Thalis Greatlight's page

29 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


I asked this on the Rules board but no one answered so I figured this would be the better spot for it. I also see Razz above had asked this so, I now ask it, too, since no developer has come to the rescue.

The grim reaper monster entry has me very confused.

It's an incorporeal creature, but yet it has a Strength score? It is incorporeal but also has damage reduction? It can't be tripped either? I assume this is due to incorporeal, but yet it, again, wields weapons and has a Strength score? This doesn't make any sense, how can it be incorporeal and corporeal at the same time?

Please help! I am trying to run this creature in a game but I need to know the specifics to this confusion.


The grim reaper monster entry in Pathfinder AP #48 has me very confused.

It's an incorporeal creature, but yet it has a Strength score? It is incorporeal but also has damage reduction? It can't be tripped either? I assume this is due to incorporeal, but yet it, again, wields weapons and has a Strength score? This doesn't make any sense, how can it be incorporeal and corporeal at the same time?

Please help! I am trying to run this creature in a game but I need to know the specifics to this confusion.


James Jacobs wrote:
Thalis Greatlight wrote:
What can we expect from this book? Besides ecology? Are there mechanical ways I can adjust these giants for my games? Giant-only feats, spells, a prestige class for Giants, etc. That is what I am asking. Or even templates, these lines are also perfect for new templates, as well.

It varies from giant to giant. Some have a few new feats. Some have some new items. There's no room for larger elements like prestige classes, though.

EDIT: Looks like Ravenmatntle hooked you up with the list.

These books are about flavor first and new crunch second, though, that's for sure. We've not yet done a big book of monster options, and while I do think that's a pretty good idea... it's a VERY tough sell to management since the idea of a crunch-heavy book aimed squarely at GMs is a bit nonintuitive. We do things like this now and then in the form of support articles for the AP... but the only other place something like this might fit would be in the Campaign Setting line.

It's an interesting idea though. I'll see what I can do...

Thank you. I didn't think about a book of monster options, more along the lines of if a product involves a heavy dose of monster, or is monster-related in theme, then it would be best to plug in DM material for those monsters.

It does suck you guys can't add a few more pages to insert a prestige class designed for monsters. But I guess you guys do like to go the route of one massive book for a particular themed set.

I'll be looking forward to such a book until then. Besides that, I do hope we see more monster support since it'll be a long time before Bestiary 4.


James Jacobs wrote:
Thalis Greatlight wrote:

I remember you, James, in another thread about how you wish there were more monster-friendly material. WotC did this with Savage Species and a few sprinklings of monster-friendly feats, prestige classes, spells, etc. spread thin in other books.

Why isn't Paizo devoting a few more pages to this line to throw in new monster feats, prestige classes, spells, etc.? It's the perfect spot to do it. It's not like these lines aren't popular. I feel the last several Revisiteds lost a great chance to add more material for monsters.

The simple answer is that we're doing that with Advanced Race Guide. That book's race building rules will allow you to build a giant type race and will tell you how powerful that race is compared to a human.

The Revisited books aren't about that. They're about revisiting established monsters and injecting some fresh new energy and detail into them.

In any event, as with all our Revisited books, there will be a few new monster feats and items and the like in there. The bulk of the text, though, remains in its traditional "ecology of" style of presentation.

I'm aware of the Advanced Race Guide but that is beyond the scope of what I am asking. I don't care for player material, I care for more DM material in DM-friendly Paizo books.

Such as the "Revisited" line. I am looking for DM crunch material.

What can we expect from this book? Besides ecology? Are there mechanical ways I can adjust these giants for my games? Giant-only feats, spells, a prestige class for Giants, etc. That is what I am asking. Or even templates, these lines are also perfect for new templates, as well.


If these are pure monster books, then why is it we have yet to see new material for monsters in these in a long time. I am hoping to see new feats for giants in this, or spells or weapons or something crunchy. Something us DMs can surprise PCs with and that makes giants filled with more variety.

The early Revisited books, like Dragons Revisited and Classic Monster Revisited, actually had new feats for either the monsters within or even for monsters with similar stats (like the same creature type or subtype, special attack, etc.)

