cnetarian's page

Let me see, played a female halfling dual whip wielding Calista wannabe who was heavily into discipline, played a vampiric shadow demon who sired children on mortal women so he could feed on his descendants to increase his power, played a psychopath who semi-sucessfully raised an outer god. Nope, I don't think there is anything which is too taboo for me to play, at least for a one-off.

I suspect the bans are really aimed at players who use their characters' alignments as an excuse to be jerks. While it is certainly possible to create a chaotic-evil character who works well with a party, it takes a serious role-player to do so and most of the CE characters one is likely to encounter in games are solely there to screw over the rest of the party. It is also possible to create LG characters who cannot work with a group, but again, it takes a serious role-player to do so and most of the LG characters one is likely to encounter in games are not going to be a problem.

As has been mentioned CN is one of those alignments which is often used by players to create characters with no actual character who are often incapable of functioning in a party. It tends to be cyclical in my experience, players start abusing CN alignment to justify bad characters, DM bans CN (or evil or whatever, once I saw CG get so abused it was banned) out of hand, a player comes up with a reasonable CN character and talks DM into relaxing the ban for that character, players make some reasonable CN, players start abusing CN alignment to justify bad characters... .

The same level unless there is some really good reason otherwise. There are two practical reasons for this: 1) the replacement character almost always takes over the same role as the dead character, and if the player was unable to handle the role with one character without dying a new character at lower level is even more likely to die, 2) it is much harder as a DM to build interesting encounters for parties with characters of diverse levels.

Show me where in the mechanics where it says that has to be your character's flavour.

If you check the class skills for barbarians you'll note that barbarians are the only class which doesn't have profession as a class skill. While the class description doesn't dictate any individual character's flavor, the barbarian is a mechanically inferior class for building a civilized character.

I understand the usual technique used by kingdoms is to offer admission to the royal family to whichever adventurers survive killing the dragon. It may not be efficient in terms of adventurers since one might go through thousands before some manage to slay the dragon but for the kingdom it is very efficient, no actual expenditure to slay the dragon (the adventurers become part of the royal family and if the adventurers have any wealth of their own it gets added into the kingdom's wealth) and potential out-breeding with proven superior stock. As an added bonus, from the kingdom's point of view, it is also a good way to cull the murder-hobo population which is (even when not slaying villages of goblin subjects) quite disruptive with all their trying to sleep with every mildly attractive citizen, starting bar-fights, conspiring with priests and so forth.

The road paved with good intentions is an easy way to handle this sort of reversal. Start with defeating evil, move to the more neutral then before you know what is going on the good guys are your target.

Certainly the goblins which were attacking the town were a valid target. It just made sense to investigate the mercenaries who had sent a recruitment letter to the goblin chieftain. And who wouldn't have followed up on all those wagons of weapons found in the mercenary camp? Admittedly burning down the smithy might have been a bit extreme. But it did lead us to the cleric who was paying for the weapons and mercenaries, although in retrospect we probably shouldn't have just assumed that a cleric of Torag creating a mercenary army was an evil traitor to the deity. Those secret letters between the priest and the minister of the army were soooo incriminating and it was public knowledge that the minister of the army had a better claim to the throne than the king, there was no way we could have known that she declined the throne in favor of the king and was one of his strongest ... .

CR is never and always useless. If you run 1,000,000 different parties through an encounter, then CR is going to be a good indicator of how much of a challenge that encounter is going to be, on average. If, like most of us, you only have one or three different parties going through an encounter, then CR is a poor indicator of how difficult the encounter is going to be for the one or three parties you have going through the encounter. About level 10+ with my players, the characters start to develop some sort "tricks" which can trivialize a lot of encounters, but that is less a problem with CR than with the way character development works.

There was an experiment done a few years back where d20s were rolled 10,000 times and the results recorded. The experiment was to compare the randomness of Chessex dice against GameScience dice. It was demonstrated that the GameScience die rolled more true than the Chessex die.

