Felldales Dragon

Toblakai's page

Organized Play Member. 170 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 170 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

It's neat and all, but the dozen or so people I play with all use Herolab and shared google sheets for notes and loot, paper sheets are a little old fashioned now.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:

A gargantuan pawn is large enough that we'd only be able to fit one on a page. We could fill the leftover space with mediums and smalls and maybe even larges, but that doesn't change the fact that we'd need to put a LOT of sheets in there to cover the number of gargantuans we want to cover. Furthermore, we don't offer Gargantuan bases, so we'd have to solve that problem as well.

I have created 3D models that you can print if you have a 3d printer or a friend with one:


I have made colossal and gargantuan bases, I use them with smaller pawns, I made them square instead of round so they fill the entire space correctly also. I also have created medium numbered bases and other misc things for gaming.

ograx wrote:

I know it was mentioned that Paizo was looking at making the larger style pawns years back but they hadn't figured out anything that they liked and that would work.

Has this changed??

Not that I have seen yet, I just use the larger bases with a smaller pawn. Like a huge blue dragon. What's nice is the bases take up the correct amount of space on the mat.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have posted this link before, but I have added more to the list of 3d printable Pathfinder accessories!

3D designs

You can find:

    * Numbered 1-10 medium bases
    * Huge squarish base
    * Colossal squarish base
    * Gargantuan squarish base
    * 30' cone templates
    * 20' radius template

Thanks to my Nest doorbell, I know my third set of mini's has arrived (I'm feeling a bit under the weather, I think I may need to leave work early). But my china cabinet no longer has any more room, how do you all display (store) your mini's?

Cheapy wrote:

Unfortunately, it has a range of personal so it can't be made into a potion.

Look into an oil of flame arrow though!

Serious necro, but Iron Fang Invasion book 3 has Oils of Gravity bow on some enemies.

msbranin wrote:
Lone wolf makes thier money when they sell us the core for 34.95 and when they sell us the addons that each person has to own for 12.95.. currently With the core and the 2 alien archives and the pact world and the dead suns expansion you will have dropped over 100 dollars per person on hero labs... I am not bashing thier model.. but warning to all... there is zero offline method of using the program... and when the subscription kicks in that will be 100 for the content and 25 a y eq ar just to have access the content you have purchased.. dont want a subscription.. bye bye content... meaning you cant even create characters for offline play with out resubscribing... a lot if people dont mind this model.. just be aware of the cost up front.. it's a good program... just understand there is no offline use and you will have to purchase all content and keep an active subscription or your content goes bye bye.

Yes they make the money when they sell the addons, a portion (half?) goes to Paizo for licensing, but let's say there is a product (like PF1, which is coming to HLO) that will no longer have new products, what pays for the server maintenance for those users in perpetuity?

There really is no way around not charging a subscription fee for an online service, unless you want banner ads...

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I had HLO for the better part of a year for Starfinder.

1. It wouldn't print anything remotely decently in Firefox. (A known feature, their 'workaround' was 'well, just use Chrome').

It is not Lone wolfs job to fix firefox's print feature. They did end up creating a work around by printing to PDF.


3. It didn't work for me because the venues I was at did not have the bandwidth to support the O portion of Online, and my tablet refused to do an off-line version.

Bandwith requirement is very low, but yeah, if you play where there is no internet you won't find much use, luckily I have never encountered this problem.


4. Others have commented about the Pay, and then Pay Rent issue.

What would be a good alternative to ensure that:

1. Paizo gets paid for the content
2. LW gets paid to create the dataset for the content
3. LW can afford to maintain the servers? (currently $2 month is what it costs)

2 people marked this as a favorite.
gbonehead wrote:

All I can say is I sincerely hope they never use this GameOn thing for crowdfunding again.

It is very, very buggy, and painful, and so very very lackluster compared to how Kickstarter campaigns are run.

I thought GameOn was a pretty decent site. Seems to manage add on's well and you don't need backerit to fulfill. Late pledge support also.

I think competition makes the market better overall.

