Spring-Heeled Jack

Werebat's page

476 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.

1 to 50 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

This is purely a lore/history question.
The description of Andoran says that all nobles either abdicated or were exiled after their revolution, and their lands and holdings were confiscated by the new state.
I have a campaign book that I want to run that is not a Paizo adventure path, and is not set in Golarion, so I need to transplant it. For geographical reasons, Andoran makes the most sense for the campaign to begin in, but the first adventure features a noble patron who is not all that they seem.
How could I possibly reconcile this with Andoran? Obviously, the "noble" could just be an elected official, perhaps a wealthy merchant. But are there any Andoran nobles still living on their ancestral lands, or at least in their ancestral mansions and keeps? All lands and holding were confiscated, but surely they were not turned out onto the streets - and what of nobles who allied with the revolution from the beginning?
Just fishing for some ideas here. Actual canon would be great, but I understand that it might be hard to come by.
I'll be running this campaign with the Savage Pathfinder rule set, FWIW, but I don't think that fact is terribly relevant to my question.


OMG! Did Paizo even register on the HRC's radar? Did Hasbro BEAT Paizo when it comes to LGBT friendliness? WHAT-*WHAAAAT*?!?

* * * * *

Hasbro, Inc.(NASDAQ: HAS), a global play and entertainment company, has been selected among America’s top corporations for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality by earning a perfect 100 percent score on the Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) 2017 Corporate Equality Index (CEI).

I've been discussing with friends which of the two campaign settings -- Pathfinder's Golarion and D&D's Eberron -- is the more "progressive"? By this I mean which one is more inclusive and inviting for a wider spectrum of players.

For example, Golarion clearly appeals to the LGBTQ community, with NPCs who are specifically LGBTQ.

On the other hand, Eberron has an entire race (changelings), who are by definition genderfluid beings who can choose to be physically male, physically female, and/or of any sexual orientation and gender identity.

Meanwhile, Eberron goes to great pains to explain that no monster is "always" a given alignment, and nonstandard alignments for humanoids such as goblins and orcs seem to be very common, as opposed to Golarion, where goblinoids and orcs are much more likely to be "evil" and savage.

Moreover, Eberron gives these humanoids rich cultural histories, and does not resort to relegating them to being the "other". It would seem that those of different cultural identities in the real would might be more comfortable playing in the Eberron setting, where "humanoid" races (who are thinly veiled fantasy stand-ins for people of ethnicities other than Caucasian) are treated with more dignity and respect. Goblins in Golarion are fire-obsessed lunatics, while in Eberron they once ruled an empire and are in fact the "first people" of the campaign mainland.

What do you think?

Aw... This little guy looks like he really belongs on my Underworld Blood Bowl team!

Not sure where to post this, but this seems like the place.

I write a blog for my Blood Bowl team on another web forum.

I don't usually write anything that even lightly touches on lesbianism, but this recent piece might. I'm just wondering if there is anything in this that the LGBTW community might find offensive (especially lesbians, but you know, whatever). I understand that a lot of lesbians find "lesbian titillation" in writing and other mediums to be offensive.

Note that at least two of the characters are probably bi, and might engage in sex with other species (although this hasn't been more than implied). Also, I guess this piece unavoidably includes hints of incest.

Here it is:

* * * * *

"Sisters!" growled Eugenia the Bog Hag, "It is time!"

One by one, the three sisters took their places around the ring of mushrooms, stones, and eldritch sigils and disrobed, revealing all manner of hump, lump, and imperfection to the moon and midnight forest. Eugenia and Aneira's bony green and ivory frames contrasted even more than usual with Gretchen's pendulous bulk, which was riddled with warty splotches of an even deeper hue than the rest of her bruise-colored hide.

They were alone -- even Groxx and Bogger were forbidden to witness the hidden rituals of the Hag's Sabbath, held only one night of the year at a time when the winds of magic blew most favorably for witches' hexing.

And tonight, there were dark hexes to work.

Together, they writhed obscenely and chanted the foul cant of their loathsome kind, words of gibberish and black malice made sound. Limbs both fat and spindly swung and weaved in dissonant harmony as weird tongues of green flame sprang forth from the ground at the circle's center to lick at the spinning shadows of the hag sisters.

