The Black Bard's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 7 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 1,763 posts (1,768 including aliases). No reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 3 aliases.

1 to 50 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

3d printing that is! Our little terrain store returns for a third year, and now we have 3d printed terrain to complement our resin and dental stone mold cast terrain. Thanks to the number of licenses we have access to (Fat Dragon Games and Heroes Hoard among them) the number of items we can create now climbs into the quadruple digits!

As always, our prices remain low and our enthusiasm high! But 3d printing is time intensive, so we would rather make what is definitely wanted rather than educated guesses. So, what do folks want? Ask if we can make it or browse the linked stores; we do have a website finally, but its still being assembled.

Can't wait to see you all again!

I'm looking at the map of Talon Citadel in Red Flags, and the scale says 1 square = 5 feet. Ok, it seems about right overall then.

But upon looking closer and reading the text, I find a lot of inconsistencies:

Spoilered for Obvious DM reasons:

It describes the approach as being narrow, to the point where rounding the first talon bastion would require horses to be shoulder to shouler. As it stands, the space on the map is barely enough for a single medium humanoid to comfortably walk, much less two horses.

In N5, the stairs leading to the 20' ramparts would be very steep (6 inch tread over 12 inch rise).

Likewise the stairs leading to the N8 from N7. There needs to be room for the tunnels leading to N9 and N10, so N8 must be 10 feet up, which means those stairs are very steep.

N11 describes the stairs leading down as 10 feet down, same problem. N11 also describes the trapped area of floor as 20 feet, rather than the 10 on the map. This creates a distinct tactical change relative to the trap in the room.

N14 describes the mirrors as 10 foot with 20 foot danger zones. The map describes half those measurements. Again, this creates problems with how the trap in the room is resolved.

The occupant of N15 is gargantuan, but at the listed scale has no location it could actually fit in using its native move speed without squeezing.

The problem is that many other map elements remain correct, like the beds in the servants quarters and the tables in the gambling area. Even the stairs being overly steep is understandable, but the actual contradictions between map and text in areas N11 and 14 really stick out.

All of this said, the point of this adventure was more to playtest roleplaying and skill interactions, rather than stress test more combat. But it also does admittedly become a small dungeon crawl past a certain point. Should the map size be doubled to be accurate to the text? Should only parts? Should it just be left as is, despite the contradictions?

Hoping for an official weigh in, as those map/text contradictions strike me as tangible problems rather than cosmetic oversights. Other opinions are welcome as well!

I meant to apply my store credit to this order, unsure if I did or didn't properly click the prompt when it came up. Likely my fault.

Can you please apply my store credit balance to this order? Thank you for your time!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I would love it if all bestiary entries listed the height/length and weight of a creature. Most entries do, but some omit these details. I find the data quite valuable given the single sentance needed to relay it.

While an ogre and a hill giant are both large, they have very different heights and weights, which can matter for the purposes of reaching objects or moving corpses or whether the surface can hold their weight. Yeah, I can just say "10' reach, it can reach up to 20'", but sometimes I'd like a little more granularity.

And I would love a scale reference in the illustrations. Many bestiary illustrations give no sense of scale relative to the subject besides the size entry. I frequently simply show the bestiary image to my players after describing the monster, and having a built in comparison to give a sense of how large or small the creature is would be extremely useful.

I'm unsure if it would be better to include a figure in the illustration for direct scale, or to perhaps have an appropriately scaled soft-colored silhouette adjacent to the image. I'm personally in favor of the silhouette, due to a wonderful prehistoric animal book from my childhood years at the public library. I think it would be unobtrusive and useful, easy to add to existing art (it could be zoomed in to the head or hand for smaller creatures), and likely free of the extra cost of adding a fully drawn figure to each piece.

So yeah, I guess this is the less rules based Bestiary request thread? Chime in or call me out, feel free!

We return! Back with more Hirst Arts terrain, and best of all, some of our own design! We also will be bringing some Starfinder dungeon dressing, in the form of crates, canisters, missiles, and so on! Also a small selection of Egyptian accessories. Need a sarcophagus? We've got them!

We've shifted some of our casting to resin for greater strength for thin pieces like our trapdoors, wolf skin rugs, and carpets!

It is a bit late to really squeeze in a major order, but if anyone has anything they would like to see at our table, shout it out now!

In Strange Aeons, especially in the dreamlands quests of book three, there are lots of potential "enemy of my enemy is my friend" situations.

But a LOT of those enemies are really evil on both sides! Can a paladin deal with those adventures as written, or do they need to just clank down the visor of their helm, draw their sword, and start swinging? Part of the code is "help those in need" as long as they don't use that help for evil or chaotic ends. And its true that some of these "bad guys" aren't threatening or harming innocents. But is that enough to override the prohibition of working with evil creatures? Or is accepting a non-evil quest from an evil creature not "allying" with them? I'm just looking for some opinions on these wacky and awesome, but slightly problematic, scenarios!

Some examples (spoilers for player courtesy):

The viscount's gala: ettercaps are abducting and apparently eating people during the gala. Which people seem to be aware of, just unwilling to acknowledge. This hits both "help people" and borders up on "punish those who harm or threaten innocents". It seems the only way a paladin wouldn't go on a tear up into the rafters or to the viscount is to just sit in a corner mumblings "its all a dream" to himself.

The skull of ghoul royalty: ghouls ask for help against gugs. Evil creatures asking for help fighting evil creatures. And technically using detect evil reveals at least the leng ghouls (and possibly some of the class leveled regular ghouls) are MORE evil than the gugs.

The red webbed foot: Again, helping ghouls against other creatures that are technically less evil. That said, the ghouls aren't hurting anyone (at least the ones that try diplomacy arent) and don't seem to have any plans to in the immediate future.

The ambassador's heartstone: A night hag, explicitly involved in the soul trade. About as bottom of barrel evil as it gets. How does this even get past the room description before the paladin says "I smite her"?

So, how can things be presented that a paladin can even go to the dreamlands without being constantly placed in positions to break their code of conduct? Or am I being overly harsh on the paladin?

So, Animal Archive went to the trouble of listing the item slots available for different animal shapes.

But what about other non-humanoid creatures like magical beasts and aberrations?

I'm working on a monster with class levels and as I start looking at gear budgets I realize "I don't know if it can wear this." So I'd like to start this thread as a place for DMs to chime in their thoughts on what oddly shapped critters may or may not wear.

