

I wholeheartedly agree with the OP that we need a better method for rules questions, i.e. a method where there can be some feedback on the more popular questions without having to wait for geological timescales.

And while I am at it, I for one really miss JJ quick rules answers/advices/suggestions/interpretations on any rules questions that forum users would submit on the "ask JJ" thread.
As a DM, I found it extremely helpful and didactic (since it often helped me understand the motivations behind designing a rule in a certain way) and I find it frustrating that somehow JJ has now been restricted in what he can asnwer to.

Liberty's Edge

Hi KTFish7, there are a couple of annoying typos in the short description above, you might want to correct them to avoid making an unjustified bad impressions on potential buyers.

what has casued the death -> caused
4 new Magical Items, inclusding a Weather Machine -> including

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
3) While I do have favorites and least-favorites... again, I'm not going to say which ones they are because there's not much more demoralizing to a freelance writer than the guy who hired you/Creative Director of the company saying that the thing you wrote was his least favorite. Not cool.

Hi James, of course it is very reasonable that you do not wish to make a ranking of your favorite APs.

However, even without mentioning any products by name, I would be really interested in knowing what are the general criteria that make an AP your favourite: is it the plotline? the writing style? the NPCs? the commercial success? the level of innovation that you could put into it?

What are - let's say - your top three criteria?

Liberty's Edge

James,

did you play Planescape Torment?
What do you think of it?

Liberty's Edge

Hello James, does the Intensified Spell feat work on spells such as scorching ray and magic missile (i.e. allowing the caster to cast 6 or 7 magic missiles if she is of high enough level)?

Thank you and enjoy the weekend!

T.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
If you take damage from a dazing spell and fail to save against the spell (or the daze effect), you're dazed. This means that for a spell like fireball, you could potentially daze a lot of targets.

Hi James, thank you very much for the clarification. And on a Sunday no less!! Do you guys at Paizo work 24/7? :)

Liberty's Edge

Also, always regarding the Dazing Spell metamagic feat, if this is applied to a spell that affects multiple targets (e.g. scorching rays or fireball) are all the targets potentially affected by the dazed condition, or only one single target - chosen by the caster - can be affected?

(I am a bit confused by the feat description: "when a creature takes damage from this spell, they become dazed...")

Thanks a lot!

Liberty's Edge

Hello James, is it possible to apply the Dazing Spell metamagic feat [from the APG] to enervation or the feat only works on spells that inflict "standard" damage (i.e. hit points damage)?
Thanks a lot!

T.

Liberty's Edge

Hi James, first of all thank you for taking the time of answering ALL our questions in this thread! :)

As a GM, I am not sure I understand how the Oracle's revelation surprising charge (and similar powers that involve the immediate action) is supposed to work.

The description says: "Once per day, you can move up to your speed as an immediate action."

Now, suppose an Oracle is attacked with a melee attack or a spell, and uses this power to move outside the range of the attacker (or outside the spell's range, which might happen easily for spells with Touch or Close range).
Is the attacker's action just wasted? Or can he redirect the attack/spell towards other targets within range (if any)? Or can the attacker forfeit that attack and just do something else (and different, e.g. drink a potion) with his action?

Thanks a lot!

T.

Liberty's Edge Star Voter Season 6

Congratulations Sam!
I am looking forward to playing your adventure!

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
So! If you want sample stats, would you prefer us to stat up the iconics (warts and sub-optimal choices and all) or would you prefer us to just provide sample "good builds" for all the classes?

I support the "good builds" option: I think those might be very useful for unexperienced DMs and players, in particular if they come with a little "design notes" section explaining the salient aspects.

They don't need to be excruciantly optimized builds, of course, "good" is good enough.

Liberty's Edge Star Voter Season 6

This is without question my favorite adventure: you got my vote!
Congratulations for the excellent proposal.
(Incidentally, I also really liked your Gentleman Knave villain in a previous round, actually so much that it started my interest in the whole RPG Superstar competition, which I had never followed closely before that).

