If you change the length of the round, you have to adjust movement to match, or people will be CRAWLING across the battlefield. Basically, you would take all of those speeds above, and reduce them by 40%. No one in the game would be eligible for even high-school track-and-field, let alone the Olympics. And this includes the monk.
You do realize that Humans didn't break the 4 minute mile until 1954.
Not 500 years ago.
Also, Runners NEVER CARRY ANYTHING when they're doing those sorts of activities. A Light Load (we'll say 30 pounds of equipment for a 9 Str Individual) would slow a runner down.
Have you seen what Runners Wear when they do those times? State of the Art Sneakers, Aerodynamic Shorts/Shirts and maybe a wrist watch. Not Robes, a Backpack, carrying a Staff (not a Baton), wearing a Belt (with pouches)......you get the picture?
You're probably right, with their modified round rules, the Adventurers wearing suboptimal gear, carrying stuff and occasionally have people swinging at them aren't going to compete with the time of a Kid running on a Track at a High School, let alone Olympic capacity.
It depends on the campaign. The current one, we have a player who basically won't let us have "Down Time". I was trying to Work on my Mithril Breastplate, and every day I tried to go, he'd find something that needed to be done, and screw up the little progress I was making ;-p
I've seen this before both in players who want to be the center of attention all the time and in a GM that didn't want spellcasters preparing spells, hence nerfing them. (I left that game fast)
You need to get the GM on your side. he/she is enabling this behaviour.
However, try to buy the brestplate. It'll take months to build that way.
While the campaign isn't a "low magic" campaign, my character had more Mithril that the city we're based in had to sell.
After awhile, he ended up "handwaving" the creation process and I got the Armor made by an offscreen NPC who was passing through town and completed everything in the Smithy that was being made, including my armor.
Quite frankly, if the Wizard does this going forward, all the GM has to do is throw in a creature with the Combat Reflexes Feat that doesn't normally have it. These could be "Slightly more evolved Goblins" or just "Elite" versions.
To me, if the Player is going "I know the Stat Block of the Goblin, and I know he doesn't have Combat Reflexes", THAT is MetaGaming.
The Player is saying "I'm willing to take a hit for a good chance that it doesn't have Combat Reflexes" is taking a Gamble, not MetaGaming.
Throwing in my suggestion at the top, throws off both his ability to MetaGame & shows that Gambles have Risks sometimes. He might use it more sparingly, or when it truly needs to do it.
Master Craftsman Feat says You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.
I don't think you can just "Raise the DC by 5" to get around missing Spells, and I don't think you can use Scrolls/Spellcasters to help you out either.
Its not about missing requirements, its about the Feat point blank saying you can't do it.
Because Toughness is a better HP Feat, the two reasons you'd want to take Fast Learner is if you wanted both the Skill Point & The Favored Class Option (because the HPs aren't worth the Feat) OR if you have Toughness and still want the extra HP from this & the skill point/FCO.
1) The spells written in the spellbook are referred to as "arcane magical writings". Now, maybe the book itself isn't magical, but the writings inside are magical? (So, a blank spellbook isn't magical, whereas one filled with spells has magical writing.)
2) You use Read Magic on someone else's spellbook. Read Magic deciphers magical writing without a skill check. And you use read magic to decipher magical inscriptions, keyword magical. Heck, it's even in the name of the spell, Read Magic.
So what I assume is correct is that a spellbook is not magical, but the "arcane magical writing" (aka spells) inside the spellbook are magical.
I agree with your take, and that is how I run it. Blank pages are not magical, but writing a spell imbues the pages with magic, ergo there is a faint aura when looking at a spellbook full of spells.
That's how we run it as well. But as others have said, I don't believe it holds up to RAW though.
There are exceptions, magically trapped books, Blessed Books and various other reasons can make it radiate though.
for a Sorcerer, the Feat Expanded Arcana (from APG) would also work, add 1 or 2 spells known to your Known list....
Add one spell from your class's spell list to your list of spells known. This is in addition to the number of spells normally gained at each new level in your class. You may instead add two spells from your class's spell list to your list of spells known, but both of these spells must be at least one level lower than the highest level spell you can cast in that class.
Our main usage of WBL is when we bring new characters into campaigns.
When I was in a Round Table DM'ing Group, we each took 3 levels at a time, after each DM was done, everyone who needed to be brought up to WBL was done so, that way the next DM wouldn't have to worry about where we were in comparison to CRs for planning purposes.
Its different when you're the only DM, and can gauge the party and know when/what's coming ahead, but when you're planning your segment and you don't have any idea what's happening in the 3-6 levels before yours, it was nice not to worry about it.