Here's the one I would like help with: Intellect Devourer.

As far as I can find, there are two classed IDs found in Into the Darklands and Darklands Revisited. Neither has the full gear appropriate to their CR/level as per Monster Advancement (making me think others have hit this stumble as well). One specifically caveats the gear "when wearing a host", and the other has a single magical dagger.

With that in mind, here's the critter shape (with quotes from Darklands Revisited): a round body/head combo, four "claw-like legs" that are "unsuitable for grasping objects", and a proboscis that "can manipulate simple objects" allowing them to "activate wands, drink potions, and, in rare cases, wield rudimentary weapons".

The other limiter is its iconic ability: body thief. Some magic items just wouldn't work with crawling inside something's cranium. Even if we say it has a head slot, the Helm of the Mammoth Lord seems a bad call, but should that be a limiter on the ability, or on wearing the item?

Here is what I'm getting with "Generous DM" hat on (without getting into the body thief "clutter in the cranium" issue):
Rings, Wrist, Shoulders, Chest.
Maybe Body, Headband, Head, Belt, Feet and Hands (if designed for a monster/animal, no standard boots/gloves)
No eyes or neck slots, no shield.
Armor possible but obviously non-humanoid and back to cranium clutter.

Here is what I get with "Cautious DM" hat:
Ring (maybe 1 on proboscis), wrist.
Maybe shoulders, chest, headband or head or belt (1 slot for all three).
All others unavailable.

So, what do you think? Feel free to give your own ideas, and also to submit other monsters for examination. Can a Scylla wear a belt with those wolf heads in the way? Where does a Xacarba put its amulet? For the love of Sarenrae, what about the flumphs!

This order has exceeded its original 1 to 18 days to ship estimate and now says waiting on backorder, but doesn't let me know which item is the one being held up.

Can you remove the backordered item, whichever it is, and push this order through? Waiting even longer for all of these items is less useful to me than getting most of them sooner.

Thank you for your time!

I'm working on some ideas for physical Starfinder terrain (I was a vendor at PaizoCon2017, some of you might remember me), and once again figured a bit of polling the group would be wise! Obviously, this is all keeping in mind that we haven't seen that much of the Starfinder aesthetic as a whole, but we can still bounce some ideas around!

I'm considering a modular dungeon system of floors and walls for creating ship/station interiors. Between boarding actions and derelict hulks I can see a fair amount of use for such. Obviously, single person craft are more like horses, no terrain really needed there, but bigger ships, those are totally just mobile dungeons! What sort of elements should there be? Navigation screens, medical bays, defense turrets, help me brainstorm if you don't mind!

And what sort of dungeon dressing should there be? Crates and barrels are easily updated, but what else? The campfire might be out but should a vending machine be in? I'd love to hear ideas!

I'm the one hosting the Crafting Terrain seminar, and I haven't received any emails pertaining to it. In fact, I didn't realize my submitted event was accepted until the event list came out and noticed my own name!

Is there any information I should have regarding running my event? I've been to the con twice before so I'm not completely clueless, but I was curious if I should have received any info or such.

Thanks againto the staff for all your work putting this together, I certainly don't want you to have to do more, but figured I should ask since the lack of email seemed odd.

At PaizoCon2017, I will be setting up a small vendor table, focused on terrain. Chairs, tables, treasure chests, rocks, castle walls, etc. Cast from dental stone, painted and sealed, ready for use.

Legal stuff for those who care:
I'm a licensed distributor of Hirst Arts products (paperwork pending), currently trying to get a Lady Sabelle Designs license in time for the con. Also, I asked Jeff Alvarez if this thread was okay, and he said go for it.

So, the question is, what sort of things would YOU GLORIOUS PAIZONIANS want to see at my table? This terrain is meant to compliment Pathfinder Battles miniatures, and generally be compatible with other terrain company products like Dwarven Forge, Tablescapes, etc. Sadly, I'm putting max effort into inventory, so I haven't had a chance to take many good photos of what I have to offer. Will try to remedy that asap, but a quick search for Hirst Arts will bring plenty of images up for basic reference.

I have a lot of products planned to bring, but I want to give my potential customers an opportunity to tell me WHAT to bring.

Things that feel like solid choices from my end:
Treasure Chests
Low/damaged walls

So, opinions? Ideas? Requests? I'm not planning on large or complete structures, as they tend to be situational. I do have a modular dungeon system, would people be interested or has that ship sailed with recent Kickstarters? Custom orders are certainly a possibility.

Basically, I want to sell what you want to buy. So... what do YOU want?

4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

I'm aware of the various interactions of spell resistance and physical/energy kinetic blasts. But in my game, a particular spell raised its head: Spell Immunity.

The question is: Can Kinetic Blast be selected as a spell blocked by a casting of Spell Immunity? Would a specific type of blast (fire, electric, force) have to be called out? Obviously, the physical types would be not selected, as they don't allow SR and Spell Immunity simply grants "unbeatable SR".

Or, flipside, is Kinetic Blast simply off the radar as far as Spell Immunity is concerned? There is language to support that interpretation as well.

My group already has some ideas, but we always like to poll the forums before making final decisions.

In an upcoming game, a player has expressed interest in a rogue character who disables armor as well as traps. I already have some ideas for a rogue talent or feat to that end, as all the necessary mechanics appear to exist and thematically it feels great.

I tend to approach mechanics from a stance of "you can try, but without training, you wont be good, much less great". So building off of existing mechanics is a favorable starting point.

So far, I see a rather robust pool of possibilities and connections, but my current line of thought for a starting point ability is as follows:

Quick Disable as a prerequisite.
Full round action.
Disable device check against CMD (not sure about this, skills are easy to skyrocket, but disable seems like it should be involved)
I'm of two minds of thought at this point: sneak attack damage applied as a sunder, or simply taking the armor to a phantom "broken" condition, where it can be repaired with a minute of work, a second check takes it to phantom "destroyed".

This is also where a lot of the dirty trick feat progression starts to make sense, making me think perhaps this should be a feat that allows a modification of dirty trick. Part of me thinks the target should be distracted/unaware in some why, which is why the sneak attack conditions (flanked/flat footed) come to mind. Heck, I even considered the effects of the chaos beast corporeal instability in regards to the effects of undone armor. Lots of thoughts, still very disorganized.