Eugenia cackled as her dark, lank locks slapped wetly on her slack and withered bosom, quickening the pace of her mad but methodical prancing. Gretchen bounded from rock to mossy rock, exhibiting a kind of hulking grace as she danced the circle counter to wild-haired Aneira, whose milky eyes appeared to pose no hindrance to her own ability to whirl and gambol. The green flames grew in height and intensity with the crones' chanting and dancing, and embedded within the ritual was an implicit supplication to the dark power of the hags, some unnamed spirit of chaos or worse.

And then, as the flames reached their crescendo and the sisters' gyrations twined their bodies together in lascivious abandon, a sacrifice was made -- a sacrifice of Toadbrew as well as other things whose particulars are best left unsaid.

Appeased, the sinister force whose aid had been sought gathered itself to do their bidding. Its manifestation sprang simultaneously from the darkness of the wood and the glowing green of the flickering flames, a roiling force of shadow and unnatural light that careened erratically about the sisters and their circle before rising and exploding outward in all directions across the night sky.

Exhausted, the hags collapsed against each other and slumped to the ground, still holding one another's taloned hands.

"It is done," panted Aneira, her cold breath frosting the air above her pale face.

"Aye," gasped Gretchen, the black wires of her hair and thick flab of her body spreading out on the dirt and leaves beneath her. "An' not one moment too soon, neither. I ain't near as spry as I used ta be!"

Eugenia merely laughed in satisfaction and examined the stars above with a gaze that shifted quickly from wondering satiety to cruel calculation. "They should be feeling it right about now!"

And indeed they were. Every soul who had tippled even the slightest sip of Toadbrew in the last day or so was touched by the magic of the hags' patron spirit, it finding even traces of the strange liquor to be swift conduits through which it could easily enter their systems and their psyches.

And as it did, it shut them down, changing their eyes to a featureless lambent green and leaving them just conscious enough to do the bidding of the sisters. Here a blacksmith rose from bed, there a band of brigands ceased their gambling and left their hideout as one, and elsewhere a group of goblin scouts abandoned their subterranean mission to heed the call of a new master. All equipped themselves as quickly and set out as quietly as possible, leaving no word to their loved ones or superiors. Most disappeared into the night and began making their way inexorably to the hags' circle, although none of them had any clear idea of their destination.

Eugenia closed her eyes and grinned toothily as she thought of them -- all of them. No doubt many would fall victim to the dangers inherent in their journey, and others would be restrained by loved ones and other meddling types, but most would make it. With Toadbrew selling the way it was thanks to Girgenti's distribution, it would be enough to assemble an army.

A hag's army.

I'm pondering the possibilities of reskinning a summoner so it appears as a sort of tinker/mechanist/golemancer who crafts constructs that do his bidding.

The eidolon could simply be a golem that the "summoner" constantly tinkers with and makes upgrades to.

"Summoned" monsters would be a little trickier, but could be handwaved as portable mini-bots that -- I don't know, unfolded from storage cubes?

Just a half-baked idea I'm wondering about. Any suggestions?

Any way to run Blood Bowl in the Pathfinder game? I mean, have the party actually BE a Blood Bowl team, with maybe some NPCs or cohorts as the disposable linemen?

Alternately, has anyone run a Dark Sun type game where the PCs were gladiators and had them engage in entertaining combats? I ran one back in 2e D&D where the party started out on a makeshift network of planks and scraps of cloth that abruptly levitated thirty feet into the air at the Sorcerer King's command. PCs had to make the equivalent of Acrobatics checks in order to avoid falling at the surprise levitation, then had to keep making them all through the combat due to the narrow nature of the plankwork. Ropes tied to some of the planks allowed fallen combatants to climb back up to the action -- and avoid the pack of beasts that were released into the arena right after the plankwork levitated into the air!

A player is interested in playing a witch with a Soul Bound Doll familiar.

Seems reasonable to allow the witch PC to take the Improved Familiar feat in order to do this.

But at what level should the SBD become available? For example, the witch would have to be level 7 with the feat in order to take a mephit as a familiar.

Edit: Soul Bound Doll

Back me up here, folks -- this has become a major showdown between myself and the GM of our local campaign.

Playing a non-standard race (just like always), and I know the GM was soured by this from the get-go. As a result, he's being pissy as usual and trying to put the kibosh on everything cool that I can think of for my character to be able to do. Lame!