I show the following:

Spymaster (Early-Bird Ruler)
- PFS: The Silverhex Chronicles
- PFS: Oathbreakers Die
- PFS: Perils of the Pirate Pact
- PFS: The Horn of Aroden
- Kingdom Management Screen
- PFS: You Have What You Hold
- Kingmaker Map Folio
- PFS: Six Seconds to Midnight
- PFS: Fortune's Blight
- Kingmaker Poster
- PFS: On the Border of War
- Kingmaker Adventure Path PDF
- Kingmaker 1 of 6: Stolen Land
- Kingmaker 2 of 6: Rivers Run Red
- Kingmaker Companion Guide PDF
- Kingmaker 3 of 6: The Varnhold Vanishing
- Slipcase
- Kingmaker 4 of 6: Blood for Blood
- Kingmaker Adventure Path Special Edition
- Kingmaker 5 of 6: War of the River Kings
- Kingmaker Companion Guide Special Edition
- Kingmaker 6 of 6: Sound of a Thousand Screams
- Weight marker50
- People of the River PDF
- Guide to the River Kingdoms PDF
- Kingmaker Kingdom Tracker Accessory

Thanks for the ideas!

So i am going to be running this for a group of 8 to 10 people, but I don't want to overlap on campaign traits. Has anyone come up with alternative traits for this AP?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thistledown wrote:
She looks very bow-legged. Has she been riding around too long?

I thought the same thing, she is very wide.

Brother Fen wrote:

Buy them before they go out of print. Pawn sets go out of print too. Ask all of the people crying over the Monster Codex box.

I don't want some bizarre base to a pawn, not to mention the fact that gargantuan pawns would look ugly on the table.

It's impractical. You have twenty odd folks here saying they want it, so is Paizo supposed to print twenty copies?

Not sure if you knew this, but forum users are very small fraction of the actual user base for Pathfinder. So multiply the 21, actually 22 now by a that ratio.

I designed some colossal and gargantuan bases that can be 3d printed, you can find the designs on Thingiverse. I use them with a smaller pawn, just use a huge dragon pawn with the colossal base to get a colossal dragon!

Moro wrote:

Which is great, if tons of these new players are purchasing your material. Which it seems to me from everything I am reading and hearing that they are not.

Where are you hearing this? I know there is a company (ICv2) that tracks games sales, but they don't have access to sales direct from Paizo. It has been many many years since I have bought a Pathfinder item not from Paizo, and if you notice I subscribe to most of Paizo's offerings.

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Staffan Johansson wrote:

While actual sales figures are likely company secrets for both Hasbro and Paizo, there are some public figures we can look at. One indicator is the number of games being played on the popular platform Fantasy Grounds. There we see that D&D has 66% of the games played, and Pathfinder has 12% (and Starfinder 1%). That's not sales per se, but it's certainly an indicator of popularity. Roll20 posts similar numbers, 61% for 5e and 10% for Pathfinder.

So your Fantasy Ground link shows PFRPG at 80,000 games.

Looking at 2016 graph PFRPG accounts 40,000 games.

Seems like usage for PF is growing right alongside all the rest of the games. The pie is just getting a lot bigger.

A Ring of Wizardry will double 1 levels worth of spell slots.

Hellz wrote:

Have mobs rush at him? He PROBABLY doesn't have the feat that allows him to shoot at melee.

He could/should have this.


Don't use Humans/Undead enemies as often?

Level 10 ranger, Instant enemy spell makes this moot.


Sunder his bow?(Unless he has a spare bow you're basically telling him to sit out of play in combat)

This is just rude to do to a player. Maybe once in a long while.


Use buffs other than AC to determine hit/miss? Like Blur, Mirror Image and Displacement.
Play around cover.

Improved precise shot will eliminate the usefulness of blur, cover and displacement.


Get some DR on those mobs. It should take a lot from those arrows.Also Piercing Resistance/Immunity?

Clustered shots feat, blunt arrows, cold iron arrows/etc.

2d6+8 seems low also. I just created a basic level 10 ranger archer, 20 point buy and against favored enemy it would be 2d6+18 per arrow, and 4 arrows per round.

This also assumes no other buffs from the party.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

FYI the iPad Hero lab portfolio works perfectly fine on any device with hero lab so ask him for his portfolio.