The games I play in, are usually free form (at least to an extent) and the DM slides the meters around at times. The games I DM, I do try to keep track of it (without looking over shoulders) and keep track of what I've given out vs what the party has spent. But as far as Character Audits, no it doesn't happen much in normal game play for us.
In games, I usually am the "Accountant" of the group, but it depends on the group how much "Nickel & Diming" we do. One group, its probably high magic, and we only loot valuables. Another group, I won't say it's low magic, but we tend to be the "taking the nails keeping it nailed down too" type.
Basically, if the treasure doesn't seem to be coming quick enough, you start looking at used weapons/armor and saying, well, that's a bit more money......
There was a large discussion with my players about changing rounds to last 10 seconds instead of 6. More like a thought experiment really. I thought that the conversation could be fun here, so I bring it to you to think on, and respond, if you'd like:
What happens to Pathfinder's mechanics, balance, etc. when you change rounds to last 10 seconds instead of 6? Is it too powerful? Too restricting? Inconsequential? Could you balance it back? Like making spells last 10 rounds instead of 1 minute?
my view is inconsequential as long as you address "1 Minute/level", "10 minutes/level" and similiar other time periods are addressed and everyone is in agreement with it
It depends on the campaign. The current one, we have a player who basically won't let us have "Down Time". I was trying to Work on my Mithril Breastplate, and every day I tried to go, he'd find something that needed to be done, and screw up the little progress I was making ;-p
Prior campaign we were Pirates/Explorers, so we had lots of downtime on a boat to get various tasks done. The Smithy in the group wasn't happy, but the Map Maker was.
I haven't used (DM or player) training rules since 2e, or maybe the beginning of 3e.
Training also (usually) cost money as well, which needs to be compensated usually (in order to keep up with WBL). Quest rewards could be to use the facilities for free as well though.
As was stated, its success will depend on the campaign. If there's a time limit (or a series of them), you might end up not being able to train to the level you need to succeed in the mission.
I grew up in the 80s (when I started playing D&D). I watched a Cartoon, the Dungeons & Dragons Cartoon. The "Dungeon Master" handed out pretty impressive Magical Items to all the "Kids". I'd say Magic Weapons & D&D do actually go back some time. K, I agree, not the "Best" example, but since it was the 80s, its still an early example. But they did only really have 1 magical item each.
So for better examples, if you played high levels of 1e/2e (85-88), the Bloodstone Pass Series (H1-4), which was a High Level campaign, allowed you to get Magical Weapons to equip your Army (since it was part of the Battlesystem rules).
Again, enough Magical Weapons to equip your ARMY (Of course, if you spent that much on those weapons, you're army was going to be quite a bit smaller than you'd probably want/need).
So while it might be nostalgic to think that the older editions didn't have as many magical items, when you start outfitting your ARMY with them, I'd say they were pretty prevalent in the system. I'm not saying my "Personal Campaign World", I'm talking about TSR published materials for AD&D (that's 1e btw).
Yeah. That's what people have said about 4E gear. It all* has a flat bonus and some other power. There's no such thing as +1 Armor. It's all bonus and something else. Which tends to be an encounter or daily power, because that's how 4e rolls. (*All may be strong. There may be exceptions, but it's pretty much the standard.)
well, you're wrong (or overstated if you prefer), the PHB had weapons with "Just +xs" in it
4e info not really needed for the thread:
Because the Items are split up into levels....
Level 1 - +1 Magic Weapon/Armor
Level 6 - +2 Magic Weapon/Armor
Level 11 - +3 Magic Weapon/Armor......
Level 2-5 were all +1 Magic Weapons with a special "Quality", but you could have a "+1 Longsword" with nothing attached as a level 1 item.
Now, the way 4e was set up, were these as "appeasing" as something With a encounter/daily power? Of course not. But that doesn't mean they weren't there.
4e also tried to limit the "overflowing bag of excess magical items" (like a bag of 20 wands) and limited how many times per day you could use the Daily abilities on magical items, which actually blends more "realistically" to a lower magical campaign
And the way I do Magical Rewards (in 4e, but sometimes in 3e), if the players like their equipment, it will raise in power. So if they have a Level 3 item, and they're up for a level 8 reward, they will discover it has more power, as opposed to replacing it. I would make sure the party got a reward to make up for it (so in this example, another level 3 magical item/treasure packet).
What if we just eat cows & pigs (aka the ugly animals), but not horses & dogs (the cute & lovable animals)? Does that make it better now? It somehow seems to. Unless you live in an area where your main choice is dog.