Anyhow, I would love to hear anyones input on the idea. I like the image of a rogue darting around the enemy, popping buckles and cutting straps, and suddenly the enemy's armor is more hindrance than help.

I've got my own opinions, but I want to hear some input from others regarding this.

Would a dragon in the form of a human, be it from change shape or alter self/polymorph/shapechange, retain its energy immunity? Or any of its immunities, for that matter? I find a conflict between the fact that the creature's original type is retained, which should mean abilities granted by the type should still function. Yet darkvision is called out as an ability frequently lost when changing shape. Would draconic immunity to sleep still apply? Would a green dragon's immunity to acid? Would a red dragon retain its fire subtype, and thus both its fire immunity and cold vulnerability? If dragons loose their subtypes, do shapeshifting outsiders loose their alignment subtypes?

The other question is regarding dragons which can cast spells as sorcerors after a certain age category. Can these dragons use scrolls or wands in the age categories before they gain spellcasting? A precedent is set by the ranger and paladin, but the divide between player character and monster rules is often wide.

I realize this might be kicking a hornet's nest, but these questions are both interesting to me, and pertinent to my games. I would love to hear opinions on them or links to previous similar conversations.

As the title says, what happens to a dead character that is exposed to an area of effect? Specifically, the character's gear?

Do dead characters still "attend" objects? Are all objects subject to the AoE? Is it treated like a natural 1?

Lots of questions, few answers that I am aware of. I would love to hear what others have to say.

Does anyone know what the small (presumably) stone thing is in the Hut's garden configuration? Off to the side, at the end of a path. It doesn't have a map key or a reference to it that I can find, but it just looks like it should be terribly important.

Anyone know? Or have any suggestions what it perhaps should be?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, my fabulous party has made it into the Maiden, Mother, Crone stage of the AP, and certain things have become accepted aspects of the campaign, for better or worse.

1. Irrisen sucks, Iobaria sucks more, Baba Yaga sucks most.
2. There is always room in the Gunslinger's harem.
3. The urban druid will always open his big mouth at the wrong time.

So, a few rooms in to Artrosa, the druid has made the moves on Caigreal.

The half-fiend satyr managed to hit EVERYONE with suggestion, but upon seeing them absoutely destroy the tendriculos, he thought better of outright assault and brought them to the annis hag. Who has likewise succeeded in bluffing them as to her true nature and setting them against Jadrenka. Granted, most of the PCs are still suspicious: whats a human woman doing all alone in Iobaria? Her cover story of being a Desnan priestess only goes so far. Even Caigreal herself warned them to not trust anyone in the dungeon.

But here is where it gets fun! After the friendly meeting and a few more encounters chopping away at the daily resources, the party retreated back to the top of the mesa and rested in the grove there. However, the druid decided he wanted to spend more time with the pretty lady, and went back down to have dinner with her.

Even better,

Fate of the foolish druid:
the dinner provided was the dead pig familiar of the ettin witch from the first room. Which the druid had engaged in solo battle due to an insult and profanity laden exchange made possible by Speak With Animals.

While Caigreal is playing a long game and wants to use these pawns to acheive her goals, her innate haggish nature can't be suppressed that long. She collected the coven, and used their powers to do a number of things during the dinner date. Some of these are a little loose with the rules, but my group has always agreed that outside the box thinking is fair game regardless of PC or NPC status.

So, what has the hag coven done?

1. Cursed the druid to only gain sustenance from undead flesh.
2. Animated the pig's spirit as an ectoplasmic creature, disguised as the gravy of the meal. It now swirls in his guts, biding its time to use its horrifying ooze ability against him from the inside. Should he be nauseated by anything, it will come up, and attack.
3. Animated the pig's skinned, boned, and roasted corpse as a meat-puppet undead, where it now sits within his stomach permanently regenerating. Soon he will notice that he isn't getting hungry anymore. Should he ever assume a female shape via Thousand Faces or Wildshape, the meat-puppet will fully regenerate and attempt to escape, which will be likely completely horrifying.
4. Cursed him that the next time he prepares Reincarnate (he's had to reincarnate 3 party members so far, so it will happen again), it will be the coven's animate dead ability that gets used. Until he does this or dies, the coven does not have access to that ability. This is a one-off curse, permanent until expended. I'm planning to offer the unlucky PC who gets animate dead on them the chance to come back as a skeletal champion, if they don't want to wait for ressurection magic.

This isn't the first terrible thing to happen to this druid, nor is it likely to be the last. The previous session's encounter with Tooth Fairies (I had to, how could I not?) left him in a coma from the pain and violation of having ALL his teeth taken (failed every save against paralysis). He got half of them back in time to re-set.

Anyhow, I just wanted to share a brief look at the trouble my party gets into, and perhaps see if anyone has any further ideas for haggish manipulation of the PCs (in general or mine in specific) throughout Artrosa.

Title says it all. Normally, burrow speeds only go through stone when specifically noted, as per Burrow from the d20 srd (since Pathfinder doesn't actually have a burrow entry, as often bemoaned).

However, blue dragons have the earth subtype, which states "most earth creatures can burrow through solid rock". It also states that the creature has tremorsense if it has a burrow speed as well, but that's unimportant to me at the moment.

So, can a blue dragon burrow through stone?

My group, consisting in part of a ranger/sleepless detective, made canny use of her abilities and intelligence to determine the who, where, and why of the vampire murders before lunch of their first day in Caliphas. By evening they were wrapping up the abbey, and at dawn they visited a certain noble at his place of work. Now, with the criminal in tow, they finally head to the vampire underground to hand him over to the "proper"

This renders the XP awards for "learning clues from the vampires" rather pointless. How should I account for this? Simply give the same amount out, as the murders were solved regardless? This is complicated by my second question:

Should there be a monetary reward? Let me clarify: Players have the option of simply carving their way through the adventure, gaining XP and loot from the (technically amiable) vampires. Or they can use diplomacy to work with them, gaining XP (but see my above situation). But what then of loot? Does it create a vacuum on the wealth by level? Or is the adventure calibrated for the diplomatic mission and the purge everything option technically gives extra wealth?

Any input would be welcome.

So, dispel magic can suppress the magic properties of an item for 1d4 rounds. This makes them vulnerable to shatter and polymorph any object, as has been discussed multiple times.