Cavall wrote:

No dev is going to answer you. They are busy. Also, even if they had the time, your demand they and only they do so means they won't.

Everyone can read what you want. Everyone has told you it won't happen. So the only person lacking comprehension is you.

Not to mention PF1 is old news, and they are focused on PF2.

My first level 1 character by hand took about an hour. Though I had played pre-gens a couple of times at Gen Con so had some experience.

I then bought Hero Lab Online and I created a 4th level cleric in probably 20 minutes. I highly recommend HLO, it sped up creation dramatically.

Personally I wouldn't run an AP until I have at least the first 3 books, preferably all 6. I have been burned in the past over not knowing what is happening in the next module(s).

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Tarondor wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
Did Krune somehow survive The Waking Rune?
** spoiler omitted **
I should still find some way to play through that scenario if I want the full Varisian campaign experience, right? I'd feel like I'm missing a chunk of the settings "metaplot" otherwise.
It’s not just one adventure, APZ. It’s 3-4 of them.
And that's what makes me frustrated: I had initially thought I could safely ignore PFS modules and that they didn't impact the setting and stuff, and then not only is there several of them where they confront and kill a Runelord, and other things are referenced in other books (like that tapestry the Society won that is a parallel dimension and stuff), and I realize I have to play through YEARS of modules with no clear clue of how they fit together into a narrative-style campaign and I'd probably have to run them myself because everyone else has already moved on and I couldn't do it anyway because I suck at GMing, and that means my Pathfinder experience will always essentially be incomplete! *screams into pillow*

There is also another Runelord killed in one of the novels (It is mentioned in Secrets of Roderics Cove). So you probably want to read some books too. I suspect the comics are a part of cannon Golarion also.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cydeth wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Ultimagus wrote:
Six remaining? Is Krune back from the dead?
This Adventure Path likely only assumes that RotRL and SStar have happened, and doesn't take into account things that may or may not have happened in certain Societies. ^_^
It does take it into account. It doesn't mean he's necessarily entirely out of the game. I will say no more.

In addition the events of the book "Pathfinder Tales: Lord of Runes" is also taken into account.

Zutha is awoken and then slain, but he is a lich and his phylactery is split into three.. so who knows what can happen.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sounds like 5E designs your background for you, no real work needed for the player, I guess it is good for the lazy player.

I’m perfectly fine with this change. Never thought that a cleric should be aligned differently than their god.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Ultimatecalibur wrote:
Voss wrote:
Why is the lingering composition performance check expressed so oddly? Why not X+level rather than the ' convoluted high difficulty based on highest level or GM messing with you?'
I think it is so that the GM can actually make it easier rather than harder. If the Bard opts to use an incredibly appropriate piece of performance for the composition the effect would have an easier time lingering.
Yes, it's mostly to make it easier. In theory I guess if you sing an "inspiring" song to the dwarves of the Five Kings Mountains about the glory of Taldor's Fourth Army of Exploration (which attacked the dwarves) or something contrived like that, you might make it tougher on yourself.

Obligatory OOTS comic.

Vidmaster7 wrote:
Well that and it doesn't take up your boot slot and a resonance.

But it does use up one of your few options for a legendary skill feat. I think that "No damage" from falling will not come into play enough for the feat to be horribly useful. I like to take feats that get used regularly.

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Franz Lunzer wrote:

Not going to disagree regarding the power shift in PF2e and how spells improve (that's why I specified the circumstances of PF1e feather fall), but:

You expect the PC's are going to fall down more than one cliff any given adventuring day?

Maybe not, but I will have flying monsters drop them from great heights multiple times on occasion.

Catfall is a neat little trick, but I suspect there are other legendary skills that would be more useful. How often does a character fall after level 15 (or ever)? The occasional pit trap, maybe there is a creature that picks you up and drops you. But maybe 3-8 times in a 1-17 level career (just thinking back to the APs I have been in).

The funniest fall I remember was when the wizard cast Telekinetic charge on the fighter and moved him onto a hidden pit.

Looks like I misread the duration of feather fall, I still would house rule my interpretation more than likely (honestly I and all the GM's i have played with have inadvertently house ruled it that way). I personally would allow quickened spells while falling also without a concentration check, obviously not as an immediate action.