Horse meat is rather tasty but expensive and hard to get where I live. The reason I have not and will not try dog is that I think they are ugly animals, eating feces and all. I've already eaten lots of different animals.
But the thought of eating a human? That freaks me out so much I don't even enter katholic churches anymore because of all this "christs blood and body consuming" stuff. Which for me is cannibalism.
And in other parts of the world, the thought of Horsemeat in their food is causing a panic (see World News on Europe).
And we're not talking about a Human eating a Human. That's Cannibalism, and not what we're talking about.
We're talking about a Mammal eating a different kind of Mammal. And where exactly that line is drawn.
A Human eating a Goblin, is probably not the norm, but how different would eating a Minotaur be over a Cow? An Orc has frequently looked like a Pig at times, so would they make Tasty Baby Back Ribs? People eat lizards, so would Kobolds be much different? Especially with enough BBQ sauce?
The Thread isn't about eating members of your own race. Its about eating the other races ;-)
And if you do like Horsemeat, would Centaurs be ok to eat? Or would the Human half freak you out too much to do it?
I do own the 4th Ed PHB. I own the 4th Ed DMG.
I own the PF CRB. I do NOT own the PF Game Mastery Guide, which I assumed was the equivalent to the 4th Ed DMG.
If the reason PF put the Magical Items in the CRB to eliminate the "Game Masters Book", why did they then publish a "Game Masters Book" anyway?
The Gamemastery Guide is NOT a DMG. It's not anything close to a DMG.
It's more like a 'Idiots Guide to Being a GM'. It has all sorts of dissertations on how to run a game, pointers, things to help out new GMs, etc. It might be closer to the 3.5 DMG2, in some respects. But it's not anything like the 3.5 or 4.0 DMG.
That's right on the money. The PF GMG is a great resource for beginner GMs (at least, I think it would have been great when I started out), but if you're not a beginner, you really don't need it. Although, I do own it, and I did like reading it. The only thing that I've actually put into my games from that book was the chase rules and the addiction rules - both of which I think are fantastic.
But it is certainly not an equivalent to a DMG. The CRB has everything the player and GM need, it's both the PHB and DMG combined.
That sounds exactly like the 4e DMG though. I felt the same way about that book, it was very well written, lots of useful tips, but 20 some years of experience kinda killed its usefulness to me. The "Useful" stuff was for the most part in the PHB.
But that still goes to the Crust of the matter. IF the CRB had all the DMG stuff stuffed in it, TO PREVENT A "Game Masters" book from being done (which was another posters argument), and one was done anyway (Note, it doesn't mean done well), how does that argument really hold up?
To further my point, if you take the Chapters in the CRB that were in the 3.5 DMG out (so chapters 11+), what would the 3.5 DMG book look like. There were still chapters in that book, beyond the "5", that would still exist. It wouldn't be a good book anymore. But it would still exist.
IMO, Paizo could have sold quite a few more books. A 380 page "PHB" and a 520 page "DMG" as opposed to a 572 page CRB & 320 page GMG doesn't change the page count overall. Add them together, they're still 900 pages (give or take). Most players (note not DMs) would probably not buy the GMG as made, but if it had the sections on Prestige Classes, NPC Classes & Magical Items, I think the sales for it would be much higher, because there would be a lot of players would have bought the GMG BECAUSE it had the Magical Items Section in it. I know that held true to 1e, 2e & 3e (it didn't in 4e, because they weren't there).
4e & PF made a "DMG" that was ONLY useful to DMs. 1e, 2e & 3e made a DMG that was useful to DMs & Players.
So, back to the original point, the CRB is the PHB. The Magical Items aren't in a different Book. They are in the book the PLAYERS WILL USE to play the game. They aren't in a "Special DM only section that you need your DM Decoder Ring to open". They are in the Main book. Same as in 4e (and this was the actual discussion point). The APG follows the same guide as the PHB2 in 4e as well. The Magical Items (for the most part) are ones that work well with the Classes presented in that book.
And yeah, there are Magical ItemS in the General Equipment Section. But I'm sure they've been HouseRuled Out of some peoples games already.
1: They essentially become expensive common items. You might as well go with 4th edition's design and put all magic items in the PHB.
You might as well put magic items into the standard gear column of the PHB and enable themto purchase the items at the start of the campaign.
Edit: It becomes an arms race.
K, I gotta ask.
Do you have a Pathfinder Core Rulebook?
Cause all the Magic Items ARE in there already.
They might not be in the "Standard Gear" column (well, some of them are already), but they are in the Book.
