The King In Yellow's page

72 posts. Alias of William H Watson.


1 to 50 of 72 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:

In PF1, where any fight that challenges the PCs has a good chance of killing them due to -Con being too small a buffer, I routinely had death counts in the low double digits in an AP, though much much higher if you count it as a death even after someone uses a breath of life or two.

In PF2 with the same group, we nearly had our first death last session, and they haven't even really used that many hero points to stave off death. The difference comes in the ability to knock someone out at mid to high levels without a massive chance of killing them unless they fall into a tiny HP band.

I've seen the comment about the buffer being too small stated before, and never really understood it. Your -entire- hit point pool is your buffer. Not just the part below zero. Now, not everyone plays the same way, but we play on a grid for -tactical- purposes. If you are getting low in HPs, back off, withdraw, fight defensively... while you get some healing. A lot of people comment about healing not keeping up with damage, but that is only partially true. It doesn't keep up with damage if the players just try to zerg everything. If the table wants to play that way, it's perfectly fine. But the system has those defensive abilities, and spells, and feats for a reason.

As for healing, I've played with many a long term group since I started. And every time, someone at the table has wanted to play the healer. Including groups where people played the actual 'healer' class from 3.5, which has almost zero offense.

It's not a problem with the buffer. It's a choice made by some tables to play the game in a certain way, ignoring all those nifty defensive abilities that are also invented by the game designers, like yourself!

It's not wrong, no. But it's also not right. It's just a playstyle choice. (And, in my opinion, a consequence of the rise of MMOs.)

Sovereign Court

I'd still like to see a return of the Paladin class. In the tradition of AD&D. As opposed to the... class that is called Paladin, but really has almost nothing to do with its historical game roots.

Sovereign Court

GM Oriklad wrote:

Does this act like ol 1-7s, where 16s cant play with the 12-13 teir, and bottom and top tiers dont mix?

There are quite a few questions about that on the Passing the Torch pt.1 page. At the very least, however, everyone can play in the 14-15 subtier, if you have a suitable mix.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

If you are wanting an obvious superhero... go play a superhero RPG. (And yes, I have played many superhero RPGs.) Almost none of the players I have played with have any interest in seeing martials turned into superheros, and that is what a lot of you seem to be asking for, or think 'needs' to be done. Back in 1st / 2nd edition D&D, it was actually fairly well balanced. Yes, a high level wizard was more powerful than a high level martial, but they spent a -long- time working up to that power level. 3rd edition started a trend of seeing D&D as an exercise in powergaming for, in my opinion, to many people. This continued into pathfinder 1st edition, and people are trying to push it into 2nd edition as well. Even the playtest character creation rules push people towards not building a good, viable character... but building an optimal one.

Now, the game is all about having fun. And everyone has fun in different ways. But at least, in my (decently wide) experience of D&D / Pathfinder, people wanting martials powered up is an extremely small minority. We'd rather see spellcasters pulled back in power. So most of the people I've spoken to are happy with the reduction in spellcasting power.

As a side note, I play both martials, and casters. And hybrids. And multiclassed. I've also played (as in long term played) dozens of other games, as well.

You want that guy who can do superheroics? Play Champions. Or GURPS. or any of a dozen decent superhero games. Not D&D and derivatives.

Sovereign Court

All you have given us is a pile of stats, without meaning behind them. Almost ANY pile of stats from a 20 point buy are going to work, the question is what are you wanting the Paladin to do, and more importantly, what kind of person is he?

The comment about wis 7 because he never sense motives people, btw, is somewhat backwards. If you don’t sense motive people, then you don’t put ranks in the sense motive skill. The fact that said skill is adjusted by wis doesn’t mean you have a low wisdom because you don’t work on said skill.

Also, don’t forget... Wisdom is a measure of your willpower first and foremost. Regardless of any magical effects you have to shore up the dice, if you have a low wisdom, it means you are lacking in willpower. (And common sense, and yes, intuition as well.)

Think about it. Do you really want to be the one who always backs down in confrontations? Again, we are not talking getting magical enhancements to shore up weaknesses. But the basic nature of a human with wisdom 7 is the guy who doesn’t interfere when he sees wrongdoing. The one who, when he comes upon the mugging in the alley turns and walks away.