As such, could fabricate work to modify a magic weapon into a different form? For example, a +1 silver longsword, could it be dispelled, then fabricated, into a (at that moment while dispelled) MW silver handaxe. And after the 1d4 rounds, its magical energies return and, as it is a MW weapon, there is no reason they shouldn't operate as normal.

The idea is based on keeping tabs on the materials involved. A dagger would not provide enough material to make a greatsword. But, what if you brought to the casting enough raw metal to do so?

So far, I can not see any reason why this wouldn't work. Fabricate is a transmutive effect, it turns the original material into the new product, so its not as if the sword is being completely deconstructed then reconstructed, like a Star Trek teleporter might do.

Ultimately, to receive this service from a non-party spellcaster, you are looking at a 5th level spell (restricted to larger settlements) along with at least 1, maybe 2, castings of dispel magic, since the dispel check needs to succeed, and many common weapon properties are CL 8. Two dispel magics, and a fabricate, all at CL 9, would be 990gp. Round it to a thousand, or actually have the spellcaster roll for it and charge as he feels appropriate (some might charge per dispel attempt, some might only charge for 3, some might only charge for the successful one, personal preference).

1000gp (with restrictions on availability already built in via settlement rules) seems fair to turn an interesting but ill-suited magic weapon into a desirable component of the character's arsenal. And seems better than selling it for 1/2 and buying something else.


Pretty simple, a joke turned into an idea and here is a rough draft:

Perturbing Spell (Metamagic)

Your spells manifest with unusual appearances, distracting those who witness them.

Benefit: Your spell's effects contain a powerful figment, such as a summoned creature dancing wildly as it fights, or a conjured cloud making loud snorting noises. Any creature within 10' spell level that observes the spell's effect must make a Will save, with a DC equal to the original spell (Spell Focus: Illusion applies). Creatures who succeed are unnaffected, but those who fail take a -2 to AC, can not take 10 on skill checks (even if they had an ability that would allow them to), and must make concentration checks at the same DC as the Will save to cast spells or use spell like abilities.

Spells with instantaneous durations create perturbing effects for 1 round. Spells with greater durations create the effect for the full duration of the original spell. Spells with durations of permanent or that create permanent effects instantaneously have perturbing effects for 1 round per caster level. This feat can not be used on spells that do not have some sort of physical presence or visual/sonic effect.

Any fine tuning? I'm still trying to figure out the metamagic cost of this. It's a decent effect, but the range and duration is subjective to the spell, and allows a save to negate. I was thinking +1, but I would gladly hear any constructive commentary.

So, Speak with Dead. The text says "This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature."

Maybe it's just my BA of English, but that sentence is obnoxiously vague to me. I can see three possible ways to interpret it.

1. The spell doesn't work on a corpse that is CURRENTLY an undead creature.
2. The spell doesn't work on a corpse that is NOW OR HAS EVER BEEN an undead creature.
3. The spell doesn't work on a corpse that has become a PHYSICAL undead creature.

I've seen a lot of people rule #2, but the Carrion Crown AP has some events in it (Village of Herstag in Trial of the Beast) that rule out both #2 and #3. Which makes it seem as if #1 is the only possibility, but as I said, so many people seem to rule it as #2 that I begin to second guess myself.

Any thoughts?

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

In the 3.5 PHB, under the Selling Loot subsection of equipment, it stated that trade goods sold for their full value. A 50gp trade good could be sold for 50gp. It further expounded that trade goods included gems and art objects.

In the PF Core book, that secondary sentence is missing. Is this an issue with the OGL/SRD (as that sentence is likewise missing from the 3.5 SRD), or was this an intentional restructuring of the wealth system? If the art and gems of a dragon's hoard are worth 50% rather than %100, that could create a very substantial difference in the total value.

Should we assume backwards compatability and continue selling such items at full value? Or was a deliberate change made and I'm just now catching up with the times?

Any answers would be nice, but a developer comment I think would be very helpful in this case, as modifications to the wealth system directly impact character power and by extension game balance.

Specifically, to put an end to it. Extra specifically, if you had something important to it in life, such as a prized possession, or especially its own mortal remains.

I admit, I love watching me some Supernatural, and this sort of thing seems to come up a lot. So I thought about it, looked at spells like Speak With Dead, Planar Binding, Ghostbane Dirge, the 3.5 spells Make Manifest and Ghost Trap, and the glorious Incantations from 3.5 Unearthed Arcana. And really, I think its just fine that there might be a way to do such a thing. And especially likely that the church of Pharasma would know how.

Still, while I will run my home games the way I want to run them, I want to know how the rest of you feel regarding the subject. Note "subject" rather than "mechanic". This isn't a rules question so much as a "spirit of the game" question. Although I suppose it is also a bit "setting" related too. I'll understand if this thread gets moved.

So, what do you all think? Could a knowledgeable person summon a spectre/shadow/wraith if they dug up it's bones and enacted a proper ritual?

Is there anything (besides the train-wreck of common sense slamming into animate dead things) that prevents undead from using performance instruments? Pianos, drums, violins, that makes sense, but what about the wind instruments? Undead don't need to breath, and more often than not, aren't equipped to.

So what does a skeletal champion/lich bard do? Must he put his flute away and start learning the pipe organ?

I've found no explicit rule that says they can't play an instrument like anything else, and they do speak, producing words and sounds. With a vampire or ghoul, which are so much more fleshy, this seems easier, but even then, the question does still somewhat remain.

So, what are your opinions on the prospective careers of the undead flutist?

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The title says it all. What is a concentration check? There seem to be four options, each with varying levels of legitimacy.

1: As a check that relies on the modifier granted by the spellcaster's casting ability score, it seems possibly like an ability check. But it also incorporates caster level.

2: Because it uses a function of level plus mod, it seems like a skill check.

3: Because it uses spellcaster level, it seems like a caster level check, but it also uses the ability mod.

4: It might just be "only" a concentration check, a unique check of its own.

The evidence seems to point at #4, which then begs the question: what can penalize a concentration check? Bestow Curse? Evil Eye? Wish?

Are there any effects that explicitly penalize concentration? Or does a sickened, frightened, entangled, and cursed spellcaster get to make his concentration checks at no penalty besides having to make them at all?

Just looking for a little clarification and a lot of input. Thanks in advance.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The section on Aid Another is fairly vague regarding hard numbers of "extra workers" working on a craft project. I wanted to find a pre-existing formula (I find it helps with reinforcing the ability to remember the rule) to help structure a guideline for such estimations.