I just have one comment/suggestion, if I may dare. I liked the fact that when the PCs meet Nicasor violence does not need to erupt, but he is willing to negotiate:

Sam Zeitlin wrote:


If the party tries to negotiate, Nicasor is reasonable, but ultimately demands either the child or the barony itself as the price for ending Stepan’s debt and its vendetta. A peaceful solution is unlikely, though a clever lie might lure Nicasor from his sanctuary.

I think, however, that another possibility should be presented: Nicasor should try to bribe the PCs offering them a powerful magic item (or some other enticing reward) if they agree to kill baron Stepan (and/or possibly bring him the child).

This would a be very interesting offer for an evil PC party, and maybe even for a particularly cynical neutral party: after all, at this point the PCs will have discovered that baron Stepan is not a good guy either, so they might consider killing him as a sort of retribution.
Moreover, murdering an unsuspecting Stepan is probably going to be much easier for the PCs than challenging Nicasor, which has clearly been presented as a very dangerous threat, so pragmatical PCs (a category which I am quite familiar with) might be very enthusiastic about this course of action.

Liberty's Edge

Ksorkrax wrote:
but come on, I bet you´re intelligent enough to analyze the new spells for yourself.

Maybe. But I am lazy! Never underestimate laziness. :P

And moreover, I have a lot of fun reading Treantmonk's scathing critique of the least useful spells (i.e. the red color-coded ones).

I bet everyone can easily see that haste or fly are far better choices than gentle repose and secret page. But then reading things like

The Most Praised Treantmonk's Guide wrote:


Gentle Repose: Works exactly as advertised. If you've got use for that, then this is better than I've rated it.
Sepia Snake Sigil: Prevent others from reading your stuff. If that's a problem.
Illusory Script: Give your sepia snake sigil company, and make your books really hard to read. Hooray.
Secret Page: Why do they keep reading my stuff? Mix this with Sepia Snake Sigil and Illusionary Script and your diary is really, really safe.

makes me chuckle every time.

And now that I think about it, I would already be happy if he could review just the red spells and feats in the APG. :)

Liberty's Edge

I was casually re-reading Treantmonk's Guide to the Wizard, and I am always struck by how useful it is (and it happens to be very entertaining too, which is quite remarkable for what one would expect to be a very dry "user manual").

So now I am left wondering: Treantmonk, what would take you to update your Wizard's Guide with the new spells and feats from the Advanced Player's Handbook?
Would flattery be enough? :D

T.

Liberty's Edge

Shifty wrote:
I think it does already, my quoted reply above was a direct copy and dump of text, says per day.

I guess I have the first edition of the book then! You have the PDF, right?

Liberty's Edge

Ok, I finally found the FAQs for the APG (of course I cannot reveal the link now! :P) and it appears that someone else shared my question:

Quote:


What's the time limitation for the witch's disguise hex?

The hex's description should say that the witch can use the ability for a number of hours per day equal to the witch's class level.

–Sean K Reynolds (12/13/10)

Liberty's Edge

Drejk wrote:
Quote:
Disguise (Su): A witch can change her appearance for a number of hours equal to her class level, as if using disguise self. These hours do not need to be consecutive, but they must be spent in 1-hour increments.
It would be more clear if it was "for a number of hours equal to her class level every day". Flight hex has "per day" clause included in its description, Disguise probably missed it.

Yup. And the Flight hex also clearly states that feather fall can be used at will. It would really help if all hexes were described as crystal clear as the Flight hex.

Liberty's Edge

Kierato wrote:
Unless they state otherwise, they can be used at will. Evil Eye can be used at will, healing Hex can be used once per creature per day, disguise can be used for one hour per level per day.

Ok, that makes sense.

But how does one infer that from the description? It seems to me that both the Disguise and Evil Eye just indicate a duration, there is no mention of the latter being an at-will power. IMO it's not clear from the description alone that they work differently in terms of frequency.

Liberty's Edge

I am a bit confused by the description of the witch hexes in the APG: how often can you use a given hex? Once per day? Or can you use the same hex again and again?

