Search Posts
I would give him the template with the following changes. DR/silver equal to half his character level. No stat adjustments. Honestly I have trouble seeing how that will break the game and could make it a lot more fun for him. Edit: Also limit natural attacks to the same limit as eidolon.
You need crusaders flurry and Weapon focus still. All the same you might prefer warpriest for the spellcasting.
They did just hire a new developer -- or, at least, they were advertising for one.Still looking for one, so if you know somebody who's interested, tell them to send a resume in. :D Is there a particular reason this doesn't say the pay? Many jobs I look at give at least a ballpark.
Would love one! Williamhamrickatlive.com
James! When playing Dragon Age Origins who is your favored Dwarven King choice?
I don't buy debuffs being considered the worst kind of magic. Turning an enervation would be great. Charm person. Dominate. Irresistible dance. I know it is no fun for the caster but no worse than another caster can do and further the monk needs the love! I would give him an additional stunning fist power to give 40% spell failure.
D'oh, had it confused with precise strike and inspired strike. Ah it happens to us all!
Daring Champion does have one key weakness though; it can not get Signature Deedyou can't use it on opportune parry and riposte I must be forgetting something....why not?
3) All you need to get Improved Familiars is to qualify for the feat. On your note! Sorry if I came across as putting you down. I actually knew you could have been right depending on what you meant but was trying to keep my post short.
3) All you need to get Improved Familiars is to qualify for the feat. You might have made a mistake here. From ACG"A shaman uses her level as her effective wizard level when determining the abilities of her spirit animal. A shaman can select any familiar available to wizards to serve as her spirit animal, although her spirit animal is augmented by the power of her chosen spirit. Once selected, the spirit animal cannot be changed." Now I am someone who really wants improved familiar to apply as I think it would allow the shaman to pick thematically appropriate choices for someone who deals with spirits to get her magic(a kami for instance!) but reading that text I was in doubt about the ability to do so myself.
I know this is thread necromancy but where in the rules does it say a summoner has to summon creatures of his alignment? I know summoning a Babau makes it an evil spell but I thought only clerics where restricted by alignment spells. Is this an error or am I missing something?
Flumphs would make a great PC in your game! Yes or No?
What makes you believe this is the bottom?
....Any chance of Unspeakable Futures? ;)Well, if this product sells ten times the average Campaign Setting book, I'm sure we'll eventually get an Ultimate Technology. Fair enough! I am just very intrigued...it sounds awesome! Very much a sort of storytelling I enjoy and frankly isn't served all that well by RPGs out there now. :)
Lets see, i've never in my life ordered anything from Starbucks (and i once lived in Seattle!) and i cant afford to eat breakfast at McDonalds or shop at Trader Joes i dont want an iphone, nor need one, i also have never had Cable, like ever, in 37+ years. I am not quite this broke but unless you can't afford a home then get netflix!(unless you just dont like tv.)
I want more! The beastmorph alchemist is probably the best fit as it is for a PC who fleshwarps himself but it is not perfect. Love the idea of a character who looks at how outclassed humans are compared to the dangers of the road and tries to assimilate those dangerous monsters abilities.edit:also thanks for the long answer!
Hello James! Well in inner sea magic it mentions the Oenopion Fleshforges(nex) do fleshwarping but they are never really mentioned elsewhere. In bestiary 4 is treated like an exclusively monstrous thing. What is up with this? Is one or the other in error? :( I like human fleshwarpers. BTW is it "always evil"? The lesser variant?(with temporary modifications...I think called fleshcrafting) Also is it possible for a fleshwarper to create different combinations other than the normal ones? For instance a drow turned into a new creature instead of a drider by some high priest of haagenti or whatever.
Well, if this product sells ten times the average Campaign Setting book, I'm sure we'll eventually get an Ultimate Technology. ....Any chance of Unspeakable Futures? ;)
Is there anything preventing a paladin from worshiping an evil deity? Actually the books have paladins who worship Lawful neutral deities such as Abadar.