So here's the sitch: I'm picking my two traits, and one of them is going to be Adopted. GM rules that Adopted only gives me the OPTION of spending my OTHER trait on a trait from a race not my own. In other words, I have to spend BOTH of my traits to get ONE race trait from a race that isn't my own.

OK, I'm interested in keeping the peace and respecting this guy's rulings. Fine. I don't kick about it and just roll with it.

Next thing you know, he's giving me guff about my choice of race trait. I chose to be raised by humans and to select their race trait of Bonus Feat (I need it for my build). He insists that that's not the kind of trait that Adopted gives you. I point to the core rule book where it's clearly listed under Human Racial TRAITS.

I'm obviously correct but this guy just won't let it go. He's being completely unreasonable and not only has he insisted that I cannot take Bonus Feat, but that I'm "locked in" to his weaksauce interpretation of Adopted because I agreed I was taking it for "flavor" reasons only and he's sick of everyone "powergaming".

That's right -- I can't change my traits! I'm stuck with either throwing a trait away or wasting the other trait on one of the human traits from the back of the APG.

How ridiculous is this? The RAW is obviously in my favor and he's pitching a fit because he can.

From what I've seen, Pathfinder encourages martial types to go ranged. Melee martial types don't seem able to compete on real (as opposed to theoretical) DPR -- in large part because of maneuverability issues.

What would happen if we just gave the Pounce ability to everyone?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder was great when it came out. A real relief from the madness that 3.X had descended into. I loved how game play seemed more balanced, and many of the optimization "tricks" were toned down in the core rules and even the first supplement or two.

And then came the APG. And with it, the gunslinger, the alchemist, and the summoner.

In the time since, Pathfinder has begun to groan under the weight of its own cheese. With the new class book coming out, I'm starting to feel just like I did with 3.X when Pathfinder first came out.

And now I see 5th Edition D&D, just about ready to bite into. Simplified. Less optimization-y. A lot like Pathfinder was, once.

Hear that creaking and groaning? Right around the structural supports?

So here's my situation:

Just finishing up a two year P6 campaign (actually a heavily tweaked P8) based on the Age of Ice mod for Civ 4 (it makes for a great campaign), using the Kingmaker kingdom building rule set.

The players are chomping at the bit to end the game, although they had a lot of fun in the earlier months. I love P6/P8, and would prefer to run nothing but; however I'm afraid my players are burnt out on it.

I had previously planned on running Carrion Crown next, possibly by the book or possibly as an E8 game with mythic tiers. Given the players' apparently intense desire to play up to high levels, I was thinking of just running it BTB.

Now, I had told people that I was planning to run CC long ago, and asked the one guy with the subscription to please not read the books if he could avoid it. He had agreed, but then a player in another campaign I play in decided to GM for his friends and (of all the APs out there) went and bought CC to run in his game.

When he bought the first book I reminded him that I had sort of reserved it for my game, and already owned all of the books and some supplemental stuff. He went ahead and bought the rest of the books anyway and has been running it with his friends since.

The one crossover player in all of this is his brother, who recently (due to work schedule) had to chance from the game I play in to the game I run. He has been playing through CC and is on Book 2 now.

So I have a few choices.

I could tell him he's out of luck because I'm running CC and he's already playing in a CC game so he can't play with us.

I could let him play and run CC, just dealing with the fact that one of the players has already played through whatever I'm running.

I could let him play and run something else. Am considering the upcoming Iron Gods AP, but the theme of that one (while it appeals to me) is very close to the theme of a homebrew campaign I'd love to run someday (which would be P8).

Any suggestions? Our group should be 5 people for this new campaign.

One of them has a subscription to the APs and tends to use "bits and pieces" from them all in his own campaign that he runs -- he is also the biggest powergamer out of the whole group and tends to make characters with power levels that make published adventures go rock in the corner and cry. Pick the most powerful/problematic class in the new class book coming out and that's probably what he's going to want to play.

Another is also a powergamer but not to such a degree; he's very smart about character builds and tactics though.

The guy who is currently playing CC is actually a pretty green player, and doesn't have the best grasp of tactics either. In a way I'm not so much worried about him using his knowledge of the AP to gain an edge as I am worried about him getting bored.

The other two guys are competent at building competitive characters and playing them effectively.

