VictorCrackus's page

Currently. A friend that plays nothing but Gish casters. Not magus. Not iniquistor. Not even cleric, or paladin, or bard. Or things that could be considered gishy. No. He goes Wizard. And Fighter/ranger. Then goes into eldritch knight. This has happened since 3.5 started. The same concept. He may change into other things. Like.. used to be warlock. Currently, he isn't very effective. Has alot of blasting spells, and save or die spells. So things don't always work out. So I offered him the chance to reroll as something, as long as its different from this concept and.. He refuses.

By different, I mean he can do some sort of magus type thing, but not Eldritch Knight path wise.

He is also the source of our Mysterious Stranger meme in the group.
But that is the Ugh class. The same concept executed the same everytime.

Doesn't help that he keeps begging me to use 3.5 feats and classes and spells.

Can not say -no- enough times.

Rockhopper wrote:

26 episodes? Sci-fi? Newer than the series you mentioned? Maybe you'd like Gurren Lagann.

Saw it on Netflix. It has the same kind of ridiculous escalation I see in Shounen anime. Still, it's pretty good. Very unique too. I strongly suspect the crazy escalation therein is meant only as a parody of other anime like DBZ, but that might just be me.

Unlike Bleach (where nobody important dies) or DBZ (where dying doesn't matter due to wishes) important people in Gurren Lagann do die, sometimes from the most mundane things.

** spoiler omitted **

Cue up some Escaflowne. May not be new. But its good. *Shrug*

Just not the movie.

Never the movie.

Douglas Adams.

Do I really need to explain myself?

One game. A long time ago.

We fought vampire ninjas.

The rules for ninjas in this game. Is that the more ninjas there are, the less powerful they are. But. When there is one ninja.

You are about to get your head chopped in nine hundred ways.

Was hilarious.

Also.

No Naruto ninjas. Please. Just die. Die now.

Especially the American Naruto Ninja.

They can especially die.

Yes the damage stack. It's a bit too good of a trick.

True. But now I want to go all -Fist of the North Star- on someone.

VictorCrackus wrote:

Zark wrote:

edit:
if this had been a bard play test people would have screamed: we don't want char as a casting stat. MAD, MAD. We want int as a casting stat (or nwis). People just don't care about the role playing aspct of this role playing ghame, they just wantv to go meshuggah on everything.

This.

I am finding that a bit annoying. Thematically. Cha is awesome for Ninjas.

thanks :-)

I wrote this in another thread:

BTW.
It's very funny how some people say that Ki isn't a big deal at the same time scream MAD and want the Ki Pool based on Wis.
If ki is no big deal then char 10 or 12 would be enough. Right?
The people that want to downplay the importance of Ki claims a Ninja should start with at least 14 char. As Zappa one said: Isn't this amazing?

Ki is king. Especially with some of these ninja tricks. Plus. I find that playing with the Cha would just be fun anyhow.

Because someone needs to say it here goes:

That’s it. I’m sick of all this “Masterwork Bastard Sword” baloney that’s going on in the d20 system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.

I should know what I’m talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that’s about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.

Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.
Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I’m pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That’s right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Katanas:

(One-Handed Exotic Weapon) 1d12 Damage 19-20 x4 Crit +2 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork

(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon) 2d10 Damage 17-20 x4 Crit +5 to hit and damage Counts as Masterwork

Now that seems a lot more representative of the cutting power of Katanas in real life, don’t you think?

tl;dr = Katanas need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

:D

Probably 2d8 as a two hander. Maybe a small nerf to the crit range. But otherwise. Kinda what I had in mind as well.

Also. They would be expensive. Perhaps Samurai could get some sort of additional class feature where they craft their own sword over the various levels. Doesn't even have to be magic. They could just improve it over the levels.

So at level 1? Perhaps the same stats as a bastard sword. But as they grow better in their art and their craft, they could steadily work on another sword. Change up the stats a bit more. Definitely would add even more incentive to play one.

edit:
if this had been a bard play test people would have screamed: we don't want char as a casting stat. MAD, MAD. We want int as a casting stat (or nwis). People just don't care about the role playing aspct of this role playing ghame, they just wantv to go meshuggah on everything.

This.

I am finding that a bit annoying. Thematically. Cha is awesome for Ninjas.

super_radish wrote:

debuffs to stats on attack is great idea. The problem is, it's bad mechanics to do -1 to a stat. Make it -2, so no matter what there's a penalty. It's the same as the +1 ring of str. Someone with 15 str gets strong but with 16? it goes up to 17 and nothing happens. "Why does this ring make you stronger but not me?"

Bad mechanic. It's silly... oh, and people are never gonna pick that ninja trick if that's how it is.

Ninja hits a pressure point! Damn that hurt! But it hasn't slowed me down or weakened me! How lucky! and the ninja is thinking 'has my training been worth nothing?" all because the dude had 15 str instead of 16 str.