I also wanted to explore the concept of projects so large they could conceivable have multiple "primary workers" with their own "extra workers". Things like houses, sailing ships, and the like. Even something like a longspear, where the metal head and the wooden haft both require distinct crafting.

I ended up with this:

A craft project can generally have a number of "primary workers" and "extra workers" equal to the item's size modifier +1, minimum 1.
A dagger, being tiny, is 1 primary, and 1 extra.
As is a longsword, cauldron, or saddle (and other small and medium items).
A large item can have 2 primary, each with 2 workers (total of 6). An example would be a lean-to shelter, a dinghy, or a ballista.
A huge object could support 3 primary, with 3 extras each (total of 9). Examples: small home, fishing boat, trebuchet.
A gargantuan object could host 5 primary, with 5 extra each (total of 25). Small warships, larger homes, a stone watchtower.
A collosal object could host 9 primary, with 9 extra each (Galleons, small forts, mansions, large bridges.)

Are some of these workers just doing things like moving raw materials around? Yes. But they need to do so in a way that doesn't interfere with the current activity, and makes the next step of activity go faster. Which is the essence of the Aid Another check. I won't post the math, but several explorations with 5th level "master craftsmen" with averages of +16 in their skill, and untrained laborers, all came quite close to the reasonable expectations of larger craft projects.

Obviously, this doesn't address craft issues like functional value vrs. artistic value, nor does it take the relative size of the workforce into account. Building castles with giants is obviously faster, doing it with pixies, not so much. conversely, pixies could conceivably gang up on medium chainmail, but a giant is pumping the bellows at best. Easy enough to modify by the relative size mod, but that is outside the scope of this post.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So, I'm running my group through the levels of the Pyramid of Kamaria the Brazen, the Rovagug worshiping pharaoh.

Does anyone want my encounter designs and statblocks? I've done up to level 7 of the pyramid, and will likely go a bit further before summer break temporarily puts the game on hold.

Basically looking to see if anyone thinks this combo is too good to allow. A beastmorph alchemist in my group would like to take levels in dragon disciple. Now, to be fair, he has been of a draconic bent in his mutagen usage since day one, using bits gathered from defeated dragons and purchased from trophy shops and arcane dealers.

His idea is to only go for 5 levels, because he doesn't actually want the Form of the Dragon ability acquired at 6th. He's even willing to have all the abilities except extracts be restricted to mutagen form.

So, does anyone think this would be a broken combination? Everything I see says its overall weaker than just staying in alchemist for the beastmorph increases, or going into Master Chymist for more mutagen options. Am I missing something?

A question: while the rules are clear on multiple grapplers working towards the same goal (extras use Aid Another actions), what happens when the grapplers are not all working to the same goal.

Most expressions of this are corner case, but two come to mind (and came up recently in my game).

A chupacabra drains blood when it pins a target or maintains a pin. If multiple chupacabras grapple a foe, obviously all of them are attempting to drain blood, but by the RAW, only one can, because the others are simply aiding the first. On a semantic level, one could argue that by assisting the pin they are accomplishing it by proxy. Pinned is a condition, it can't be given multiple times.

Personally, the RAW image of two gentlemanly chupacabra holding down the victim while a third graciously drinks the blood is funny, but not realistic. The RAI image of three chupacabra frantically all trying to get a hold and suck away seems much more appropriate.

I personally think the "assisting" chupacabra should just roll a CMB check as if they were pinning. If they succeed, they drain blood.

On a semi-related note, what happens if one of two aggressive grapplers wants to move the grapple, but his partner is instead trying for damage or a pin. Related to that, what happens if a grappler is involuntarily moved, (bull rush, telekinesis, etc)? Is the grapple broken for the moving creature? Do both parties go flying?

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

As per the magic section, a summoned creature that is slain dissapears and is unavailable for 24 hours, whereupon it reforms on its home plane and can be summoned again.

So, during those intervening 24 hours, what happens if the summoner tries to summon it again? Does he get a poof of smoke and nothing arrives? Does he get a similar but different summon of the same type? Does he get Celestial Badger "B" while Celestial Badger "A" is sleeping off his brush with death?

And depending on if he gets nothing, what happens when he summons multiples with a higher level spell? Does he just get Celestial Badgers "B,C,D, and E" if he rolls well on his 1d4+1?

I recall 3.5s Unearthed Arcana having some rules/options for this, but I was wondering if Pathfinder has actually set it in stone, or at least clay.

So, we have the first gods, who made the titans, who made the gigas, who made the giants.

We have statted versions of the Hell and Abyssal gigas. We have mentions of the Maelstrom and Nirvana gigas.

So, what more to the gigas is there? Elysian, Boneyard, Axis, or Abadon? Are we limited to outer planes for gigas sources, or could there be a fire gigas, an entropic gigas, or even a material plane gigas?

Any and all ideas are welcome (especially from any developers who might want to hint at upcoming books!). I've got a plot line involving a storm giant "ascending" to gigas status that I want to develop more aggressively within one of my games.

Its been almost five years, but the Wreck is getting raised once more! My Savage Tide game has finally come back to this point, revived from the catacombs of failed campaigns by dimension hopping sorcery!

Some of you may recall I built the Wreck for my previous Savage Tide game. I wanted to get photos up, but didn't have a digital camera at the time. Well, it went into the attic, and its coming down now. I'm assembling it, and will take photos and upload them to my facebook page.

It begins!

So in my home game, my players have found a hidden, sealed dungeon in the upper city-ledge of Tumen in Osirion, specifically the one once owned by the Pharaoh of Numbers. They have already played through Entombed with the Pharaohs, and are working on discovering the location of The Pact Stone Pyramid, so I have plenty of material to work with.

I want this small dungeon in Tumen (which is almost a megadungeon in its own right) to be a hidden stronghold of the Pharaoh of Numbers, a place where he recorded lore on the Dominion of the Black and what their inevitable return to Golarion might mean. I also want them to find one of the doomsday clocks, since that was their entire goal in this expedition and they've done a darn good job with info gathering, smart exploration, and so on.