So it's close to time for the end of my frozen world campaign, and the PCs will soon be trying to wrest the final part of the Godslayer from the claws of the Great Wyrm White Dragon, Drifa, who serves Mulcarn, the god of Winter who has been ruling the world for the last 1000 years.

If any of this sounds familiar to you, congratulations -- none of my players have realized where I ripped off my campaign plot from yet. If you are playing in my game, please stop reading now.

In short, I need a challenging and memorable encounter with a Great Wyrm White dragon.

This is an E8 Pathfinder game, and we use a few rule variants such as Conviction Points and Plot Twist cards. The party consists of a (very optimized TWFing) dwarven Gunslinger, a (quite well optimized wolf-riding and longbow focused) halfling ranger, a half-orc bombardier (ie nova-enabled) alchemist, a human cavalier, a human bard with a staff that lets him cast Prismatic Ray/Spray a few times a day, and a human oracle of flame. All will be at least 8th level with 15 post-8th level feats by the time they head to Drifa's lair.

CRs aside, in a straight-up fight at close range, the gunslinger and alchemist will obliterate a typical Great Wyrm White Dragon in a round or two without breaking a sweat while everyone else looks on and claps. The dragon might not even be able to act before dying.

I've already done the "flyby attacking dragon" schtick and would like to try something different this time. That worked fairly well, by the way -- went with a mature adult green dragon in a dense forest, so it could easily fly out of visual range every round after making its vital strike attack with a bite (and snatch attempt). It also had a pair of shadow fey dire tiger minions that could charge through undergrowth, pounce, and either turn invisible or dimension door away after attacking (and were protected by the blurring shadow effect in any event). This encounter ended in a draw as the PCs realized they were in dire straits after wounding the dragon, and they chose to parley and strike a deal with the creature rather than deal with the potential repercussions of continuing to fight it.

I see a few obvious possibilities, including the 3.5 Scintillating Scales spell (the PCs are using 3.5 material too so it's certainly fair game). I also want to use an illusion of the dragon sleeping to hopefully draw out a nova from the alchemist and maybe others as well. Some degree of protection from fire sounds like a good idea, and I'm thinking that a clan of kobold thralls might fit this dragon well and serve to rationalize a few encounters before the dragon itself is reached (mostly traps, as the kobolds will try their best to not even be seen by the PCs, let alone try to actually fight them). Maybe the kobolds have a beast of some sort that they can unleash on the PCs on their way to the dragon -- this will be in a land of tundra and broken ice, so any ideas are welcome.

Any suggestions on how to build the dragon? I envision the encounter as taking place inside a great glacial cavern, perhaps high atop a mountain of ice.

Again, I'd like to do something different from flyby attack vital strike; or is that the ONLY option available for an effective dragon encounter when the party includes a gunslinger and alchemist?

What if a GM were to house rule that guns didn't have any misfire or jam chance, but also lost the touch attack at close range mechanic?

Would Gunslingers become a class that no one wanted to play?

Would power gamers who scoured the net for builds involving Reloading Hands on intelligent Ioun Stones and prehensile beards look elsewhere for character concepts?

I'm just wondering what would realistically happen. I've got a Gunslinger IMC who gets in 5-6 attacks at level 8 and has only had his pistols misfire -- once or twice, all campaign.

I don't mind the flavor of the class but don't like the fiddly rules associated with misfire that seemed designed to balance the fiddly touch AC rules (which I also do not like).

Any suggestions on what could be done to further balance the class after these house rules were implemented would also be welcome. Remember, I want things simple, with few fiddly rules that clever players can come up with ways to effectively min/max into OP-land.

I like the IDEA of the Downtime rules, but they look easy to "game" in silly ways. I'm trying to build a thieves' guild and can't help but notice that raising an army of soldiers would be more profitable (+5 gp per day with soldiers instead of +2 gp per day with scofflaws).

Maybe I'm just confused on how to earn money with an organization. How DO you do that, anyway?

Let's say I have a modest thieves' guild with one team each of scofflaws, cutpurses, and soldiers (enforcers). The scofflaws add +2 gp, the cutpurses add +3 gp, and the soldiers add +5 gp.

Does that mean my guild earns 10 gp per day total?