Hello James! Why do you dislike Book of Nine swords? To go a bit further would you ever consider "martial magic" for say the Magus? Using a spell slot to for instance teleport behind each enemy and making a single attack against each at his highest base attack bonus?Because it drifted too far from the traditions of the game I enjoy, and because I'm not of the opinion that the way to fix martial classes is to make them spellcasters under a different name. That is a fair assessment I think. You didn't answer the second question though! To go a bit further would you ever consider "martial magic" for say the Magus? Using a spell slot to for instance teleport behind each enemy and making a single attack against each at his highest base attack bonus?
No. If he is honestly following his god's ideals he will fall. If not he is being chaotic and will fall.
Hello James! Why do you dislike Book of Nine swords? To go a bit further would you ever consider "martial magic" for say the Magus? Using a spell slot to for instance teleport behind each enemy and making a single attack against each at his highest base attack bonus?
See I assumed the opposite. I figured most would know this helps the community and be comfortable but I can see it going the other way. Still your solution is definitely a great one.
James! Who initially designed the gunslinger? I think it was one of the more innovative things to come out of paizo and I think the whole grit thing really works with what it is trying to reproduce so I was just curious. Also who did summoner? It is one of my favorites because I always wanted to be able to play say a succubus as a PC and this gets me as close as anything.(even though I realize it is probably the class many are real disappointed with) Anyways I hope you find a bit of fun during your days. Good luck and thanks for being cool.
Sean I am certainly interested in this although my main question is one of prince. Would you be willing to record these conversations you have one on one and either sell them or put them up for free? It strikes me that although the advice would not be personalized it might be helpful in the way your advice post or your posts as a judge are. People can see the mistakes that some people have made and check themselves for them.
Hey James! Random question for you. If a character in your game was a up and coming god with the domains and all that. Had a church and had the worshipers going on when the character dies of old age or violence. What becomes of them? Do they stay a quasi deity or just become a petitioner? Thanks James! Something that has sort of bugged me for awhile for some reason.
Who are some evil deities who are usually cheerful or friendly?(if there are any. The possibility I find intriguing at least.)
Doesn't seem cheesy to me really. Would probably go with a chakram. FAQd though.
You are right you did answer. No idea how I missed it! I ctrl+f for bull! :\ Thanks for the answer though!
Sorry James but I think my question got lost in the shuffle last page James! Does bullfighting go on in golarion? If so where? Also! Question from several pages back...you mentioned you have had evil parties. I have heard many people around the internet talking about how that rarely works. Any advice on how to have a successful game? My only real thought so far is have lots of things premade to bond the party together.
James! Does bullfighting go on in golarion? If so where?
" It's been pointed out to me that the GM is being a little bit of a dick. He could, after all, tailor the game to match the players' skills. He offered that option to the players, giving them opportunities that, while not as lucrative as adventuring, suited their group build, like guarding a fixed location or scouting a bandit camp. The group refused and went on an adventure to rescue a group of villagers from a cult" The thing is they could handle an adventure if the GM would adapt. It is just like offering CR appropriate challenges. You need an adventure that is challenging but not impossible for the group. This group should probably have its APL adjusted downwards a level or two is all.
Agree completely on shielded ally. He is not within the eidolon's reach.I am not sure you are reading that right. The names of the abilities do seem to suggest that but "At 16th level, as a swift action, the synthesist and his fused eidolon can split into two creatures: the synthesist and the eidolon. Both have the same evolutions. The synthesist emerges in a square adjacent to the eidolon if possible. All effects and spells currently targeting the fused synthesist-eidolon affect both the synthesist and the eidolon." Considering they both have evolutions it seems to me he is fused. The other side of that I see is it calls it the synthesist and his eidolon. Might be FAQ worthy.