A 4th level ninja who catches a flatfooted opponent at the beginning of combat, could theoretically drop an opponent FOUR points of strength buy using shuriken, assuming he is using flurry of stars and rapid shot. FIVE points of strength if the ninja also uses TWF. This is still within the realm of possibility due to the flatfooted opponent not having a Dex bonus to AC. If the ninja is attacking from an area of total darkness, said target also might suffer another -2 AC, due to the ninja being essentially hidden/invisible to the target (assuming the target does not have darkvision).

If it was 2 ability damage per strike, that would be a -10 to that boor bastard's strength or dexterity, which IMHO would be very OP.

Edit- oh yeah, that's not counting the 8-10 dice of sneak attack damage in there...

If anything I think that Pressure Points might need to cost 1 die of sneak attack damage to balance out based on how the number of attacks can scale it up dramatically.

I was going to agree with the OP, until I read this.

Wow.

Kolokotroni wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Nobody here is saying ill against the playtest itself. Just on the bad initial design of the gunslinger.

Honestly its mostly not even the gunslingers own fault, its those stupid things he carries around in holsters. If his class features worked on crossbows it would be a perfectly servicable if a little underpowered class.

I used a musket from the setting book with a rogue. I greatly enjoyed using the musket and I found the misfire issue to be minimal. If nothing else it creates interesting situations =D

Raving.

Just wait until they introduce the Major Artifact.

The Gatling Gun.

World of Warcraft gives me 11 million reasons to pinch the bridge of my nose and sigh, as it has claimed several friends, and in various degrees turned them away from the P&P.

I loathe MMOs with a passion, as it is NOT an RPG in any shape or form. You level up and increase numbers. That is IT. There is no real interaction, no character development beyond the crunch and appearance, no story to speak of, no continuity, and no goal beyond higher and higher numbers.

Not to say that I do not enjoy computer gaming. I loved Neverwinter Nights 2 - Mask of the Betrayer. Even Dragon Age, despite striking me as a glorified single-player MMO at times. As long as there is a story.

But none of them are able to evoke the same flair and passion I exude when I am playing a character I REALLY made, playing with my wife and friends, being on an actual journey where I can do WHATEVER I WANT.

I play World of Warcraft.

But the moment I hear of friends wanting to play pathfinder, D&D, some white wolf game, dresden files, dark heresy, mutants and masterminds, or even some game a friend made himself called Ork Death Race, I drop World of Warcraft. Shut off my computer, and go play it. As I find it infinitely more fun than anything WoW Can offer me.

I love DMing. I love playing. Hell. I think I would love just being in the same room as people playing.

i.e. Ork Death Race is a twisted metal race game that requires no DM to run it. Everyone is an Ork, from Warhammer 40k. Well. A certain class of ork, like Mad Dok, or Mauler, or Burner. And there are several types of vehicles with different stats and speeds. Then, there are several different types of weapons. People roll an initiative of sorts, and the first round there isn't any combat allowed. After that. Do whatever you want. First one to finish the race wins. Or.. Last person alive wins the race.

Anyhow. I can't think of a game that would pull me away from Tabletop RPG gaming.

Unless its some sort of virtual reality that basically does the same thing in every respect, but over great distances.

RPGs, for life.

My 16th-level gunslinger can do 4d12 base damage with a single attack AND it's a touch attack! Woohoo! Beat that fighters and wizards!

[/sarcasm]

In all seriousness though, this class is suffering from some horrible balance issues. The above simply cannot compete with a wizard of similar level dealing 28d6 damage with a touch attack or a fighter doing ~200 damage each round with multiple standard attacks (which may well have powerful rider effects by then). Considering its supposed to be a primary damage dealer, it's doing a TERRIBLE job. It doesn't have much else to help make up for that fact either. I mean, no perception? Come on!

Shoulda' been a ranger variant.

(Just wanted to join the chorus.)

Its a play test.

But perhaps we should sticky a:
1. Constructive Criticism thread.
and
2. Complaint Thread.

Then the other threads can be lovely discussion. :D

But surely. Most of my friends view the rules of guns as a bit powerful. Especially since the wording does imply that more barrels may come available. Like.. A six shooter, or a double barrel shotgun. You can bet they'll be as expensive as an adamantine masterwork bastard sword though. Perhaps the gunslinger will get crafting abilities when it comes to guns. Or. Well. Anyone would really.

Make a crafting feat even.

Or, have the misfires happen so that the first time you roll the misfire range, you have to make a certain check of a certain DC, or it breaks.

Though, I still maintain. Shooting a broken gun is realistically not intelligent. So. That point is just moot for me.

Though yes, right now. One shot type of guns at high levels are pretty weak. Fortunately ladies and gentlemen. This is a play test. Which, thank the Paizo gods they actually do. Rather than just releasing them as is telling the players. -Enjoy-! And when the players open it up, they see the CW Samurai staring them in the face.

I for one, have seen it once, and never want to see it again, thank you.

vagrant-poet wrote:

Jesus, people need to give players a break when they roll high on the random encounter chart!

Coming from a GM's perspective, I'd say the player's need to give us a break when we roll high on the encounter charts!