I remember you, James, in another thread about how you wish there were more monster-friendly material. WotC did this with Savage Species and a few sprinklings of monster-friendly feats, prestige classes, spells, etc. spread thin in other books.

Why isn't Paizo devoting a few more pages to this line to throw in new monster feats, prestige classes, spells, etc.? It's the perfect spot to do it. It's not like these lines aren't popular. I feel the last several Revisiteds lost a great chance to add more material for monsters.


Kevin Mack wrote:
Thalis Greatlight wrote:

I am very disappointed in this. I was hoping for something more Player friendly, but this big book is only good for DMs. Will there be new feats and items and other such in here? I was also hoping for a new Bestiary.

We have a ton of NPCs from the Gamemastery Guide, please don't make NPCs as necessary as monsters. They are not that highly valued. I really hope this waste of "Big Paizo Books" per year doesn't happen again.

I was hoping for an Advanced Player's Guide II. It's about time for a new one already. I am stuck waiting another year it seems!

The very first Pathfinder book I am NOT looking forward to. Can't win them all I guess.

I shall point out that there was no way you woild be getting an Advanced players guide 2 since a, they have already done most of the class related stuff they want to do and b, if it wasent the NPC guide it would have been another bestiary.

Uuuuh, hello!? Of course we need an Advanced Player's Guide II, and not for new classes. I care less for that. We need more supplemental material for everything, especially the new classes.

Please point to me where Paizo has released more new material for the Gunslinger? I didn't think so. And, no, not 3rd party stuff. I want Paizo to get us more Gunslinger stuff, more Ninja stuff, more Summoner stuff, more feats, more spells, etc. That's what I like in my RPGs, not more stat blocks, unless they're cool monsters!


Golden-Esque wrote:
BlackKestrel wrote:
What reason is there for me to buy this book? I don't need 320 pages of stat blocks. I'm tired of seeing generic NPCs showing up in my Pathfinder Chronicles books (not to mention the 4 NPCs statted up in every AP volume now) as it is. What is your compelling case for me to purchase the NPC Codex? As it stands I'll be skipping this book in my subscription (much like I did with the Beginner's Box last year).
If you do not need 320 pages of NPC stat blocks, then you are clearly not a GM! I'm giddy with the thought of how much time this book is going to save me.

I am a GM and I am NOT excited about this book. I enjoy player material for my PCs to have fun with or Bestiaries, which are much more awesome than an NPC book ever will be.


I am very disappointed in this. I was hoping for something more Player friendly, but this big book is only good for DMs. Will there be new feats and items and other such in here? I was also hoping for a new Bestiary.

We have a ton of NPCs from the Gamemastery Guide, please don't make NPCs as necessary as monsters. They are not that highly valued. I really hope this waste of "Big Paizo Books" per year doesn't happen again.

I was hoping for an Advanced Player's Guide II. It's about time for a new one already. I am stuck waiting another year it seems!

The very first Pathfinder book I am NOT looking forward to. Can't win them all I guess.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does falling count towards speed used during a round? For example, if I fall 50 ft., do I still get my Standard and Move Action?

What if I deliberately fall/jump?

I'm curious because I have a PC that is playing a Psychic Warrior/Elocator. He is on the ceiling 20 feet above an enemy via the Personal Gravity class feature (using Elocater from Psionics Unleashed obviously).

He wants to just fall straight down, so he can get a full attack afterwards, taking whatever damage he has to. Is that legal? Or does falling use a "Move Action" in any way, or even use up any speed?

Thanks!


Since Paizo insists they listen to customers suggestions, might I point out one suggestion concerning the Grab special attack?

Could you possibly, one day, release new MONSTROUS feats in future bestiaries? I really do believe more of those would flesh more dangerous enemies.

One suggested feat is something for the Grab special attack. As it currently stands, a monsters can keep hold of an enemy without being considered grappled by taking a -20 penalty.

However, this only leaves said monster able to make attacks of opportunity on other opponents, because it cannot make normal attacks without also letting go of the held target. This is because they have to use a Standard Action to continue holding the opponent.