Mind you... there is nothing wrong with playing said character. Not a thing. But abilities scores are not just numbers on a sheet. They are the basic building blocks of who your character is, stripped of levels, magic, and items to hide your deficiencies behind.

Sovereign Court

Except, in the case of a pregen, it is acceptable. Someone may be trying a new class, etc. And that is fine. There is no expectation of them knowing the class.

GM credit chars, however, do not get a pass. GM credit or not, if you have not taken the time to understand the character’s basic mechanics, you should not be inflicting it on the table.

Sovereign Court

Personally, I wish 6 xp per level was the default, and then you could slow track on top of that.

(And do not even get me started on modules for quick leveling.)

I would like to think I am a nice person, in general. But when people show up to play 7+ and have no clue how their character actually works, because they have emerald spire’d it, it makes me want to beat them with a rule book.

Please note; I am not referring to optimizing, tactical play, or the like. I’m talking about the simple fundamentals of their character. Like reloading. Or opportune parry and riposte. Or power attack.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The biggest problem with allowing or disallowing any particular alignment is that it seems many people do not understand the alignment system in general, and even fewer seem to actually understand the differences between moral norms and social norms. And it gets even worse when people try to add real world religious beliefs into the mix, to justify their definitions one way or the other.

As a reminder to all those neutral characters out there, if you are casting good spells and performing good acts “on-screen” during scenarios... what evil acts are you doing the rest of the time, to stay neutral?

Sovereign Court

The way to fix a problem in games is not to power up the weaker side. It is to tone down the more powerful one. Otherwise the inevitable power creep just happens even sooner and ends up being worse.

Sovereign Court

Matthew Downie wrote:
Paralyzed: A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act.

Nothing in "aware and breathes normally but cannot take any actions" adds anything to the standard paralyzed condition. "Cannot take any actions" and "unable to act" are the same thing. Why would they add a second effect of Hold Person that's identical to the first?

Because paralysis allows for purely mental actions, whereas hold person does not.

Hold person is... poorly worded. It is an enchantment (compulsion) spell that compels you to choose to do nothing. (And are thus, for game mechanics purposes treated as having the paralyzed condition.)

As opposed to a transmutation spell that locks all your muscles in place, preventing you from accomplishing the physical actions you are attempting to do. (And thus allows for purely mental actions, including many supernatural abilities, psychic spellcasting, etc...)

Sovereign Court

There is no need for clarification here. Slashing Grace does not get around the Blue Scarf’s piercing weapon restriction.

What people want is a change to the existing rules to increase the power of their characters. Admit that is what you are after, and ask for the rules change. Trying to claim it is not clear, etc... just adds to the noise.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would love for xp to be slowed down. Even something as simple as requiring 2+current level to get to next level. (So going from 1 to 2 still takes 3 xp, but going from 7 to 8 takes 9.) Perhaps even 3,3 then current level xp. (Which would be 3,3,3,4,5,6, etc...) Or whatever formula desired, but let us -play- the characters for a while. Not just churn through them.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It has been mentioned already, but really nothing compares to a brown fur transmuter arcanist.


(And since high level play has been mentioned...)

“Why yes, yes I did just drop an extended shapechange on the fighter.”

Sovereign Court

Mark Seifter wrote:

Actually, Cuup is correct from an even deeper dive into the class's history. The alpha medium, which never saw the light of day, had a stable of prepared spirits with one active (two at later levels) and many faces to switch between them on the fly whenever you wanted during the day, eventually as a swift action (same as the beta's trance action progression) based on whatever you were doing that round. I wanted it to be a jack-of-all-trades that switches spirits to handle various situations. When Jason requested the spirits be locked in on a daily basis, I upped the number of active spirits to go from 1 to 4 and adjusted a bit to handle. Many of the newer beta spirits wouldn't even work back with the alpha version at this point.

The spirit dancer brings back some of that flexibility, but it needed to have the rounds per day limitation to make up for the fact that each individual spirit legend in the modern medium is balanced as a singleton that doesn't swap.

Now.. we just need a magic item (or possibly feat) to get extra dance rounds... It is far to few as it stands.