Fixation is, that my mates don't accept other forumer's "opinion" on the subject. They say 6 uses a day is 6/5 of the base price, and so on, so 10 use is double price. They state, that the guide can be read that way, 1 charge is X so 10 is 10X. The trouble is there are no rules for new prices. There are guidelines to help GMs but if your GM made a different call than what the guidelines say then why should staff answer such a question? He is doing exactly as the book suggests. If his decision is silly then calmly explain why or find a good GM.
James just to clarify I didn't really mean I believe you know the rules worse than the design team. :) The reason I would put those sorts of caveats there is so that hopefully those who wish to use it as ammunition in their arguments would hopefully not point to that post but those who wanted a sensible ruling for a home game could look at it and say Hmm that is sensible I think I will use it! Sorry to have implied otherwise! Honestly it would be sort of silly to seek out your rulings if I really thought they were bad. But still I will refrain from doing that.
So if I was going to "use" your post in an ongoing argument I would say hey this is what James Jacobs said. He is not a part of the rules team so this well may be a house rule but I tend to find his responses to be level headed so any gms who need a decision right now could use this until the FAQ team gets around to it. Now would you still be uncomfortable with that? If so I won't do it...Just trying to figure out what is helping other people vs making James mad!
Honestly if your DM rules the arrows don't work then I think you ought to invest some feats in melee so you have options when the arrows don't work. I know everyone here says they would rule differently but they are not your DM and this guy is. If you want to game with this group you must adapt to this groups rules! :)
Because the cleric's powers only work if the cleric is devout. It doesn't matter if the deity cares or even knows about the cleric. If the cleric isn't devout, the cleric doesn't get to do cleric things. And one big way the game measures if you're devout in this case is by alignment. If you're not the same alignment as your cleric, you're simply NOT as devout as you could or should be. If you're within 1 step, you're on the edge and are in danger of straying from the religion you purport to be a worshiper of, but...I agree in most cases but this particular God has no real philosphy to speak of it seems. He is called the blind idiot god and may not even be aware of his own existence. That is the source of my confusion as to why the within a step of deities alignment rule would apply in this case. :)As for deities not caring... that's true for a couple of deities, mostly the Outer Gods like Azathoth and Yog-Sothoth, but the VAST MAJORITY of deities actually DO care about their worshipersSomething has been making me wonder for awhile now....Why do clerics of Outer Gods have to be within two steps of their deity? I imagine that mostly chaotic evil people would be inclined to worship them because why not go for a nicer god but I have trouble imagining why Azathoth for instance would deny a cleric spells if he shifted to neutral evil or whatever. Thanks James! That actually clears up a lot for me about how it works! I always assumed it was the God saying NO! but this makes sense of several questions I have had.
As for deities not caring... that's true for a couple of deities, mostly the Outer Gods like Azathoth and Yog-Sothoth, but the VAST MAJORITY of deities actually DO care about their worshipersSomething has been making me wonder for awhile now....Why do clerics of Outer Gods have to be within two steps of their deity? I imagine that mostly chaotic evil people would be inclined to worship them because why not go for a nicer god but I have trouble imagining why Azathoth for instance would deny a cleric spells if he shifted to neutral evil or whatever. I agree in most cases but this particular God has no real philosphy to speak of it seems. He is called the blind idiot god and may not even be aware of his own existence. That is the source of my confusion as to why the within a step of deities alignment rule would apply in this case. :)
As for deities not caring... that's true for a couple of deities, mostly the Outer Gods like Azathoth and Yog-Sothoth, but the VAST MAJORITY of deities actually DO care about their worshipers Something has been making me wonder for awhile now....Why do clerics of Outer Gods have to be within two steps of their deity? I imagine that mostly chaotic evil people would be inclined to worship them because why not go for a nicer god but I have trouble imagining why Azathoth for instance would deny a cleric spells if he shifted to neutral evil or whatever.
Why would detect magic be silly to include? It seems pretty broad to me and it seems that creatures with bloodlines etc are pretty likely to be under the effects of magic and thus valid targets. It is still only a mildly useful feat but I wouldn't go so far as silly.