GM: There's a rustling in the grass to your right. As you look closer, you realize it's a werewolf ready to pounce. If you run away right now you can probably-
1st level PCs: CHARGE!!!
GM: *facepalm*

I had a group of 6 players in my game. All level one at the time. Had a fighter, barbarian, paladin, monk, wizard, and bard.

I rolled an owlbear. Now. They could of taken it, but when it charged.

The fighter, the barbarian, and even the stupid paladin ran away. Owlbear reached the squishies. Almost murdered them completely, when the -tanks- of the party finally returned.

The bard threatened them with a story of how the brave and strong fighters of the party turned tail and ran upon first sight of the dreaded monster.

Needless to say. They players have put up bounties for owlbears killed in part two..

Skaorn wrote:

You know, the evil part of me would have been sorely tempted to let him keep his one level of Paladin :D. Of course the good part of me would be saying not to let the door hit him on the way out.

I actually heard about a group of players where he'd have probably fit in from my friends that he and his wife went to once when they lived out of state. As an example, before they told the group to grow up and left, he told me that they started laughing at his wife and making fun of her for rolling a d12 instead of a d20, something I'm sure all experienced role players have done (and she wasn't new to RPGs). They didn't make it an hour with that group.

He kicked himself out. We were too busy trying not to laugh at him. In the end karma and the universe has a way of fixing things.

Still the hobby does have it's share of male chauvnits imo. Either a female gamer get stared at like she is out of place when she goes to gaming events. Worst if she is very attractive. I remember getting kicked out of LGS before it went under because the owner was treating a female customer as if she had walked into the wrong store and acted like she was not buying for herself but her boyfriend. A few unpolite words later both she and I were shown the door.

I could understand the attitude 20 years. Possilby even 10 years ago but now it just disgusting. Then we wonder why the hobby does not have as many female gamers.

I find female gamers to be a wonderful change to today's gaming.

Our gaming group acting needs some females in it. XD A friend and I discussed it once, out of amusement. WE decided that a lesbian D&D loving girl would be the most utter perfect addition to our group.

But. I live in Texas. East Texas. LIke. Don't think Houston. Think the closest county to Louisiana as you can possibly get. First, not many people who play D&D, second, not many women who are even interested in the concept. And. Lastly. Homosexuality is still considered taboo by the more ignorant members of the county.

Course, this same county made a petition to reinstate a police officer that got suspended due to DRUNK DRIVING in his police car, in another town, and stealing a hotel's complimentary breakfast.

Yeah. My town... Love it.. >.>

This is sorta sounding like this one guy I kicked out of my gaming group... That tried to put iron kingdom classes and weapons into a 3.5 game campaign. <.<

VictorCrackus wrote:

VictorCrackus wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

Zombieneighbours wrote:

Of cause they did, but it isn't part of the narrative of bows in the same way.

No, the narrative of black power guns is "lol, they fell into the water and now when they tried to shoot the guy, all their guns just clicked." I can't think of a single pop-culture movie or book (you know, the source of "narrative" reasons) where a black powder weapon explodes.

Well duh.

Who would try to shoot with a broken gun?

Doing that is just begging for bad things to happen. If anything, if they do change that mechanic, they should have a range of things to happen. Like maybe you can just break it further, it explodes..

Or maybe you shoot yourself in the foot.

Cartigan!

Foot shooting.

Also.

Tell me, I implore. Why are you shooting a broken gun?

Because Martial Classes need to enchant their weapons to contribute against level appropriate foes, and he can only afford to enchant one gun while maintaining all the other stuff he needs. If he repairs the broken gun (which Kaisoku explained the rules are very vague on) at BEST he's not contributing for a whole round, which means people are dying.

Considering both of these weapons are NEW experimental advances of technology. Perhaps Paizo should scrape the idea entirely.

New things. Brand new things. They break when you screw something up.

If one only has the willingness to enchant one gun. Perhaps they should invest in Steadfast upon their one gun. Great for musket. Perhaps a small bit of a waste for two pistols though. Quite the expenditure of gold you might say.

Though. If you are willing to use new technology that hasn't been perfected, you should expect issues like this.

More power doesn't come without consequence. Personally I find this consequence interesting. And how hard is it for one to have a crossbow on hand? Or, just another +1 pistol as -backup-. If you say that at early levels you can't afford that, then get a crossbow.

If that doesn't fit your image. Suck it up, and get a crossbow, or use the pistol.

Cartigan wrote:

Zombieneighbours wrote:

Of cause they did, but it isn't part of the narrative of bows in the same way.

No, the narrative of black power guns is "lol, they fell into the water and now when they tried to shoot the guy, all their guns just clicked." I can't think of a single pop-culture movie or book (you know, the source of "narrative" reasons) where a black powder weapon explodes.

Well duh.

Who would try to shoot with a broken gun?

Doing that is just begging for bad things to happen. If anything, if they do change that mechanic, they should have a range of things to happen. Like maybe you can just break it further, it explodes..

Or maybe you shoot yourself in the foot.

Cartigan!

Foot shooting.

Also.

