Wicked Woodpecker of the West's page

Both because you have to be thinking about technicality and thus reading in a technical language standard, and because the general flow of a conversation between people that starts "You regain hit points." and follows with "How many?" leading to an answer of "Zero." would produce a "...huh?" or "that's stupid" response rather than understanding unless those people possessed some special circumstances which have lead them to immediately assume a numerical (you added a number, that number happened to be 0) rather than intuitive (the situation has not changed, thus no (re)gain happened) interpretation of the situation.

Language is bit wonky here, however there are two good arguments against theory that hydra regeneration is fixed according to original number of heads - a) then it would be enough to just state original 18 reg in case o prismhydra rather than specifically use 3xheads b) linking regeneration to heads still on necks is tradition since PF 1e if not DnD 3,5 - but there it was more clearly stated as minimal regeneration was always 5.

"It will "rest" the night and regain HP, at that point it would be presumed to be able to regrow heads with enough HP. "

But RAW heads regrow only after passed Fortitude when regaining HP via Hydra Regeneration not rest.

So, generally in all Hydra type monsters has Hydra Regeneration of simmilar type, let's say:

The stargut hydra has regeneration equal to 3 × the number of heads it has. If a hydra's body is missing any heads and the remaining stumps have not been cauterized, the hydra attempts a DC 29 Fortitude save after it regains Hit Points from regeneration. On a success, one uncauterized stump regrows two heads; on a critical success, two uncauterized stumps regrow into two heads each. The hydra can never grow more than double the number of heads it ordinarily has. The hydra's regeneration only fully deactivates if all its heads are severed and all stumps are cauterized, at which point it dies.

And the description about general regeneration states: Its dying condition never increases beyond dying 3 as long as its regeneration is active.

So... what happens if team gonna decapitate all hydra heads without cauterizing any?
Hydra regeneration equals 3xheads... which is 0 now. But it's still active since no stumps were cauterized... so hydra is in forever limbo of dying but not really dead?

In any case, Thaumaturge is not an official title in any church, but simply a common word in Greek used to describe some people who perform miracles.

In the same way it could be argued since this example was brought down that phylactery is common word in Greek for talisman, or amulet.

Its context that causes the issue and your main beef here seems to be that the gaming concept ISNT the same as the real world term.

I just don't understand why druid is okay but thaumaturge isn't (to pick an example). Whats the difference there in your eyes?

I guess it's matter of scale.

And to the original point, see previous threads trying to get Paizo to change the name of playtest or new classes, such as Oracle, Gunslinger, Warpriest and understand that they will not change the name.

Also using Thaumaturge is not vilifying anyone AFAIK and FYI TTRPGs are not actually tools of the devil like they were decried in the 80s.

I'm not saying it's villyfying. It's just very very very off.

Thaumaturge means something different in essentially every work it's ever been used in. It just kind of means "magic guy".

Well from I understand about this new Thaumaturge he is more anti-magic guy isn't it?

Christianity is the world's dominant religion (I'm not talking about numbers here, I am talking about cultural and political dominance). Thaumaturge isn't being taken from an oppressed minority by the dominant culture - it is a product of the dominant culture.

Yes this extreme political and cultural power hold by Greek Orthodoxy over the world, indeed.

Like PF2 is not really my schtick, and aside of lore aspects and adventures I do not really delve into it's mechanics and stuff, I'm stuck with PF1, so I cannot say if Thaumaturge is working as class. Definitely it's cool concept - and I really liked occultist from 1e, so it's definitely something that should be in a game.

But... why call it Thaumaturge? Like it sounds guys like you took 20 random unused fantasy names and just roll 20 to pick one.

In real world Thaumaturge is title used by Greek Orthodox Church for some of their saints, equivalent of those called in old English Christianity - Wonderworkers. In fact Thaumaturge means precisely - Wonderworker/Mircaleworker. It if anything cleric equivalent I'd say for lack of better suitable terms. (Which makes old Tome of Horrors demonic-worshippers kinda iffy).