Sovereign Court

Derklord wrote:
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Derklord wrote:
Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a Dazing Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.
If the campaign is high enough level for the summoner to be casting a Wall of Fire, much less a Dazing Wall of Fire, it is high enough level to have opponents that routinely fly, dimension door, and/or teleport.

Summoner can cast Wall of Fire at 7th level, that's not high. A Lesser Rod of Dazing costs 14k, affordable (or craftable) soon after. The "dazing" should be in parantheses though, fixed that.

If the enemy mooks (!!!) are able to fly, dimension door, and/or teleport at single digit levels, martials will be even more outclassed.

Um... using a class with a spell access list that they have admitted they screwed up on as your example doesn’t really help your case.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

No, it means your DM is doing something right.

For all that people argue otherwise, the game is not supposed to be rocket tag. Sure, people can play that way, and plenty have fun doing so, but it not how the game is designed.

Take a look at a wizard. Even completely unoptimized, at mid level (say 11) they are going to have 32 or so spells per day. Many duplicate party buffs will be pearl’d. They are not supposed to simply allowed to go nova every combat, and unless you are using the system as designed (you know, for non-optimized characters) they will go nova every fight.

Fun for some? Sure. Nothing wrong with it, if everyone is having fun. The problem comes when people constantly give advice with the belief that the system was intended to be played that way (it wasn’t) and try to enforce the thought in people that it is the correct way (it’s not.). It is A way. Not the ‘correct’ way.

Rage is something you use when it is needed. Not something you should expect to have every round of every fight every day.

Sovereign Court

Dragons may be intelligent, but also very proud. Letting the PCs believe they are a different color through misdirection, some scales from a different dragon left about.. sure. Actually disguising itself as a lesser color (to an evil dragon ALL other colors are lesser) ... I’m not sure about that.

But absolutely litter the ground with scales from a previous fight with another dragon of a different color!

Sovereign Court

I’m a huge fan of the medium. Part of that, though, is that i’m a rather large opponent of the (often seen) school of thought that one has to optimize in pathfinder.

You don’t need an 18 (or 20!) str at 1st to be a melee. You don’t need 18 in ANY stat, for any class, to be Completely Viable in pathfinder.

All to often, people make comments about how combats shouldn’t last more than 4 rounds, tops. Sure, if all you are wanting to do is play rocket tag. If that is the style of play you want, that is fine. But it is NOT the ‘correct’ style of play. It is ‘A’ style of play. No one should ever be pressured into adopting that style, yet time and time again that is what suggestions and complaints come down to, on these boards.

Is the medium an optimal character class? Probably not. Can it be a fun, perfectly viable, and useful character? Absolutely.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just want virtuoso bravo made legal for my singing, dancing Paladin. More fey would just be icing.

Sovereign Court

As a side note... folding cannot do light shields. So starting with a quick draw mithril light metal shield covers a lot of bases for cheap.

Sovereign Court

Wait, what?

Killing incapacitated foes, in and of itself, is nowhere close to an evil act.

It is, at best, a neutral act. If they were evil, it may very well be a good act. If they are goodly people, then in that case, it is probably an evil act.

I will say it simply.

Killing someone who is evil is NOT an evil act. It is a GOOD thing.

Sovereign Court

The main reason it isn’t logical is the price of any item fluctuates.

Darn it, gold prices are down today, so the 50 gp worth of gold dust I had ready to cast wall of iron is only worth 47 gp today.

Spell fails!

The values listed for components are an abstract. That silver mirror worth 1000 gp doesn’t really mean you just need an expensive mirror. You need an incredibly well designed and clear mirror. Having intricate silver chasing worth 990 gp and a cheap, cloudy, viewing surface doesn’t actually work.

But we abstract. So yes, you can pound that 200 lb block of silver into a flat surface, polish it up, and have your 1000 gp silver mirror.

Sovereign Court

Almost all Paladin characters I know tend to start with 17 or 19 charisma, because it’s a Paladin’s defining stat. Always has been. Maybe not the most optimizing stat, but the defining stat.

Claiming paladins need to optimize strength to be effective is just that... optimizing. 14 str is more than enough for a melee Paladin.