Tell me, I implore. Why are you shooting a broken gun?

Zombieneighbours wrote:

Of cause they did, but it isn't part of the narrative of bows in the same way.

No, the narrative of black power guns is "lol, they fell into the water and now when they tried to shoot the guy, all their guns just clicked." I can't think of a single pop-culture movie or book (you know, the source of "narrative" reasons) where a black powder weapon explodes.

Well duh.

Who would try to shoot with a broken gun?

Doing that is just begging for bad things to happen. If anything, if they do change that mechanic, they should have a range of things to happen. Like maybe you can just break it further, it explodes..

Or maybe you shoot yourself in the foot.

I thought of something completely different.

I also thought of something different, but perhaps not AS different.

Krisam wrote:

[sidetrack]

DungeonmasterCal wrote:

Wow...just...wow. Maybe we do things differently here in the southern US, because had that guy punched me or any gamer I know in the head he'd still be taking his meals through a straw.

I'm not a very strong girl, whereas the guy was pretty fit, so I wasn't about to get into a fight with him. Had I been the Hulk, though, it would have been awfully tempting.

[/sidetrack]

You're a GIRL and he hit you!?

Yeah. That brings a certain saying to mind that is relevant to that particular situation and the thread at large.

“Of course we must fear evil men, but there is another evil that we must fear more… and that is the indifference of good men.”

Sounds like the people just standing by with stupid looks on their faces should be kicked in the face just as much as the offending guy.

Just last night, I was pondering a TV show regarding people just.. playing RPGs.

But this idea sorta trumps it. Honestly. A crusade to educate those that still believe that these sort of games are a gateway to... TO be frank. Evil. Its silly for people to still think that. How could we begin to educate those that still see these sort of games as evil? Or satantic.. Or gateways to worse things.

I gotta say.

This dog nonsense needs to end.

Thus. I have decided to..

*rips shirt off revealing flab*

Challenge...

*intense glare with flames licking out of the eyes*

THE DOG!

*the dog sits there. It cocks its head to the side while panting*

TO MORTAL KOMBAT!

Distant Scholar wrote:

I don't mean to make a big deal of this, because I don't really care which way is the correct way (either way works for me). But, when I read the "it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell" part, it seems to clearly mean that a wizard needs a 15 Int to cast an empowered fireball. It takes some effort on my part to see it differently. [Kind of like those color-blindness tests.]

I just spoke to Jason about this, and we're going to change the wording of this sentence.

Current version:

Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast as a higher-level spell.

Proposed new version:

Effects of Metamagic Feats on a Spell: In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot.

Is that sufficiently clear?

I would of murdered my players with a blunt axe if they would of argued the original errata with me.

Congratulations to everyone!

VictorCrackus wrote:

I've been rather calm about it.. Until today. Now I'm all antsy, and semi-working on my archetype that I finally decided upon. I promised my players should I get into the top 32, my item would certainly make itself known immediately in my games. Heh.

No need to under-play it, man;

Not only have I told my players they might see my entry and all my other ideas that I didn't enter, I've noted a slew of past years' entries for use in my home game (with the appropriate gratitude to their creators), whether or not if they were accepted as top-32 or if their creator advanced any further.

As long as you don't attempt to publish any nicked material commercially or profit from it in any way, I see it as a great idea-sharing resource to be among fellow GMs, being witness to other sources of "campaign flavor" and gaining new ideas through collaboration.

If anyone objects to other GMs using a wondrous item that someone else created in their own home game, please, do speak up.

That. Is an awesome idea.

I'm going to do that most likely. It would be foolish almost not to. Even if I don't get in the 32, I think it would be an honor knowing my item is already being used in games. So, perhaps the winners would enjoy knowing that as well.

I've been rather calm about it.. Until today. Now I'm all antsy, and semi-working on my archetype that I finally decided upon. I promised my players should I get into the top 32, my item would certainly make itself known immediately in my games. Heh.

snobi wrote:

There is this feat:

Spell Finesse (Source: Genius Guide to Feats of Spellcasting)
You have learned to cast spells using a different style than most of your spellcasting tradition.
Benefit: Choose one of the following ability scores – Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma. All your spellcasting calculations are now based on this ability, including maximum level of spell you can cast, spell save DCs, and bonus spells per day. If you have spellcasting abilities from multiple sources, you can change all of them to this same attribute. Once this feat is taken and your new spellcasting attribute is selected, it cannot be changed.

Wow, just wow.

Both the Mystic Theurge and a whole bunch of Gish builds are hugely more viable with that, I find it hard to imagine a lot of DMs allowing it.

Yeah. At that point. I would get a megaphone.

I would wait for the offending player to be distracted.

Then -notso- quietly tell them no.

If you don't pump your intelligence, you're basically building Draco Malfoy or Hagrid, a third-rate or failed wizard who put all his points into something else--family connections and Charisma for the first, a half-giant template and handle animal for the other.

Can such a character be fun? Sure. Playing the scullery maid can be fun given the right game.

