Harsk

TxSam88's page

Organized Play Member. 1,118 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

KingGramJohnson wrote:
TxSam88 wrote:
there's a number of movies and TV shows that dealt with this. interesting idea, but nothing earth shattering.

I never said it was an earth-shattering idea, just a fun situation for a one-shot. But maybe watching a few of those movies/TV shows will help with inspiration, as Andostre said.

Got any suggestions?

Can't think of any off the top of my head, I know one dealt with a Monkey's Paw. I think one had Mark Hamill in it, I seem to remember a couple of the Amazing Adventure's episodes dealing with it. I bet if you googled movies that dealt with wishes you might come up with a list.


there's a number of movies and TV shows that dealt with this. interesting idea, but nothing earth shattering.


Conacer wrote:


That makes more sense. I guess i would need to build multi attack into the build. With the change shape i wonder if you strapped a dagger sheath on your tails would that interfere with the tail natural attack.

My thoughts are change shape being used to smuggle weapons into secure areas by keeping them small and melded into your body. No search check would find them

You need to smuggle weapons in that often? We play Adventure Paths and needing to smuggle in weapons happens so seldom that I can't remember ever needing to do so. In any case, just strap them to your waist and they will still meld.

Seems like a build focused on countering things that aren't encountered that often.

Also, from what I can tell the best "weapon" you could use with teach tail is a Kobold Tail Attachment - not really daggers, etc.


So, there's a way easier way of dealing with Damage Reduction than carrying around an array of weapons, Penetrating Strike, and Greater Penetrating Strike.

Also, in most adventure paths - Damage Reduction doesn't seem to be that big of a deal, that you need to build to counter it.

AS for 2, this is what the Elephant in the Room system is for, basically all of your feats apply to all of the weapons in a group. Many players have switched to this set of rules.


Shawn Valleau wrote:
Really late to the party, but can anyone tell me why there isn't a list sorted by level.

I just use Hero Lab - it pretty much has them all.


I would rule that once the Magic Fang wears off, then the Rune of Durability would drop off as your body is no longer a manufactured weapon.

then I would chastise you for being cheesy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

so, Many times people have asked how does INT translate to the real world, and the most often answer is that your INT score, times 10 is your IQ. So someone with an IQ of 130 would have a 13 INT.

The military has basically said that anyone with an IQ under 80 cannot comprehend things well enough to be useful for any kind of military service.

I would imagine someone with an IQ of 30 (your mentioned Animal with an IQ of 3), would not have enough comprehension of any type of higher thoughts required to comprehend deities or their worship.

So while there are no official rules, I would lean toward no, an animal of INT 3, cannot venerate a deity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

in our old game, we had "Hermes' Infinite Bag" (a bag of holding with an infinite sized space inside) and "The Pen of Xerox" (a magic pen that would copy scrolls for you, so it didn't cost you any downtime).


Boomerang Nebula wrote:
TxSam88 wrote:

we encountered one back when we were playing DnD 2.0 we just cast reverse gravity under it twice and sent it into space...

Reverse gravity can be cast at 13th level.....

Interesting tactic. Unfortunately, it is not as viable in Pathfinder as the Tarrasque is so big you would need to be a 27th level caster to effect the entire creature.

yeah - lots of the spells that we used offensively back in the day got huge nerfs when ported over to PF1.


we encountered one back when we were playing DnD 2.0 we just cast reverse gravity under it twice and sent it into space...

Reverse gravity can be cast at 13th level.....


Skulls and Shackles has a character trait where you are missing a leg (you have a pegleg instead), but you have had it long enough that you have grown accustomed to it, and as such have no penalty.

I would do the same for a character with a missing hand, you've become accustomed to it and know enough work arounds to act normally.


That's a 65 point build - your stats are WAY more than fine. leave them as is.

feat choice for a level 1 paladin? easy Weapon Focus.

I'd personally go straight Paladin. mixing with a caster causes problems with action economy.


Melkiador wrote:

“Slots” only apply to magic items. You could easily wear 20 rings with 2 on each finger. But you’d only get the benefit of two magic rings.

If wearing 2 armors, you only get the magical benefits of one.

I suppose you could wear more than 1 suit of non-magical armor, the same way you can wear more than one pair of non-magical boots.


RAW you have a single Armor slot, so cannot wear a chain shirt and a reinforced tunic as both are considered armor.


the bloodrager or the cleric can't take the main frontliner duties?