Does the guild have to make an "earnings" check once per day, with a +10 to the roll from these teams, and then earn whatever the check is divided by 10 in gp every day? If this is the case, what is the "earnings" check based on? One of the guildmaster's skills?

I feel like I'm missing something important.

I like the IDEA of the Downtime rules, but they look easy to "game" in silly ways. I'm trying to build a thieves' guild and can't help but notice that raising an army of soldiers would be more profitable (+5 gp per day with soldiers instead of +2 gp per day with scofflaws).

Maybe I'm just confused on how to earn money with an organization. How DO you do that, anyway?

Let's say I have a modest thieves' guild with one team each of scofflaws, cutpurses, and soldiers (enforcers). The scofflaws add +2 gp, the cutpurses add +3 gp, and the soldiers add +5 gp.

Does that mean my guild earns 10 gp per day total?

Does the guild have to make an "earnings" check once per day, with a +10 to the roll from these teams, and then earn whatever the check is divided by 10 in gp every day? If this is the case, what is the "earnings" check based on? One of the guildmaster's skills?

I feel like I'm missing something important.

"Wizard's core!"

It isn't exactly an RPG, but it's close and it is a lot of fun -- Blood Bowl!

If anyone wants to check out my team blog for Wyrmwood, here it is!

Wyrmwood is an Underworld team, which is a mix of goblins and skaven (think ratmen with attitude) who are addicted to warpstone and prone to mutation. In Wyrmwood's case, they get their warpstone by drinking a toxic beverage called toadbrew, which is basically absinthe that has been so infused with warpstone that it glows green.

P.S. I've also put together an atmospheric bit of audiovisual portaying a blood bowl pub here.


Furious Focus helps you "when you are wielding a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon in two hands (and using the Power Attack feat)".

The lance is a two-handed weapon that you can wield in one hand while mounted.

Can you use Furious Focus while wielding a lance one-handed (because you are on a mount)?

It IS still a two-handed weapon, even though you are using it one-handed, so my guess is that you can.

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Raise Dead is a "healing" spell, and "healing" has a positive connotation -- it strongly implies "fixing" a "problem".

But what about necrophiliacs? Might they be offended by Paizo's inclusion of this spell in the Pathfinder game, and their use of the "healing" descriptor? The clear implication is that there is something "wrong" with being dead, which implies that there is something wrong with loving the dead as well.

When someone insists that there is something "wrong" with one's love, because of something that individual has no control over, isn't that offensive?

Should Paizo have been more sensitive?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The word "baleful" has certainly got many negative connotations -- "deadly", "pernicious", and "evil", to name a few.

But what about furries, and others with fantasies (sexual or not) about being permanently turned into animals? People who indeed feel that they are trapped in a body of the wrong species? Couldn't they find the label "baleful" to be offensive in this context?

Should Paizo have been more sensitive in naming this spell?

I was wondering if the Girdle of Opposite Gender was offensive to transgender players, as it is officially listed as a "cursed" item. Think about the implications. Couldn't Paizo be considered to be insensitive to the TG community in its official consideration of this item as "cursed"?

I'm thinking of running the Carrion Crown adventure path in the future, and considering several ways of running it. Here they are:

1. E8, combined with Mythic Adventures. Carrion Crown goes to 15th level, and E8+20 with five Epic Tiers roughly translates to level 15. I would simply award one mythic tier for every book of the AP that was completed, which might skew things in favor of the PCs in the early books (2nd to 4th). In this scenario I would allow the PCs to use 3.5 sourcebooks such as the Magic Item Compendium. Of course I would also allow Paizo material other than the core.

2. Normal Pathfinder (or "E20"), allowing 3.5 material as well as all Paizo sourcebooks.

3. Straight up Pathfinder, allowing every Paizo sourcebook there is (but no 3.5 material).

4. Pathfinder, but core only -- and I mean just the original Pathfinder. I've seen so many arguments about (and seen first hand examples of) the three "new" core classes in the APG (alchemist, gunslinger, magus) that I wonder if they would muck with the AP. Thanks, but no thanks to touch-attacking, nova-ing wunderkinds that laugh at traditional encounters.

5. Pathfinder, allowing APG etc. but with some modifications to (for example) the APG classes. Maybe allow gunslingers but get rid of the joke "drawback" problems with firearms in exchange for removing the uber touch attack at range ability (for example).