However it has been pointed out that a typical d20 is more egg shaped than round, with the flattened axis being aligned through the 1 and the 20. If you look at the bar graph of the Chessex die in the link above you will see that the numbers that came up less often were the 1, the 20, and the six other numbers that share a side with them (2,7,8,13,14,19). The numbers that came up more often were those along the "equator".

Because of this shape it makes sense that the 1 and 20 would come up more often in the saltwater test, but I would expect the same thing to happen when they are rolled, contrary to what the data show.

The saltwater test will not detect a die which is 'out-of-true' shapewise, only one which has poorly distributed weight. The saltwater test demonstrates the heaviest side 'sinking' to the bottom resulting in the rotating die stopping with it's lightest face (or vertex if the weight is really off) on the top. If the weight in the die is evenly distributed then the shape of the die is irrelevant in the saltwater test and the die won't roll to any favored side.

Just because a die passes the saltwater test doesn't mean it is fair. Also one shouldn't expect too much of a die in the saltwater test, what one should really look for is how long it takes to come to rest after being spun than what number it comes to rest on, the faster a die comes to a stop the more unequally the weight is distributed.

Wait, so you throw your dice in the water, and if the water accepts them and they sink then they are safe, while if the water rejects them and they float then they are cursed? I'm sure I've heard of this trick before.

on a more serious note, better to change to a denser fluid than changing the salt in the salt water. if you feel like going all out, switch to glycerin (cheaper than caesium chloride too) but cooking oil or liquid soap should do the trick for most dice and does not require a trip anywhere but the grocer.

----edit---
completely forgot that what most people use as cooking oil these days is less dense than water. why people would want to cook perfectly good food in light oils is beyond me, but it is the fashion.

Wizards are kept impotent by use some magical item,probably a special collar. This would also work with spontaneous casters, so any PF prison would probably have developed such a device.

Despite the fact that wizards (and magni) in the prison are unable to cast spells, over the years the prison underground have developed a small library of magical 'spellbooks'. Most prepared casters use these spellbooks regularly because otherwise when released they would have lost the mental discipline necessary for spell casting and have to relearn it. The players have tapped into the prison underground and have access to a few spells, a poor selection true, but if the wizard and magnus can get their collars off they can cast spells.

---edit---
I should mention that by giving the wizard a weird selection of spells to memorize you get to see how creative the wizard is without his/her usual selection of spells.

The best 'trick' I've found to maintain horror is difficult to describe how to do. The GM has to give the players the sense that there is something important he knows that the players don't. It starts with attitude, ignore any concept of the game being a cooperative endevor, the GM needs to think of himself as an impartial observer who is simply watching the players' fate unfold.

Random die rolls, a quick meaningless check of notes, taking one player aside all help during the game but can backfire if overused.

A technique that can help (not just with horror), although it might be tough to get right in a few days, is gradually dropping the volume of your voice. If you start talking in a normal tone and drop it just a hair every so often, the players start to lean in just to hear what you are saying and they assign more importance to it. If a player cannot hear or complains then go back to a normal voice, but if you can pull it off it works well at creating a low level of tension.

[humor] In a similar vein you could get a tape of noises in the 13-14 HZ range and let the traffic noises cover it, good old infrasoundt will keep the players on edge.[/humor]

Dunno if it was intended, but it is legal. Note that players can get the same attack sequence using the anaconda's coils belt slot item and a binding blade, which can make for impressive barbar damage.

Went through a worse situation with an eidolon using grab and rake [strike]abilities[/strike] evolutions which at level 9 had an unbuffed no feat attack routine of 4x(claw +14 (1d6+1d6acid+7), on hit grapple attempt +14, on successful grapple 2x(rake +14(1d6+1d6acid+7), release grapple). 12 non-iterative attacks/round is probably too many for a level 9 pet.

66. My father was a sorcerer, his father was a sorcerer, his father was a sorcerer and so for 65 generations. The family estates are mine if dear old dad doesn't disinherit me. My features bear a strong resemblance to those of the family gardener ... .

well in terms of Golarion economics I'm fairly certain the value of a gp is fixed by weight and cost of CRB items does not change from campaign year to campaign year; again, I'm trying to answer "HOW BIG IS A 25,000 GOLD DIAMOND?"

