![]() ![]()
![]() had a question come up in a game and couldn't find anything in the forums. if an arcane archer uses manyshot and rapid shot for a full round action can you also use the ability to imbue an arrow with a spell? or does the fact that it takes up the casting time make this impossible? also just to clarify, only one arrow per round can be imbued, but all 3 would have the elemental enhancement, right? ![]()
![]() HappDude69 wrote:
I did something similar to this in a 4e campaign with a changeling, it took them over half the campaign to figure it out, although I was evil and working behind their backs the entire time everyone had an awsome laugh about it OOC after the game. Love those unexpected character development/ RP moments. Seems like a good plan just to talk to everybody. If it's a problem with anyone it'll also give them a chance to clean the air and you can try to remind them to separate in character RP and OOC friendships. ![]()
![]() I wouldn't try to stat him out, make him a dungeon. in order to defeat him the adventurers have to destroy his heart, etc. instead. also he doesn't have to even be aware of the gnomes, what if he just destroys because he's a beast and the gnomes just live on his shell picking up the scraps of what he leaves behind. being that large he probably wouldn't even feel gnomes and like scurrying across his shell. just some ideas that I thought of. hope they help ![]()
![]() as above, play a bard. always fun to whip up a rousing song while everyone is being all serious battle mode. also ask your GM if you can use other sourcebooks, it's usually a simplification factor and if you explain how you feel he might be willing to reconsider. at least for something like archetypes or the above mentioned bloodlines. ![]()
![]() I'd go with the lightning bolt/call lightning, but talk to your GM first to make sure that your game will follow the laws of physics. Electricity should let you get all of the monsters in the orb in one hit, and I wouldn't think that electricity would break the orb spell either = nicely sustained damage combo ![]()
![]() Phasics wrote:
also this, this is also good ![]()
![]() firstly, a natural 20 doesn't equal a critical success on skill checks (they can't crit fail or succeed) so unless 20 plus his handle skill equaled your DC modifier they aren't 'handled' secondly, do you want them to keep the dogs? If you want to include them in the story or see your players use them advise them that they're dangerous wild animals that need to be properly caged, maybe see an animal trainer in town etc to find out specifics. if, however, you don't want to keep the dogs then just have them escape, eat the stable hand and whoever gets in their way on the way out of town. wild animals kill things, that's why adventurers go out and kill them ![]()
![]() Skaorn wrote:
I actually really like this idea. It made me think of .//hack and their many worlds based off of one hub thing. it would also allow cohesion as long as there's some kind of reasoning behind it as well as allowing much more variety and freedom with the stories and locales ![]()
![]() so me and my friends are about to finish up a campaign that i wrote and they're already talking about what we're gonna do after it... I don't feel like trying to write anything else so soon, and they're fine with a module of some kind. so my question is, what are some fun midlevel modules for a party of 3-5 PCs. (midlevel = 9-14 or so) ![]()
![]() hogarth wrote:
that goes back to the problem of who controls her actions? her summoner, aka controller/master, or her own free will? ![]()
![]() W E Ray wrote:
the spell says it works as in Nondetection, meaning that they acknowledged the absence of what you're requesting. the only stipulation is it can only be broken into 1 hour increments. the designers obviously didn't want it to split among recipients as water breathing or they would have worded it as such. ![]()
![]() the only problem I immediately see with this is that the player whose companion/eidolon it is is that they are supposed to have control over said creature in battle meaning that she wouldn't be doing anything except what that person tells her 'character' to do. However I have had situations like this rise before, it makes more sense from an RP standpoint, imo. example: the party I was dming for requested to turn a skull into a skull that could house an elemental or fey spirit of some kind. (a la dresden files) they came up with appropriate spells, components, and prices so I let them and the skull became the character of one of the guy's friends who wanted to hang out without getting overly involved in the game since he didn't know how often he would be able to join. another time we had someone capture & befriend a goblin who he made a follower. let someone take over the character instead of rolling up one and he became a goblin with character levels. overall it's up to you as GM and your players, if the other people are willing to try it out there's no reason not to, unless you have some reason not to. remember, the game is only limited to how you, as the GM, want to run it. ![]()