It has nothing to do with classic characters that fits supernatural hunter archetype neither occultists proper like Constantine, not hunter like Van Helsing, or Geralt... no one here was called thaumaturge... because well it has nothing to do with concept of thaumaturgy and miracles.

I mean occultist was also bit off, but at least somehow connected by archetype of Occult Detective (pity we're not doing two word class names).

Like literally I heard thaumaturge I think mighty spells, not opposite of that. That's kinda jarring. Maybe consider finding more suitable, archetypical name to suit it.

That can be resolved by chain elements. The most op elements would be depended of others.

Code against poisons would be OK against real life poisons.

Against PF - you get -4 to Str poisons... not really.

"Note that not all class features were Talents that you could choose from freely. Some were Edges that excluded one another. So it was not a 100% customizable system either"

100% customizabilation is impossible anyway in such crunch-class system. Some level of exclusivity is good. I think Talented strike good point for it.

I'd like take with archetypes as done with Rogue Genius - Talented Classes - all special class features put together as list of free talents for martial classess to customise from it.

No strictly bound to archetypes.

Now, I don't want start a flame - but when I read about the last adventure of this 24° Pathfinder campaign, why did I had the unpleasant feeling that the group could be reduced in props, and the whole campaign ruined in that moment by "the GM's PC"?

Well it could go different ways.

We're like absolute badasses in scale of continent. Demonslayers, dragonslayers, saviors of Empire.
Even though our Epic Mission is to let free powerful NPC (goddess of law Arianka who's also Living Saint of God-Emperor) to fight with 40k scale villain, that can wipe out floor with Sigmar, Ulric and rest of pantheon with one hand, way beyond our reach.

And it's freakin' awesome.

So have some trust my friend.

Quickster is clearly a monk who sunk all his feats into additional move speed

Yeah it seems to be.

What!?

Where? Who?

Kazutal, Mohawk deity of Community, Liberty and Safety

Possible. But somehow still at level 8-9 mine PC's did not died so far.

Only few moments when some guys died were enemies touch-channeled by our Jergalite priest, including frost giant boss who died after getting 48 direct damage and failing critically. Quite fine action.

Then while our cleric is our healer, he's not so good in that, our paladin is fight not heal specialised, and our oracle do not heal at all.

I was playing with idea, of making wound separate and spells centered on separate wounds rather than overall abstract health.
But while spells would go easy with that... channels need some rethinking.

not really, I play relatively low with magic items both for PC and NPC, and I trat NPC bit harsher - if they get critical failure on Fortitude Save - they are dead...

for a PC - you'd have to get three 1 in row to insta-die.

And DC is growing per 1 for every 10 points over Con, so it's not that high.

But I prefered to have a risk element that would make players more cautious about fighting even... well low level threats.

Man if making canon was a finder's keeper's affair based off home campaigns I'd start flinging out all sorts of half baked affairs and invoicing Paizo for a paycheck for all my "hard" work.

Now that's an IDEA! ;)

As for the last part, I don't know about you, but a (mostly) full party Crime Syndicate sounds like the perfect set up for an antagonist adventure party...

Let's think it would need some rebranding here and there...

So our strix daemon-worshipper and leader of the ring - now I wonder whether zealot vigilante could work - with him working as secret Inquisitor of... probably Szuriel...

Now rest is bit more problematic, since Owlman was really only one with really interesting agenda... I'd make them just really powerful group of mercenaries.

If I remember correctly this alternative Wonder Woman have shapeshifting monster-lasso... that could be played as summoner, a bit although I suppose Evil Lantern could work here as well.. or maybe as evil spiritualist because fluorescencing ectoplasma.

Ultraman... some kind of... Nephilim Brawler... or maybe Shaitan Genie Brawler...

And quicksters... damn quicksters are broken ;)

Well but consider this Tarik - Arcadia is basically unwritten. There is vague shape of continent, few nations barely mentioned, once city, one specific god and that's all.