Please contribute.

probably somewhere in the 20-30 carat range, far from common but not so rare as to have each one be considered singular. If they were any bigger then at best only one a year would likely be available for purchase in all of Golarion. Consider a range of 1/8th of an ounce (18.5 carats) to 1/4th of an ounce (37 carats) to be a good guide.

Bandw2 wrote:

Killing for your country is honorable, but killing for your townsmen is wicked?

Killing when it's not neccessary to do so? Damm yes!

But she kills to punish for misdeeds. If all killing when it is unnecessary is evil then I doubt you can find more than few dozen non-evil player characters in the whole of D&D's existence, the game is pretty much predicated on players deciding to unnecessarily kill creatures. Most of that killing is justified, but it isn't necessary - you don't need to slay the orcs in the hunting camp which raiding the town, but you are justified in doing so. And if justified killing is not-evil then how can her killing as punishment for mistreating the villagers be considered evil?

More on-topic: Amplified Rage is pretty awesome. I built a Mad Dog barbarian with a badger companion, both using Amplified Rage. They had a damn nice set of stats. I think it could work with two barbarian PCs, too. Basically, a party with more overlap is much more likely to benefit from these feats than the classic "cleric/fighter/rogue/wizard" team.

Mind you, the Mad Dog and his badger were NPCs and they went down pretty hard, but that was because they got scattered by create pit and hide from animals.

well, unless I missed some special ability which lets a badger companion be an orc or half-orc to qualify for the amplified rage feat, it would require 2 barbarian characters for PCs to pull off absent a GM change to the rules.

Orfamay Quest wrote:

I should think that what people imagine when they use a coffee pot is .... (wait for it) a coffee pot.

To be fair, the coffee pot description does sound rather arcane if you don't already know what a percolator is.

I agree, I spent a while trying to picture a coffee pot according the description and everything I pictured looked more like this bong than a coffee percolator.

Well the design is about what you would find from the 17th century to the mid 20th century (it works well) and since before the 17th century there wasn't much coffee drunk outside of Africa you are unlikely to find a medieval design.

I was coming back to edit since I thought my previous comment came across as snarky, but it wasn't intended that way. It just kinda surprised me that I haven't seen a percolator since the mid 1990s, when I was a kid there was a coffee percolator in everyone's kitchen and i guess in the 1970s/1980s everything switched to drip coffee markers and percolators disappeared. Something I never thought about until you mentiopned it.

man I must be getting old when someone doesn't recognize the description of a coffee percolator. strange, because you can still buy new ones.

The most important thing about a macho death is not the means, but the why. Attacking Asmodeus because he insulted your mother, macho - being seduced by a succubus while out buying scented candles, not macho.

If nothing else presents itself, a good macho reason to die is to protect innocents (in a silly campaign they don't have to real innocents).

As to the how, having a wizard turn you into a statue as you drop on the BBEG just isn't macho. Quaffing a potion of petrification and turning yourself into a statue as drop on the BBEG is macho. The difference, a macho man is self-reliant and not some wuss who needs a stinkin' wizard to turn him into a statue. It might be heroic to have others help you, but it isn't macho. Unless the stinkin' wizard in question is an evil wizard who you've managed to beat into submission, in which case they can be considered part of your equipment and not a real person.

No offence intended: even though you are a ghoul, you surprisingly have some really interesting stories to tell people about.

It is only surprising to people who are unaware of the great stories which came about because of failures. The Lord of The Rings trilogy can be traced to a halfling missing his survival check during a fight with some orcs and getting lost - Bilbo gets acclaim for starting a major war by not being able to tell his left from his right. A party of uber-competent heroes going down a railroad track and saving the world can make a decent story, a party of heroes-in-name-only getting side-tracked and overcoming their weaknesses to save (or fail to save) the world can make a great story.