Sovereign Court

DrDeth wrote:
The Shaman wrote:
Ehhh, tankiness is hard to quantify in Pathfinder as there aren´t very solid "taunt" or other control mechanics outside of spells, and you usually don´t want to be casting those on the "frontline".
The term "Tank" cames in D&D before WoW. It means to be able to absorb damage, not taunt.

‘Tank’ in D&D is a very new term. It came from online MUDs, and was popularized with the advent of Everquest. It was never actually a D&D term.

People almost never used the term tank in D&D until long after 3rd edition had come out. If you asked someone pre-2005 or so, the term that was used was simply ‘front-liner’ or the like.

Sovereign Court

@Chromantic Durgon

You are misrepresenting the numbers for your argument. Or perhaps more accurately you are cherry-picking specific situations and stats to suit your purposes, without doing the same for the Paladin.

Sure, a superstitous barbarian has decent saves. Sometimes. And if you play with a DM that lets you get away with 15 minute adventuring days, it is up often. But you also allocated class and stat choices towards having good saves, without doing the same for the Paladin.

And the same with monk. You picked options for the purpose of increasing saves, but again.. compared them to a apaladin who was not trying to increase saves.

Simply put... the default Paladin has better overall saves than either the Monk or the Barbarian. Because by default, most Paladin do prioritize charisma.

Now, yes, a save optimized member of another class can match them. Until said Paladin also chooses to save optimize.

Sovereign Court

Omnius wrote:
As a GM, it's your job to lose.

Um... No. Very much no.

It is your job, as GM to cooperatively tell a story will your players. First of all, it is bad to get into the win or lose mindset. Second, there is absolutely nothing wrong with forcing the characters to have to retreat. Not. One. Thing.

As for how tough you should be, that depends on the story you are telling.

But generally speaking, the answer to “when should I kill my player’s characters” is: when they make a significant mistake in a life or death situation.

Attack something they shouldn’t, that is capable of crushing them? Crush them, leaving them barely alive. They refuse to flee? Drop them. They can escape from the slavers they get sold to later.

They refuse to work as a team? That is also a mistake. Punish them for it. (Note, however, you should not be arbitrarily upping the difficultly because they DO work as a team.)

The idea is to present -challenges- to your players. They should be using their abilities, otherwise it can get boring, but they should be using them thoughtfully.

Accept from the beginning that you -are- going to screw up on both ends of the spectrum often, when starting out. You will get better with time.

Just never make it personal, on either side.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Saldiven wrote:

He's gotten his defensive buffs so high that he can no longer effectively serve his party function as "tank" unless he's in a choke point where he is the only character that can be attacked.

I cringe every time I see something like this mentioned. “Tank” is not a party function. That is a belief that comes from people playing MMOs where artificial constructs like aggro mechanics override NPCs actual reasonable tactics.

If you don’t present an actual threat to the NPCs, they should rightly ignore you. Now, there are multiple ways to keep the NPCs attention on you, but if you are trying to protect others, you have to do it by protecting -them- not by protecting yourself.

Trip maneuvers, large threat areas, even large amounts for damage can all serve to keep opponents focused on you, or to keep those you are trying to protect safer.

All the MMO “tank” mentality does is lead to people focusing on protecting themselves, and then getting upset when the NPCs -correctly- ignore them.

tldr; Never build a tank. Build a threat, if you are wanting to function as a protector.

To DMs... playing non mindless NPCs intelligently isn’t invalidating PC builds. If that alone invalidates their build, the simple fact is they built without thinking of the consequences.

Sovereign Court

One completely random point. Your table mates may get upset with you, if the spell you focus on messes with their wealth by level, because you sent the creature (and it’s gear) away. You are dedicating a LOT to resources towards that trick.

That having been said, the Occultist is a very strong archtype, and it is hard to go wrong choosing it.

When you look at superior summ vs evolved, remember that the more creatures you put out there, the longer your turn gets, and thus also takes away from other players at the table. It is not wrong, but unless you know exactly what you are doing, with each crature, it can bog things down.

Summoning is a powerful play style, but it takes a lot of prep outside the game, and rules knowledge to pull off.