Will the character be effective, either in combat or in the world of wizard politics? Not really, no. Draco and Hagrid couldn't magic their way out of a paper bag, and Draco coasted by on family (presumably there were some actual competent wizards back in the Malfoy family tree) and Hagrid got by on being nice and a personal favorite of Dumbledore (which is better than tenure).

Much as I usually hate minmaxing, my opinion of wizards who don't put all their points into Intelligence is that these are basically the Draco Malfoys of the world, the people who went to wizardry school because their family paid their way and expected them to do it, not that they would ever amount to much. Which is fine for NPCs, or even for certain special PCs, but in general isn't going to fit the mold of someone who's going to take the profession all the way to 20.

I would hate to have someone like you in one of my games.

This thread has been a hoot to read! I'll share my oddest experience that I've had in 30+ years of playing.

When I was in high school, my gaming group was meeting at my girlfriends house to play one sunday afternoon. Before we started to play she recived a phone call from her sister inviting us to play at her sisters house. The idea of me getting to play and not DM is a rareity for me so after a quick vote we went.

My group consisted of my girlfriend, myself, 2 friends and a friend of my girlfriend visiting from California. We arrived at the sisters house and their game was already going. Their group consisted of the sister, her husband (the DM) and another player named "Micky".

They were playing a fairly high level game for 1e (around 8-10th)
so we pulled out characters and handed them to the DM for consent.
He OKs them and he puts us in with a hand wave.

We are in a castle-like mansion of an arch-duke of hell. As we were going through the place we find a library. My character being a wizard-rogue was interested in this as was the friend from California, playing a wizard also. My girlfriend playing a barbarian stayed and guarded the door to the library as the two squishies looked about. Everyone else went down a staicase in the hall outside the library to the next level down.
I found nothing of intrest in my search and decided to go downstairs with the barbarian, thinking the other wizard was following. She found some sort of magical tome and decided to look at it more closely. "Micky" had decided that the library should be burned and came back up the stairs as we were going down. Before we realised what he was doing he threw oil and torches into the library and wizard locked the door with a magic item (ring I think). My girlfriend and myself came back up the stairs saying that her friend was still in there and "mickey" said she deserved to die saying something about evil and corrupted knowledge.
My girlfriend and I attacked this idiot and killed him and was able to get the door open to save...

.. Wow.

Posts like that makes me rather thankful for the group I have. Just amazing.

CoDzilla wrote:

Dabbler wrote:

Why would there be more than one? Just because your DM usually 'takes 20' on guard animals and then racks in CR4 encounters for 1st level parties doesn't mean every DM has to. Guard dogs are expensive, so they use the minimum they require.

Your strawmen aside, there's more than one because guard dogs are cheap, even by level 1 standards, are as strong or stronger than level 1 characters, and can also guard things. There are also multiple encounters in a day, because to do otherwise is just foolish.

Yet I use the tactics in actual games ... and this doesn't happen. Strawmen is what you keep coming up with, like claiming there will be as many dogs as it takes to detect the sneaker - it's just BS. Indeed, they are MORE LIKELY to detect the invisible mage than the non-invisible rogue. All your argument means is that your own spells-only-solution is bunk.

Sure there are multiple encounters a day, but why would every one of them be optimised to detect sneaking rogues?

Rogue sneaks in, drugs dog/knocks out guard. Rogue then opens door for rest of party. Party file in, rogue locks door behind them. Party are now on the inside ready to deal with next encounter, and no-one knows they are there. This is what happens in an actual game, although unlike you I accept that experiences may differ.

I'm sure there are ways to cover your scent, mask your scent, or otherwise distract the dogs, using their ability to smell.

Brian Bachman wrote:

As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point).

I'm amazed by how often my friend is sent into a pout because I hold him up to the rules. *shakes head*

My friends tend to get annoyed when I correct a rule that, when corrected, hurts me, rather than helps me.

Its a habit.

Depends on the character concept and game.

Started a legacy of fire game recently. A rogue living in Katapesh. Figured he would be dealing with far less traps. Especially since yes, he was a cut purse. Course, he worked an honest living as well. Living on thievery alone there wasn't recommended.

Dabbler wrote:

CoDzilla wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

Dabbler wrote:

Cartigan wrote:

You can possibly skip one, but you aren't going to be able to leave out both at the same time, especially once you get higher in level. And remember, Paladins, Bards, and Rangers are also all casters when looking at filling the healer role (ie, why divine casters are really so important)

I agree, one full caster is pretty essential, but other than that ... you generally can get by with other means.

Or a lock and trap smith. A big dumb fighter with lots of HP can sort of be both, but the one thing a caster can't do is be a lock or trap smith.

Adamantine bolt > locks that are not adamantine. If the lock IS adamantine, you slice the hinges. If the entire DOOR is adamantine, you attack the wall it's attached to and then sell it for megabucks. If the WALLS are adamantine too, expect your DM to cry in very short order.

How do you shut the door after you without anyone noticing you were there?

You don't. But you don't do that anyways because 1: You want the door open so you can escape. 2: You cannot shut the door without alerting people to your presence.