![]() Belle Mythix wrote: Be sure to ask your players where they stand on the sliding scale of RolePlaying vs RollPlaying. also a good thing to do. What I usually do with a campaign that I'm creating all by myself I'll write out a prologue to their story and act like they're the characters in a book. there's always a big over arcing plot to follow and usually some recurring villains, but I leave decision making and what role they actually want to play in the story completely up to them. I'll also usually have some generic dungeon maps with lists of monsters depending on what kind of dungeon or area of the world they find themselves in. Then it's just following the story as you go. I like this because most of the time your players will surprise you with the decisions they make and it ends up being more fun for everyone involved. There is never a specific way to solve the issues they're facing but there are a lot of options for them. ![]()
![]() Indagare wrote:
Foghammer wrote:
I love these two ideas. good ideas for some fun items, might put these in my game sometime ![]()
![]() to clarify the player is a cleric and as such I've tried to explain why he should change his alignment/deity or change his actions. And yes I've explained that it wouldn't require him to act differently, only find a new deity perhaps. The only problem I'm having is his reluctance to 'change' his alignment. After reading the posts here I think I'm going to talk to him about it before the next game and try to explain it more clearly so that we can continue on. I don't want to lose the party healer, but he can always be replaced with a wand. also Haladir, thank you for explaining it all so clearly, I'm gonna let him read your post when we talk to try to clarify ![]()
![]() as a GM do you feel like you should change your PC's alignments based on their roleplaying actions and choices made? I have a player who enjoys killing, raping, pillaging, and thieving wherever he can. I don't have a problem with this because it fits his character and he has the skills to back it up. however I'm not liking that he has a true neutral deity and he claims that "he's chaotic neutral so he gets to do whatever he wants" I told him that he either needs to change his alignment or cut the crap and he told me that if I tried to force him to play an alignment he didn't want to he would just leave the game. How do you guys handle problems like this and do you have those CN players that just rain destruction on everything? I've been friends with the guy for a while and don't want something stupid to ruin our gaming group either ![]()
![]() as Johnnie said, don't get bogged down in the rules, the most important part is to have fun. 1) I agree with johnnie, use them as a guidelines to what makes sense based on how you want the encounter to play out. 2)I would say it's a knowledge check (possibly arcana) or perception to notice that the symbol is repeated and if they are curious enough to ask for a history check then you can give them the additional information. if, on the other hand, you really want to give them the info just ask everyone to make a history check. 3)I would say a skill check is necessary. 4)I agree with only one DC check, but it's up to you. I usually let everyone roll one check and take the highest score for the party, this way they can also avoid the bad luck that is inherent in rolling dice. ![]()
![]() I personally don't feel like rping requires funny voices or acting out everything that happens. if you wanna try bringing more rp into the game then try every time they encounter an npc such as at the inn, the local shop, etc. have them talk to you as if you're the npc in question. if they want information, make them work for it. but really, you can't force them to get into character, and if they're unused to the idea it can take a while to get them used to it. Encourage them to make decisions based on their character's ideals when you can, have them discuss things in character such as battle plans or how their loot gets split up. as long as you as the DM keep encouraging them then soon they should get into the habit of acting as their character would and interacting with the game world through you. ![]()
![]() I usually play a wizard or sorcerer of some kind, but when there's a boss or fight where our fighter/barbarian isn't being useful I'll usually have him hold the potions and/or wands and then stand in as my meat shield while trying to poke at the bad guys with a bow. sure it might not be fun for him, but our GM usually makes sure to involve everybody in the battle, i.e. a flying bad guy with some minions on the ground trying to overwhelm our ranged attackers. ![]()
![]() it looks good, the only thing I'm confused by is the lemon grass. you describe it as something that people smoke all the time, but it does at minimum 6 damage every time you smoke it as well as adding 1 hp for the duration? I don't see this as a good thing so I'm just wondering why someone would want to smoke this stuff? ![]()
![]() the ever present problem of who the hell is actually gonna show up to a session. In my opinion the dungeon looks balanced for a party of 3-4, if you end up with more than that you might want to throw in a few more enemies. for the final boss instead of adding more enemies since it's such an epic fight you can increase his hit dice to make him last a little longer or give him some AoE attacks instead so that it'll spread around the damage and everyone can share the 'fun' It honestly looks very well put together though and looks like you guys will have a lot of fun :) ![]()