It's asking to make our homebrews and MAKE THEM CANON BY FORCE ;)

Heh, TBH now when I went with Owlman joke, I wonder should I add rest of Crime Sindicate of Arcadia XDDD

Although wonder how such build will go with my houserules where every attack above raw constitution score is critical threat risking life and health of hitted person.

Even with racial bonuses? Becasue I suppose that's the point - smartest elf college graduate will be smarter than smartest dwarf college graduate...

I'd bet there will be. Although I'm not sure if from the get go.

But then Mercy feats came with Ultimate Magic... so it's not like they were present from the get go.

Critical failure - CHAOS MAGIC. Random d1000 roll for some other magical effect ;)

But still you cannot replace material component which need to be bought or gathered

As someone whose group plays PF because it isnt 4e, I would very much hate this.

But difference is as I pointed out - that Golarion would still be source of flavour to this elements. It's just it will be flavour sort of independent from mechanics and easy to ignored.

I call bluff or typo on preferring capping stats at 12 and giving an average of -2 on stat modifiers. 3d6 in order, maybe?

I used 4d6 drop lowest, re-aragne although I plan play a game with 4d6 in order. 4 because I assume adventuring characters shall be statistically more gifted by gods.

But I;d rather playd 2d6 in order than arrays based on Class+Background+Ancestry combo.

So now we've got a vesk solarion with an Intelligence of 3, and the player is happy because it was a legitly rolled 3.

3d6 in order. Cruel, but I respect it.

Probably because Tiefling and Aasimar won't be ancestries on their own, but sort of additional templates that could be added to many ancestries of mortals.

I hope they do it this way with all planar elements.

So you could add beastspawn template to your dwarf...

Let's join forces my friend! If PAIZO don't want to flesh Arcadia, we will do it for them, and promote it, until there will be no place in fandom memetic space for other Arcadia than ours!

+2 from ancestry, +2 from background, and +4 from class. The base is 10. 10+2+2+4 = 18 maximum.

There's no point buy in their version; it's just bonuses. (This sounds like what they're probably going with, since they talked about building your stat array.)

Oh, that's just... blah.

Summoning spells, on the other hand, never get new summons when a new bestiary is out, thus locking them with 1st bestiary's monsters (which explains why you can't summon daemons).

TBH that's like easiest thing to tweak? You just add every outsider with proper HD and CR where other outsiders of this level dwell.

In my games nevertheless any summon spell is like... bound to some specific being, so you do not have summon monster I, but summon anarchic dire rat... and you need different ones for different kinds of beings, which also allow to add any new beings.

I'm betting that the final 1st Edition AP might have some daemon love, it just feels appropriate for daemons to feature in the end of an era.

I had two visions of Daemonic heavy AP - one sort of WotC in Galt, where you play future Napoleon Bonaparte... wait better where you play Molthune agents send by general lords to take control over Galt in first proper LN versus CN, anti-chaos campaign.

Molthune after reaching uneasy trust with Nirmanthas, and not wanting to risk Lastwall reactions, decided to estabilish empire around southern side of Lake for which they have to take Druma, and also Isger. For this they want they agents to take power in Galt, and attack merchant princedom from both sides.

But behind constant revolutionary spasms of Galt, there are darker powers creeping, wishing to make CN country, a NE gate to Abaddon.

Variant second:

Arcadian adventure.
You need to unite forces of various native nations and avistani colonizers to fight threat of powerful Empire based on Aztecs, who are lead by fiend-worshipping god-king (in secret exiled strix occultist) who estabilished panteon of dead Azlanti gods serving as a foci for several powerful fiendish lords.
Most prominent of course is chief deity Acavna (maybe bit mispelled to point language distinctions - I hate how Abadar and Desna does not have different names for Tian people (and various Avistani people really).

