![]()
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Just finished up a 5 year campaign that started with us enslaved at lvl 1 and ended at lvl 29 and mythic tier 8. Playing in a world that has been running since the late 80s. This was the 7th campaign and we saved the plane (I think.. *) I hope linking to the imgur gallery is fine. Note: We use a ton of house rules and there were many many interventions by gods and the like, so the character has no real way to be reconciled by RAW. https://imgur.com/gallery/Wkk9w6d Happy to answer any questions if y'all have any. Hope y'all enjoy! * we finished last weekend, but the DM will be giving us an epilogue that lets us know how the plane is getting along ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() VoodistMonk wrote: You would need vampiric and cruel on a viscous anything just to keep yourself from suffering too much. I have never seen anyone choose to put viscous on anything, personally. I have both received and handed out viscous weapons as loot, though. Heh. I am currently running a 14 Synthesist/11 Preacher that has it on his offhand and natural attacks. Let's just say he is ... very odd. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Mahtobedis wrote:
Ahh.. yes then. And if the ruling comes back 'they stack'.. take a dip or two of Sacred Fist! ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() I am betting that 5d6 damage and 2d4 rounds being sickened is rather painful. Of course so is a 10d6 fireball, does a fireball have the [Pain] descriptor? Most likely the designers decided that a class called 'Inquisitor' should have some inquisition spells that did not require evil alignment to be useful. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Y'all are still on this?
Answer truthfully or be in massive pain So yea.. the very definition of torture all wrapped up in a spell. Oh yea, the spell is not evil. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Deadmanwalking wrote:
I think we can safely assume that in a conversation about an Inquisitor using torture on magicians in a world where roasting someone with a ball of fire is not an Evil act yet causing someone who has already hit you with a two handed sword some pain (Retribution) is an Evil act, we are in a world very much NOT similar to the real world. The reality is that you are in Pathfinder world, where torturing is a heal check that takes 1 hour. Yes it is also an evil act, but just like anything else, mitigated by context and circumstances. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Deadmanwalking wrote:
As long as you have the time. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() No torture is not always evil.
Anyone who has seen 24 will understand that Jack is nowhere near evil, and he tortures people. It's about context and intent. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() tony gent wrote:
But there isn't always a chance that you fail. A wizard has 0% chance to not cast his spell if he does things right.A Monk has 0% chance to take damage from falling if she does things right. Anyone with a total of 19+ in Acrobatics has a 0% chance to fail at a running 20ft jump. It can go on and on.
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() cnetarian wrote:
Sure. But by lvl 11 (when you get Dervish) you have it a bunch of times from spells as well. Oh also Summoners get Dimension Door on their list at 7th. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() LoneKnave wrote: Yeah, but they already have access to pounce at lvl1 so it's not worth as much for them. Of course, if you use biped or serpent base form it's still pretty good. What they don't have access to is. Port into melee range of something with reach.Hit it. Port behind. Create Flanking for self. Hit it a bunch more. Port away. All without any attacks of opportunity. :) ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() cnetarian wrote:
Actually the Synth has a BAB of +6 at 7th level since you use the Eidolon stats. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() StreamOfTheSky wrote:
Synthesist gets Dimension Door SLA at 6th. So they can start the hopping train at 11th as well. ![]()
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() A good trick for the melee Synth is to use evolution points to get Shadow Blend and cast Evolution Surge for Shadow Form when you want it. Constant concealment, total concealment on demand and no permanent negative of dealing 1/2 damage. Interestingly enough a ranged Synth deals full damage using RAW. "The eidolon's melee attacks deal only half damage to corporeal creatures." ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() I believe Displacement just gives a miss chance, not concealment of any kind. Total Concealment is a thing though.
If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment). You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies." Once again we have a lovely example of things in parentheses. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Sounds like the Synthesist could fix all of the house rules.
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() blahpers wrote: C'mon, iammercy, you can't seriously believe that parentheses can only convey optional information. Actually I was more thinking along the lines that the developers meant to have the words 'for example' and forgot them. However, what I said was "often times text within parenthesis is used to explain something". Often times != can only. James Jacobs has chimed in on this.