![]() so in the campaign I'm currently running I had an npc that gave my PC's advice every now and then to help them on their journey. The problem is that I ended up liking him so much that I basically made him omnipotent. Now my players, for some reason, feel like he's a suspicious character and the next time he shows up they need to try and catch/kill him so they can get more info out of him. (he seems to know a lot about their quest but he won't share all of it) Should I A)never have him show up again
Side note: The characters know little to nothing about him, although they have brought up the fact that he almost seems like a Deity that took interest in their quest and decided to offer some words of advice every now and then. ![]()
![]() Monkeygod wrote:
I agree (except the lovecraftian mythos, I enjoyed the look on my parties face the first time I said the word Cthulhu) All the content that Paizo produces is yours to choose to use or not use. If you don't wanna use it, don't. obviously people do want it, so they're making it. It's like saying, "well, some people didn't want a 4th edition bestiary since we already have enough monsters so we decided not to make one." the whole point is that the game is constantly expanding and giving the players and GM's more options to work with to create new stories. There's only so many times you can fight an owlbear before you just wanna fight a few bearowl's, you know? ![]()
![]() if it fits story wise then go ahead. as stated the monster in question would need invisibility and good stealth, passing him a note should work, it'll let the other pc's know something is up though (may ruin a little bit of the dramatic tension) just make sure that he isn't taken out of the game for too long otherwise it'll just get frustrating and he'll lose interest quickly. I'd suggest having a separate area in the dungeon that he's taken and then he's forced to try and find his party again, following the noises of battle or what not. it's doable, just hard to pull off. ![]()
![]() although the rules don't allow a critical failure/success on a skill check, I usually house rule it to the contrary, regardless of how good you are at something you're bound to fail every once in a while, this also makes it a little more fun since there's always a chance for the awesome rogue to have a trap blow up in his face or trip over himself while trying to jump a pit. just as it's fun for even the clumsy paladin to be able to pull some ridiculous acrobatic stunt with a nat 20. ![]()
![]() Alitan wrote: The casting into empty areas thing is intriguing... I think it would be like a summoning spell, really; it's not doing harm, it's just sitting there until some idiot walks into it (or an unfortunate is tossed into it). I agree with this in terms of it's equivalence to summons, which are specifically allowed. I feel like most of the spells would fall to the GM's discretion, i would probably look at how much they're trying to use sanctuary for it's intended purpose as a rest to rebuff/summon things and how much they're just trying to abuse the immunity it offers. but if it specifically affects an opponent with damage or hampering effects it should be a no-go BigNorseWolf already gave good explanations for the listed ones. ![]()
![]() as a GM i would say that he should pay 3/4 of the full market price, meaning that if the other party members wanted to buy their own they would all end up paying 3/4 of the total price for their own. nice way to make it fair imo. or you could say that he gets this item now, and next time an item comes up someone who hasn't gotten an item yet gets it until everyone has received one, rinse and repeat. for the most part splitting up loot should be up to the party though, so ask them how they feel about splitting it up giving them options or letting them rp through it. for the most part this works better than 'telling' them how they should split it up. ![]()
![]() Ion Raven wrote:
see Sun Wukong in "journey to the west" I also like the idea of the macguffin being a 'halfway point' that would require them to chase down the abyssal master as this would let me continue the story and put in some high level inter-planar travel if they're interested in continuing the story. Right now I have it written out as:
(I sort of took a lot of the ideas listed here and mixed together my favorite parts) and then as stated before, I'll talk to them about whether they want to continue the story or not and if they do it wouldn't be that hard to have her master show up at the final showdown. edit: does this sound alright, or is there anything that should be edited? ![]()
![]() Haha, loved that book so much thanks for recognizing the reference. and I was actually planning something along the lines of what richard said, something that would both reveal the succubus' true nature and weaken her enough to kill. the bag of 'dirt' hasn't been opened so I can always just say it's sand and i told them incorrectly the first time. ![]()
![]() So I'm in the midst of dming for the second time and, as per my players request, came up with a completely original story since they've gone through too many modules lately and wanted something original they could sink their teeth into. Since I didn't have quite as much time as I wanted to prepare, I ended up writing my story as we go, and I've hit writer's block with what the mcguffin is turning out to be. Basic summary of the story so far:
also, this is my first post on the forums so if it's in the wrong section just let me know, advice seemed appropriate to me. |