Also, you have no decent arcane caster.


zza ni wrote:
TxSam88 wrote:
zza ni wrote:
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.
From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.

the arm is not a mutagen discovery

Can you walk me through the build then

What I am seeing is you take fighter as a class, mutation warrior as an archetype, to get a vestigial arm you use a mutagen discovery which you get one (and only one) at 7th level.

Or are you using a different build?


I view the Fire jet etc that classes like evoker wizard get as what your "scalable cantrip"s should look like


OmniMage wrote:


I don't agree on the pricing method for upgrading magic items. The book rules say that the cost of adding a new ability to an existing magic it is 1.5 the price of the new ability. This can lead to a player spending more than what the item is worth. This can dissuade players from trying to upgrade magic items.

Instead, I prefer the price to upgrade be the difference between the old item and the new one.

it's only 50% extra for oddities like combining items.

When upgrading a +1 item to a +2 item, you pay the flat difference


zza ni wrote:
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.

From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.


Mysterious Stranger wrote:


A 15th level draconic sorcerer with no gear can still use form of the dragon II to turn into a large red dragon. They also have mage armor as a spell so can have that up. Assuming a 10 STR, 14 DEX and Con and a 21 CHA the sorcerer at this point has an AC of 25 and has a bite at +9 doing 2d6+4 damage, 2 claws at +9 doing 1d8+3 damage and a tail slap at +4 for 1d8+4 and two wing attacks at +4 for 1d6+1. Changing into a dragon boosts his STR and CON so he also has a 152 HP. The sorcerer also has DR 5/magic, fire resistance, a breath weapon and can fly. The 15th level fighter has an AC of 12 (assuming 21 STR, 14 DEX 14 CON). He gets 3 unarmed strikes at +16/+11/+6 doing 1d3+13 damage (with power attack).

The fighter is totally outclassed by the sorcerer at this point. Even without using any spells the sorcerer has an AC of 16, two claw attacks doing 1d6+ 1d6 fire, fire resistance 10, a breath weapon, and flight. The sorcerer also has access to his spells. It’s pretty obvious the sorcerer does much better without gear...

using a sorcerer is a niche example: A 15 level wizard without his spellbook has a few cantrips and maybe a school ability or two, but for the most part is crippled.


fluffwise, sure. call it whatever you want. mechanically however, no, a falchion is a falchion, and a scimitar is a scimitar. So no buying weapon focus falchion and getting a +1 on a scimitar, etc.


RAW, yeah gloves would work. From a Role play perspective, you would actively avoid using any form of Iron or Steel.

Aside from weapons, this is pretty easy, Leather armor, bone or wood utensils, bone or wood buttons (I don't see Zippers existing on Golarion), Buckles could be made of bass or bone. Etc.

for weapons, you would probably try to stick to bone, wood or stone weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
Rule 0 of RPGs is that the GM can enforce, ignore, change, add or subtract any element in the game regardless of what the rules or setting says. Enjoyment of the players is not a part of it. Rule 0 of having friends and folks to play with is not being a dick.

I'll agree to this as long as he does not do it on the fly. When you go into a session, you should have a fair assessment of how the rules of the game should work. If suddenly the GM decides he doesn't like how something works, it's not fair to suddenly change it, at least without some discussion of why he wants to change it and some mechanism to keep it fair.


so, first off, fluff is not rules.
Second, Order of the Green is a requirement of the Green Knight Archetype. Both Herolab and the PFSRD seem to back this up, and as such, I'm pretty sure there's no FAQ or Errata about this.

It seems you are trying to read way too much into Fluff.


HeroLAb Classic


Dragonchess Player wrote:

Five shots per round at level 7? Only if you include Rapid Shot (which I was not proposing); +6/+1 BAB, free attack with Spell Combat, and haste only add up to four attacks.

For an eldritch archer gestalted with arcanist using Ranged Spellstrike, one or two shots per round is usually sufficient for adding scorching ray to firearm shots until reaching CL 11.

Even without Combat Stamina, a beneficial bandolier and the spell reloading hands can allow two reloads per round (one reload if using the swift action on something else instead of the beneficial bandolier reload).

Or you could just pass on Dex to damage and only go three levels in musket master instead of five (or using trench fighter). With the spell riders from Ranged Spell Strike (and Intense Spells from school savant in Evocation/Admixture), the handful of extra points of damage per shot from Dex isn't a make or break for the character's effectiveness (IMO). If you want...

My plan was to be having sneak attack damage by level 7, in place of dex damage, and using spell combat more for casting buffs while making full round attacks as the pool of ranged touch spells is somewhat limited.