Kirth Gersen wrote:

For example, if I were in a game with TOZ, he'd be respectful enough say point-blank at the start, "I will occasionally fudge the dice, and if you call me on it I'll admit it." I can respect that approach far more than the people who fudge the dice and then pretend like they don't. Hell, I've run games for players who preferred the DM to fudge rolls; I roll in the open, but I'd occasionally say, "Screw that 20! I'm rerolling it, unless anyone objects!"

Well, I'm no TOZ, but can we compromise? "I will occasionally fudge the dice, and if you call me out on it I'll call you a liar, say you drank all my milk*, and shame you in front of your peers. If you prove I'm lying, I'll storm out, break into your neighbors' house, drink all their milk, and leave a note saying it was you."

terrible to deprive the party like that. when characters get together in the bars to talk about their players, they don't talk about the upteenth time the party slayed a dragon risk-free because the GM was fudging the dice. We talk about the players who almost got us killed with their crappy rolls - Windmill Willy who couldn't roll above a 4 to hit for 3 sessions in row and had an 0 for 47 record, Stoney Steve who played a barbarian and made exactly one will save in a 15 level career and had to be repeatedly turned to stone by a druid to keep from wiping the party, and Snake-Eye Susan the girlfriend who filled a spot with a ninth level wizard for one session and cast fireballs that did less than 10 points of damage. We talk about the time our player learned that a babasu with a single spear attack can do over 50 points of damage on a crit. When the GM decides to coddle the players it is the characters who suffer, dying isn't bad as long as we get some good stories out of it.

I can tolerate a fair amount of GM cheating, but I hate it. Inevitably I have found that it becomes a means of GM favoritism and/or a tool for the GM to railroad the story. That said, I can tolerate a fair amount because a GM can find other more offensive ways to do the same things, and the only alternatives I find are to abandon the GM or let the GM get experienced enough to grow out of it, and GMs do grow out of it (faster when they sit on both sides of the GM screen).

Player cheating I have very little tolerance for. Die roll cheating, no way - for me the whole point of using a d20 system is challenge the fates. Character sheet cheating, if a weak character has some fudged numbers to go from pathetic to merely miserable then I don't get upset and don't mind overlooking it as long as it is corrected; if a strong character fudges numbers to go from strong to dominating then I get fairly upset as I consider the player stole narrative power - while I keep in mind that it could be an innocent mistake, the amount of benefit of the doubt a cheating character gets depends on the strength of the character.

Actually, the familiars retain their intelligence and abilities, but no have no way to advance beyond that point. Doomed to a life of remembrance of the connections they had to their wizards, yet bereft of the mystic powers that bond conferred, most of them turn to booze and an endless string of one night stands and meaningless relationships, none of which can fill the lonely void.

This, compounded by the desolation stemming from their inability to communicate with most intelligent species, inevitably leads most to eventually join gangs with like types of base creatures banding together to battle their hated foes of other former familiars - bats vs toads; cats vs hawks, etc. In this way, they eventually kill each other off which is why "former familiar" is so rarely found on wandering monster charts. But woe befalls the unfortunate low level party that accidentally finds itself inside the territory of the Rioting Ravens, or Tumultuous Toads.

We should be so fortunate if this happened to all familiars. Some turn feral and become real threats, the Demon Lady Jezelda was once the Pekinese familiar of an evil Azlanti wizard who specialized in transformation magic, after his death she figured out a way to transform herself into a wolf to survive better and a human so she could travel in civilization when she wished. This was acceptable until Jezelda tried to increase her power by turning a human into her own familiar, with the well-known results. Of course her followers refuse to talk about her origins because it is kinda embarrassing that your deity was once a small dog familiar, but if you ever encounter Jezelda and want to get a rise out of her call her a "yappy little puppy" or ask if "Jez-Jez want's her belly rubbed."