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() James Jacobs wrote:
I don't disagree with your 'THAT SAID' at all. It is true though that this one spell is literally useless to the Inquisitor. Really though if one spell doesn't work right that isn't so bad considering the amazing system. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() James Jacobs wrote:
But the other dozen or so "litany" spells are not like this at all. As far as I can see Litany of Righteousness is the only Litany spell that an Inquisitor cannot benefit from. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() I want to approach a previously hit upon question from a different direction if that's ok. Q: Why should only paladins, clerics, and good outsiders benefit from Litany of Righteousness? A few points that seem relevant.
![]()
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Turgan wrote:
Well.. The first sentence of the spell implies it would help anything with a good aura.A paladins good aura is the same good aura as anyone else's of sufficient level. As far as I can tell every single other Litany spell is intended to work for an Inquisitor. The number of mistakes or unclear wording in pathfinder is hardly 0. The developers could very easily have been attempting to clarify what a good aura is, as opposed to limiting which good auras are included. Oh, and a good reason to link it would be that it would have clarified the developers intent for the spell. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Turgan wrote:
That would have been a great thing to have linked. Also, unless the answer comes from one of the devs it is hardly automatically true. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Scavion, It's a bloody question because often times text within parenthesis is used to explain something as opposed to being a limiter. Of course had you read the thread you would know that. Gauss, you are making up words. Obviously it is not based on 'a good aura from a class feature' since the first sentence states very clearly 'Calling down a litany of anathema, you make an evil more
blahpers, except it's nothing like that at all. The spell specifically starts out saying 'hey guys! This is for good creatures' then later, if you take the parens to be exclusive says 'haha.. just kidding'. So it would be more like if Paizo wrote 'You can apply your Dex modifier to a light weapon' and then three sentences later wrote 'oh just kidding, only if you are under 4'3"'. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() So nothing from any official source on this. Clearly an aura exists for everyone, although slightly stronger for some. And Gauss.. a 5th level good Rogue has a Good Aura from the RAW. See the spell Detect Good (which points to Detect Evil). Claxon. You actually cannot promise me something that has not been clarified by them that wrote things. You may be correct as to their intent but it is a muddy thing. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Gauss wrote:
BUt that is exactly the point. A paladins aura is nothing more than what anyone else has, just stronger. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Paladin:
Cleric:
Both state very clearly that these class skills enhance the aura that all things have. i.e. An 11th level Good Rogue does have a Good Aura. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() mplindustries wrote: The Good Aura referenced by Litany of Righteousness is the Aura class feature of Clerics and Paladins or a creature with the Good subtype. Registering to Detect Good is irrelevant. Except that the aura that a paladin or cleric gives off is the exact same as the one detected by Detect Good. A 4th level Paladin and an 11th level Good Rogue have the same aura. ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Litany:
Detect Good:
Detect Evil:
Who shows up?
There is obviously no question that a Good PC of 5HD has an Good Aura.
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Karuth wrote:
The Dimensional feats are not combat feats. Summoners can get it done at 11th but pretty much anything else is min 13th.![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() ryric wrote:
Actually a Synthesist can start at 6th (well yes 7th). ![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() With only 3 PCs it seems a bit much.
Take the biggest hitting PC. Everyone Aid Anothers him. Even with the -1 a GS Paladin should be hitting for somewhere around 2d6+6 or dropping one with each hit. A d8 PC should have around 11 hp with the negative level. Taking 4 hits from the gobbos to drop him. Assuming 4 PCs the Paladin should be attacking at around:
Figure the players have AC's in the 17-20 range the Goblins attacking at +4 are going to hit a good deal less than the Paladin. It a teamwork encounter. Maybe not the thing to throw at them the first time out but a well coordinated group could take them. ![]()
![]()
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
![]() Diego Rossi wrote:
So.. never. Got it. I'm not even playing a magus. Nor am I saying that the ruling is wrong. Just that one of the staple spells to enhance melee damage is not doing so in this case.
|