No again it is the "when" part of the feat that matters here. When you use Detect Evil to detect a creatures alignment. Detect Evil does not check a creatures alignment it detects evil auras. So I think that if nothing if detected detect expertise is useless. So that is why I disagree with "regardless of the results of your check. " part of your interpretation.
I was pretty close to agreeing with you but.... When you use any of the spells listed in this feat's prerequisites to detect a creature's alignment... you have a chance I think it is saying when you detect someones alignment you get a chance. If someone is not giving off that evil aura then you have not detected their alignment in the sense meant by Detect evil.
I honestly don't understand this hostility toward the idea. Taxes can be eminently escaped by moving to, say, Guernsey, already. If nothing else, a rich enough person can set up an armed camp in any of dozens of poor countries, meaning they don't have to pay taxes for anyone. Nor do I understand the idea that everyone trying for a new life in seasteading is a complete and utter moron. The people who settled the US weren't, and they took enormous risks in a similar vein. They had to contend with no societal framework, violence from hostile natives, and so on. But then, I am sure many people said stuff about their coming rude awakening. These people are willing to take risks, and think they can make it work. Let them. We, as a species, are only served by having people who want to reduce conformity.You say that there was no societal framework but there were also hostile natives? Did the natives have no society? Indeed I would say that they did and were hostile because the settlers were making war upon them. No I am arguing that there was a societal framework in place and that the settlers prospered from the resources formerly held by that framework. It is a stark contrast with the seasteaders who have no natives to kill and land to take. Harder on the seasteaders. Also the settlers obviously had a societal framework. Either the society they came from or religious notions or both. It is why we have common law today.
I wish you would think this over. You are literally the best for being such an open book for us and doing so much to promote gaming but I love your sensible and smart answers and I think loads of others do too. I hate to see that ruined because some people don't know how to act like a grown up. BUT OTOH you do more already than I might be willing to put up with so.....thanks for all you do either way and I totally understand. PS sorry if this is off topic. :( I just wanted to let you know. No more posting about it! Also I have been meaning to ask a question of you! You mentioned playing in an evil campaign. Any advice of how those ought to be run? I see lots of talk about them being a Bad Idea or is it just getting people with a decent head on their shoulders?
I honestly don't understand this hostility toward the idea. Taxes can be eminently escaped by moving to, say, Guernsey, already. If nothing else, a rich enough person can set up an armed camp in any of dozens of poor countries, meaning they don't have to pay taxes for anyone. Nor do I understand the idea that everyone trying for a new life in seasteading is a complete and utter moron. The people who settled the US weren't, and they took enormous risks in a similar vein. They had to contend with no societal framework, violence from hostile natives, and so on. But then, I am sure many people said stuff about their coming rude awakening. These people are willing to take risks, and think they can make it work. Let them. We, as a species, are only served by having people who want to reduce conformity. You say that there was no societal framework but there were also hostile natives? Did the natives have no society? Indeed I would say that they did and were hostile because the settlers were making war upon them.
Thanks for working your butt off for my benefit!
You might also try Greater Eldritch Heritage orc...both of these are decent but it isn't potion drinking.I am mostly putting it out there if you don't want to worship Urgathoa. Strength of the Beast (Ex): At 9th level, you gain a +2 inherent bonus to your Strength. This bonus increases to +4 at 13th level, and to +6 at 17th level. Power of Giants (Sp): At 15th level, you may grow to Large size as a standard action. At this size you gain a +6 size bonus to Strength, a –2 penalty to Dexterity, a +4 size bonus to Constitution, and a +4 natural armor bonus. You may return to your normal size as a standard action. You may remain in this size for up to 1 minute per character level per day; this duration does not need to be consecutive, but it must be used in 1 minute increments.
My gut says no that isn't what is meant by damage rolls. I might say the amulet adds one point of damage though. Not STR damage just regular damage. Good corner case though tbh so faq.
Yeah it is the part you bolded. As part of a melee attack so no you can't do it as a touch attack. You have to put up with regular AC. Use a scorpion whip perhaps?
|