Not track arrows!!! Arrows weight 15 pounds per hundred, not including special quivers, I'd love to be able to build an archer who doesn't need to track that much weight. As for durable arrows, they can be destroyed through things like hitting a fire-elemental (specifically mentioned) and are lost if the party cannot take the time to recover them. When even a level 3 archer can be shooting 3 arrows a round it does not take long at all to go through a quiver of 20 arrows.

Once I have a portable hole for carrying around supplies it makes sense to stop tracking all arrows owned, but even then arrows weigh enough to make me track the combat load, replenished from the arrow supply bought 1,000 at a time when I think of it and put in the portable hole.

The problem is not the cash, it is the weight and until weight isn't a problem you should keep track of arrows for that reason.

20) skeletons ice cutters, both to cut ice for food preservation and to cut open passageways in harbors for ships. works well since skeletons are immune to cold damage and don't need to breath.

21) burning skeleton fire fighters. not so good with rescuing kittens from trees but they do a bang-up job at the end of the bucket brigade, they drop sand or water right on the flames.

Haggis and beer.

The night before a battle with the drow (or other underground critters), the leaders would throw a big party and drink all the beer and eat all the food. Then early in the morning the leaders would have the horns so all the dwarves would wake up with terrible hangovers, and the leaders would give this prepared speech:

"we've nothing left to eat but haggis, and nothing left to drink but water. we either take the drow village and their supplies or we'll have to eat the haggis while sober."

If you are contemplating breeding with a dragon be forewarned that the most difficuly part comes after the physical act. While dragons have no familial affection for their offspring, they have a very strong appreciation for child-support and custody battles often involve actual combat.

ran into a rust monster on the way out of an underground dungeon, no arrows left. must have been the funniest sight, a stream of mithril chain wearing folks running away weighed down with loot so they were barely able to keep out of charge range of a rust monster with a gnome wizard (sorc?) without any metal on her running after the rust monster and tossing out an acid ball every second or third round.

Usually I just have dynamic combat, but then again it is rare these days for me to see an endless succession of 10' corridors leading to 20'x20' rooms.

3 ways to change the combat narrative when fighting in an endless succession of 10' corridors leading to 20'x20' rooms.

1. if a NPC/monster is getting the worse of swapping full-attacks with the party then they should darn well try to make an attack and move, or just run to a safer location (the foe takes one swipe at Player A, then retreats around the corner when the arrows of Player B cannot pepper it's hide).

2. if a monster/NPC has reach and the PCs opposing them do not then the monster/NPC can take a 5' step out of PC range and force the PCs to 5' step into range(the PCs drive their foe slowly towards the back wall).

3. conversely, a monster(NPC) with 10'reach due to size can press into 5'range of reach weapon equipped PCs, forcing the PCs to 5' step back to be able to use their reach weapons (the PCs struggle to contain their gigantic opponent).

2 ways to make combat more dynamic.

1) big, open spaces. Pull out a 25x40 battle mat and see how the party handles goblin archers in every 4th square around the perimeter while melee goblins wait in the center to charge any back-line type who are left open. A dragon with enough room to maneuver should have the fly speed to smash-and-dash out of charge range of a cavalier on most mounts, forcing the cavalier to ride up to the dragon without charging, whereupon the dragon breath weapon attacks the the cavalier and moves out of charge range again.

2) narrow, tiny hallways. (It was monotonous and terrifying taking the point down that tunnel full of wolves. The monotony came from the fact that it was too narrow for the wolves to get by me, so we wound up killing one and advancing over it's corpse until they all died. The terrifying part wasn't the ranger's arrows flying by my face because they went by too quick to notice, it was those slow moving axes the halfling bard kept tossing between my legs.)

cnetarian wrote:

A caster I play with sometimes picks fleet up at level 7 or 9 to be able to use close range or touch spells (move 30' + 5' step + level 9 close range spell distance of 45' = 80' range), but that has as much to do with not having a feat they want as for the extra movement.

You can't 5' step after moving 30'.

mental auto-fill, I intended to write + 5' fleet but wrote 5' step instead.

Never saw Conan use a damn bow.

That's kinda the point of ranged weapons, kill them before they get close enough to recognize you.