I would still avoid GM's that stuck to the DC 21 check on the spell.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Let's correct your statement: "something that a level 1 wizard has a 30% chance to do if he has used 1 of his 2 slots to memorize Feather fall and the fall is 60' or less". That completly change the value of your rant, right?

(30% chance because you need to cast the spell while falling, that is a concentration check against 21. Int 20+level 1 give a bonus to 6 to the roll, so he succeed with a 15+)

I disagree on your interpretation of the casting while falling rule. IMO the concentration check is for the case where the fall is over 500 feet and it is a regular casting of a spell, the fact that feather fall is a swift action and called out separately makes it not require this check.

Also the feather fall spell reads:
Duration: until landing or 1 round/level

The 1/round per level is for the case where you pre-cast before jumping off a cliff. The "until landing" duration allows the caster to fall any distance.

James Jacob on Feather fall:
Nope; no concentration check is necessary to cast feather fall

If my DM required a DC 21 concentration check to cast feather fall while falling, I would look for a new GM.

Jurassic Pratt wrote:

BPorter, I highly suggest you take a look at my list of impossible things you can do without magic I made earlier on in this discussion.

Legendary Skill Feats (at least the ones we've seen) are not allowing PCs to do anything more impossible than what can already be done in PF1 without magic.

Now it's perfectly fine to want more realism in your game and to dislike them because of that. But it's simply not true that these legendary skill feats are suddenly making the impossible possible in the setting. The impossible in our world has been possible without magic throughout PF1.

I suspect your post has been purposefully ignored. Martials can already do crazy things without magic, just by leveling up.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:

Again, people have been able to catch bullets, slash lasers out of the air, fight things triple their height with swords, use alive enemies as a weapon, fall 1000 feet as long as there's a wall near the bottom, and run 825 feet in 6 seconds, all non-magically...

And this is what you have a problem with?

Yeah, let's ignore all the world bending done by those with spells and focus on some mundane abilities like not taking falling damage. Something a level 1 wizard can do.

The only thing I can think of is that they want make sure the only people with cool world changing abilities are the spell casters because they don't want the rogue to show them up.

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
I'm really curious if folks who don't like the Legendary skills played PF1 past level 15, and if so why they bothered.

I know, a level 1 wizard can fall any distance, and these people are going to complain about a level 15 rogue being able to do it. I just don't get it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DropBearHunter wrote:

it feels as though most people who would have critical things to say about this munchkin mania that second edition PF looks like it is becoming, are just shrugging and sticking with PF1 like me.

have fun everyone with „slow fall any distance“ without even a wall next to you, like the monk used to need.

thanks, but... no thanks
I‘ll be out at this point.

Added to my list... Let's see what you are doing in 2 years.

You played with your mom/dad's rod of wonder and it accidentally went off and turned you red. (Red isn't in the list of colors it can change you to, but not all rods of wonder have to be the same)

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Slithas wrote:

Hey all,

Been loving what I've been seeing thus far for 2E, but one thing I have noticed is a sharp increase in the number of dice rolled, especially at later levels. Rolling 2 or 3 dice isn't too bad normally, but if you end up in a situation with more, especially if you crit, that's a lot of maths, and can slow down the game.

This is especially problematic for one of my players who has Dyscalculia (Dyslexia with numbers essentially) so she wouldn't do well with this at all, and to be fair I don't think she'd be alone in struggling to work it out around our table- more numbers mean more likely mistakes.

As an example (and hopefully I get this right from what I've seen), if you crit with a +3 Flaming Greataxe that's Deadly 1d8, and thus roll 8d12+1d8+1d6+8 (consisting of double normal dice for crit, deadly bonus, plus the extra d6 for flaming quality); that's both a lot of maths, and probably more d12s than you have at the table.

What's a viable alternative option for this? Two things come to mind at first: rolling one dice and multiplying it (ie. 1d12x8 instead of 8d12), but this still involves much maths, and can be pathetic or brutal if you roll min or max. The other is to just have a flat damage value, no dice rolled, at half the dice value (ie. the above example would be 33 non-crit and 68 on the crit); this would certainly speed up that aspect of play, but probably take away from that feeling of risk/reward. Players would probably only need to bring d20s to games too.