Yes, they could take Improved Grapple so they can make one attack while still holding onto a foe with a Move Action, but the silly consensus is that monsters with Grab don't meet the "Improved Unarmed Strike" requirement for the feat. This also doesn't help when said monster grabs two victims.

It's just very hard for me to imagine a Huge or larger opponent, such as a Kraken or a Deepspawn (from the FR setting) who grab one struggling halfling, for example, with their one enormous tentacle but find themselves helpless in attacking others around them unless those enemies provoke AoO.

Or say a kraken wanted to grab up 3 opponents at once, hold and constrict while using other attacks to ward off unheld foes. It's physically possible, but not according to the restrictions these grapple and Grab attack rules impose.

So, hopefully, we see something aid monsters in this department. But in general, I would very much like to see feats that enhance many of the universal monster rules we see. I am surprised you guys don't put these in new Bestiaries.

That is all.


Oh, I'm kind of new obviously. How could I have known calling out a designer was taboo? Maybe someone should sticky a thread to the top of this board so everyone knows?

I know it was a mistake in the book, when are they going to fix it? Or do we lose out on a new Rogue Talent just because they made a similar one? Can't they make it do something different? Why is that so hard?


We've been wondering this for a very long time, but can we get a FAQ/Errata on "Confounding Blades" rogue talent in ULTIMATE COMBAT?

It does the same thing as "Slow Reactions" from the Core PFRPG book.

Can we get something new with Confounding Blades? Maybe something along the lines of making the enemy accidentally strike an ally or something? Just something new instead of an accidental repeat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm kind of upset at this. I love prestige classes, unlike many, even as a DM. People illegitimately fear new options and the mythical "glut", but a game only has as much options as YOU allow it. What one finds trash, another finds treasure. Some may not like extra game material, others do whether it's in the form of new spells or new PrC. I never understood why, of all the new game material, PrC are hated so much. We always found PrC to be half the fun of character creation! Why should we suffer just because there's a large number of people that can't get a tighter hold on their own gaming sessions by limiting PrC?

My expectations were a book on prestige classes but for the Pathfinder RPG line. Not for the Campaign Setting line. How exactly am I supposed to adapt these to a Forgotten Realms or Dark Sun game, for example? Are the PrC abilities going to be just too world-specific now? I was hoping for more "generic" prestige classes like what is found in the Advanced Player's Guide. Instead, I see this and I am very disappointed.

I know James mentioned adapting these to your campaign as needed, but I hate how PrC are tied to world-specific things like a type of magic or organization. Generic PrC are much better. I know some people will call out "You have archetypes for that." but we find archtypes VERY LIMITING. If archtypes allowed "swapping" (as in, I can choose which class abilities to swap and I don't have to take the entire archtype and lose class abilities I never wanted to lose) then I'd be fin with archetypes. But they don't, and it's one of the things about archetypes I really wish the Pathfinder developers would consider making an exception and making errata stating you can "swap" abilities.

Here's to hoping an Advanced Player's Guide II, then. More options for all classes plus new, generic PrC. :(


Question, how come I hardly see any material available from the APs, especially the monsters, on d20pfsrd? I thought it was Open Content, except for the adventure/campaign specifics and the artwork?


This book is fun and amazing indeed. I would like to ask one question; the Spell Gunner feat, it states it uses attack bonus as caster level for a Dispel Magic affect. I do hope, just like Dispel Magic, it is capped at +10, correct? Otherwise, Spell Gunners become the best dispellers in the game what with the easy ways one can boost attack bonus and all.


I don't know how this turned into a Psionic topic, but I will ask our DM if he will allow Super Genius stuff and/or Rites Publishing.

But if he doesn't, that just puts me (and future gunslingers) back at square one. No good chunks of new Gunslinger material while the core classes bask in an abundance of material. :(

I still highly suggest Paizo consider doing class-themed products. Not as hardcovers, maybe as softcovers for their Player's Companion line or something?

You say you hear your customers, well I hope we're heard. We like more game material and hope to see more quickly.