Basically illusions are as real as need be to make you believe them until you interact enough for a saving throw. if you fail the saving throw, then it's real enough for you to believe it.


Dragonchess Player wrote:


Tiefling with Prehensile Tail to hold the Arcane Gun pistol for reloading and either the pistol or sword when using Spell Combat/Spellstrike with the other weapon (for the free hand to cast with).

This is why I'm using the Eldritch Archer - no free hand to cast required.


Lelomenia wrote:
I always put Musket Master+ Eldritch Archer on one side of the gestalt, straight full caster on the other. Honestly you don’t need more than 5 levels of Gunslinger or 6 of Magus.

that's what I am staring with.

Musket Master/Eldritch archer, and once I get enough levels in each to have Ranged Spell combat/Spell Strike, and the reload abilities so I can make full attacks, them I want to switch to Slayer/Exploiter.

the limiting factor is the Broad Study Magnus Arcana coming at level 6. if I stick long enough to get it, I might as well just do a dip in Exploiter and then go full Magus.


zza ni wrote:
a gunslinger\spellslinger gestalt should be pretty sweet.

I hope so, the plan is to use Dimensional slide to use a 5' step to always be in 1st range increment, so full attacks going against touch AC.

since 1 track will be full BAB, I should have plenty of attacks, some of which have sneak attack from the slayer side, not to mention studied target etc. then either a buff spell or an extra attack with a spell from spell combat/spell strike.

3 levels of gunslinger with alchemical cartridges should grant full attacks for the round.

just trying to find the best way to allow spell combat with the wizard spells.

discussed it with my GM, and he is considering to allow it in place of a wizard talent.


zza ni wrote:

If you want to use ranged attacks to cast spells:

you might want to check other classes that have something akin to ranged spell-strike. like the Cartomancer witch, spellslinger wizrd etc.

the problem with builds like this is the low bab of wizards\arcanist\witchs.
arcane archer fix that somewhat with his high bab. and the variant divine arcane archer of Erastil can have even higher bab then that (more so if he was a pure ranger).

------------------------

if you want to cast spells while attacking you might want to try out eldritch night at level 10 whenever he score a critical he can cast a spell as a swift action.

the BAB won't be a problem. it's a gestalt build and the other half is Gunslinger/Slayer, so full BAB, plus attack against touch AC.

but I will take a look at those other builds. Thanks


That Crazy Alchemist wrote:

Broad Study is going to be the only way to do spellstrike/spell combat with the wizard spell list, and there's no way to get that arcana on another class.

I personally wouldn't allow it, but you can always ask your GM to let you take that magus arcana in place if a wizard discovery. Homebrew is pretty much going to be your only option other than dipping 6 levels of magus.

That's what I was afraid of. Thanks for the help.


so, only humans fighters get 3, if they were any other race they get 2

All classes get 1 every odd level
Humans get 1 at first level
fighters get 1 at first level, and then one at every even level.

other classes have bonus feats at various frequency.


I'm working on a multi class build, I want to start with Magus (eldritch Archer) and have enough levels to get ranged spellstrike/spell combat, and then switch to Exploiter Wizard so I can pick up 9th level spells and Dimensional slide. But, I want to be able to use my wizard spells with the spell combat which needs the 6th level Magus Arcana Broad Study.

I could just go 6 levels of Magus, but it delays picking up Dimensional Slide, and it limits me to 7th level Wizard spells.

so, I'm trying to find an easier way of gaining that Arcana


happykj wrote:

variant multiclassing

I not sure is this what you want, but variant multiclassing allows you to get secondary class feature (which will replace 5 feats)

I appreciate the information, but VMC isn't allowed at our table. Any other options?


Is there any way a Wizard can learn a Magus Arcana?


Derklord wrote:
Either try the internet wayback machine, or tell us what you're looking for - I have no idea what the document did. I have a list of all monsters Paizo ever released (with average statistics for each CR), if that's what you're searching for.

yrsh, bit of a Necro here, but as for the lycanthrope question in the OP, becoming a werewolf is actually part of the Carrion Crown campaign, and it's a +2 effective level increase for the player.


Assuming his Con is less than 25, and he doesn't have any of the fancy feats etc giving him an extra round or something, then he's probably dead, but most tablew would leave it up to the GM. Our table would allow the Heal to go off and the character would survive. A good GM would probably rule the same way, as the players are the heroes and as such should be on the side that wins.


Reksew_Trebla wrote:
TxSam88 wrote:

Nothing in Time Stop says you cannot move another creature. Not only that, a Swarm is not considered individual creatures, but a swarm.

based on both of these, you should be able to move freely out of a swarm.