For example, can the witch use the Evil Eye again and again every round? And what about the Disguise hex? (To me it does not make much sense that it lasts 1 hour/level but you can re-use at will, that would effectively give you permanent disguise, but maybe that is WAD).

T.

PS: I wanted to look at the APG FAQ first but I could not find them. I remember a poster some time ago stating (I guess jokingly) that the FAQ are purposely kept well-concealed by Paizo. :)
Could someone please provide me with a link to this secret location? Thanks.

Liberty's Edge

Kthulhu wrote:
Prime Evil wrote:
The idea that the name Cthulhu can have a plural form is downright terrifying!
I prefer Cthulhi.

Nope, Cthulhu is most certainly a neuter fourth declension noun (Cthulhu, -us), so it should be Cthulhua. ;) :P

the fastidious T.

Liberty's Edge

Dear James, I was wondering if you find it annoying when people start a thread in the rules questions forum with words like "Question for James:..." :)

T.

Liberty's Edge

I would like to see many new metamagic talents, including a few ones designed with the bard, inquisitor, paladin or ranger in mind.

But most of all, I really do not want to see the corresponding metamagic rods. I find that the mere existence of metamagic rods trivializes metamagic talents.
Not too many talents can be substituted by a magic item after all (and actually in this case having the rods is often better than having the talent itself, since they do not increase the spell level, and the wizard can apply the talent on the spot).

Oh, and I would also like to see plenty of art featuring Feiya! She's hot! ;)

T.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
A wall of thorns doesn't magically paralyze creatures or otherwise rob them of ability. All it does is create a difficult to navigate barrier that does damage. Someone trapped in a wall of thorns can take any action it can normally take.

Hi James,

thanks a lot for taking the time of replying to my questions! I really appreciated that! :)

I was quite confused on how this spell worked and the clarifications you provided are really helpful to me and my gaming group (and also to many other people on this forum, I hope).

I find that sometimes the spell and magic items descriptions in the core rulebook tend to be too concise, and/or would really benefit a lot from a few examples of how they work "in practice".
But of course I am also aware that the Pathfinder rulebook is already very thick, so maybe adding additional content might have been impractical. I hope therefore that clarifications and examples will be able to find their proper place in the (IMO much-needed) FAQs that - if what I've read in this forum is correct - you have been compiling for some time.

Liberty's Edge

Thank you to both for your replies!

I am still hoping James will chime in! :)

T.

Liberty's Edge

Dear James, I have a few (long-standing) questions regarding the Wall of Thorns spell (Core Rulebook page 367). I'd be really grateful if you could clarify these to me. Thanks a lot!

1. Precisely, what can a creature do (i.e. which actions can it take) while inside a Wall of Thorns (WoT)?

2. If a creature can take an action (other than attempting to free itself with a Strength check), will it take damage as if it moved even if it remains in the same square? [Question credit: Laurefindel]

3. Does the WoT provide a concealment/cover modifier to those inside? Does it block the line-of-effect of spells?

4A. If a creature is blocked inside the wall, can it still attack with melee weapons opponents which happen to be on squares within its reach? Can it attack target outside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?
Can it attack other targets inside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?

4B. Viceversa, can creatures from outside make melee attacks to the creatures inside the wall (and within reach)?
Can creatures from outside target the creatures inside with ranged attacks and spells?

4C. Do breath weapons and gas-based effects (e.g. cloudkill) affect the creatures inside the wall of thorns?

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

In the description of the unhallow spell:

Quote:


Second, the DC to resist negative channeled energy within the spell's area of effect gains a +4 sacred bonus and the DC to resist positive energy is reduced by 4. Spell resistance does not apply to this effect. This provision does not apply to the druid version of the spell.

Shouldn't that bonus be profane instead?

T.

Liberty's Edge

bump!

Liberty's Edge

The strangest character I've ever seen was played in an independent RPG called "Alter Ego".