Sovereign Court

Syries wrote:
You have to UMD a spell trigger/completion item that is a bonus spell known if it's not on your regular spell list and you are not high enough level to actually learn that spell yet.

This will have some variance based around the wording of how you get the bonus spell known.

Sovereign Court

Ghillie suits are only a small part of what allows a sniper to not be easily found after sniping.

Smokeless powder, lack of movement (and a corresponding fairly small arc of fire,) extreme range with modern firearms... several things go into making that suit do its job as well as it does. Note, there is also a HUGE skill requirement, before you can get anywhere near optimal use out of them.

Emulating them in the abstraction that is pathfinder combat comes down to a small bonus to stealth.

Sovereign Court

For me, it is simply about tactics. If appropriate tactics for the creature involves CdG, then it does.

What comes up more often is hitting a downed character. If I put someone down, and they get healed and get back up and involve themselves in the fight... From then on, if I put someone down, I will toss an iterative or the like at their unconscious body to keep them down, unless it just doesn’t make sense tactically.

Note, however... I did say involves themselves in the fight. If a healed character half crawls away, obviously just trying to get away from the action, I might not even waste an AoO on them, if I think I’ll have better uses for it.

Also... when I say tactics, I don’t mean ‘optimal’ tactics. I mean tactics appropriate for the creature.

Sovereign Court

born_of_fire wrote:

If not selfish, I do think you are being a little short-sighted. What are you going to spend the gold on if not scrolls? You don’t need to buy armour and weapons the way the martials do. It is in your best interest that they buy gear rather than pay for scrolls even though it’s hard to feel that way when they’re all blinged out and you have next to nothing in comparison. They are what stands between you and the things that want to hurt you after all. The better off they are, the better off you are. You want them to have all their wealth worth of big 6 AND the portion of your wealth that you’ve dedicated for consumables to help them as much as possible because helping them is helping yourself.

Not that casters don’t deserve nice things; they do but the amount you spend on consumables versus the value you will get out of them versus your overall wealth should work out just fine. You should be able to buy nice things and make consumables because you really only need 4 of the big 6. That said, I would not apply this to magic items if you start crafting those however, only consumables. They need to pay for the value of crafted, permanent items.

Wait, what?

A caster has as much if not more need for gold than martials do.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The game is meant to be descriptive.

Poison burns in your veins.

Tendrils of darkness invade your mind as you feel your will being crushed and replaced by another’s.

It is not meant to be “Bad guy does something. Nothing happens.”

Unless there is a specific -in game- reason why the effect is being hidden, it shouldn’t be hidden.

This is a ROLE playing game. Tell the story. Be descriptive. When the players are talking to npcs around a campfire, dim the lights.. (Trust me, it adds to the experience!)

Now, if that is not what your players want, that is fine. To each their own. But the game is NOT Players vs DM. It is cooperative storytelling.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In a RPG, it's generally a much better idea to significantly reign in the powerful classes FIRST, and then work from there at increasing any classes that are far below the curve.

The main reason for this is to avoid power creep as much as possible.

Sovereign Court

Elegos wrote:
Im pretty sure the kineticist powers list was written by watching Fairy Tail and One Piece then going "oh man, that was rad as hell"

The fact that you choose those two instead of referencing, say... Avatar: The Last Airbender, makes me twitch.

It's not even that old, and people have forgotten it already?

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

First off... There is no fallacy here.

Second, As mentioned previously, Full casters come online around 7th-9th level. That's when they start having to be specifically designed around.

Third, most campaigns I've been in have gone past 15th level. Usually we take them to 20+, and finish them with a big, world-shaking, climatic scene. Which we sometimes lose.

Fourth, the game is -designed- for 20 levels. The fact that you don't use all of it doesn't mean that all of it shouldn't be considered. Especially when full casters actually begin taking over at 7th-9th level. Not 15th.

Fifth, at 15th, the level you mentioned, it's not that casters have taken over. It's that the martials are no longer even relevant, if that's how the casters decide to play. (Taking over the fun, in most cases, instead of working to make sure everyone has fun.) Mind you, not all casters choose to do this, but the option is there, and it is OBVIOUSLY there. It's not even optimizing.