You make an attack roll to do a combat maneuver, such as reposition, against a character. Time Stop says you can't attack time stopped characters. Ergo, you can't move a time stopped character.

It's not intentionally moving them, and it's a swarm, not individual creatures, so you can't make a combat maneuver against them anyway. you can also freely exit a square occupied by a swarm. none of the cases warrant a combat maneuver - so the "no attack" clause wouldn't apply.

It may not make any sense, but RAW it's how the spell works.


It depends on the race and age of the orphan girl. Assuming human and a child, then teleport and leave her in a human orphanage. Carry On.

Other free willed races? something similar.

a member of an inherently evil race, probably ignore her, unless she poses a threat.


Nothing in Time Stop says you cannot move another creature. Not only that, a Swarm is not considered individual creatures, but a swarm.

based on both of these, you should be able to move freely out of a swarm.


WagnerSika wrote:
Burning hands could be used to light a fire. \

Spark and Presdigitation both should be able to light a fire and not waste a level 1 spell slot.


Not sure if this answers your question, but I played a Cleric necromancer build a while back.

I played a Neutral Separatist Cleric, and took the Versatile Channeling feat. It was really neat to be able to channel to heal my party, or heal my undead, or to damage the enemy.

Be sure to read this article about your Undead buckets, it will help you know just how many undead you can drag around. It's written for Clerics in mind, but quite a bit will still apply.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5kvBvq2DEHjRWFhSWc1ZzAzaDg/edit?resourceke y=0-14szXwlKO7ndjgv4Q3A9EQ


Paltor wrote:
Kasimir vonVang wrote:
Honestly, just play mutants and masterminds. It does exactly what you want.

and it finally degrades to 'just leave, you make my brain hurt. '

I have played so many systems and Pathfinder 1e is still my favorite and I would much rather home brew this than play another system.
So I understand the OP intent and have tried the same myself. I did find that the slots are quicker and easier to use and it may just be easier to allow slots to be swapped around based on feats,etc.
As far as the caster OP thing, as GM I've always handled this with the expectation that creatures aware of caster will be waiting to interrupt and the caster's power is limited as a result.

4 year Necro - but aside from that, I disagree with the original premise that casters are all that powerful. My preference to play is casters and even the best ones seen to not be able to go over about 200 damage in one round, where as the current record in our current campaign for top damage in one round is over 600, from a Paladin in melee. so yeah, just limit the spells the wizard can find, and have an archer ready to interrupt their spell... or just give the bad guys more hit points.


MysteriousMaker wrote:

. One doesn't go to the game looking to play conan, but rather they go to the game to see what they get and what they can build from what is handed to them.

yeah, I think you are wrong here, and I'm pretty sure that you are not understanding that most people prefer systems in which they can control the outcome. Most people come up with a concept first and then build the character to fit, not get random stats and see what they can do with it. Point buy has become the preferred system because people want to play their concept, not what the dice gods allow them to.


MysteriousMaker wrote:

Your discussion of how bad stats leads to players killing off their characters because they are "bad" characters. That is built entirely on the fundamental mindset of "playing the mechanics." People who "play the game" don't do that, because it misses the entire point of "playing the game." Those "bad" characters are not bad characters to players of a different mindset.

I disagree, and so does the mechanics of the game. your suggestion of playing the numbers as dealt to you forces people to not play the character they want (I wanted to play Conan, but my rolls gave me an 8 STR, so no way I can play Conan now (non min/max system)). yet, the mechanics of the game allow players to play what they want (Man, I really want to play Conan, I'm going to spend more point on STR, let's say a 17, so I can start pretty strong (what you consider a min/max system).


MysteriousMaker wrote:
TxSam88 wrote:


There is a huge fundamental difference between guaranteeing that I have the minimum stats possible to make the character I want playable, and Min/Maxing.

The only minimums I'm aware of for 3.5 is the spellcasting. There are no other minimum requirements. Not even for multiclassing. Well, some feats have minimums but those all make sense when you remember it's a casual simulation system, not a complicated version of chess.

But this again is demonstrating a misunderstanding of how 3.5 is intended to play. Paizo style AP like campaigns that run straight from lvl 1 to near max lvl as a single overarching story is a modern concept and not the expectation when 3.0 was created.

Things were still fairly old school in those days. Single modules taking place in a single lvl was the norm. Reaching lvl 20 was expected to take years if not decades in-game as players complete storylines and then do stuff in downtime, moving from dungeon delvers to leaders of organizations. And from this, characters didn't need to be established from day 1 to run till 20 and players can have multiple characters that they swap between for each module.