What are other people's thoughts on trying to help with the mathematically challenged?

Try using a tablet/laptop/phone with a dice rolling app.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

PDF's can contain embedded fonts. It would be very easy to make the Icons actually part of a font, and therefore the Action icon can map to the letter A and the reaction can map to the letter R. Then if it is colored correctly for those with color blindness I think this should alleviate a lot of concerns maybe?

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Trimalchio wrote:
Do please review your statements because they are incorrect and do not facilitate accurate dialogue.
My statements are not incorrect. Nor is the math faulty. The math is standard DPR math, which is simplified, but it's also, well, standard as a measure for damage.

You are arguing with a wall, they are never going to understand so you should probably just drop it.

Diego Rossi wrote:
Note that currently a heightened MM deal an average of 15*3.5=52.5 hp of damage

Just as a comparison to PF1 a Maximized, empowered, intensified MM does an average of 52.5 damage in a level 7 spell slot instead of a level 9.

Add a quickened, maximized, intensified MM also for another 35 using a level 9 slot and 4 17th level PF1 wizards can kill a lot worse in one round.

Jurassic Pratt wrote:

I guess HLO is great if you don't mind continuing to have to pay for each expansion package while also now paying a monthly fee on top of it. And the fact that the resources put into giving it that beautiful UI could've been used to overhaul the regular HL UI.

To each their own I suppose.

I think it boils down to most people fear/dislike change.

I am looking forward to the tactical console being updated automatically as players add/remove buffs from their characters. Shared resource tracking is planned also, which again would be very nice feature. These kind of features would be very hard to integrate into the existing app. Plus $25/year is a minimal amount, I spend more on Starbucks each week.

But as you said, to each their own.

Tallow wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
GM Red Box wrote:
The more I read the more I pray HeroLab is ready day one. I love the options but there are so many, as a GM, it will really help to have a program do some record keeping and math.

AS long as it's not HLO.

Classic? Sure. HLO no.



A clunky app that looks like the UI was designed in the 90's (which I use weekly) vs. a fresh interactive interface with a lot of potential features to manage party inventory/buffs/shared resources.. I will go with HLO.

Catharsis wrote:

I agree with everyone and their dog about how spell points are an utterly nonsensical term, given that «spell» makes people think of conventional (non-power) spells. The whole point of these points is that they're exclusive to powers, so why on Golarion wouldn't you call them power points?!

I mentioned power points in a previous comment on a different blog. I think it is the perfect name for a pool of powers that can be used.

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:

I don't know why do I even read this blogs and comments. PF2 clearly is not a game for me.

Good luck in your new 13th-Age/M&M/D&D4/D&D5 esque, Paizo.


** I am compiling a list of users to check back on in a few years to see what they are posting about. :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
\/\/arlok wrote:

I've never had anyone ask that in 40 years of gaming. Characters have levels. Spells have levels. It's a wild leap of logic that they should have the same numbers at the same time.

I have seen this happen a couple of times. One guy I play with took about 2 years until he got the whole spell level/character level/caster level difference down.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:

So, nerf? Yes. It depends on the situation. But you're going to have to drop Charisma into the character, in all likelihood Charisma is now the more important stat than Wisdom, and as you level up you're going to boost Charisma over Wisdom - once your Wisdom is 19 you have all the spells you need in any event. But you better hope you can keep boosting that Charisma because that's ALL of your heal spells unless you load up your far-more-limited spell selection.

It's still not a nerf it is "different" than PF1. PF2 is a new game therefore it cannot be a nerf, nerfing something requires a change in the games rules and that has not happened.

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:

Oh, and you nerfed it by taking away the ranged aspect. So you can focus a channel positive energy or use one that is effectively two levels lower in power.

A "nerf" is when you change something to be weaker in a game. So what was the original version of this ability in PF2E that was nerfed?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I wonder if a Wizard will have to use DEX to hit their targets versus Intelligence as a balancer for a Cleric having to use CHA for their channels versus Wisdom.

Spell points?


Is there a better name for that game-y item? Please?

Power Points?

1 to 50 of 170 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>