hgsolo's page

Now, most people have given you the best advice (deal with it OOC or find another group). I'll just echo that as well as give you a cheap and efficient way of getting rid of him.

Simply offer him some tea as a peace offering, then coup de grace his unconscious ass.

Note that the listed DC is merely to avoid addiction - not to resist the effects. This is spelled out quite clearly in the drugs subsection. Cheesy as heck - but at the very least you will be following the actual rules of the game, unlike his plans : )

Edit: Should he be unwilling to take a drink, lace his food with it or look up the Syringe Spear

He's a wizard, meaning he has to sleep to regain spells anyway. Just offer to take watch and CDG him in his sleep, without doing anything to tip him off before hand. Remember that a sleeping creature takes a -10 penalty to perception checks, so it should be easy enough to sneak up on him by taking 10. If he complains about you having no in character reason to do so just take the alignment hit to chaotic evil and multiclass into antipaladin so his new character can try to mess with your now amped up saves.

Or, you know, handle it maturely or whatever.

"Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses. Shield enhancement bonuses do not act as attack or damage bonuses when the shield is used in a shield bash. The bashing special ability, however, does grant a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls (see the special ability description).

A shield could be built that also acted as a magic weapon, but the cost of the enhancement bonus on attack rolls would need to be added into the cost of the shield and its enhancement bonus to AC."

Also check out this feat.

I don't really think there is much hype. Despite the fact that some people on this forum (myself included) like the idea of playing a MT, it is generally considered a suboptimal build choice. The primary reason MT is weak is that you have to spend several levels splitting classes, losing out on class features other than spells (which all classes have a lot more of in PF than they did in 3.5), and getting your spells later than a single classed caster.

One thing that helps if you do want to go this route is based on errata that says you can use spell-like abilities to qualify for prestige classes. The most common choice for this seems to be an aasimar with an alternate SLA (as daylight is a 3rd level spell, and thus doesn't meet the 2nd level spell requirement). You then take 3 levels in either wizard or cleric (or whatever your base classes will be), take one in the other, and you've qualified by level 5.

If you are at a home game rather than organized play a MT can be more (or way less) appealing. If you start at mid levels the class can hold its own. You can also run by your GM the possibility of qualify for the class one level before you get 2nd level spells, i.e. wizard2/cleric2 istead of 3 each. This worked especially well for me in my old group where we started at level 5 and never seemed to make it past 10. Though that group had other issues.

Another one raised from the dead? What in the blue blazes is going on here exactly?

Well, as this thread points out, you have to raise the dead before your spontaneous inflict spells are a worthwhile class feature.

You think that's crazy? A giant porcupine deals the same amount of damage with its tail slap. Giant porcupines are the greatswords of the animal kingdom.

Mythic adventures playtest wrote:

Mythic Saves (Ex): At 5th tier, whenever you succeed at a saving throw against a spell or special ability, you suffer no effect as long as that ability did not come from a mythic source, such as a mythic creature or character.

If you fail such a saving throw, you take the reduced effect instead (if one is given by the spell or effect). If the spell comes from a mythic source, you treat the results of any saving throw required by the spell or special ability as normal.

I feel that the wording of this ability is really unclear. It really mean that if you fail the ST you always get the result of making it?

The wording is a bit unwieldy, but I think you have it right. Essentially, Mythic Saves works like Improved Evasion, except it applies to all three saves, and does not function against other mythic creatures.

If you are a Cleric, who's god's favored weapon is a thrown weapon, then you could take the Guided Hand feat to use wisdom for attack rolls, then get that weapon the Guided enchantment, and use wisdom for damage.

WE HAVE A WINNER!

Then you make them a TWF, so they can throw that favored weapon and use it in melee with full WIS bonus to attack and damage on every attack!

So I decided that I would go straight fighter here. Character background is essentially the same (though she never became a cleric). I figured the character works just as well as a fighter, and it provides us with a primary melee. I made minor changes to the background personality sections, so you guys can read them in her profile if you wish.

I'll be happy to receive feedback here if anyone has any ideas.

One goblin already did something similar.

I would say that you can't add a +1 cause the site isn't masterwork, but we all know that isn't true.

Also, there is nothing about making spellcraft rolls in place of concentration. Total houserule there. Concentration is not a skill like it was in 3.5, it is now d20 + caster level + caster mod (INT for wizard, CHA for sorcerer, etc): http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Concentration

It also might be that he doesn't like being interrupted while trying to GM. Try talking to him about this stuff out of session. Lots of GMs get frustrated if players interrupt them in the middle of a game because they have to put a lot of work into it.

You are your friend, and you are your ally.

That's true for most people, but not me. I glare at that bastard every time I look in a mirror.