CoDzilla wrote:

Traps are completely irrelevant in PF. Just run through them.

Quote:

Even the disintergrating wall trap? Or the rotating vorpal scythe blade trap? or ... any one of a hundred lethal traps there to eliminate the shallow end of the gene pool when forethought was being handed out?

There are no lethal traps in PF.

Your disintegrating wall does not exist. Though if it did, it would have a trivial DC of 19, and therefore be irrelevant. Neither does your vorpal blade scythe, though if it did, there's you an easy 25k or more by looting the trap. In this case the lack of forethought is all the DM's. For you see, forethought is realizing anything the enemy will do to you by screwing around too long in their home is ten times worse than the piddly traps will.

Telling a DM that something is NOT in their game is a hilarious way to get your foot in your mouth.

Sometimes literally. XD

Players that correct me, about MY campaign. Or say metagame. Or do anything like that, find that my wrath can be swift.

Or I pull a Mr. Fishy and get a stick.

I get that you think it was a bad idea as GM... but do your players think it was a bad idea? Or, specifically, does your king's player think it was a bad idea?

Some people don't want to go through a series of blind dates with NPCs. It can be kind of awkward, honestly - roleplaying romantic relationships is one of the hardest aspects of GMing. So perhaps your players don't want to have to go through that all, and just want to move on to an established relationship.

Or you can simply hand waive the breakup, since you hand waived the relationship. People break up all the time. Perhaps she doesn't want to get married - and especially to a future king! (I could definitely see a river folk girl shrugging her shoulders at the possibility of a queendom.) Or she proves to be infertile, and thus a poor choice of queen. (Actually that idea does have a number of interesting hooks, as she can then serve as the king's mistress while the PCs search for a more convenient political arrangement for queendom...)

Oh god. In my game. We got the political scandal one about three times as an event.

The king was.. Quite the playboy.

Quite.. The playboy. In about a year. He is going to be owing alot of women. Alot of money.

I find this highly amusing since the most broken character in our current group is the human Healer. The DM has the same problem you describe about encounters being boring because nothing can really hurt us. :)

Yes. I really, really, prefer games where we have a few wands of healing. Maybe a cleric, or oracle that have a few healing items.. Or even a witch with a few healing options.

Pure healer makes games boring. Trust me on that. If someone focuses on NOTHING but healing and buffing spells. THe game can really get boring. Brain numbingly boring.

I now want to just play pathfinder in a discworld setting.

Please.

VictorCrackus wrote:

Klaus van der Kroft wrote:

ohgod

That is horrific. That sounds like a sort of game I run every once in awhile called a Random campaign. But its not meant to be serious.. At all. Or have any continuation. Its just meant to fill a space, and be stupidly funny.

In fact.

Your story gives me an idea for a random campaign.

Are you telling me that, due to me posting that, another group somewhere in the world is going to have to fight wild giant anemones in a forest?

You do know this means I will accumulate so much bad karma that I will reincarnate as a buttscratcher, right?

Oh. NO. Worse things have happened in the infamous random campaign in my group.

Imagine if you will.

You are an orc barbarian. YOu have just experienced the most insane past 3 hours of your life. The last of which, being a duck, that refused to die. And refused to stop quacking. And.. Refused to stop staring at you. Only after finally scoring a critical hit, did its reign of terrible.

The orc sat down on a nearby decaying log. His axe at his side, buried in the mud. He took his head in his hands, groaning with utter frustration at how things could work this way.

At which point a tarrasque walks up. Sits down beside the orc. Crushing that part of the log, then in a typical sad panda voice says.

"Whats wrong buuuuddddy?"

The random campaign is not meant to be serious.

By the way. That orc just sorta went insane after that.

ohgod

That is horrific. That sounds like a sort of game I run every once in awhile called a Random campaign. But its not meant to be serious.. At all. Or have any continuation. Its just meant to fill a space, and be stupidly funny.

In fact.

Your story gives me an idea for a random campaign.

I remember someone rolling up a cleric.

And someone getting mad at them when they cast spells that stopped combat, rather than heal others.

I was sorta amused..

(edit) I was also forced into a healing role before.

New DM. PLayers and DM DEMANDED they have a healer.

So. I took healing and buffing to 11.

I did a Radiant Servant of Pelor.

And thus all the encounters became very boring as the players couldn't even be touched. Combined with Status and greater status. My cleric could of gone to get coffee in another city. And be back just in time to give the finishing blow.

The Half-dragon fighter and the monk/warlock/enlightened fist were not amused when I soloed fights with.. Just a cleric/radiant servant build. With little to no min maxing.

That was back in 3.5

Never used cursed items in my game. Except as plot devices. The murderous berserker killing women on the edges of civilization is really a former guard for the town, transformed by a cursed sword that forces him into a rage that changes his entire being. Players were level one. They removed the curse in the only way the guard knew how.

Cutting his hand off while he held the sword.

After reading every post, on every page, upon this thread.

I find that the paizo community is full of awesome people.

Also. I find myself confused on how other men are unable to understand how to deal with a lady.

