Taow's page

Organized Play Member. 98 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Simon Legrande wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
I think it's a pretty big presumption to assume that "blinded" and "sightless" are the same thing. If you are in a dark room and have no way to see in the dark, you are effectively blind, but you are not "sightless"; you're just not currently seeing anything because no light is reflecting from objects into your eyes (or, at least, insufficient for sight).

Let me try this, the link might have been missed by some:

Dictionary.com wrote:


1.unable to see; blind.

So sightless creatures are invisible. This is why we don't use external dictionaries.

color spray needs to be FAQ'd and that's all there is to it. Every solution we may come up with is made up because the game lacks the definitions required to satisfy the description. No matter how much logic you use to satisfy your argument, there is logic to satisfy the opposite one.

The original discussion very much confused power "creep with" "good things." Giving more power to a less powerful class is not power creep, it's a fix. More options only look like power creep when GMs are unimaginative in dealing with new options.

That being said, infinite horizontal expansion is always going to have unexpected interaction between old and new.

You use monk levels instead of monk BAB, then add the other classes' BAB. Your free "2 weapon fighting" attacks are only based off monk level.

If she is interested, she'll likely enjoy the paladin and be able to keep track of what applies when better than some (stereotypes, multitasking, and all that). If she's not interested, the paladin is going to feel tedious and push her away even more.

My house, my rules.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My group enjoys the very real possibility of death. If we knew the GM would pull punches and not let us die, there would be no point. Just make sure it's not your fault for creating an inappropriate encounter.

Note my choice of words, "inappropriate," not "too difficult." There are fights we shouldn't be in because of the sandbox world we're in, it's our fault if we pick those fights and follow through.

Does the barbarian have a dump stat? Because you can look right at that too, if you're going to punish the bard for "dumping" str. quotes because how does anybody know it's not a negative Str race, a 10 isn't dumping.

Perception? Ignore WHAT they want to roll on. Let them make one roll for the event. If there is something to perceive, the roll applies to it.

He needs a good video game.

The GM sounds like just as big (or bigger) of a problem as the player. 6-10 players weekly (not just large, but a 4 player variable), allows weekly changing of characters, and allows this D-baggery.

See above. A caster is entirely doing their job by setting up the fighter to be even more glorious, but some people don't appreciate that role. Some people think a powerful caster is the blaster, others think wizard = wish. This is why it is so important to figure out what you actually want to do before you make a character.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The problem with that argument is that divine spells DO have schools.

It sounds like they just want to roll big damages. If I play a control character, I know that I won the fight when I set up the fight perfectly for the fighter to smash everyone, and nobody on my team to get smashed. That was my job. If I don't enjoy that role, I don't play a control based character.

The other players may just not understand what they're actually contributing, or they may have some peen envy for those big numbers. The solution depends on the actual problem, that is what needs to be found. Talk to them.

Everybody understands combat Reflexes and how it works, I think he was just asking other options without explaining the obvious

It's not precognitive to be faster than someone, even when they started acting first. Read Bruce Lee's principle of an "intercepting fist."

A wizard can prepare a 9th level slot with a temporary ability score, so it should work fine for a scroll.

That said, the UMD check to activate the scroll may be high enough to emulate that score anyways. 1-5 spells the ability score emulation is harder than the scroll activation, they're even (dc31) for level 6 spells, and scroll activation is harder for 7th level and higher.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Anybody find it ironic that Lancelot is referenced as an iconic paladin? Let me know how that plays out.

It's not long range, but for your hostages...

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/spells/unwillingShield.html#_un willing-shield

Dont forget your free ability point every 4 levels. You can have a 16 at 4, a 17 at 8 and an 18 at 12. This is before headbands. Your required ability score will progress well ahead of your spell levels.

By the time scry&fry is a real threat, paying for Forbiddance isn't a big deal for your base. And that's without even being creative about it.

Your actual usable spaces are covered by Forbiddance, as well as illusions to all look like the non usable spaces.
Non usable spaces are NOT covered by forbiddance, but are all trapped/alarmed rooms that look exactly the same.
So teleporting based on this scry either fails or dumps PCs at a similar location, which happens to be prepared for them...

Someone tell me how different total defense looks compared to readying an action for the first attack against you. Comparing to real life fighting doesn't work, children attack more than once every 6 seconds.