According to the Fly rules, you can turn 180 degrees with a DC 20 Fly check and an expenditure of 10 feet of movement.

You can also turn 90 degrees with a DC 15 Fly check and an expenditure of 5 feet of movement.

Does anything prevent a flier from making TWO DC 15 Fly checks (spending five feet of movement twice) to make TWO 90 degree turns during their movement?

I have a few questions.

An old green dragon can cast Plant Growth 1/day as an SLA, and also has Woodland Stride.

A close reading of the rules SEEMS to indicate that the dragon's Woodland Stride would not enable it to move unimpeded through an area of Plant Growth (Woodland Stride specifically says that "overgrown areas that have been magically manipulated to impede motion" still affect the dragon).

Now, how high up does Plant Growth run? The trees it affects could be very tall.

Is the dragon's flight speed limited to 10' (assuming it is Large or larger) while flying OVER the Plant Growth area?

How high up? The height of the trees? How tall are the trees after they have been Plant Growthed?

From da rules:

"Note that all items have prerequisites in their descriptions. These prerequisites must be met for the item to be created. Most of the time, they take the form of spells that must be known by the item's creator (although access through another magic item or spellcaster is allowed). The DC to create a magic item increases by 5 for each prerequisite the caster does not meet. The only exception to this is the requisite item creation feat, which is mandatory. In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting its prerequisites."


"Creating magic armor has a special prerequisite: The creator's caster level must be at least three times the enhancement bonus of the armor. If an item has both an enhancement bonus and a special ability, the higher of the two caster level requirements must be met. Magic armor or a magic shield must have at least a 1 enhancement bonus to have any armor or shield special abilities."

It would seem that nothing here restricts a character from making an item with a higher bonus than 1/3 their caster level, it simply adds a new prerequisite. If you don't meet the prerequisite, it's a +5 on the check to make the item.

Is that correct, or is there some other clarification that I am unaware of?

The Status spell mentions that "if a subject (of the spell) leaves the plane, or if it dies, the spell ceases to function for it."

Consider this situation:

Party cleric casts Status on the rest of the party. Later on (before the spell expires), most of the party uses the Shadow Walk spell to travel to a nearby location (about a mile or two away). One PC (a bard) is left behind.

When the cleric returns to the PMP, can he use the previously cast Status spell to determine the location and condition of the bard?

In effect I am asking if ceasing to be on the same plane as the caster results in a suppression or an ending of the spell. The RAW says "ceases to function", but what does that mean?

When a party is shadow walking via the spell, Shadow Walk, what sorts of things do they encounter?

Obviously tenebrous things like Shadows, Greater Shadows, etc. live in the Shadow Plane. However, assuming the PCs stick to the border of the shadow realm, they are walking through areas that roughly correspond to areas on the PMP.

Do these areas affect encounters on the shadow border? For example, if there is a forest full of elves between Point A and Point B in the PMP and the party uses Shadow Walk to cross from Point A to Point B, at some point it walks through the elven forest. Does the party encounter nothing but shadows, tenebrous worms, etc. or will it encounter some elves? Some sort elves with a "shadow template"?

Is there a shadow template in PF? Was there one in 3.5?

How often do you check for encounters on the shadow plane? Same as usual or more often because the party is traveling a greater distance in a short time?

Let's say a PC has the Leadership feat and a trusty cohort.

Once attaining cohort-have, is the GM responsible for making sure the player finds extra treasure in order to outfit the cohort?

At 11th level, a PC should have about 82,000 gp in gear. If they have found 100,000 gp in loot, but give 50,000 gp of that loot to their cohort, are they right in complaining to the DM that their character is low on gear and that he needs to make with the loot?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How cheesy is it for a GM to give a monster a feat or special ability that makes their natural armor bonus count as a deflection bonus for the purposes of defending against firearm attacks?

Say, an ancient dragon?

What should a DM say when a monster like this is encountered and the gunslinger player begins howling about how his +1 Distance shotgun should be blowing right through the dragon's hide? "There may be things going on here that you don't know about"?

I can understand the point about it being kind of lame to tailor encounters around party configuration, but it would seem that in a world with firearms in it dragons would quickly go extinct unless they DID tend to take a "bulletproof skin" feat.