I might be missing your attempt at Sarcasm though. But its hard to translate it sometimes. Especially when you're using it as a Reason to defend why you dislike something.
I own lots of Pathfinder books actually.
The thing is the magic items are in the DM section, chapter 12+, of the book. Paizo decided to cut down on two books so they shoved them all into one. If they were two books then magic items would be in the DMG.
There is no sarcasm. I'm not sure if you own the 4th edition Player's Guide but it contains magic items while the Dungeon Master's Guide does not. The game itself was specifically designed where PC's must have magic items because it is thoroughly built into the system so they moved the items to the player's book.
I do own the 4th Ed PHB. I own the 4th Ed DMG.
I own the PF CRB. I do NOT own the PF Game Mastery Guide, which I assumed was the equivalent to the 4th Ed DMG.
If the reason PF put the Magical Items in the CRB to eliminate the "Game Masters Book", why did they then publish a "Game Masters Book" anyway?
ZugZug, against a troll, I'd rather summon multiple dogs, flank, trip and attack. Next round, attack again, use SLA for 1d3(possibly+1) eagles, have them all smite evil and rock the troll with a world of hurt (with 1d4+1 or +3 3x per eagle). An exceptionally poorly built/rolled summoner would have 5 uses of his SLA per day. These two seem well worth it and very likely to swing any battle against a single troll in favor of the party. This is using a level 3 summoners statistics.
Sure, you can't daze the troll, but the combat is going to be over within three rounds. You've just spent two.
But that's kinda my point. You've spent 2 Summons on something you really didn't need to. Part of it is playstyle, and how many encounters your group has to go through. If you're only doing 2-4 encounters in a day, blowing through 2 Summons isn't a big deal, but when you need to have them go through more encounters, it will make a bigger difference.
Also, the point of the Troll, was the Acid Splash will shut down the Regen (and most other things with Regen as well), so it's not 2-4 points, you all of a sudden got an "effective +5 damage" on it from turing it off. Unless the Dogs are going down quickly, I'd take advantage of the duration they're up for, and "Ping" the Troll down.
It's a matter of Playstyles. I'm not a big "Let's go Nuclear on every combat", I'm more of a "We might need these resources later" kinda player.
1: They essentially become expensive common items. You might as well go with 4th edition's design and put all magic items in the PHB.
You might as well put magic items into the standard gear column of the PHB and enable themto purchase the items at the start of the campaign.
Edit: It becomes an arms race.
K, I gotta ask.
Do you have a Pathfinder Core Rulebook?
Cause all the Magic Items ARE in there already.
They might not be in the "Standard Gear" column (well, some of them are already), but they are in the Book.
I might be missing your attempt at Sarcasm though. But its hard to translate it sometimes. Especially when you're using it as a Reason to defend why you dislike something.
I see almost no purpose, whatsoever, to learn Summon Monster 1 as an actual spell. My summoner intends to be able to casts summons as well as use his eidolon, simultaneously
I am pretty sure it is in the rules that a summoner can not have the eidolon out at the same time as a summoned monster
[i]** spoiler omitted **.
Does that apply to the Spell as well as the SLA?
(I know the Master Summoner does bypass this limitation for the SLA, but is the Spell limited as the SLA is)
So, in the priest/dragon example, if the ranger had favored enemy (human) would he get the bonus until someone told him it was really a dragon? Could the party wizard use illusions to give the ranger his FE bonus against everything?
Or just play a Don Quixote type, and think every foe you face is a member of the FE, even if it is just a Windmill/Gazebo. I can see the following conversation happening. ;-)
Player - "That guy looks like an Orc"
DM - "He's not an Orc"
Player - "It's Orcish Trickery, it is an Orc"
DM - <sigh> Make a Knowledge Check
Player - <rolls a 2 and has a +2 modifier> "I failed, It's an Orc"
The way we ran it (before giving up XP) was an extra 10% XP per level behind you were, so in your example, if each character got 1,000xp, the two 4th level guys would get 1,200xp. They'll catch up quicker.
I'd personally stay away from acid splash. It's just so bad over time, imo. I guess it depends on style, too.
The nice thing about Acid Splash, is that it doesn't allow for Spell Resistance or a Saving Throw. So as long as you can hit the Touch and it doesn't have Acid Resistance, it is damage each round. Its better than any ranged weapon you'd take (between higher AC & Damage Reduction anyway).
Now 2-4 points of damage might seem "Useless", but if you don't want to go nuclear each combat, its not a bad fallback position spell. At early levels, you can still kill creatures outright with it, and can help whittle things down you can't.