10. The Three Golden Balls. This shop is not named the Three Golden Balls, that is merely what is pictured on the sign over the sheltered doorway. Asking the locals will not reveal the name since most deny knowing that the shop exists and the rest will only acknowledge it with a grunt and a head-jerk. There is actually nothing nefarious or evil or mystic about the shop, it is a pawn-broker's shop but no one want's to admit to needing their services.

resources: cash can be converted to jewelery easily here at a nominal mark-up, a changing stock of used magic items can be purchased as can a surprising large inventory of used musical instruments. Loans can be obtained using valuables for colteral(maximum loan at 50% price of item, 10% interest per month, item to be sold if more than 3 months go by without paying interest.) Despite the hints of the shopkeeper that the buyer is getting a great deal because what the inventory is of dubious ownership, nothing in the shop is stolen - the shopkeeper is on excellent terms with the authorities and checks with them before purchasing any thing questionable and turns anyone trying to sell stolen items over to them.

So it's either meant to be super powerful or essentially useless.

What do you guys thing would be a fair version of this feat? (Or is the current version fair to you?)

The word "suffocate" (the transitive verb used in kraken strike) doesn't mean the same thing as the word "suffocate" (the intransitive verb used in the environment rules). Without a dev post about how kraken throttle is intended to apply 'suffocate' then the grammar of RAW does not allow me to conclusively decide if kraken throttle applies either the 'suffocation' environmental condition or the 'suffocate' effect, although my understanding of the balance in the game favors adopting the former over the later.

have you considered building around using the strangling hair spell?

It shouldn't be that hard - all you need is a time machine, a dozen trained monkey pickpockets, 3 ounces of blood from a dead god, a case of cheap white wine & a 1000 faceted ruby the size of a hen's egg. Once you've assembled the materials, the rest is obvious.

Since Nandaka and Zulfiqar are both proper names of specific swords instead of types of swords I'm not certain what you asking. Zulfiqar is the double-pointed (sometimes double-bladed) sword wielded by Muhammad's son-in-law Ali, while Nandaka is the man who became a sword so that one of Vishnu's avatars could slay a demon. Both of the swords linked to seem to be ceremonial swords and are only called Nandaka and Zulfiqar in the collection because of their association with specific named swords. Are you suggesting that instead of 'longsword' the name Excalibur should be used?

A few more that I thought of, serious although I like the image of such a character warning the party to beware of wolves' breath attacks:

The frog people who steal little children (bogards).

Sirens who lure sailors to their deaths.

Naga who guard ancient treasures.

Drieder who infest the underearth.

Basilisks who can found among such realistic statues.

The quote sounds more like something from the Necromongers in the The Chronicles of Riddick than something a paladin would say. Regardless,

Trolls, giants, wolves (who huff and puff and blow houses down), evil sorcerers (may cause problems if the character doesn't accept that there are non-evil sorcerers) and all of the undead spring to mind as common villains.

"Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons."

"Wisdom describes a character's willpower, common sense, awareness, and intuition."

I am hesitant about comparing IQ directly to intelligence scores, part of what many IQ tests measure is better thought of as wisdom. In RL there are people who can be thought of as having high wisdom scores who are well spoken and function quite well but because of things like dyslexia have difficulty in learning which can be represented by low intelligence scores.

A 7 intelligence character I would play as not having broad base of knowledge, (they might know all about making swords but very little about making houses) with a preference for relying on feelings over reason in making decisions (this can cause problems if the character also has a low wisdom and thus bad intuition). I would also play the level 7 intelligence character as getting confused with anything which takes more than 7 steps (same as INT) from start to finish, Rube Goldberg would have nothing to fear from the character.

Now a low wisdom character can be fun - impulsive, trusting, forgetting the monster in the next room, always instinctively choosing the wrong answer - but that is not same as a low intelligence character.