James Jacobs wrote:

The vast bulk of the class options in the rulebook line will remain the Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, and Ultimate Combat. We have no plans of continuing to put out hardcover rulebooks in this exact theme—one of our goals was to get all the class option books out first so that we COULD support them in the following years. You'll certainly see new class options appear now and then, but the focus of rulebooks going forward will be on things other than character classes.

That said, we DO plan on continuing to support the base classes in our Player's Companion, Adventure Path, and Campaign Setting lines!

Yes, but that doesn't help someone like me. Someone that doesn't want to purchase one AP, for example, to grab at 1 new grit feat.

So are you, along with everyone else here, saying I have no choice but to rely on 3PP for new material? This hurts those only investing in Pathfinder products. So, as a gunslinger player, I can't look forward to any new gunslinger magic items, grit feats, or the like for a very long time from you folks?

Not liking what I am hearing :(


Though I'm aware the Ultimate line of books provides new material for the classes, I feel that waiting 1 to 2 years for new material for classes is an agonizingly long wait for many. Can't there be a middle-ground of some sort? Small PDFs to sell that give material to one class, or a few similar classes, every few months?

I ask this because, as Ultimate Combat was the last class upgrade book, I feel the Gunslinger class is lagging behind the rest and as a player with a Gunslinger character, I really would like to see a host of new material for the Gunslinger very soon. I really don't think it's productive to wait years for new material.

WotC may have done it too quickly and too much, but I don't think Paizo should do it too slowly and too little. :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's why WotC posted this

Pathfinder is 3.5 compatible for a reason, you know. ;)


We also have some suggestions for future Bestiaries. We noticed that by trying to make a creature squeeze into one or two pages, you're limiting the creature itself. A good example is the simurgh. In Pathfinder #24, it can bypass damage reduction good with its talons and it had Wholesome Touch. But these were taken out. That's just one example, and a minor one, but significant nonetheless. Maybe you guys can make the font smaller or break your philosophical opinion on keeping the page count per monster as low as possible.

The same with templates. We read about how you don't want templates to be too big, but sometimes a template that is a couple more pages isn't a bad thing. I don't think anyone has complained about a monster or template being too spacious. I think in the race to squeeze the most monsters in a book, many of the monsters lost flavor and uniqueness when compared to other creatures. When the difference between monsters is only one or 2 special abilities, they all start to look the same. More special abilities (beyond the standards, as in beyond the typical resistances, DR, fast healing/regeneration, trample, etc.) is what sets them really apart and make them more memorable. Without resorting to adding templates or class levels, that is.

Just our thoughts. We liked the way WotC did their monsters, we thought Monster Manual 4 was too wordy and Monster Manual 3 to be almost perfect, so a blend of the two would be the best route. Maybe Paizo one day does the same? If not, it's fine. Just submitting feedback.


My GM showed this to us. We're excited to face many of these creatures, or to RP with them the way our GM will play them.

We do have a question. What is the difference between the Fey Animal template in "Land of the Linnorm Kings" and the Fey Creature template in this book? Why two Fey templates that can work on animals? Which one takes precedence?


I am curious. There's only been 3 demodands in D&D. I assume Paizo is doing more than 3 for Bestiary 3? Or is that number staying the same?


While I am looking forward to this book, I am concerned about one thing.

A glut of reprints.

While I understand not everyone subscribes to the APs, having a glut of monsters from the AP books is what I think may turn off some people considering purchasing this. I know my GM has voiced concern about it, and he also pointed out that he thinks it's silly that people are paying for some monsters that were given for free on the Bonus Bestiary. That could've been more new monsters instead, according to his view. (I personally think because it's only a handful in a 300+ monster book that it shouldn't be that big a deal)

From what I see, a lot on the current list a previous poster put together appears to be quite a number of AP reprints, too. What, may I ask, is the estimated ratio of reprint and new monsters in this book? Maybe I can convince my GM to use it depending on the answer, hopefully.

