Torlandril Morninglord's page

Thanks for the replies... few notes.

* Archery seems to be a third-rail issue, good to know in the future.

* This is a house rule forum, not your gaming table. Do not take me talking about this optional rule as me punching your baby in the face.

* Those who say Archery uses one-arm strength need to research archery in real life.

* I agree this should also apply to crossbows that have been enhanced for greater strength (not to shoot but to "reload"). Such enhanced crossbows are not currently in the game, but I see no issue with house ruling them.

Various reasons to use this house rule:
* You wish to make enhanced strength bow/xbow damage in line with other two-handed weapons. (Ergo you feel as I do that these are two-handed weapons)
* You feel Archery DPS lags behind other two-handed weapon DPS.
* You dislike the notion that current book damage for archery is a game-design decision. Lowering its damage in trying to balance its ability to damage targets at a distance.
* NPC archers are much more likely to kill players and you like that.

Various reasons not to use this house rule:
* You think Archery damage does not need a buff.
* You dislike house rules in general.
* You like the notion that current book damage for archery is a game-design decision. Lowering its damage in trying to balance its ability to damage targets at a distance.
* Your players already play too many archers and you don't like that.
* NPC archers are much more likely to kill players and you don't like that.

Simple changes:

The feat "Deadly Aim" (Use +3 Damage / -1 Penalty)

If using a compound bow with proper Strength increase, use 1.5 x Strength bonus for damage.

So a player with a Strength of 14 (+2 Damage, +3 Damage [two-handed]) would need a compound bow with a (+3 Strength) modifier to take full advantage of their two-handed damage bonus.

Since all bows are two handed weapons they should follow the two handed damage bonus rules.

Thanks again for the comments. The original Google Document in the first post is updated with changes. I specifically separated out the "idea" of the gaming contract, from my group's own contract example.

Hopefully this works better, as I am only here really to push the idea of the gaming contract. What you want in your own contract is up to the GM and players.

I still defend my contract as working excellently for myself and my players, but looking back on it I agree with some wording changes people have posted about 'vagueness.' Should my group need to send it out again, I would likely edit it. For now I am leaving it alone so that this thread and my example contract match the comments.

I for one think it is very defensive and veers close to passive-aggressive in places.

Not something I would hand out to players-to-be and expect anything positive. If it works for your particular group, great. Yet I think most groups I played with have solved these problems by having a private chat or two, if and when actual problems arose, instead of up-front legalese laden with threats.

This contract was used to filter potential players before they even got to us, not handed out to someone who sat at our table ready to play. Again, I must keep repeating myself, we are not trying to 'convert' people, we are trying to sort through the hypothetical 99 people to find the 1 that fits our table.

It worked for the 2 players we found.

Problems I see - ...

You proved it worked as intended. Not to offend you, but to make it obvious you were not the player we want, and we are not the team you want. That is the main purpose of the contract.

I have added a disclaimer to the top of the Google document (linked in topic main post.)

- I appreciate the constructive comments. Understand that I fully expect people that would benefit from this material would almost certainly need to adjust the rules to suit their purposes and I said so in the original document. What I didn't mention was that those rules were not just my contributions, but the rule contributions of the two players I had at the time it was developed.

- People keep getting stuck about its attendance clause. This rule was exactly what me and my players wanted from everyone at our table. We wanted people who's situation was already compatible to a 'never be late or miss a session.' After looking for a while, we found two players that wanted what we want. The attendance clause was also designed for a once-a-month game session.

What was the point of posting this then? You know it works for your group and expect the wider community to think that it wouldn't work for them.

Where are you going with this? I'm glad you're having fun, and the Hardcore Gamer merit badge really brings out the color of your eyes, but I wouldn't touch your contact with a ten-foot pole. Is this a win for you

This is specifically the "Suggestions, House Rule, Homebrew" forum and you are giving me crap for taking the time to post something gaming related that I created and is working for my group?

Who stole your GI-Joe?

So far the response is what I expected.

It exactly the reason I used the sports metaphor to illustrate the common negative reaction of 'gamers' to personal behavior codes that billions of sports players take for granted.

Just think of a high-school basketball team? Those players are not paid, but players would understand that if they missed game day they would be in serious peril of loosing their spot or at least warming a bench for a while.

I want a commitment from my players. I have found players that feel the same way.

I already have a gaming group that is working within these rules for almost 6 months now. It is exactly the point they are taking this contract seriously that it is the best gaming session that any of them (and me) have experienced.