But for the life of me, I can't figure out what to put in this mini-dungeon/stronghold. The relation to the Pharaoh of Numbers makes stuff relating to Aucturn the 11th planet and the numbers 11 and 56 a no brainer, but beyond that, I feel like there should be something truly unusual, like a chunk of the dungeon being a permanent demiplane with objective gravity for some sort of MC Escher madness.

I'm just drawing a blank, so I figured I'd ask for a few ideas here to get the engine warmed up.

Any thoughts?

So.... an Alchemist's competence bonus to alchemy checks goes away in an anti-magic field, because its part of the Alchemy (SU) ability. The creation of entirely non-magic tindertwigs and alchemist fire is tangibly more difficult for him in such an area. He also can't identify potions within an anti-magic field for the same reason.

Conversely, that same Alchemist can brew those potions in an anti-magic field with ease (although they won't work until he comes out) because it is listed as Brew Potion (EX).

I'm not griping about these on some deeply personally offended level. I just thought this was amusing. Anyone else have some odd quirks they have noticed in the rules?

Are there any discoveries besides Feral Mutagen (and the Greater/Grand mutagens) that only apply while in mutagen form?

I figure I can simply self restrict using discoveries like Vestigial Limb and Tentacle to when the alchemist is in Mutagen Form, but such acts tend to lead quickly towards "shoot self in foot" land. Then again, any sort of compensation for self-limiting often goes the way of munchkin (Unearthed Arcana Flaws).

Are there any recommendable 3PP Alchemist materials? Or any Alchemist stuff beyond what Paizo has in their core line?

Am I the only one who thinks there should be more "Hulk" discoveries besides the few in Master Chymist, most of which seem rather underpowered for their prerequisite level? (Still miffed at Half-Dragon Mutagen)

All help is appreciated, and thanks in advance!

There is no post in this thread. At least, not one I can see.

Did the OP delete the post while allowing the thread to somehow remain?

I read through the archives and while it seems the RAW is pretty clear that undead just make crappy barbarians due to the fact the primary benefits of rage are morale bonuses, and the undead type is immune to morale effects, I wanted to see if there was any official ruling on this one way or another.

I don't like calling for developer intervention, but there have been enough undead barbarians in the modules (including ones described as gaining said levels after becoming undead) that I think it might be nice to put this to rest once and for all.

So, does anyone know of a stated confirmation? Or is this just a slightly grey area made blurry grey by the time when the Beta listed rage as typeless bonuses?

And for bonus points: if you cast Create Undead on a peasant, you can get a ghoul. If you cast it on a 4th level fighter, can you get a Ghoul with 4 levels of fighter? I'm not advocating Create Undead as poor man's ressurection (well, maybe, but not for those reasons). Just curious if that is withing the rules, not allowed, or just not covered.

Are there any encounter tables or even just lists of inhabitants for the Boneyard? I have a detour coming up in my Kingmaker game that makes me really in need of such info.

Should I just assume there may be just about any type of outsider capabable of honeyed words and concerned with mortal souls? Are there any inhabitants specific to the Boneyard?

Anyhow, help would be appreciated. Many thanks in advance.

Title says it all, I have a player at level 11 who is looking to pick up a divine caster class as part of delving into the background of the tribe she is from. Rage Prophet is interesting, but oracle just doesn't quite fit, and shes been rolling Cha 10 from day one, but Wis 14.

So is there any feat/class/prestige class love for a Barbarian/Divine Caster beyond Rage Prophet? 3.5 material is fine too, but Rage Mage is arcane only, and again, Cha (and Int) of 10.

Is she just destined to take druid levels from this point on? Not that there couldn't be a lot of flavor and interesting stuff there, but it just struck me how little there is for this niche. Maybe its too niche.

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Wide audience specifically gives you extra numbers of creatures affected when you use a bardic music effect that targets "multiple creatures". I assume this wording is meant to differentiate from bardic performances that simply affect an area (which receive their own expanded capacities via Wide Performance, as noted one sentence prior).

When a bard gets Inspire Greatness at 9th level (something Court Bards still get), it only affects one creature. As they level up, it begins to affect multiple creatures.

Would Wide Audience grant extra targets to Inspire Greatness at level 10 (when it grants its first extra target), when you can technically only target a single creature (it does specifically note that it does not affect powers that only affect single creatures)? Or do you have to wait until level 12, at which point you can normally target 2, and Wide Audience would then grant 1 more, total 3.

RAW, it's pretty obvious that until Inspire Greatness can affect 2 targets on its own, Wide Audience does not apply.

RAI, its a pretty fuzzy to me, enough so that I'm asking for others opinions/dev comment/etc.

I've been toying with my semi-annual irritation at the weapon proficiency system, and wanted to throw out my current idea mish-mash that came up. Feel free to comment/advise/critique, although I don't have much yet.

Weapon Proficiency Points

Instead of standard weapon proficiencies, a character gains a number of points with which to purchase weapon proficiencies. (Idea is heavily influenced by Unearthed Arcana's Weapon Group system back in 3.5)

Simple weapons cost 1 point to learn.
Martial cost 2
Exotic cost 4.

Proficiency with all simple weapons costs 10.
Proficiency with a weapon group (see Fighter)costs 10.

A class can always choose to take the "default" list, as the class is normally presented.

A wizard starts with 5 points.
A rogue starts with 22 points. (Should this be lowered to 20, to represent a cost for deviating from the standard? Or should it be left as a 1-1 conversion with just a "default" selection?)
A fighter (or any other full martial proficiency character) starts with 150 (Again, should this be lowered? This would be the cost of simple weapons and 14 weapon groups, but many of the groups have overlap. Should the number just be an itemized tally from the core weapon list? Conversely, should a fighter receive any sort of extra points beyond what barbarian/paladin/ranger get to represent their consumate skill and training?

I can't decide if I want to make a Weapon Proficiency feat that grants a certain number of proficiency points, or if I want to make skill points usable as proficiency points (but certainly not the other way around, that way lies min-maxing).

The ultimate goal for me, and as such in my games, is to eliminate the flux point between exotic weapons that are classified as such for being culturally exotic (kama, nunchaku, etc) and those that are actually mechanically superior to martial weapons (one handed bastard sword, dwarven waraxe, etc), while at the same time providing the option for a specific character concept's weapon proficiency to be viable and beleivable without requiring spending feats on it, such as an egyptian flavored sorceror having proficiency with things like the kopesh, or the crescent shaped polearms.

Again, constructive criticism and input is welcome and encouraged!