In my gaming group. When we get women in our group, we pretty much tell them that we can be rather... Uncouth. Thats a polite way of putting it. We've had different races, different genders, different sexual orientations, and different degrees of intelligence.

We make sure, that everyone knows we are offensive to all creeds. All religions. All people. Though we cease ANY such actions the moment we realize someone is offended.

We never talk about rape, except in the context of: "That hydra just raped me with all of its heads but one. The one that was spitting ice into the wounds!"

But generally we come from many different types of beliefs and such, and are all hard to offend anyhow.

As far as last straws for me. Never left games forever or gaming groups forever. Only really had this gaming group, and we've survived a very obese genius of a character that defines chaotic neutral in real life to a T. I mean. He was intelligent. Very. Intelligent. Very Charismatic. But he used these gifts to manipulate, toy, and even cruely mentally abuse a certain person in our group. Every game he ran, or played in. The sheer amount of trolling was, amazing. He did other things too. Leaving divets in floors. Breaking things in the bathroom. Stuffing pizza down his pants, and try to trick others into eating. He could be awesome, and he could be horrifying.

It was a pity he tried to be terrible just to screw with people. Because he could be purely hilarious.

Though. Last straws for me was the guy that the obese fellow liked to torment so much. He is guilty of.. Really good dice rolls when no one is watching. It has pretty much reached the point of us not caring, just so games can continue without the collective groan. At least he fails now and again, so we can hide behind our fourth wall of happiness.

When he is DMing. No one picks spells that have saving throws. No one concentrates on buffing our AC. No one tried to worry about anything that involved the DM rolling something, and beating a number we had for him to beat. His games are fun. Its just rules that we know now to do. Only once has he ever slipped up so bad, that the fourth wall crumbled down on my nerves.

It involved my monk. My monk still believed AC worked. It was a pathfinder game, and we were playing rise of the runelords. AC still worked. It was a decent amount of high. The sort of high that people would miss time to time.

Well. My friend, the DM. Doesn't miss. He doesn't miss alot. Oh well. The lucky jerk can have his dice, and kill me all he wants. Things are okay.

Then. At one combat. He isn't using a screen. He just rolls on a book, and we are at a far enough distance to not see. No worries. Combat begins. He says my character gets hit. At which point I look at him oddly. I had been watching him. Because well, he is the DM, I wanted to know the set up.

He didn't roll a single dice. He just said something along the lines of. "Well.. It hits you." We didn't get to find out how much damage it did. As my hand raised and pointed it out right there. We were friends. We can point out mistakes like this without too much rage. I pointed. Then declared.

"You didn't roll a single die!"

He didn't rage. He just stared at the die like he had just picked up a very deadly insect, that could kill in one sting, but it was dead. We laughed about it. He apologized profusely, and we decided from that point on, no matter his protests. That AC didn't matter.

Which really was quite fine. Hit points are fun.

This thread makes me want to start a "Silly Interpretations of Rules" thread.

Though. I'm sure that exists. Somewhere...

Quote:

3: Multiple opponents increases the GM's chance to get a 20 by several hundred percent.

Rolling a 20 is not automatic success. If the character's Stealth check is +25 and the perceiver's Perception check is +4, the perceiver will never see the hiding character. Even if the hiding character rolls a 1 and the perceiver rolls a 20. 26 > 24 so the Stealthy character wins.

If we assume that there are 4 monsters with +10 to their perception checks, they have a 25% chance each of knowing that the stealthy character is there. That means that it is likely that at least one of them will make their perception check if the both roll the same number. The problem is they are probably not going to roll the same number. The stealthy character still has the upper hand and it gets better the higher he rolls.

This. For sure.

I recently constructed a level ten sniper that was hunting a level eight party. He picked up that stealthy sniper advanced talent, and still managed to have a +20 on his modifier. Unfortunately, he wasn't a halfling. Which would of given him his whole +30 modifier. Even with natural 20s, the party couldn't find him. There was almost the "Which way did the arrow come from, and where is it sticking in someone" arguement. Which was solved with a direction of "Probably north".

Also. A rogue with two daggers, that gets two weapon fighting, as well as just attack modifiers can be one hellish thing to fight. Though. That tends to only work with people to flank with.

In regards to a stealth check eventually failing.

It could also be said that using the exact logic, it will eventually succeed wonderfully.

Huh. Just checked my 3.5 books, and it seems you're all right. Ranger, Assassin and Shadowdancer are the only ones who get it now.

Wow. It simply boggles the mind that you have to spend (some would say waste, considering Combat Reflexes and Mobility is among the requirements) 5 levels worth of feats to dip in a different class to obtain the most iconic sneaking ability in the game.

Suddently understand the "Rogues suck" thread more. Just... wow. Rogues are bad at stealth, how intuitive is that conclusion?

Thanks, I guess my wife's character is just gonna suck then. Gonna ask the GM if we can change around Skill Focus: Stealth for Nimble Moves, which seems abundantly useful, and focus on combat and trapfinding.