We get more done, have more fun, and get better at gaming. We do it all in just a 4-hour session once a month.

As I stated before, I don't expect this to be for everyone. Just like not everyone has the disciple, time, skill, desire, etc. to be a professional athlete.

I am also not saying that 'casual' players with family or 'higher-priorities' cannot be great gamers. If you read that, you read it wrong. Tt is not about skill, its about commitment.

For a while I was disillusioned with gaming. I found that the structure of games was always too casual for me.

Recently I got a team together using what has now become my "Gamer Contract." It is the idea that a role-playing game should be respected just like sports. That discipline, teamwork, dedication, a desire to improve, and an obligation once signed-up are all fundamental parts of the experience.

Feel free to read it in Google Docs LINK to the Gamer Contract

Comments welcome, but understand that I already know this is not for everyone.

Profession (Manure Technician): +10
Profession (Royal Steward): +10

Both.. same income per week = broken. Next.

Opinion piece:

Ok.. I get it.. Just because it says "Pathfinder" on the cover, the author is not bound to follow the Pathfinder rules in any way other than setting.

That being said, I think Ed has never read the Pathfinder RPG. I think he read a short synopsis of the setting, jotted a few notes about names and deities, and then shoved all Pathfinder reference materials into a nearby bag of devouring.

This novel is horribly paced, with a never ending ridiculous chase scene that reminded me of a Jackie Chan movie. The characters were spotted at least a dozen times by basic guards (warrior 1?) meaning the PCs were at best level 1. So why are they being hunted by armies, and archmages, and nobles who seem to think they are super-powered professionals?

I kept looking around for the GM so I could punch him in the face.

Its like Ed took all the bad parts of "Crown of Fire" (and there were a LOT of bad parts) and he just adapted that book here with a few word replacements.

And... a Halfling female -> Human Male romance? I think there are some physiological incompatibilities. Just sayin... Wail of the Banshee.

Ed, if you want to write a book where the main plot is a series of miserable, un-believeable, and railroaded events... at least make it fun.

This book was just... not fun.

/opinion

I am looking to buy a Pathfinder supplement that has the largest amount of text about town details.

The real specific stuff like a map with detailed points of interest and each point has a paragraph about the place, owner, stat block.

Details about the inns with NPCs, menu, beverages, which rooms have fleas?

Just some nice flavor stuff which helps me details out various towns I put in my game and I also find this type of book the most fun to read.

Any ideas? 3rd party/non-official is fine as this is not really a rules book request.

Thanks.

Ideas?

Hey,

I did some quick math and it seems you have a gear market value of ~200,000gp at level 12.... Which means your GM is Monte'Haul or you are loot whore (I say with a grin on my face).

Either way, with that in mind and looking at your gear I see a GLARING ommission. Where is your MASS STORAGE?!? You have a haversack, and the "loot whore" in me is laughing uncontrollably. Where are you keeping your 500 lb. worth of coins right now? (yeah I know, they may be gems but the gold is cooler).

Come on now... If you are finding this level of loot without mass storage, I am worried that you are leaving behind a TREASURE TROVE of stuff that you just can't carry with you. We need a place to put all of this antique furniture, ancient tapestries, statuary, and other heavy yet valuable loot you find in your adventures. Evil Cleric Alter you say? Someone in Cheliax NEEDS that for a coffee table.

May I suggest a portable hole. Within you budget and a very capacious storage container.

If you want to go low magic, and for a budget price you can always hire a caravan of wagons to follow your party around. Just 1,000gp would pay for at least 10 medium wagons with mule and drivers for a month, easily enough to transport 20,000 lb (10 tons) of valuables from the various places you invade (I mean "Discover"). (unskilled labor costs like 1sp/day, skilled around 1gp/day. 20,000 gp would buy a LOT).

Speaking of NPC hirelings.. Why not:
* Guards to do the night watch.
* Laborers to set up camp, clean, carry stuff.
* Entertainers to bring merryment to the group.
* Heralds to announce your parties comings and goings and announce your victories.
* Young pretty ladies to.... cook for you. Yeah. Cook.

You see where I am going.. Just imagine the look on everyone's face (and the GMs) as you basically hire out an entire gypsy troop to follow your group around for the next month.

Can you say "EPIC", yup.