Rurric wrote:
Arcane casters are highly persecuted (like killed) in this setting :-)

Perfect, writing the back story just got 1000x easier.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Drizzt lives in a world where everyone has heard of drow. Those stories don't apply to every dark elf in every setting.

DrDeth wrote:
Taow wrote:
What does he do for the party? I build an awesome high AC monk with snake style to get AoOs every time someone misses. I then realized nobody was going to miss, because they weren't going to attack me.

Not every monster has Skill Focus in Metagaming. ;-)

It's not metagaming to realize the naked guy in front is tickling you, while that sorcerer is making fire.

If you're going to relate to a PC, either include them all or change from one PLAYER to another evenly. It really sucks being a 3rd or 4th wheel in an adventure all about one guy.

What does he do for the party? I build an awesome high AC monk with snake style to get AoOs every time someone misses. I then realized nobody was going to miss, because they weren't going to attack me.

I'd like to see a game with the people who think you can do nothing else during a full round action. Somehow, I don't think they apply this rule universally.

Actually, I don't think they apply this rule at all, they're trying to stop something that they think is too powerful by twisting existing rules, instead of just saying it is overpowered and needs to have restrictions added.

Scavion wrote:
TheNine wrote:
Ilja wrote:
TheNine: with modern carrying techniques (masterwork backpack) qnd the first outfit being "free", 276 pounds total is at the very edge of a heavy load for a str 16 character. So it seems quite a good fit, unless you often did headstands in that.
18 automatic weapon, 12 pounds of ammo, oh yeah there was that 20 ballistic jacket, the 4 pound kevlar helmet, 3 frags (about a pound a peice) SHoudl i keep going? and no, no handstands but spriting behind the nearest cover (or concealment if you were unlucky enough) to remove the big pack did happen often.
I always thought the carrying capacity system was off. It is highly unlikely all the folks in the military have a 16 strength though. Especially considering a 10 is the average human. Most folks are likely to have NPC Non-heroic stats, so a 15 strength is about the best they could hope for.

You're ALMOST on to something here. The reality is that this fantasy game does not accurately represent ANY of the nonmagical characteristics of the real world. It is a fantasy game. Both words in that label are important.

First we'll address the word Fantasy. This is coming from a former Marine, current personal trainer. Your strength can change, your dexterity can change. I've even watched intelligence, wisdom and charisma change. These have happened in FAR less time than "aging" or "gaining 4 levels." And I can one shot ANYONE in the world with a mundane item. Real life does not apply to fantasy, fantasy does not apply to real life.

So now let's address the word Game. This word implies mechanics and balance. One one hand people will take that statement and say "you can go play a different game with different mechanics and balance for your martials," while the rest will say that the mechanics and balance need to put the martials on par with non martials. Fighter, rogue and all those others are hero classes, not NPC classes. They should be on par with all other hero classes.

Merciful doesn't turn arrows into bludgeoning, which is what is causing the attack bonus loss...

Leave the wizarding to wizards? Absurd. In a world where wizards exist, it's an unacceptable concept that a 15th level fighter has absorbed some of the magic of the world around him to be able to do extraordinary things? But it totally makes sense for wiggly fingers and a couple words to break any and all of the laws of science you are binding this fighter with.

It must suck that there are only wizards, worthless martials and animals to fight in that world. Although I imagine the page flipping in the bestiary is minimal.

Anything that is explained by specialization in a skill is not "see martials CAN do that," because a wizard can do the same thing. It's not extra to that class. And anything that is explained by taking the leadership feat follows the same path.

Except for the cases specifically cited in your link.

looks like you're stacking it fine. there's an item to let you walk away from a fall from space with 20 damage.

I like how this thread proves alignment doesn't work.

That, and use of the bluff skill is chaotic evil.

"I like my PCs squishy"
This is level 1. Max HP barbarians are squishy. House rules are fine, I generally appreciate them to be accompanied by a reason. Especially when it means you die to a shuriken.

"Time" in game terms is accurate, it's the time it takes to play a round that is too long. "ok i rolled a 15 plus... *flip flip* 3... 2... 17... 20... ok, i got a 26 to hit. Now my next 3 attacks... oh, I need to roll damage." Players need to have a quick reference chart for their offensive abilities. Your normal attacks are +16/+11/+6. they all add 14 to the die roll. right under that line is with power attack, +13/+8/+3 and they add 20. my actual lines look like this

weapon name here
n (16/11/6) 1d12+14 /20x3
pa (13/8/3) 1d12+20

n is for normal attacks. pa is for power attack. My fighter archer build has 4 lines, so I know what I can be using at any given time. If you cast a buffing spell, REWRITE the reference line on your notebook. write the duration of the spell. I tally the rounds next to it.