I played a Finisterre Summoner, a bizarre scholar-like character looking for the edge of the world. (I found it.)

A friend of mine was playing the shadow of my character.

The shadow for some reason had taken a life on its own, it was sentient, and could move around more or less freely and easily sneak around unseen. Excellent for scouting. Being a mere shadow, of course, its physical interaction with the surrounding world were very limited.

Also, people were quite in a discomfort when interacting with me, seeing that my shadow was so "emancipated", let's say.

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:
I suspect there might be ONE sub-forum in the FAQ forum that might be open for everyone, but that forum would ONLY be for folks to post questions. Raw questions. No pontification or anything like that. Then we'd use that sub-forum to draw questions from (in addition to from the regular boards), deleting posts from that sub-forum as we get FAQ entries written.

I've seen this post just now.

Sounds like a great idea!

T.

Liberty's Edge

Questions' summary.

1. What can a creature do (i.e. which actions can it take) while inside a Wall of Thorns (WoT)?

2. If a creature can take an action (other than attempting to free itself with a Strength check), will it take damage as if it moved even if it remains in the same square? [Question credit: Laurefindel]

3. Does the WoT provide a concealment/cover modifier to those inside? Does it block the line-of-effect of spells?

4A. If a creature is blocked inside the wall, can it still attack with melee weapons opponents which happen to be on squares within its reach? Can it attack target outside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?
Can it attack other targets inside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?

4B. Viceversa, can creatures from outside make melee attacks to the creatures inside the wall (and within reach)?
Can creatures from outside target the creatures inside with ranged attacks and spells?

4C. Can gas-based effects (e.g. an incendiary cloud or a cloudkill) and breath weapons affect the creatures inside the wall of thorns?

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

James? :)

Liberty's Edge

reminder: these are the questions

Just to be clear, these are the questions about the Wall of Thorns spell (PF Core Rulebook page 367) that I would like to be answered:

1. What can a creature do (i.e. which actions can it take) while inside the wall?

2. Does the WoT provide a concealment/cover modifier to those inside? Does it block the line-of-effect of spells?

3A. If a creature is blocked inside the wall, can it still attack with melee weapons opponents which happen to be on squares within its reach? Can it attack target outside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?
Can it attack other targets inside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?

3B. Viceversa, can creatures from outside make melee attacks to the creatures inside the wall (and within reach)?
Can creatures from outside target the creatures inside with ranged attacks and spells?

3C. Can gas-based effects (e.g. an incendiary cloud or a cloudkill) and breath weapons affect the creatures inside the wall of thorns?

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge

Bump.

Liberty's Edge

bumping this up for James

Liberty's Edge

Zark wrote:


A) In the RAW Break Enchantment can't reverse it
1) The effect of a spell with an instantaneous duration can’t be dispelled
2) Flesh to Stone has a duration of instantaneous

So, why does break enchantment states "This spell frees victims from enchantments, transmutations, and curses. Break enchantment can reverse even an instantaneous effect."?

Quote:


3) If the spell is one that cannot be dispelled by dispel magic, break enchantment works only if that spell is 5th level or lower.

This is a good point instead.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ambrus wrote:
These two points would seem to point to a morbid possibility. Even if forced to select an arcane bond, a wizard can simply kill his own familiar at no penalty to be rid of it. Might as well let him choose neither if that's what the player wants. The idea of a fledgling wizard killing his own familiar does make for an intriguing back-story though...

I can tell you, sir, that I have seen a PF wizard disabled (i.e. zero hp), dimensional anchored and in really dire needs cast a maximized vampire touch on his own familiar in order to avoid kicking the bucket! :D

It wasn't pretty but it worked. All the other players were sorry for the poor little rat treated as a disposable hp-bag, though!
And it makes for a great story that the players go on retelling to each other again and again... (players do that a lot, actually, they act like granpa repeating his best stories over and over) ;)

Liberty's Edge

ZappoHisbane wrote:
One of the players in my current group has, for whatever reason, declined to take either a Bonded Item or a Familiar. I believe this is because he feels the advantages don't outweigh the risks. Is this a valid option?