Enough time has passed that I can write this now. My daughter, Kaiya Annette Rands, died on Febuary 28th. Some of you may remember my posting regarding her birth two years ago. I'll give you a short summary of what has occurred since then.

About two weeks after we returned from the hospital, we had to go back. Kaiya was failing to thrive, as getting food into her was immensely difficult. She was unable to nurse effectively, and it was a constant effort to pump milk into her with a syringe taped to a finger. Another week spent at the hospital and we found the problem. Kaiya had intense acid reflux, so we received medications for such, learned some new feeding techniques, and returned home.

Some time passed, and by the six month mark it became very apparent that Kaiya was behind in most of her development. Her health was fine, although she didn't have the babyfat most infants possessed. In fact, she was actually startlingly muscled, with actual definition in her legs. However, she was not vocalizing beyond cries, and she was unable to sit or crawl, or even effectively grab objects.

After a pair of MRIs and some visits to neurologists, we learned why. Kaiya had cerebral palsy, due to five cavernous angiomas inside her cerebellum. Cavernous angiomas are blood vessels with thin walls which become inflated, like a sort of baloon animal in the brain. The push aside and compress brain tissue, interfering with normal operations. They aren't that uncommon, but having five was definitely unusual. Being in the cerebellum, they were the answer for her difficulties in balance, motor control, and speech acquisition.

We learned that there was a, by the cold scientific odds, cumulative 1% chance per year of a cavernoma rupturing and causing a brain bleed. With five cavernomas, and how deep they were, that basically came up to a 100% chance of Kaiya having a likely fatal brain bleed by the time she was 20.

But almost as if in response to this, Kaiya began to show her strength. Horrifically strong, and I do not use that term lightly as she literally broke out (as in broke the wood itself) of a wooden crib three times, she began pushing herself to her knees, pulling herself to standing on objects, focusing and trying her best to grab things with hands that almost seemed to work backwards. She was bright, alert, and enjoyed life immensely. The time we spent with her was wonderful, even if we only heard her laugh once, when she was 10 months old. Since that point, we could only get a sort of chuckle.

She was also an adrenaline junkie. She loved to be thrown into the air, spun rapidly (she loved being set in an office chair and spun), or even just held upside down. She would pull herself to standing, in her crib, by the couch, whereever, and then just let go, enjoying the fall, and shrugging off the head bonk that followed. Yes, the little girl with five pressure sensitive time bombs in her head had a love for things that put them even more at risk. My wife and I shared a moment once, both of us knowing that the 100% by age 20 was likely more by age 10, with how she was.

Food made her sneeze more often than not, but she loved food, even things like pickles and lemons. She would make a face the first time, but if she didn't like it, she would still eat it, if she liked it, she would devour it. Once her teeth came in, we shifted fully to spoon feeding (she was never able to feed herself, although we had a few messy experiments with oatmeal that were starting to show progress.)

We padded her crib with foam so that she wouldn't hurt herself, as she liked to pull herself up in the crib, and leg go, slamming against the other side. This is what allowed her to break out, as she blasted out the wooden slats with her head. So we put the foam on the damaged side and turned it to the wall. She liked falling against it, it gave her all the rush, and none of the ouch.

Kaiya was a night owl, rarely going to sleep before 11, and usually closer to 12. But she was up at 9 in the morning, like clockwork, playing in her crib for a few minutes before crying for me to come get her, so she could have breakfast. This worked just fine, as I had quickly gained the habit of waking up instantly when she cried for me.

On Monday, Febuary 28th, everything changed. I woke up at noon, and instantly knew something was wrong. I rushed into her bedroom, and found her. Out of character, she had pulled herself up on the foam side of the crib (as she prefered the other side, where she could see the door), and with her immense strength pulled it free of its attachments, and somehow, despite the relative height of the foam (we had cut it tall so that she couldn't reach it, but she had been showing progress in balancing on her knees that last week).

She had pulled the foam down with her as she fell, and it caught under her chin, the height that was supposed to be unreachable making it angle across the crib in the perfect length to put pressure on her neck. I found her in a sitting position, something she could never do due to her arching back and lack of balance.

I admit, I screamed. The physical therapists who were working with her had told us that by three, you generally know where the limitations will be. As the days had gone by past 1 and a half years, I was watching those limitations, and realized that I might have to care for Kaiya for the rest of my life. And I was happy with that. 100%. I was more sure in myself that I would be okay with it than when I married my wife. Kaiya was my everything, my purpose, practically my god.

And she was gone. I'm educated, and human physiology and forensics were a dalliance I had engaged in during college. I knew she was gone, from temperature, lividity, and so on. My baby girl was gone. But I did what I had to, I called 911, I gave her CPR, I gave my statement to the police, I held Anna when she got home from work on her lunch break (she was on the way when I awoke, so I couldn't even warn her). I held it together to see everything through, and it wasn't until the paramedics had left and the funeral home attendant gave us a moment to say goodbye that I let myself finally go.

There are sounds the human voice should never have to make, nor the human ear ever have to hear.

Her memorial service was wonderful, so many people who had touched her life and been touched by her attended. It helped to know she had spread her smile to so many. Kaiya was amazing in that she never felt anger. Oh, she would get upset about a diaper or being hungry, but she never showed true anger.

We buried her in Jacksonville Cemetery, in a plot that will serve our whole family (Jacksonville has loose restrictions on how many can be interred in one plot, so as time rolls by, my urn and my wife's casket will eventually join hers where it rests under the headstone). I dressed my daughter for burial, putting her into her swimsuit one last time. Her swimsuit was the only peice of clothing she ever cared about or recognized, as it meant bathtime (she was too slippery and strong to bathe without it) and she loved bathtime more than any other thing. I put on her softest pajamas over the swimsuit, put her favorite toys (a tentacled rubber squiggle ball, and a string of mardi-gras beads) into her hands, and tucked her in with her blanket (the only blanket she could sleep under, her favorite blanket).

I, with the help of my wife's father, buried her. I've since had dreams about her, where she stands up and runs to me, or gets up despite being dead a moment prior, and I take her to my wife in the dream, and we hug her, and love her, and then we look at her and say "this is a dream, isn't it?" and then the dream ends as we say "yes, but its a good one". The dreams have been good for me, helpful.