Daze has 2 main hurting points. First is the Target can only be hit with it once every 10 rounds, so you can't spam it as much. The second, and worse part, is the limit to 4 Hit Dice. So if you proceed with it, it'll become useless.
At least Acid Splash will still turn off a Troll's Regen at higher levels (for example).
Now, if you have Wands to Spam, obviously, that will most likely be a better option, but if you've got the fight in hand, do you want to use that extra charge when you know you'll be in the dungeon a few more days?
Humanoid enemies often had magic items, which it was assumed the PCs would take.
Looking at my old copy of Keep on the Borderlands from 1980, the Evil Priest has plate+1, shield+1, an amulet and a snake staff along with jewels and other stuff.
The humanoids in early part of the module are all listed as something like "Each carries 1d6 silver pieces."
For some monsters back in the day you literally had to get the treasure from the body. They had gems in their stomachs or other things.
You can't blame MMOs for this.
But back in the day you could only loot the most mythological items ever from a kill; WoW's whole "kill the Gnolls, search their pockets for a pittance of CPs" is something different IMO.
You disagree? (No insult, just checking.)
Wait, How is the D6 Silver Pieces from an Orc in the Keep on the Borderlands different from a Pittance of CPs in WoW from a Gnoll? Aren't we talking the same mechanic there?
And "the most mythological items ever from a Kill" has the same thing in WoW doesn't it? So I guess I don't understand what you're trying to say.
Both games, killing/looting low level scrubs gets you low level rewards, and killing/looting "bosses" gets you better treasure. Unless you feel that low level scrubs never carry pocket change on them.
The Main difference in how much we scavangered, was usually how tight the GM was with treasure. If it didn't come by often, we did usually take used weapons, armor, pelts, and anything else we thought we might be able to sell. You had to pay for Training Costs somehow.
That's kinda my point: Gandalf doesn't have time to sit around making stuff; he's too busy saving the world.
I can think of few things less magical than turning a mighty wizard into a tradesman, though that is exactly what 3E and its ilk have done.
He had plenty of time. He made "Fireworks" which were essentially magic, and took time to make. Also, Sauramon always complained about Gandalf spending too much of his time "smoking the Halfling's Leaf". Gandalf in the books was always moving hecticly, but he mentioned he had plenty of time prior, and now he has none.
So he had time to do it. Just not when Action was needed. The Books would have been boring if we saw his life when the world wasn't in immediate peril.
And more to the Point, Sauron handed out a Bunch of Magic Rings to various people. Just think of the XP loss he would have had in prior editions to make those powerful rings. Does that make it "More Realistic"?
And to address the point of "Magical Items Don't Degrade"
Sure they do. Just depends which ones we're talking about.
Potions
Scrolls
Wands
Wonderous Items like Necklaces of Fireballs
Magical Ammunition
And assorted other things
These all degrade, and could allow a Small Magic Shop the ability to survive, just on these.
A local Village's "Magic Shop" is going to sell things like Cure Light Wound Potions, or Bull's Strength Potions, because those things MIGHT get purchased by the locals.
Add to that the fact that unless your 1 adventuring party is the only one in the world, wouldn't other groups sell stuff? And why couldn't the party then buy them?
yeah, we tend to have a similar time to camp as well. In our 5 person party, we have 3 shifts with 1-2 people per shift. Not everyone does a shift all the time, sometimes we have NPC Mercs who can help stand guard.
IIRC, encumbrance in D&D/PF already includes an abstraction of space. Not sure though.
A Backpack can hold 2 cubic feet of material (CFoM)
A Sack can hold 4 CFoM
A Beltpouch can hold 100-200 coins or 2 Apples
A Bag of Holding can hold 30, 70, 150 or 250 CFoM
A Handy Haversack can hold 2 + 2 + 8 CFoM (each pouch has its own limit)
A Portable Hole is 6' Diameter & 10' Deep or 1,131 CFoM
I pulled those out of the CRB & UE. Sounds like a definitive amount of space.
Unless we're carrying something obviously too big, our GM doesn't worry about Space (nor do I when I run), but technically, there are rules/limits on it. They might not "slow you down" like pure weight, but strictly speaking, they should be followed as well (and again, I say that without doing it myself).
The number was all MMOs not just the top MMOs. The Top ones do for the most part do have some form of Bag Space.
K, then I'll go back to my statement of
me wrote:
Actually, I feel the opposite way about it. Baldur's Gate & Everquest were some of the places I felt most needing to make sure my Weight Limit was watched the most.
OOps, I picked up armor, do I have room in one of my 100% weight reduction bags, or do I need to transfer something into my 80% weight reduction bags.......Hey, I'm moving slowly, lets dump 3,000cp so I can move more normal again and keep farming GP/PP instead of taking the time to go to a bank to convert that around.