So you need to negotiate with local agents of Aspis Consortium, Pathfinder Society, with Chelish governor, with native-hating old Linnorm King, with matrons of Iroquoi like civilisation, emperor of Inca like southern empire, and powerful CE (but in specific way) war-shaman of praire tribes - to create army ready to take daemonic hosts of Owlman.
Because Owlman - saw all realities, and he want to end them.

Now I honestly hope there will be no banned arrays in PF2.

They probably not because of Golarion-centrism.
Although I'd not cry if PF2 core rules were more like 4E rules, because now there is tons of Golarion lore to treat as a basic flavour... and it would make homebrewers feel less obliged to use standard lore.

But then feeling cold, bones of mechanics with own flavour can be too much chore for some, me probably included.

I already use critical flops on attack roles.

I just wish spellcasting was by roll either.

Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)

Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)

That's insanse. That would mean you could start game with one attribute at 26.

Given classes had hundreds of powers, this doesn't make sense. The reason players felt like the whole system had less options, is because it did have less options. Want to make a fighter who uses a bow? Can't be done. Gotta make a ranger.

Sure but considering classes brought no lore with them does it even matter. Fighter with bow mechanics is ranger, that's all...

Why would anyone use ivory tiles which are 100 times as expensive as bat guano, and worse they provoke a danger of violent retribution from Garundi Druidic Order of the Tusk?

I forget where I read this, but this is a good test for fumble rules.

Have 10 level 1 warriors each attack a training dummy every round for 2 minutes, resulting in an average of 10 natural 1s. If, at the end of those 2 minutes, any of those warriors are noticeably wounded, your rules need some tweaking. If any of those warriors are dead or dying, scrap your fumble rules and start over.

Oi, but it's not like strict simulationism.

For training with dummies you should literally be able to take 10.

Critical success on a saving throw causes the spell to rebound and affect the spellcaster.

I hope that neither suggestion ever happens. It doesn't sound fun to play.

Make caster rolls for casting, and make defense against spells flat bonus ;)

An option where breaking the code might be the easier method is one thing, no win situations are another, thats the kind of jerk gm behavior that contributes to issues people have with the 1e paladin class.

I'd say situation when you cannot I don't know save someone without breaking Code is one thing. I'd go for it. It's add to drama and heaviness of Code.

As reiterated countless times, Goblins are a monster race specifically created with the intention that they could be killed without qualms. As a whole, they're evil creatures, and the world's better off the fewer there are as they're a tangible danger to everyone around them. Killing a Goblin on sight is not only a justifiable reaction, but usually the right reaction.

In terms of metaphysical Good of Golarion universe killing ANY sentient being on sight is EVIL. Period.

Even orcs which are probably worst of humanoid "evil" races around - cannot be killed on sight.

Sure people will sometimes do it. In Lastwall I suppose quite often.
Still - not justified.

BTW I was thinking about Rauric languages.

For some reason Zakharan languages are also Rauric.
Meanwhie Rauric arose as a mixture of Egyptian, Semitic and Summeric dialects of Earth-slaves, mixed with Ilmaskari language (TBH in such situation I'd rather bet on variant of Ilmaskari full of Earth words but structurally Ilmaskari, but nevertheless.

Midani language and it's kin Calishite Alzhedo are classified into Untheric branch of Rauric family.

But Calishites arose when genie lords conquered southern Faerun - -7800 DR, and they brought Zakharan slaves with themselves.

That's about 3000 years before Imaskari brought Earthlings as slaves to Faerun, and then next 2000 years before Earth divinities managed to reach Faerun and make all this mess. So Unther as separate country - which give rise to Untheric branch of Rauric is what... 5-6 thousands years younger than... Calishite presence in Calimshan...

So.. what the heck?

As far as I know - WoW D20 use D&D Alignment.
So... ;)

Get Rid of Good-Evil Law-Chaos Alignment in favour of Warcraft - Order-Chaos, Life-Death, Holy-Void alignment!!!