The next time I DM I think I'm instituting a rule that if you don't have a single number written down to show what you add to a roll, you don't add anything.

They aren't his PCs. Yours is yours. His world, and that's fine... if he likes not having people in it.

Ask the other players how they feel about it, I'd have issues. He probably should play WoW instead.

Take a hard look at feat prerequisites. I'm only halfway through the first build and you can't take most of them when you did.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to point out that while I have no problem with a mechanic to increase the use of the once per rage powers, I find the concept of rage cycling ludicrous. It completely destroys my suspension of disbelief and I might as well play WoW.

You spend your entire level training for the next level. Where did the wizard get his new spells from? He's been researching them EVERY DAY while he prepares his spells, he just finally figured it out.

Necro to post false information :(

Totem warrior has zero overlap with anything, so you can take any other archetype you want with it. Alas, it also has zero function. You can only take one chain of totem powers.

Democratus wrote:
Taow wrote:
Democratus wrote:
There is good and there is evil, and they are objective. Same with law and chaos.
You have what YOU think good and evil are. That is your subjective view. Suicide bombers don't think they're doing the will of satan and going to hell.

I'm not talking about the real world. I'm talking about Pathfinder.

In Pathfinder Good and Evil are objective.
The opinion of one, or even a thousand, people have no power to change what is Good/Evil or Law/Chaos.

You're still assuming that YOUR interpretation of the words in the definition of good is absolute, but it is not.


Good implies...

There is obviously wiggle room, because a rulebook cannot define good in 7 sentences. Every aspect of good implied in that rule can be interpreted by an individual.

Democratus wrote:
There is good and there is evil, and they are objective. Same with law and chaos.

You have what YOU think good and evil are. That is your subjective view. Suicide bombers don't think they're doing the will of satan and going to hell.

Honor is a subjective concept, we just happen to all know of the classic fantasy concept of what honor is. Maybe the character doesn't believe people can reform, or that in this case the person WILL (considering they only surrendered to prevent the death blow).

I got Debo on mind control. When Debo tell me to be good, I be good. But when he leave, I be evil again.

I like it.

Given this wasn't among the smartest group of guys, and the meatiest meathead of them all decided to run a one shot level 13 game (we'd never been past 8 or so). I created a wizard, and missed the first half of the session at work. Proceeded to show up as they're clearing the last minions to get to the big bad (who was apparently specifically built to kill us all), the DM graciously allowed me to blow my teleport spell to join the party. At this point the boss comes out, and while they're finishing the last round of combat, I said, "This one's mine." No idea why they actually let me go it alone, but it made just as much sense as the DM allowing me several rounds to cast all my personal buffs. Through poor DM planning and good vs bad rolling, I ended single combat with this party killing beast with more health than I started and one spell remaining. The party felt the need to point out that it was only possible because they killed off his huge group of minions. One look back at that last remaining spell, oops Chain Lightning.

I never got to play a primary caster in that group again.

Found it.

^ This. You don't have to go to school and get licensed to be a DM. You have to want to run a game. Modules are an easy way to start. Even if you turn out to be a terrible DM, you already have one of those. At least you can be fair.

Is there a source for that?

Doesn't mention a specific action at all, it doesn't make sense for someone who is good enough at attacking to do it multiple times per round to be worse when all they have to do is tap the target's armor.

I was gonna say a lore oracle that dipped paladin, but that works too.

So is the dust gear? Or is it tucked into clothing?

Everyone is assuming that the way dust and flour work is that it sticks to the creature and is visible. If they fill the area, then you can see the invisible creature by there being nothing in a particular space. Imagine rainfall. The invisibility doesn't create the illusion of rain where the creature is standing. You'll either see water splashing off of it, or see a space where the rain stops falling.

Also, it is a cloud of particles that continues to function in the area. So you just get coated again.

Are we done using physics to explain magic? Dispel the glitterdust.

It a house rule, but my party has a wight as a cohort and any of his spawn are free willed.

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>