So, by the book, a crafter can add powers to an existing magic item. This works slightly differently from the way it did in 3.5, where the lower cost ability added would cost 150% what it ordinarily would. In PF, all further enchantments after the original cost more.

So, let's assume Wizard A and Wizard B (both capable of crafting wondrous items).

Let's also assume Enchantment X, and Enchantment Y. Enchantment X is worth 2000 gp, and enchantment Y is worth 6000 gp.

Wizard A puts Enchantment X on his boots, and then later on he also puts Enchantment Y on the same boots. He spends half the value of Enchantment X in order to do this, and then 75% (half of 150%) of the value of Enchantment Y. 1000+4500=5500 gp.

Wizard B puts Enchantment Y on his boots, and then later on he also puts Enchantment X on the same boots. He spends half the value of Enchantment Y in order to do this, and then 75% (half of 150%) of the value of Enchantment X. 3000+1500=4500 gp.

Wizard A now owns a pair of magic boots worth 11000 gp. Wizard B owns a pair of magic boots that do EXACTLY THE SAME THING, but they are worth only 9000 gp.

Now let's say that Wizard A and Wizard B both get killed in combat with a giant slug. Their rogue friend survives the combat and collects their magic boots. He goes to sell them because he can't use them. What can he sell them for?

If the two pairs of boots sell for different amounts of money, how does the person he sells them to know which one is worth more?

The question is in the title. As if gunslingers weren't laughing enough at ancient dragons already.

A glove of storing costs 10000 gp.

Putting an additional power into a magic item increases its value by 150% of the normal value of the less expensive item.

So if I want two gloves of storing, I can have them crafted for 25000 gp (by the book).

Then I can use them to snap, pop, reload, snap, pop, rotate, and TWF shoot a pair of pepperbox pistols.

Just making sure all of this is kosher with the rules.


This is something of a half-baked idea, but that's why I'm starting a thread on it.

You've probably read things like this advising GMs to NEVER use boss monster encounters because they do not "work" in PF. It's generally good advice, too -- it can be hard to create a lone boss encounter that isn't either a total pushover or a real TPK threat.

One of the big reasons for this is the action economy, and the fact that a lone boss will have a limited number of actions per round when compared to the typical party. For the boss to have "staying power" to last more than a couple of rounds (if that), it would have to be so over-CRed that it might crush a PC with a single attack. Wise GMs should instead set up climactic battles with a less powerful boss and his minions.

That's generally good advice by the numbers, but -- what if you WANT a lone boss encounter? They're a staple of video games and many other aspects of the fantasy genre. Does EVERY dragon have to have an entourage of lizardmen or ogres lounging around with them all of the time?

I propose the development of a template -- the "boss monster" template -- that could be added to a normal creature in order to make it serviceable as a lone boss monster.

From what I can see, such a template might need to do a few things:

* Increase the survivability or "lifepan" of the monster in a fight
* Even out the "action economy", one way or another
* Possibly lower damage potential in order to avoid high risk of TPK

That's all I can think of for now and the kids are screaming, so I'm going to go. Will be back to see what ideas people come up with.

I have a halfling ranger IMC who rides his animal companion around (it's a wolf).

He was interested in getting a mist wolf as a cohort. I wondered if there might be a feat or something that allows you to take a magical beast as an animal companion. It seems like this would be simpler than trying to make a magical beast cohort.

What's a mist wolf? Well, it's an old D&D monster, updated here:

Mist Wolf

I run an E8 campaign. One of the PCs is a halfling ranger who rides around on his wolf animal companion while shooting a longbow.

The PC's player has started to think that Multishot, which he took a while back, is overpowered. He asked me if I would let him swap it out for a less powerful feat (I think he feels that the other characters aren't getting to do as much damage as he does).

Part of the issue is that the alchemist in the party recently started using his feats to make the longbow an effective secondary weapon for himself. He also recently took multishot.

What should I do?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was wondering about playing an awakened wiwaxia with wuxia powers. I figure I'd go with monk because a wiwaxia cannot wield weapons and monks don't need limbs to make their attacks. Also the monk speed boost would enable a wiwaxia to walk about. Maybe it would use a wagon to wander the wide world with the rest of the party, wherever they want to go. Or they could just be carried about as a wiwaxia doesn't weigh much.