I'd not say so. Sure stabbing is easiest form of penetration of unarmed oponent, but slashing... there's is almost always worse distribution of power of strike.

But obviously there is one argument pro swords - not that they are more lethal - because let me say blow from mace into gut will gonna mess your internal organs really really MUCH, but they have reach preference over the most bludgeons, which have shorter hilts.

So swordsman get additional chance to stabe maceman, before he crush his liver. But in terms of strike... not so much.

As a GM, one of the other things I take particular note of is that some of the most violent and/or well-known goblin tribes, like the Licktoad and Thistletop goblins near Sandpoint, are victims of violent human expansion and colonization. The goblin tribes were the original inhabitants of the lands around Sandpoint and several areas of western Varisia, and their elders and warriors were all killed by humans who thought it was perfectly acceptable to kill goblins for the crime of living in lands the humans wanted to occupy. So while the goblin song about turning babies into jam and such is certainly appalling, the context surrounding it is that these goblins in particular are the result of several successive generations who all grew up without the benefit of wisdom or guidance from elder generations due to human aggressions. Assuming that the canon of your particular play-through of Rise of the Runelords included the party

Oh, THIS. If I ever run RoTRL, that will change a lot.

I wouldn't call it anything close to xenophobic. Not letting something with a know history of burning your field, killing animals and EATING PEOPLE isn't, IMO, prejudice but prudent actions to prevent harm to self, and community.

It is xenophobic. But rationally so. No every fear is irrational prejudice, sometimes it's prudent and rational prejudice that works 95% of time.

I agree this is where we disagree: from all the material, it's pretty clear that goblins are almost universally reviled [it's ACTUALLY stated as such]. On the other side, you have a few isolated instances where they are completely awful... It NOT on the same scale IMO. For every quote about goblins being not completely bad people have posted, I've found 3 or 4 that say people want to exterminate them or hunt them for sport.

I would say anyone exterminating indiscriminately or hunting for sport sentient beings, even if usually evil, cannot count as Good in Alignment terms... TBh I'd say even hunting daemons for a sport would still be iffy.

Give them Smite Chaos and send them forth to root out anarchic Paladins of Liberation from glorious Lastwall! ;)

I like idea that Paladins of Liberations are so vehemently Anarchic - they would kill enemy is alternative would be imprisonment.

That's a matter of tweaking Paladin of Valor a bit so he get some axiomatic variants.

If there will be base Paladin he should by in my opinion by any alignment/code depended - and various powers/auras/AL restrictions based on a code.

Now obviously this is partially problem because PAIZO never managed to really paint interesting vision of Law/Chaos conflict.

Easy tweaks to LG paladin - his smite smite demons harder than non chaotic evil.

As blunt trauma was generally less lethal than a deep cut or stab, they could still have slightly lower damage

As stab sure... as slash... I don't know.

Good for people that play Lawful Good Paladins, at least those that had an issue with the old Code. But bad for people who don't want a Core class restricted to a single alignment just to appease people who will refuse to play the game if everyone else isn't forced to accept their view on the nature of Valor and Justice and such.

TBH I just found quite fine Paladin of Liberation on pfsrd, hidden in some weird place, so hey, if there are still LG paladins - just take it, and tweak it a bit.

If there will be PoLs in Core, then HWalsh will just remove and avoid them. Really guys.

This is Pathfinder, hodgepodge of incoherent ideas. Let's stop pretending it has to make any sense in any direction... ;)

TBH I'd like to get Paladins like from Greenwood first drafts of Realms, where they often violently clashed with CG Harpers, and LG and CG relations was only a small bit better than devils and demons ;)

Sure some elements of the Code were fuzzy as hell.
Now - Oath of Truth was in my opinion quite simple and easy.

Now obviously it should be PRINTED IN ROCK that if paladin refusal to lie and decieve would cause ENTIRE GALAXY GENOCIDE - GM has no bloody right to make paladin fall, he did good, sometimes good ends bad ;)