Sixth, this isn't an anime. Martials shouldn't be doing anime stuff, unless they have access to magic. The game world should be (mostly) internally consistent. Guy with sword may know all kinds of tricks with that sword, but in the end, he's STILL just a guy with a sword. Not an anime character. (Note, I watch a lot of anime, but if I want to play with anime characters, I'll play in an anime-themed RPG. - That's what BESM and TFOS are for.)

One other thing I'll add is that, in most cases, the entire casters vs martials issue comes up when people aren't actually playing a game through from level 1 to 20. Very few people actually care about the disparity when you've played together for (possibly) years, and it's more about the story. It's when people sit down starting at mid to higher levels, or play very fast advancement games.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Childeric, The Shatterer wrote:
Craig1234 wrote:

How should I deal with this?


Learn from it, and change up your tactics.

As a self-described fairly new DM, your players might be counting on you to play it by the book (especially if one or more of them have already been thru the adventure and know what to expect).

Change the fights to feature more opponents; roll randomly to determine which PC gets targeted; add difficult terrain/weather conditions to the encounter; If the villians know the fight is coming, have them pre-buff with spells or items; etc.

These are all tactics that you'll pick up with experience. For now, treat every encounter that they steamroll thru as an opportunity to adapt your tactics for the next encounter. Eventually, you'll figure out a weakness in the PCs gameplan that you can exploit when they least expect it.

The one thing I'd tell you not to do is turn it into a personal vendetta against the "tank" character. If suddenly every single enemy can bypass his AC or chooses to ignore him for squishier targets, it'll cause unwanted tension and drama.

Hmm.. one thing about 'tank' characters. They -should- be ignored. This isn't a computer game with silly aggro rules. If the NPC sees a highly armored person, the correct response, in most cases, IS to ignore them.

It's a flaw a lot of computer gamers have, thinking that 'tanking' as you see it in computer games, exists in RPGs. Most of the time, it doesn't. Unless the enemies are mindless, or have no acceptable way to get by the armored character... Ignore him. That's not bad role-play, or a bad GM. It's poor expectations on the PC's part. Intelligent NPCs (meaning have an int score, period, not meaning a high int score) are not computer programs. They aren't going to mindlessly attack someone they have a very low chance of hitting.

Sovereign Court

One thing to consider... a large part of Divine Hunter's usefulness comes into play when you have -other- ranged people at the table. If you are (generally) the only person ranged attacking... it's a downgrade from straight paladin taking bow feats.

Sovereign Court

PossibleCabbage wrote:

To be fair, I'm also generally opposed to things that allow you to hit really hard with mundane weapons despite being a noodly armed weakling with a 7 strength.

So Desna's Shooting Star doesn't sit well with me the same way that Slashing Grace doesn't. I strongly prefer effects that add scaling static boosts to damage if you use non-STR to hit and STR to deal damage (e.g. Trained Grace, Lethal Grace, Shifter's Edge, etc.) All of your iconic wiry athletic swordspeople from fiction are in that STR 12-14 range anyway.

Dex to damage at least makes actual realistic sense, though. In our complete abstraction of HPs, dex to damage represents being able to more finely target weaker spots, thinner armor areas, etc.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Druid metal restrictions had nothing at all to do with fae. The restrictions on druids were based around worked metal representing -technology- and civilization.

They were, however, allowed a weapon -as an exception- to that rule, to defend themselves with. A curved blade, in honor of the sickles they used for harvesting plants.

Also, you had to murder your elders to level up after a certain point. But that is a different issue.

As the game went through changes, some rules changed. Others did not. They do not always reiterate where those rules come from in later editions, however, so sometimes things do not make sense.

Many gamers nowadays assume rules have to do with balance, and, nowadays, they often do. Many of the early rules, though, were simply based around “how do we want this to work” ... with very little care about balance.

Roll (yes, randomly, 3d6 in the listed order, no you don’t pick which stat gets what roll) and choose your class afterwards. Get super lucky, compared to the others? Then here, have access to these EVEN more powerful classes, so not only are your stats better, but you get a more powerful class as well! Or get to dual-class for even more power! Oh, and have +10% bonus XP... so you will also level up faster then that other poor fighter who only had a 15 in Str.

