Search Posts
I understand what you are saying, and I agree that fun and enjoyment of the table and player should be the first goal. However:
So to sum up, probably best to make your imaginary god something drawn from your own creation (or at the worst non-copyrighted materials.)
So, if I have a charcter from those races that was made before the decision was made, and am no longer in the area to find the GMs for 1st level was played, can I no longer play my characters? should we be notorizing race on all chronicles in case legal races change? This doesn't feel like most of the other rules related to a player's character for PFS, and is somewhat confrontational.
My skald is definitely effective on the skills/spells front and trends more towards that side of the class in design. Still, Inspired Rage is the single most iconic aspect of the class and it's hard to get people interested in it enough to use the standard action to start it. If you mean to accept it as an ally, I thought that didn't take an action.
Blood of Fiends doesn't place any restrictions on the race traits. They're just listed as legal, so it should be fine. Yep, this is what I get for posting on the forums at 4:30 when I can't sleep. What I was trying to get out is that any trait taken should be checked against the Additional Resources, as usual, as well as pointing out some things like the ARG ruling exist, so read carefully.
bzzzt... live... bzzzztttt Necro complete... So, one point here, the Boon is granted on a chronicle sheet, chronicle sheet items are not subject to fame. As long as he paid prestige to activate it, fame levels for enchant shouldn't come up. Otherwise upgrading gear sticky make it clear item total is what fame you are checking for, IMO.
Yay, no wierd reach templates!!!
How do you see a spell? This coversation has bought up points about the ways that spellcraft works to me. Do you need detect magic up for spellcraft?You don't see a spell, you see the "casting" of a spell. Whether it is Charm Person or Anticipate Peril, by virtue of Spellcraft, all spells and spell-like abilities include some non-component unique visual indication that it's being cast. Think of it like a little light show centered around the caster, except it does not emit light i.e. you need an ability to see it in darkness. Not how the PRD phrases it. I don't have my books at hand to check, but PRD was quoted earlier in the thread and it said you must be able to see the spell as it is being cast. Not the spell caster, not the spellcasting, but the spell. Hence my question earlier.
Eh... coup de grace, nor death knell, power class abilities. It is a thematic issue for some people. BTW, unless I am mistaken, there are other ways for a creature to be helpless than being under 0 hitpoints. I am thinking of playing a twilight arcanist who carries around a sack of bound puppies.....
As far as Sheila goes, I think that she was mainly a victim of inconsistent writing and/or GMing.There were some events where she seemed pretty cold, but I have also played/run some scenarios where she also shows genuine concern for the party. I've been reading the Shattered Star AP while I put together a group to play through it, and she seems pretty cool. I actually like Sheila Heidmarch, despite the efforts of some to the contrary. I don't get the feeling that some people have towards her. She is a strong woman willing to spend her resources (i.e. pathfinders) getting the job done. Maybe some people don't like the idea that their characters are resources to be spent.
You still haven't commented on the Living Monolith, a specifically allowed prestige class, requiring Sphinx, a language you claim players cannot learn. Tengu, Kitsune, and some other racial languages for allowed races don't appear to be in the additional resoucres, so are you saying you cannot learn them either?
Guide to Organized Play does allow for people to learn languages by putting points into linguistics. Additional resources doesn't say that languages aren't allowed. Unless you are saying that you cannot learn Tengu, Tian, or any other language not mentioned in the Core Rulebook, as they are not specifically mentioned in the additional resources. Whether or not I like an idea for a language has no bearing. The campaign organizisers have set out a guide to what is allowed, called The Guide To Organized Play.
I like how you assume everything comes down to player construction. Look, some scenarios aren't appropraite for all builds. This is an artifact of organized play, and limited options, as well as run as written. These aren't necissarily bad (I am a big fan of run as written.) And my point would then be that I don't like the concept of large chucks of potential builds are *campaign inapporiate*.
Jiggy, I was referring directly to the tack taken in the article. The stance implied is rigid, and bad tactics in itself. The Forge of Combat is a flawed concept, and regardless of how you feel about tactics discussion, starting from a bad footing (the article directly linked by the OP) gives you an uneven footing. The concepts of the roles are inherently flawed, and gives you a bad place to work your characters strategy from. Honestly this article reminds me of some of the worst problems facing sucessfully teaching tactics in a real world situation as well as in Pathfinder.
I am not anti tactics at all... I came in to roleplaying in Mechwarrior, as a branch in from the tabletop tactics game Battletech. I have and continue to play many tactically diverse games in addition to pathfinder, but I have 2 problems with the Forge of Combat article and similar efforts to distill tactics to a simple 3 pronged discussion. 1. When taken to extremes, it can and will replace roleplaying and damage a community. 2. It is too simplified to be of value. It encourages people to think "in their roles" and doesn't allow creative flexibility. It is the same mentality that plagues MMOs with the Trinity system (DPS, Heals, and Tanking.) Combat can, and even is in many rpgs more flexibile than is being shown. IE if I am playing a "Hammer", I can still help the team in some situations more by tying down flankers than hammering on 1 guy, or with a reach weapon (assuming a martial hammer) controlling an area via AoO. I find that these kinds of articles teach players, rather than how to be flexible, to focus on their intended role. That can be very detrimental to the table, and to the campaign. PS;
Note that as you already have an animal companion, you will have to choose whether you AC or familiar is participating, as you cannot have both active during PFS play. Note that your bolded section does not contain the words combat animal, and while it says that familiars and an animal granted by your class are okay, familiars ARE animals granted by your class. I can see having your familiar for the feat, but scouting creature is a no go for my tables, as scouts could be spotted and then are in combat. You must select one creature to participate in combat AT THE BEGINNING OF TBE SCENARIO.
WORST. ROLEPLAYING. DESCRIPTION OF ANYTHING NOT IN FATAL EVER. Seriously, that article is so mechanical it has no concept of strategy or tactics. I get trying to boil things down to a trinity system, but RPGs are not MMOs. I almost never see a character who can't do at least 2 of those roles, and many can do all three.
This happens everytime my Zen Archer is in a scenario without a faceman. They say "send the Aasimar" and 6 seconds later the arrows start flying.
Note that as you already have an animal companion, you will have to choose whether you AC or familiar is participating, as you cannot have both active during PFS play.
When I run Confirmation I like giving the NPCs random voices and attitudes.
|