What do you think? Would you be willing to weave such a character into your campaign world? Or would you not wish to allow it because you'd worry that it might be too weak?

At what point do GMs out there adjust encounter CRs?

For example, my campaign is set in a frozen world, and everyone knew this when they made characters. As a result, the party predictably includes members such as a Flame Oracle, an alchemist specializing in fire bombs, a ranger built to fight creatures with the Cold subtype, plenty of flame weapons, etc.

When I set up an encounter with, say, ice trolls, I tend to lower the CR by 1 or 2 because the party is so atypically well prepared to fight such monsters.

Does this sound reasonable, and under what circumstances do others make these adjustments?

Also, is it reasonable to adjust encounter CR based on how many sourcebooks are allowed in a game? Obviously, a party made from core vanilla ONLY is going to be less powerful than a similarly optimized party where all 3.5 and PF sourcebooks are allowed. At least for those encounters with core, non-retooled monsters, is it reasonable to adjust effective CR based on the increased power level of the PCs?

I had a simple idea to deal with TWF gunslingers, but I wonder if it would have ramifications beyond what I'd be using it for.

What if one were to simply houserule that Rapid Shot and TWF cannot be used in conjunction with each other?

The TWF gunslinger is the only character I can think of who would care (other than maybe the TWF crossbowman -- do any of those exist?). Their reaction would be to stick with TWF and drop Rapid Shot. The end result would be one less attack per round. Unfortunately gunslingers would still be tempted to get extra arms or animated beards in order to spin the barrels on their pepperboxes.

Would this balance the build?

Again, would it unintentionally wreck anything else in the game?

The 2nd level Protection From Arrows spell is nice, but it gets pretty useless pretty early on.

I've looked and maybe I'm just blind, but I can't see another spell that would protect someone from magic arrows (or other magic ranged attacks).

Is there such a spell anywhere?

Edit: I mean a spell that offers the same sort of protection (DR 10), but not DR 10 (magic) which means every arrow fired from a +1 bow blows right through it.

Is it just me, or is there a subtle pressure on the DM to never have the enemy try to sunder a PC weapon? There's obvious reasons why the players would rather have monsters try to hit THEM than hit their weapons, so I won't go into that now. But I do get the feeling that players sort of operate on the assumption that the enemy will never try to sunder their weapons (or break their equipment). Maybe it's just IMC.

I even get a sort of vibe that having the monsters try to sunder weapons would be the equivalent of the DM "going nuclear", as described years ago by a WotC employee discussing overpowered spells like Time Stop and Gate. The idea was that these spells were "balanced" because players typically didn't abuse them for fear that the DM would start using them on the players, and vice-versa.

Except in the case of sundering weapons, the PCs don't have the option to retaliate in kind. I mean, sure, they COULD start sundering the weapons of the enemy, but that would mean destroying some of the loot they get from defeating them. And what does the DM care? The next batch of villains will have brand new weapons.

Any thoughts or comments on this dynamic?

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My DM is being super lame (as usual) and has disallowed a really cool build I had for my cohort.

They were going to be a Scout (but the 3.5 Scout not the lame one from PF that is really just a kind of rogue, the weakest class in the game).

They were going to be a goblin who rode around on a medium mount (goblin dog or maybe a wolf).

Here's the thing, I got this super cool trick I thought of all by myself that was going to help me kick my damage into the stratosphere. Get this because it is awesome and it's too bad my DM is such a lamer who said it would apparently break his campaign.

I pumped the Ride skill through the roof. Now I start the combat by riding my mount up to the enemy and stabbing them with my short sword. Kind of meh but I get my sneak attack damage in because I moved.

Next round is when the magic happens. I dismount as a free action, entering a square in front of the mount. Then I remount as a free action (remember I pumped Ride) and then dismount again as another free action but on the OTHER SIDE of the mount, and right next to the enemy! I have now moved more than ten feet but still get ALL iteratives with TWF and ALL of those attacks get the scout sneak attack damage!

I know -- super cool, right? But of course my lame lame DM said it was "overpowered" and isn't going to allow it. Blah blah blah, whatever. I thought the DM was never supposed to say no, they were supposed to determine difficulty.

Well I just thought I would post my cool build here just in case any of you do not have super lame DMs. Get them to agree to the 3.5 Scout and you are *IN*!!!

1 to 50 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>