Just a thought. Here's to something different with Bestiary 4! :D


Devilkiller wrote:

Is there any reason why an incorporeal creature couldn't 5 foot step into a wall after it attacks? I was using this tactic against the PCs recently, and of course it wasn't very popular. They had a Cleric who could have staggered the spectre with a touch, but for whatever reason he didn't bother. Perhaps he was afraid that the staggered spectre would just withdraw (which it eventually did after discovering that the first 4 PCs it attacked had Death Ward on).

The 5 foot step in and out of solid objects is a very effective tactic though. Maybe it is even too effective. I wonder if there's a rule I missed somewhere that it takes a move action to "meld" into the wall/floor or if a house rule to that effect might be good. That way the PCs would at least get an AoO. Maybe I'm just getting soft hearted or something though. I mean, the PCs can ready actions to attack the monster when it emerges. They were in kind of a tight space and aren't very good at mobility though.

From what I remember, 5-ft. step can only be done if you don't use a Move Action to move at all. It's a free square adjustment.

The spectre would have to be out in the open getting attacked. Then makes one attack of its own, and 5-ft. into the wall. The PCs, unless they have brilliant energy weapons or some other method of getting the obstacle out, can't harm the spectre because it has total cover now.

However, they can simply ready actions to attack when it comes out to make its own attack. At that point, the spectre will come out, get attacked by readied actions, make an attack and its turn would be done. It could not 5-ft. back because it used one to come out to attack. It could use a Move Action to move back into the wall/floor whatever, but unless it had Acrobatics, it'll provoke AoO from the PCs.

Even if it stays, guess what, the PCs go again since their initiative comes back for the new round (the point before the spectre came out) and the spectre is hit with another dose of PC attacks. Pretty much, not a smart move for incorporeal creatures to do.

I can't find it in the PRD, but I remember in 3.5e that incorporeals can hide in walls/ceilings/floors and simply peek out and make an attack and dive back in, staying in the same square. That's the real tactic that should be used and I have used it all the time with intelligent incorporeals. The PCs are forced to ready actions to attack, and when they do, the 3.5e rules stated that the incorporeal creature gets to enjoy having Cover, because it's body is partially in the solid object, so it enjoys a nice +4 AC boost even if someone readies an action to attack it.

That's all the input I can give for now.


What are the rules for when incorporeals attack one another? Can they damage each other at all? I remember in 3.5 they can affect each other, but how do they damage each other, if they can? I have a necromancer that used Command Undead on a shadow and I had it attack another shadow. But the DM was stumped at that point, since they can't really harm each other. The best he had happen was they grappled one another, which we figured was possible.

So what other actions can incorporeals do against each other physically? I assume magic is the only way?

Thanks.


TOZ wrote:
My fix is to forget Confounding Blades ever existed. ;)

I think you missed the part where I said I feel like we're missing out on a new rogue talent in the book. ;)

It'd be nice if the designer in charge of writing up the rogue section would tell us all what it really is supposed to do. My DM friend didn't pay for the book only to be shortchanged one new rogue talent. :(


I have another question.

How do I fix the Rogue Talent "Confounding Blades" from Ultimate Combat? It does the exact same thing as the Pathfinder Corebook rogue talent, "Slow Reactions" but just worded slightly different. I feel like I am missing out on a new talent and wish to know what the original intent was for Confounding Blades? Did they fix this recently? Thank you.


Black_Lantern wrote:
it's like build a bear workshop bro. Just mix and match whatever the hell you want.

That's what I mean. How do I go about it? For each piece, which should have the check penalty, which shouldn't, what would be the Max Dex bonus for each piece and armor bonus, etc.

Do I have to make that up? If so, that's no good. I don't like to do that. Not unless I am sure I know what I am doing. Too bad they don't have guidelines. Oh well.


Hello, I am new here and have a question with piecemeal armor rules from Ultimate Combat.

In Ultimate Combat, I am given tables for piecemeal armor for various types of armor. However, not all armor is listed and I see no guidelines on creating piecemeal armor from other sources besides Ultimate Combat. Is there a formula or guideline on making piecemeal armor from other types of armor not given in Ultimate Combat? Thank you.