... Anyways... it really is that simple. They were anti-civilization, represented by being anti-tech, represented by not allowing metal, with an exception made for defending themselves.

Sovereign Court

Heh. I’m about to start a char with the intent of becoming an Arcane Archer. Going to have to look and see which copy of the book I was using when I planned it out.

Sovereign Court

Yeah. When I looked at the PRD instead of my old physical copy, I see the difference.

I wonder what printing it changed in.

Sovereign Court

If we are talking about the duelist ability... It is not a dodge bonus. If we are talking about a similarity named ability from somewhere else, please list where you are referencing the ability from. It is possible the ability has the same name, but works differently.

Sovereign Court

Functionally, yes. It is technically an increase to your dexterity bonus to your ac. (Assuming we are talking about the duelist prestige class ability.)

Note that, because of this, the total of dex and the bonus you get from canny defense would be capped by your armor.

Sovereign Court

Reksew_Trebla wrote:

There is nothing inherently evil about enchanting. Certainly not more so than actually killing a person. I’m sorry, but enchanting isn’t evil by default. Like with everything, intent is what matters to decide if something is evil or good.

For instance, let me give you an example, and until you can justify it as evil, enchanting isn’t evil by default:

A bunch of (insert common enemy here) raid the town. A young boy picks up a dagger that a dead guard had, and attempts to fight so he can go save his family. He clearly has no chance surviving the fight. He will not listen to reason. You mind control him and force him to leave, thus sparing his life.

Please find a way to justify this as evil if you are going to continue arguing that enchanting is inherently evil.

Yes... intent is what matters. And here the intent is to enslave someone against their will.

You are literally trying to claim that enslaving a child is not evil. Is enchanting evil by default? No. Using it to enslave goodly people? Yes, that is evil.

Especially when that poor boy, all alone, lost in the wilderness where he ran to until the enchantment wears off, slowly dies of hunger and frostbite.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Whats the absolute contradiction you're seeing Lau?

The context is people asking about the alternate paladin codes as if they replaced the whole of the CRB paladin code. I don't think they should; they should add to them and provide context and focus to them. Only if they actually clash should you take the code of your specific deity over the generic paladin code.

The point is that outright contradictions between the CRB base paladin code and deity-specific paladin codes are extremely rare. The only thing that springs to mind is:

CRB Paladin Code wrote:
act with honor (not lying, not cheating,
Inner Sea Gods Torag Code wrote:
I am at all times truthful, honorable, and forthright, but my allegiance is to my people. I will do what is necessary to serve them, including misleading others if need be.
It goes to great length to say it's not a contradiction, but I'm not sure how you can be truthful, honorable and forthright and mislead people.

The simple answer here is authors screw up their logic just like everyone else. Mistakes happen. You cannot be forthright and still mislead people. If you are delving into technicalities, you have stopped being forthright.

Sovereign Court

The difference with the vanguard slayer is their tactician ability can be used to grant -any- of the slayer's teamwork feats to everyone, not just the -one- you pick for free like cavalier does. And I'll admit I'm a bit of a fan of options.

Not claiming it's the best option to pick, but it -is- an interesting option.

Sovereign Court

I'd also suggest taking a look at up to 4 levels of Vanguard archtype Slayer.

Sovereign Court

A large part of the argument comes from 2 things, it seems to me.

First - Power creep. New classes tend to (but not always) end up more powerful than previous ones. (Notice almost all of those examples people are giving of why full BAB is beaten by 2/3rd BAB classes cite splatbook classes.)

Second - The 15 minute adventuring day. Casters were originally expected to be saving their spells for emergencies, NOT be tossing off a spell every round all the time.

I'll address the cleric separately:

The cleric was designed as overly powerful, to get people to play the group healer. However, as the game has gone on, the fact that the cleric was meant to be the class that heals people after after every fight was lost, without the consummate down powering that should have followed.

Sovereign Court

Considering the rust, etc, on the picture I am wondering if that is meant to be the goblin junkcycle. No, it doesn't have wheels, but maybe it's still considered ground based.

The basic enercycle seems to be a motorcycle. It is a single passenger ground vehicle that provides no cover to the rider. Yes, it is only 22 mph. But /shrug.

1 to 50 of 72 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>