Take Near and Far

This is why I can't stand 3rd party publishers. The benefit of that feat:

Benefit: When using a reach weapon you may attack adjacent foes.

Polearm master gets this:

At 2nd level, as an immediate action, a polearm master can shorten the grip on his spear or polearm with reach and use it against adjacent targets. This action results in a –4 penalty on attack rolls with that weapon until he spends another immediate action to return to the normal grip. The penalty is reduced by –1 for every four levels beyond 2nd.

This ability replaces Bravery.

"Oh hey guys, let's write up a feat that completely negates a major advantage of an archetype."

I am a bit surprised to see so much negativity on this teamwork idea. I agree they should have a good backstory for why they work together, but I can't possibly see punishing people for 1) working as a group and 2) investing in feats to do so. Feats are not easy to come by and the fact that they want to build themselves up to that way should be fine. There are plenty of ways a GM can prevent them being too powerful if need be. Hell, considering the feat costs, they are going to be as far away from optimized cheeze monkeyz when they are more than a move action apart.

What is your name?

What is your quest?

What is your favorite color?

Erato wrote:

Really? Even though I didn't mention porn at all, let alone said it was bad? And even though I was not discussing explicit sex vs. no sex, but rather the implications of willing slavery vs. unwilling slavery? And this from a guy who's so uptight and conservative that he considers bare female breasts to be enough to almost push something into porn? Your prejudice is showing.

In answer to your first question, yes, really.

That you didn't mention the word "porn" is a semantic distinction. Your point can be boiled down to saying that there's a kind of sexual fantasy which, when indulged in, promotes bad thinking in people. That's simply not true.

Alzrius, whether we are talking about porn or "titillating fan service," there are sexual fantasies that promote thinking which is harmful to others. While not every man who has a rape fantasy is inherently a rapist, the fact that he has that fantasy suggests that he views women as objects to be dominated. And Erato's main argument here is that a "willing rape" fantasy is particularly harmful to views of women because it glosses over the issue. Moreover, these fantasies have a realistic impact on women's lives. Rape victims are often portrayed as wanting it and later changing their minds, which is enough to get a defendant off in a jury system.

A slightly more concrete example we can look at is slavery. Most of us should be able to agree fairly easily that slavery is wrong. It might occur in our games, but we are usually the ones breaking up the slave rings. There are monsters portrayed as slavers, but they are of an evil alignment. However, if we look back at the real world examples, most portrayals of blacks in America had them as happy slaves. They wanted to serve whites because they weren't smart enough or motivated enough to want anything more. We can talk about slavery just fine, but when images like the Mammy and Sambo are tossed about it is particularly damaging to blacks because they make it seem as if all the pain and suffering involved in their history never was.

Basically, this idea of a woman (or a man for that matter) whose sole purpose is complete devotion and a desire to serve another is an excuse for rape (and slavery). Same as the happy slave is an excuse for slavery. I don't think these things need to be left out of every game, but I think they need to be handled maturely. And the "race" you've presented here as written (and portrayed through the images) is harmful to views of women.

And by your logic, the only persons who can enter into pacts with supernatural entities are those with the charisma of Marilyn Monroe.

I knew there was something strange about her. SHE'S A WITCH!

Charender wrote:

There is a lot of RAI(rules as intended) that says that the druids/clerics/paladins must intentionally and willfully violate their ethos before something bad happens. Paladins specifically state that they must willfully violate their vows to become an ex-paladin. Clerics must grossly violate their beliefs to become ex-clerics. Inquisitors must "fall into corruption" or change alignment to lose their powers, which is an intentional act. Druid class is missing that verbage, and that feels to me like an unintended omission.

Yes, this. I would not strip anyone (PC or NPC) of their powers through involuntary action:

A) It is imbalanced. Beguiling gift isn't meant to offer the caster that much power, even situationally. This is akin to summoning a magic missile directly into the dragon's brain. It makes sense, logically, but offers more than a spell of that level should.

B) As above, druids/clerics/paladins are gifted powers through their divine sponsors. The notion that such powers might be revoked by anything other than intentional action is probably poor roleplaying. I just personally cannot imagine 'mother nature' revoking a druid's ability for failing a saving throw.

This thread is starting to remind me an awful lot of the Full-Plate Fluffy thread that was running not that long ago: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/gaming/dnd/canFluffyWearFull Plate.

I'd say take a look at Raptorans from the 3rd edition Races of the Wild. They handle the progression from gliding to flight via HD pretty well. As for brittle frame, the only conceivable threat that isn't completely mitigated by 4th level is something that goes up with damage, like taking 1.5x damage from bludgeoning, but that seems a bit high. And I gotta agree with most people on the fight or flight, make it a bonus to initiative, or just up their reflex save.