The difference between the active and the passive audience. A passive audience presented with a "gun" has no control over what happens with that gun, while an active audience can control whether the "gun" becomes important or not. Throwing nonessential things at the passive audience just results in confusing and irritating them, throwing nonessential things at an active audience results in their having options and more chances to control their environment. Spend 20 seconds describing 14 rooms in a dungeon and then spends 5 minutes detailing the contents of room number 15 then the audience know there is something important about the room, while this cues the passive audience to pay more attention to what is going on, the active audience knows to ignore the contents of the first 14 rooms and then spend 3 hours ransacking room #15 until they they figure out why it needed such a detailed list of it's contents.

Better question: Why should the players fear the almighty GM?

Winning when you could have lost is exciting, winning when you should have lost is exhilarating. A GM is shortchanging their players if the GM denies the players the pleasure of having their characters overcome real challenges.

While adventuring, at one time, have each of them make a DC24 will save. Ask those who fail (should be most of them) to check to be sure they fail. Shuffle some papers and look hard at them for about 20 seconds, maybe using a pencil to make some random marks on the paper. Then resume the game.

I'm actually only interested in a one-level dip in Swashbuckler for Swashbuckler Finesse and opening up Slashing Grace. It is my intention to build a dex-based sword (scimitar) and board archaeologist, and I want dex to damage with the shield. Spiked light shield (bards are proficient with non-tower shields) is a light piercing weapon, allowing me to apply dex to attack rolls with Swashbuckling Finesse, but I still need agile for damage.

If that's your intent you ought to use a whip instead - sure it does less damage and you need the whip mastery feat to do damage to several opponents and avoid AoOs when attacking, but it's an archeologist with a whip. As a non-light one-handed finessable slashing weapon with reach the whip has some mechanical justification as well, not enough usually to outweigh the decreased damage but the flavor is what makes the whip shine. (side note: bards don't get martial weapon (cough*scimitar*cough) proficiency so the one-level dip in swashbuckler adds that too.)

The most f***ed up thing I can recall was using prisoners as human Bangalore torpedoes in Aftermath (maybe Twilight2000 or Morrow Project, one of those post-apocalyptic games). The solution to a minefield and two fences was to strap explosives with dead-man switches to a dozen prisoners and tell them to "run to the fence and if you make it inside alive then you can go free, but every 30 seconds we'll shoot whoever is in furthest behind. Go."

Second most screwed up was probably when 2 players independently decided to sell out the party to different elder gods for power.

Have Reggie wear a black body suit with a white skeleton painted on it, so he looks like a man wearing a bad skeleton costume. A perfect double bluff.

52) because, for a paladin, I'm amazingly unwilling to involve myself, I contact social services about the abandoned goblin children and otherwise ignore them while basking in the glow of smug self-congratulation for having 'done the right thing'.

On the subject of touch AC, plate mail actually was tested against firearms regularly upon creation because plate mail and firearms existed at the same time. It was bullet proof.

I am getting a little tired about the misunderstanding of this. Back in the 16th century armor makers used to test (prove) their plate armor by firing a pistol into the strongest part of the armor from a distance. If the bullet penetrated then the armorer would patch the hole and sell it as normal armor, if the bullet didn't penetrate then the armorer would burnish the dent and sell it for twice the price as 'bullet proven' armor. Of course if someone shot this bullet proof armor somewhere other than it's strongest point, or from closer than where it was tested, or with a musket - well the armor wasn't tested to see if would stop those types of bullets. About 25 years ago a German (Austrian?) museum with too many early firearms and too many suits of armor did testing on actual plate armor using actual early firearms and that testing made pretty clear that within 10m (30 feet) the firearms would reliably penetrate the armor.

fighter wins because the fighter had to tank INT so much that he doesn't see what is so funny about the monk being in the line-up while the barbar and the brawler die laughing at the thought of a monk being in the contest.

Any paladin who puts on his X-Ray vision will see a very evil girl with surprisingly high aura strength.

Grant her the ability to mask alignment through 2 levels of the spy PrC, or giver her an 8,000gp ring of mind shielding. I favor mask alignment though since it can make her appear to be LG and worthy of help.