Nothing makes you pay more attention to your weight limit than a video game because you will notice it when you hit it if you weren't paying attention to it. When its pen/paper, you're likely not to pay attention to it, and go "oh, I'm over and have been over for awhile now....oh well".
It's more Video-Gamy to me to keep track of every ounce carried. And with most major games doing something (weight and/or bag space) like it, it feels that way.
Again, I am likely to keep track of "How Much Weight" my character can carry (for me, it's not much work). What I am likely to not keep track of though, is whether the amount of weight can fit in the space provided (Cubic Foot Space in bags, backpacks, etc). Which should be an equal problem.
15% of VRPGs include an "Encumbrance" System and counting those 39% have a "Carrying Capacity" System last time a Respectable Video Game Magazine figured it up (November 2012). The other CRPGs don't have them.
Now MMORPG and CRPGs are at 47% (counting the ones that overlap with the 39% amount).
Interesting numbers, still, not "Exceptions" even at 15%. 1 in 7 is more than an Exception here and there.
What Top MMO out there doesn't have a Carrying Capacity? I'm asking because I am curious. EQ, EQ2, WoW, Star Trek Online, DDO, LotRO, City of Heroes and Eve all did (just the ones I've played), so I'm wondering which ones did I miss that don't have it.
If we're talking about games under 50,000 players vs games with over 1,000,000, then I suppose they could easily balance out to those numbers, but specifically it doesn't seem to add up. Especially where several of those games "sell bag space" in the FTP setup these days.
There are some exceptions but most Video Games have no encumbrance system.
I think calling them "Exceptions" is undercutting their placement in the genre though. Those aren't the only ones, just the ones that I remember most having to "suffer" because of it.
Any of the D&D Based Video Games (BG, ID, NWN, DDO...) included it.
EverQuest was probably the first HUGE MMO out there, and it included it as well. Since it's still running 15 years later, I'd consider it significant as well.
I believe several others out there (Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect...) also include it, but I didn't play them, so I'm going on here-say.
Other games, instead of saying "you can have X much weight", used the mechanic of "You can carry Y number of things". WoW falls into this, as does Diablo (and many others). So the "Carrying Capacity" is still limited, and still in the game.
When you limit it to "How Much Stuff can my Video Game Character(s) carry", I think its actually a significant portion of Genre of games out there. The Mechanic they use might not all be the same, but it is there.
So do you play your character in Role Play style or do you only think of how to max it out in Rule Play style, only taking the best combat advantages?
=
Are the games you run a collection of battles or does it have a very deep story and such?
Do you ever use the Sandbox method where there are encounters you cannot beat and you must run away if your party runs in to them?
Role play. We have a very deep story most of the time, and the many of the group members have taken social skills (feats, abilities....) at the expense of more combat driven ones.
We tend to Sandbox it, however, the group I'm in, we have a tendency to retreat or not engage groups we should be able to defeat, and attack to the death groups that we should have talked our way out of or avoided.
While it certainly can be taken too far I have to say i love it when a table actually bothers to pursue the camping/carrying/eating part of the campaign. It makes the characters feel like real people and if the issue never comes up then I feel kind foolish wasting good gold and spell slots on secure shelter and ring of sustenance.
Exactly this is one of my favorite parts. Especially in Sandbox Campaigns. One of the things I hate about not tracking it is that it starts to feel like a Video Game.
& Am I the only one that finds it funny that to build a true "Dervish" to match the Real Life Fluff and Fighting Style one would need to either Multiclass or Gestalt a Cleric & Monk Build and Max out Perform(Dance)... Though their Spells would probably work best as Buffs.
Actually, I feel the opposite way about it. Baldur's Gate & Everquest were some of the places I felt most needing to make sure my Weight Limit was watched the most.
OOps, I picked up armor, do I have room in one of my 100% weight reduction bags, or do I need to transfer something into my 80% weight reduction bags.......Hey, I'm moving slowly, lets dump 3,000cp so I can move more normal again and keep farming GP/PP instead of taking the time to go to a bank to convert that around.
Nothing makes you pay more attention to your weight limit than a video game because you will notice it when you hit it if you weren't paying attention to it. When its pen/paper, you're likely not to pay attention to it, and go "oh, I'm over and have been over for awhile now....oh well".
Having said that, I did make sure my Cavalier made his weight limit (to keep a 30' move), and I made sure his horse did too (was soooooo happy when the horse added strength and I could carry extra stuff again).