Which are the risks that brought him to decline to take the familiar?

If the familiar is killed, you don't lose XPs any more in Pathfinder. You need to pay money to get a new one, but if you don't have the money or don't want to spend them you are not obliged to.

The only major risk I can see, at higher levels, is that someone might scry on your familiar even if you are protected by nondetection or similar spells, so that you might need to double your scrying defences. But that is not something that happens often in most campaigns, I suspect.

Liberty's Edge

Zurai wrote:
SR is as much a curse as a blessing. I generally avoid it if I can.

Agreed!

Luckily, however, Spell Resistance does not interfere with your own spells. (*)

Therefore, if you are the only serious caster in the party, and you are a cleric, casting spell resistance (which provides a quite good SR: 12+spell level) on yourself might be a very valuable and effective tactic.

I've seen this often in 3.5 -- I assume it would be of similar effectiveness in PF. It is never completely free of risks, though, so caution is necessary.

(*) Reference (from the PF Glossary):
A creature's spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities.

Liberty's Edge

BobChuck wrote:

No, that's NORMAL.

Name a system, ANY system, whether it be a tabletop game or computer software or a massive machine like a plane or ship, anywhere in the world, where a single user reporting a extremely minor and purely cosmetic mistake would have any right at all to expect to see it fixed within THREE YEARS. Name ONE. Please.

Paizo does it! :)

BobChuck wrote:
What you are asking for is extremely minor and can be easily ignored, fixed, or worked around. The only thing that's "outrageous" here is the way you keep on insisting that your tiny insignificant little problem deserves attention from one of the half-dozen or so very very VERY busy people who actually have the authority to make an "official" reply.

I do not fully understand why you (and Mauril as well) are getting so angry at me. You judge my question as completely minor and irrelevant, and I have no problem with that judgement of yours.

But then, why you don't simply ignore my thread?

Why do you, a fellow regular board user, feel the urge of coming here and indoctrinate me about what I should or should not post on the boards? If there is a problem, the moderator will notify it to me, and I assure you that I will respect his or her decision.

BobChuck wrote:
We are extremely fortunate to have the writers and editors of Pathfinder post on these boards with any degree of regularity -you should be nice to them, not chase them off with pitchforks.

And I am nice to them indeed. Simply, rather than singing the designers' paean on the boards, I prefer to express my "nicety" and appreciation to them by purchasing their high-quality products and - indirectly - having my players buy their products as well. I think that this is the sincerest form of flattery.

Liberty's Edge

BobChuck wrote:
I appear to have vastly overestimated the time this would take :).

"Ask, and it shall be given you".

I think that is written somewhere on a Book even thicker than the PF Core Rulebook! ;)

Liberty's Edge

James Jacobs wrote:

First off... try to keep in mind that all of you outnumber us thousands to one. We DO try to answer these questions, but we have to balance that time spent answering questions with the rest of our day jobs of writing, editing, etc.

The small silver mirror material component in this spell is indeed missing a cost (as it was in 3.5... this is an error that got grandfathered into the Pathifnder game, alas).

The cost of the mirror should be 100 gp.

Thank you very much for your reply, James! :)

T.

Liberty's Edge

Rake wrote:
Tancred of Hauteville wrote:
Of course not. I was obviously being ironic. Should I put an "irony" tag from now on?

You were being sarcastic, not ironic.

G$*$@*n you Alanis Morisette. G%~*@*n you.

Alas, it's all my fault, Rake, not Alanis Morisette's.

I am not a native English speaker and I often stumble like I did above.

Anyway, thank you for correcting me with a fair dose of irony... or was that sarcasm? ;)

Liberty's Edge

BobChuck wrote:
You are not going to get an answer, at least not any time soon. There are lots of people who have asked "official errata" style questions since August, and most of them have not been answered, so there is at least a 6 month waiting time.

But at least I'll be trying.

Bump!

1 to 50 of 168 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>