If you want more practical suggestions, here are "nice to have" items I didn't see on your list:
1. Decanter of Endless Water (1,001 uses in this infinite use item).
2. Pearls of Power (Want that Cleric/Ranger/etc. spell cast on you? Buy a pearl for you party castor and make him cast it each day, or buy them a wand with it).
3. Add Gloves of Storing on your Dueling gloves. Free "quick draw" for your axe, or whatever.
4. Figurine (Obsidian Steed), might need to save a bit more gp for this, but an excellent "Get out of jail free" Transport.
5. Immovable Rod (lots of uses).
6. Land / Business Investments. (fun role-play opportunities).

Always nice to have extra money, I hope something here appeals to you.

I too would have an interest in this.

+1, I want this conversion please! Anyone who needs to turn 18 pages into 300 pages is my kind of obsessive compulsive. Please send PM if you have it.

Thanks!

The monk's unarmed strike says that it can be considered a manufactured weapon for spells and effects. So can a monk apply poison to an unarmed attack? Can other classes?

Second Question:
Proficiency with unarmed strikes is listed under 'simple weapons' (p.142 main rules), indicating that unarmed strike is a simple weapon. Yet, unarmed strike is not listed under the monk's weapon and armor proficiencies (p.57 main rules). So does this mean a Monk striking with an unarmed strike takes a (-4 to hit) non-proficiency penalty?

Well if we are talking Golarion you can always raid a village or two for slaves. Average sell price is 50-100 gp each. Add that with looting the town and that could pay for that ring of warmth pretty quick.

Oh and for you "good" parties out there.. raid an EVIL village for slaves. There. Done. Next.

Torlandril Morninglord wrote:

IMHO,

The most effective party (of 4) would be:

Wizard (x3), Cleric

...

Once this party becomes 9th level (if played correctly) it will function far above its listed challenge rating.

And then a couple levels later clerics of Ugathoa get antimagic field with the magic domain and that's all she wrote.

I don't know if you are being serious or not. Truthfully if the party is rendered powerless against an enemy (and it take a lot more than anti-magic field to do that BTW) they can always 'retreat'

I never understood why players felt "well there is one encounter type where we suck so I guess our party sucks"

The world is a big place, have the party go somewhere else.

After 9th level this party would likely be using Planar binding and constructs to supplement the summoned creatures anyways.

IMHO,

The most effective party (of 4) would be:

Wizard (x3), Cleric

Pros:
* Players of wizard characters can easily combine spellbooks (with GM approval, I suggest making them wizards from same school/faction even brothers/sisters). Done correctly as level 1 characters they could each copy from each other to gain the majority of good 1st level spells.
* Wizards at each level up can copy from each other's spell book for 6 new spells per level. Best might combine Conjurer, Transmuter, Universalist. (Prohibited schools (2) necromancy/evocation/enchantment)
---* Conjurer specializes in summoning creatures.
---* Transmuter specializes in buffs/debuffs and battlefield control.
---* Universalist fills the gaps, supports the others. nukes.
* Shelter is easy no need to set a watch : Rope Trick, Secure Shelter, Magnificent Mansion.
* Cleric acts as tank and buffer (no need to heal summoned creatures that will disappear). Can use spells to become party rogue or better fighter when necessary (though wizard 'knock' takes care of locks). Divine magic access is a huge benefit to this party. Cleric as "archer" would be ideal. (This party excels at range combat so best for all party members to attack at range)
* Transportation is easy via spells mount, phantom steed, flight, and finally teleport.
* Minimal equipment "needed" for this party to be effective.
* If used under the "15 minute adventure day" cliche (one or two encounters then "camp" for the night), the party easily can take on much higher challenges than other parties their level.

Once this party becomes 9th level (if played correctly) it will function far above its listed challenge rating.

Cons:
* Encounters resistant to magic (Constructs, etc.) more difficult but not impossible.
* Low armor and hit points require smarter play styles that reduce exposure.
* Require daily rest to return to full power, in a situation without the ability to regain lost spells they will eventually be rendered weak to the point of uselessness.

Just a quick observation... The pre-generated character Harsk is always given a heavy crossbow and then shown with his bonuses to attack (as a full-attack).

However, even with Rapid Reload, a heavy crossbow takes a move action to reload the bolt. So these stats should be shown as only 1 attack per round as he should be unable to do a full-attack with a heavy crossbow under the rules.

Gamemasters that want to fix this should simply change his crossbow to a light crossbow (mainly changing the feat selections and the damage).

But if any admin here wants to say the listed stats are correct, please let me know how.