O.o

Awfully quick to dismiss the rogue. Just because it can't hide in plain sight? That is a silly way to approach a class. You should possibly closely read the Stealth skill again. As I'm quite sure you're missing something. Also. There are tons of modifiers to increase it. Especially if you have the advanced players guide.

My first thread attempting to be made got eaten.. Completely.

So. I'm a player soon to be playing in Legacy of Fire. A rogue cut purse. Now. A little backstory would be that he is a single father, and he HAD, had his child watched over by Haleen. Judging by the description of that character trait, I imagine she would do it for less. So. He was able to earn an honest living. Though, with her disappearance, as described in the players guide, he had to have more expensive people look after his child, while he worked. Thusly, he had to become a thief of sorts just to get back.

Being more on the side of chaotic good, without any religious affinities at this early junction, he finds that tricking bullies and those working in the flesh trade into situations where stealing would be possible.

My main worry, is the constructs that watch over Katapesh. LIke.. What they see, if they can determine exactly what is going on. If they can even be bluffed or hidden from. Information like this I think the thieves of the city would know.

So. Any tips that wouldn't be considered metagaming?

Also. No spoilers of course.

Nicolas Quimby wrote:

The "pure evil" dice just hate the heroes.

How is that different from any other GM dice then?

The World map thing sounds pretty cool too.

Though if Paizo could actually create dice that fills the viewer with regret, and look rather evil. Those would be cool too. Even if its just a d20.

We need some sort of computer dice that sends out holographic images of the players getting slain by a jabberwocky in some interesting yet horrifying way. Determined by a little menu that lets you change the rating, of the die. And if you want blood or not.

Perhaps a d20 that screams out "Haha. Suck to be you." When it rolls a natural 20.

Wicht wrote:

"Herremann the Wise wrote:

...seriously what has been invested but 300 words or less on a wondrous item that didn't make top 32. In dollar terms what do you think that writing is going to be worth?

I would hope somewhere between 3 and 9 dollars.

Which I don't mind giving away for a chance at writing a Paizo module. :)

Um, not sure what Paizo pays for freelancers, but I know what Fantasy Flight used to pay when I did some writing for them.

$.03 a word. At 300 words that is $9.00. However, I'm not sure you get standard per word payment for snippets... though its been awhile, so not sure.

I DEMAND A SET OF DICE!

Nice dice.

With.. Odd symbols.. THAT LOOK COOL!

Yeah. Red and black dice.. With cool symbols. Made of regret and pure evil.

Think that would cover the 9 dollar payment..? XD

Snorter wrote:

Because what constitutes a useful new piece of information is subjective, players are at the mercy of the GM's whim, to be fobbed off with miniscule pieces of blatantly obvious information, with the actual meat of the matter withheld at escalating DCs that are impossible for any sanely-built PC to match...it is not pleasant to have PCs with double-figure ranks in class skill knowledges being told to accept things like a creature's favourite colour as worthwhile info, when you're trying to beat its DR.

No rule can "fix" a bad GM. It just isn't possible.

I never do that.

I always try to give them something useful. Since I do want them to win. I just don't want it to be easy. :P

VictorCrackus wrote:

IN.. well. Many games. The players are up against something that would only be mentioned once or twice in legends, and using the 15+CR rating for the creature...

Start with what the rules specifically say:

"In many[1] cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster’s CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster’s CR or more.[2]"

[1] Which means not in all cases.
[2] Note the "or more." IOW, I, the DM, set the DC, not the book and certainly not the players.

So, let's say that, in my campaign, aboleths are "particularly rare" monsters. Indeed, they're virtually unknown, having vanished from history and general knowledge many centuries ago. If I treated the 15+CR as a hard-fast rule, aboleth knowledge would face a 22 DC. Hardly difficult for a properly skilled character.

There are three solutions:

1. Use the DC, but restrict the information so that only a spectacular success yields more useful data.

2. Up the DC by +10, +15, or more.

3. Rule that aboleth knowledge is so specialized that no mere Knowledge check reveals much data at all.

All that said, there is seldom any good reason to not let a PC benefit from areas in which effort (and skill points) have been invested.

In my next game where I introduce the things from bestiary 2, I think the Qlippoth would probably require summoning/binding a demon and asking IT about them.

Here's my thought on the matter, and this is just my opinion:

These are the days when just about everyone in every gaming group has their own copies of all of the rulebooks. Since most people have their own copy of the bestiary and have read through all of it they are aware of what every creature can do. Since the character that they play doesn't have all of this knowledge, taking a knowledge skill let's them use what they as players already know. I like to think of it as justified metagaming.

There are a couple ways around it. One is like you said and make the DCs of the checks higher. Another is to penalize obvious metagaming by someone who doesn't have the proper knowledge skill. A third option is to use templates or other modifications to change a creature enough so that the party still is a bit clueless on all of its abilities.

I actually am hoarding my copy of bestiary 2.

Only showing it to people I know don't metagame.

There are two people in my group I purposely do not show it to. Aeons and Daemons need to stay secrets. <.<