Dont you guy tired of carrying around stat blocks of summoned monster all the time? and bogging down combat with your extra monsters?
If the person who's doing it is ready for his turn, and can handle it without any problems, no. I've seen people control 4-6 "creatures" better than some players handle 1 (in terms of knowing its their turn, and moving through their turn quickly).
Now, when it does bog down, is when that 1 player tries to do the "Summoning" bit ;-p That I can live without.
What then about Lizardmen casually hunting and eating other sentient beings, while still being depicted as neutral ?
Way I would do it in my game is "what would the owner of the dead body think ?". If he would agree with you eating his body, then neutral. If he would disagree, then evil.
I would think the owner of the Dead Body might feel whoever just killed him was EVIL as well. I don't think that's the best PoV to use in the discussion though.
Eating Animals is viewed as EVIL by (some) people in this world. Does that make it evil? What if we just eat cows & pigs (aka the ugly animals), but not horses & dogs (the cute & lovable animals)? Does that make it better now? It somehow seems to. Unless you live in an area where your main choice is dog.
Since we can't agree on non-sentient animals in this world, I'm not surprised we can't do it on sentient "Humanoids" in a completely fantasy environment either.
Like some of the others have said, I'd probably lean on it being evil-lite and keep it as that (specific things like Cook People Hex are stated as EVIL, so they are exceptions - ie specific rules), but without a form of statement about it, I'm not strongly for it being evil.
After all, is it more evil to kill something for Sport (like an Orc), or kill something for a reason, and then use the entirety of the something for food, clothes, weaponry, household goods......
WoW, lot of coverage here, so I'll just stick to how I've done it over the years, and the Whys, and how we do it nowadays.
1e/2e - We frequently kept track of Spell Components. Want to Cast Spider Climb? That is a Live Spider you need to EAT. So you had to keep live spiders around. That's not an easy task. Dragon Magazine articles (and other publications) would provide lists of what mundane costs for various components were (some others mentioned this as well). Sand was xCP, Grease was ySP.....
3e - With Eschew Materials, we did stop keeping track of it overall. Campaigns I ran, I usually added 2 additional Feats to add to the benefit (which the Wizard could chose with his bonus feats). Even as the "Accountant" in most groups, between that Feat, Spell Component Pouches and other means, its not worth keeping track of for stuff that isn't worth much. Mind you, we also kept track of our 100gp Pearls for Identify though (and other more expensive components).
4e - Got rid of Combat Spell Components, and just Rituals require them (sometimes), and its basically all 1 Component, so its easy book keeping.
PF - Similiar to 3e, only even less want to keep track of those minor costs. But I'm going to say that except for the upper cost items, the casters haven't been keeping a close eye on them. Looking at the character I just brought into the current PF campaign, I don't even have V,S,M listed (bad player!). I'll be correcting that, but we'll see if it matters much to anyone else (I doubt it). We're getting ready to cross a desert, so we're actually keeping track of foodstuffs (which we hadn't prior in the campaign) and we'll see if the DM mentions anything on Material Components.
But overall, I think it comes to a matter of time (the players I'm currently playing with). 20-25 years ago, when several of us were in middleschool/highschool/college, we had the time to worry about those small numbers. These days, we feel its a waste to keep track of every pinch of sand, and either gets rolled into "Cost of Living" or some other hand waving. This applies to arrows and other "mundane" items unless the current adventure line warrants it.
I fall into this category. If I feel PA might not be used often/always, then I'd find a different Feat to take in its place rather than take it and not use it.
When I have it, if I'm having alot of problems hitting, I will stop using it, but I'm going into almost all fights using it.
Wow, people get pretty hot about this math issue. I know I personally use the old method, from before 3rd edition, whereby a square is 1 square of movement, no matter which direction you use. I know this makes the math experts unhappy, and I know it violates the rules, but neither my players nor I mind. If the squares are making your life difficult in trying to figure out when a diagonal means more than any other direction, you might want to consider pretending a square is a square. Just my 2 cents, but you may find this cuts through all the math hyperbole and brings you back into an easier, friendlier (though less true to abstract math) type of play! Your mileage may vary, though, just a thought.
First, I'm going to agree with some of the others, if UP is feeling hassled in RL, and its a similiar "hassle" in game, that lead to the breakdown (in command) more than anything. Making him stay Captain isn't the best idea, see if one of the other players is willing to do it (for awhile) and maybe UP will get back the "nerve" (I can't think of a better word here) and want to reclaim it at some point. If not, it wasn't really meant to be.