Further, the average for rolling 4d6 drop lowest is for the highest stat to be at least 15, and players got to place them as desired, ensuring that even if you were playing a caster, you'd have what is needed. Even being unlucky and having 13 as the highest stat would still be fine as items could make up the difference by the time it mattered.

And then the idea of playable, the game is very playable with low stats, but most modern players don't agree because it's not what they are used to. I think the psychological effect of penalties started the whole mess, which is why I changed the modifiers to not have penalties in my system.

And rolling is better for minmaxers only when the GM lets them get by with such stupid tricks. All a GM needs to do is require witnessing the rolls themselves and minmaxers immediately denounce rolling as the worst...

yeah, minimums were around before 3.5, same as 4d6, and 3d etc. the history of the game has shifted from only 3d6, to alternate methods because the original method did not work.

and 1-20 modules have been around since 1e, the classic beginning at Hommlet and going through the slaver series, giant slayer series, temple of elemental evil, descent to the vault of the drow etc being the prime example. perhaps not packaged as a single AP, but certainly used as one by many many people, and 1-20 was done not in decades, but in the course of just a few years.

And yes, having the GM watch you roll your dice does reduce the background cheating/instant abortion character, but dissatisfaction with your character leads to you purposely getting it killed off so you can try again, or lack of interest in the game which causes the game to die.

Letting players have fun is the secret to a good game. and having the stats available to do what you want with the character is critical to that. Now, I'm not saying to allow min/max, but there are good ways of generating stats that are fair, yet still allow people to play what they want.


MysteriousMaker wrote:


The fundamental trait of point buy is minmaxing. It is a precise placement of points to accurately and precisely achieve a specific goal with little to no room for taking the unplanned and unknown values and figuring out how to work them into your designs.

There is a huge fundamental difference between guaranteeing that I have the minimum stats possible to make the character I want playable, and Min/Maxing.

3.5 had rules to handle this, like being able to raise any stat to the minimum required for a class. PF solved this by not having any required minimums.

But if I want to play a Wizard and I know we're playing until 20th level, I am damn sure going to want to start the game with a minimum of 15 INT, so I can guarantee 9th level spells when they become available. rolling stats (in the strictest roll method, (3d6 in order)) does not allow me to play this character. so most players used the "instant abortion" method and just rolled and rerolled characters until they came up with the stats they wanted. It wasn't min/maxing, it's simply the game mechanic didn't work well. So various methods to make those characters possible entered the game, 4d6 drop the lowest, 3d6 place where you want, array, point buy etc.

min/maxers (and even worse, power gamers) vastly prefer any dice roll method, because they can "roll all 18's" and it's legit because their "friend" witnessed it. Point buy (and array) at least puts everyone on an even playing field. our house rules have mitigated this even more, we use point buy, but don't allow any stat over 17, or below 10, before racial mods at character creation.

Now, can mix/maxers abuse point buy? sure, but the solution is not to change the mechanic, but to change the player. either talk with them and get then to not min/max to the level they do, or to get other players.

however, one of the things that leads to min/maxing is bad GMs, the GM that feels like it's a competition, and that they have to always outthink the players, when the game becomes a GM vs the players. these game invariably lead to a game of rocket tag, where the players and the GM are trying to always one up each other.


Boomerang Nebula wrote:

Town - Saltwind, an old coastal village renowned for the magical sea eggs harvested along the shore.

Adventure - explore the old lighthouse. The bridge that connected the small island where the lighthouse stood was washed away in the millennium storm decades ago. At low tide a brave adventurer could wade out to the lighthouse and explore potential shipwrecks. But some locals say the lighthouse is haunted by the ghost of the old lighthouse keeper who disappeared in the millennium storm all those years ago.

so pretty much this exact adventure exists in the Carrion Crown AP, and it's side quest module Carrion Hill.


MysteriousMaker wrote:

Obviously I haven't written it very well, but it is as simple and easy as Savage Worlds, and anyone who thinks SW is complicated and unintuitive has no idea what they are talking about. This clearly it is a problem with my writing and not the design itself. I'll see about rewriting it monday.

For those familiar with SW, basically I mixed SW and d20. You get three dice based on stats, except instead of each being independently compared for successes, they are summed like the d20 variant 3d6.

If you're going to do that, why not just use the Savage Core for Pathfinder rule set. it's already written. Or are you just wanting to see what you can create?

1 to 50 of 1,118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>