We've been doing well. My wife's faith has supported her immensely. My acceptance of the reality of potentially loosing her has served me well, paid some of the greif-debt ahead of time, if you will. It has been by no means easy, it just hasn't been too hard. Kaiya is free of a body that betrayed her, held her back, prevented her from doing the things she so desperately wanted to do. She won't have to live in a world that is, sadly, still rather horrible to people with disabilities. We don't have to worry about what will happen to her when we are gone. I don't have to say "goodbye" along with "goodnight" anymore. Her death was, as the medical examiner tells us, painless, and short of me sleeping in her room or not using the foam to protect her from bashing her head against the wall, unpredictable and unpreventable. Quite literally, a one in a million freak accident. And so much gentler on us than it could have been. Kaiya was getting so strong and heavy, we would soon have a hard time carrying her. We had already begun to fear the day she might push herself out of our grasp and fall to the floor. A bad landing, a bad surface, and how terrible, how easy to blame ourselves, things could have become.

I hope no one takes this as an implication that I'm happy to have lost her. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know that if I found a genie's lamp, my first wish would be to have her back. I am not at the point yet where I can fully accept what has happened and move forward. But I am getting closer each day. Because I remember Kaiya, and her strength and force of will, her fundamental nature of reach for what you want, pull yourself up if you fall, smile if you are happy or hurt, because it means you got to feel something. She was only unhappy when my wife and I were unhappy, she could read the feelings in the air even if we weren't speaking, and she made her displeasure known. So for her, we are doing our best to be happy. She would want that.

I have buried my daughter. I have taken her last breath into myself when I tried to resuscitate her. In her death, she is a part of me, and her strength is as well. I have lived through the hell of kissing her goodnight knowing she may be gone the next day, and I have lived through the greater hell of that happening. I have, quite literally, survived my worst nightmare, thanks to the strength of my baby girl, and the love of my freinds and family.

Her strength is mine. I will live for her, and one day, I will be laid down next to her again. Until then, I carry her with me, and I am unbreakable.

To whoever has read this to the end, I thank you, and I hope you can take something good from this, some portion of Kaiya's strength and joy of living. Hug your children, kiss your lovers, call your family, spend time with your friends. Appreciate the life you have, and the joy in it. And when you fall down, when you hurt: smile and stand up.

If people have any questions, feel free. Talking about this is part of my healing process. Anyone who wants to see some of the pictures we have taken over the years, the photostream is here.

If this should be in the Campaign Setting section, please move it.

Title says it all: what would be the favored weapons of the Elder Gods? Specifically, I'm looking for Yog-Sothoth, as an amazing coincidence has cropped up in my Kingmaker game as a result of a player giving me a blank check on his Oracle's patron and me not reading very far ahead in the adventure. So, anyone have any ideas, or has any official favored weapons been listed anywhere?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll admit I haven't read deeply into the main Pathfinder Campaign Setting book, so if this information is in there (I put NOTHING past the Paizo crew) my apologies for not looking deeper.

That said, does anyone know/have any idea/use any specific racial slurs in their games regarding the various fantastic races and such? Things like the following:

What do goblins call orcs?
What do orcs call elves?
What do dragons call dwarves?
What do brave people call drow?
What do gnomes call halflings?

I'm looking for the fighting words, the names that get arched eyebrows at best and start vendettas at worst. If anyone has any, official or not, I'd love to know/hear about them!

So, as my second DMing of Savage Tide approaches Olangru, and the Advanced Players Guide sits on my table, I started thinking.

"Witch and Oracle seem very well suited to the Olman culture, as far as classes go. Let's explore this idea!"

So what do the rest of you think? I'm looking at both the "modern" Isle of Dread Olman culture, and the "ancient" Thanaclan Olman culture, since my PCs are more than likely to go hunting for the "Sleeping Princes" if they hear of the legend.

I'm currently thinking Oracle of Bones for the Zombie Masters, but then again, the Plague Witch can do that as well. Which brought two ideas to mind.

1. The current Zombie Master tradition is a perversion/rebellion from the previous "ancient" traditions, likely deliberately done by survivors of the first Savage Tide but unknown by modern Olmans to be anything other than "the way its done".

2. The current Tradition is decended from the only "Prince" to survive the first Savage Tide, and didn't go into temporal stasis. This could set up an interesting figure hidden somewhere on the Island, an active Prince of Thanaclan. Likely an undead of some sort, given the lifespan needed, but this is also sensible in its own way. Granted, its trying to shove Voodoo into the Mesoamerican melting pot that the Olman already are, but it got me thinking of a sort of Baron Samedi type character.

I'm interesting in what others have to say. I'm not worried about breaking with the "canon" Olman lore, but at the same time, the more canon lore I have, the more of a foundation I have to build and modify.

Any thoughts?

PathfinderSRD: Swallow Whole wrote:
Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to one size category smaller than the swallowing creature.

T-Rexs in Pathfinder are Gargantuan (a change from 3.5 which I agree with). This means, that by the rules, a T-Rex can swallow a huge creature whole.

Lets pick a huge creature we can relate to. The Elephant.

Now lets picture a T-Rex swallowing an Elephant whole.


Yeah, I don't think so either.

With the exception of creatures like a Vurgen's Eel, or maybe some of the more ambitious storks out in the marshes, I can't think of many creatures that can actually swallow whole a creature just one size below them. And I wouldn't count snakes either, as their "swallow whole" is a more out of combat ability. At least, they usually don't begin to swallow the prey until it is dead or at least no longer struggling.

I could see a T-Rex theoretically swallowing a horse whole. Humans, no problem. But the idea of an elephant, a killer whale, an animated wagon, or a 12 ton Storm Giant (which also outweighs the Rex by 5 tons, and would put it past it's heavy load of 8 tons) going down it's gullet is just ridiculous. And since we are dealing with a real (if extinct) creature, "it's magic" or "a wizard did it" doesn't really fly.

Most creatures that are one size category below a swallower will generally fall into at least the medium if not the heavy load, or beyond, of the swallower, barring "supernatural" grade strength or being a quadruped.

I would propose amending the Swallow Whole Text to read: Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to two size categories smaller than the swallowing creature.

Or the Swallow Whole text could be left alone and the T-Rex (and perhaps other monsters) could get some of that "Otherwise Noted" love.

Regardless, the modification is going in for my own game, I just wanted to bring the logistics issue up for others to be aware of.

1 to 50 of 130 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>