As for just the Ship Stuff side, the Campaign we finished up on was a Pirate Campaign, where our group recovered our own ship and outfitted it, the group sat down and discussed what was going to happen. Basically the Captain would be the Captain in front of the crew, and his orders to the crew were meant to be ordered. The Party however didn't have to follow the Captain's orders 100%, and any major decisions would be made behind closed doors (out of the crew's hearing) so when we told them what was going on, we had a consensus and bickering wasn't done (in front of the crew). As the Campaign progressed, the Captain took the reigns a bit more, but when the group was on land adventuring, it was back to the "Party" method.
It worked well for us. (YMMV, and this wasn't the AP)
When we hire Mercs, you have to visit a "Guildhouse" type establishment and they require a fee paid up front. Basically, if we're going to go "adventuring" we want our pay to go to our families, not be a bunch of empty promises.
Then, we usually have them paid at two different rates. Basically the Book for "base pay" and then a "hazard pay" amount that is quite a bit more. Basically there is a difference between "guarding the base near where our homes are" and "going into goblin lands where we're all likely to die".
We (I at least) do spend the resources (gains from adventuring) improving armor/weapons when possible, which gives them more of a connection to the group. At some point they even get names ;-)
ZugZug: as mentioned before, a sense motive check is in order... once the fighter is clearly running away the circumstance bonus to that check should be considerable, but him attempting to move through the clerics square is not quite such a clear sign itself. Granted the weapon dropping part may signal something is off but I've seen fighters drop weapons and move while drawing a new, more appropriate, weapon for the current fight on more than one occasion, e.g., to try to overcome damage reduction. But it already may grant some bonus to the sense motive roll.
Edit: If I recall correctly the yeth hound's bay ability causes the panicked not the frightened condition.
So a DC 15 or 25 then? That's to discern an Enchantment, Dominate Person is listed in the Skill, but I'd like to be sure.
And how much of a Circumstance bonus for the fact the guy in the Front Line dropped his weapon(s), ran screaming from the fight and is crying for his mommy would I get? We're not talking about him actively going through the Cleric's Square, like every other time he's done it. But going "oh my god(s), oh my god(s), oh my god(s)...."
K, I might be a little snarky here. But we're not talking about some random person trying to deceive the PCs. We're talking a battle hardened member of the group doing something he normally doesn't do AND in such a way that it should be obvious something is wrong.
I don't think it should be that hard to figure out. Nor should the Cleric be not allowed to prevent an Ally's movement if he doesn't want him to pass by him.
When I DM'd 3.x, I allowed my characters to have 1 Item Crafted Prior to Game Start (I didn't usually start games higher than level 2 though).
I did have the limitation that the item couldn't have a unmod'd cost of 50% of WBL.
So a 5th level Character, with a WBL of 10,500gp, could come in with 1 Crafted Item of up to 5,250 value and cost the character up to 2,625 (so at least 7,875gp left to spend). I haven't DM'd PF, but I would carry that forward if it applied.
I guess I need to ask a side issue that some brought up about Meta-Gaming.
At what point would the Cleric be allowed to Cast "Remove Fear"?
If it's Meta-Gaming to know that the Front Line Guy who never backs down from a fight and is retreating (advancing to the rear?) is under the effects of Fear, at what point IS the Cleric allowed to know that he is in fact, been Feared.
It seems you could cast Remove Fear before an encounter based on a hunch, but casting it when someone is afflicted with it, would seem like its undoable without metagaming to some extent. What process is needed to complete the "Diagnosis"?
On a side note, I am of the opinion the Cleric should have been able to tell the fighter, "no, I'm not letting you by". Of course, was there another path the fighter could have taken (since frightened allows player choice) to get away from the cause of the fear? (If panic'd, it would have been random and could have still caused the fighter to run in a different direction).
Bonus: Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
Otherwise its sprinkled throughout. The Armor section of the Equipment mention Armor bonuses don't stack, Combat section mentions Dodge bonuses (unlike most other bonuses) Do stack.
He means that of the 8 times you spelled "Altar", you spelled it "Alter" once.
Anyway, as to your actual complaint, I agree with Rynjin. In the Fantasy World where Gods give spells and boons to followers, How you react to Altars will usually cause a reaction from the Altar.
Otherwise, why would you be Sacrificing People to them on a regular basis?
You could find an Altar to a False God that probably wouldn't do anything though.
I've seen players provoke movement AoOs on purpose just like this in the hope that the foe doesn't have Combat Reflexes. They are then safe to take whatever standard action they like with less risk of it being disrupted.
Or to take the AoO hit "for the team" and allow other party members to not be attacked when an AoO could apply
Of course, Combat Reflexes does screw with that at times
