Diver

johnnythexxxiv's page

473 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 473 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

No, they cannot. The reason why 10ft reach has weird stipulations is because the weapon technically reaches ~halfway into the 2nd square so changes were made so that creatures would actually provoke approaching on the diagonal for them. With 15ft the overlap is too small (only about "8 inches" into the 3rd 5ft square) for it to be considered part of your threatened area. This does mean that a creature with 10ft reach can attack a creature with 15ft reach without provoking an AoO if approaching on the diagonal, but that situation comes up far less often than 10ft vs 5ft reach so the developers decided that it was fine as is.


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
Indeed. And they should make fighters keep track of their whetstones, and oil for their armor. Plus, all adventurers should keep track of their spare boot laces, because everyone knows what a pain it is when your bootlaces snap in the middle of combat!

And yet, there are item costs listed for Whetstones and oil. And for arrows and all sorts of minor things. If you think it's okay to give the fighter a free pass on lesser gear, then I guess I don't see the issue with spell component pouches.

Seems like there should be a feat for Eschew Lesser Gear or Eschew Ammunition, since we've got a feat for free spell materials.

Kinda like keeping track of character weight. I'm a fan of that mechanic, but I understand that lots of GMs don't bother with it.

Pack Rat and Well Prepared are psuedo Eschew Lesser Gear but are race specific and you still have to use Schrodinger's Payment for them.


I'd be okay with it. You are allowed to purposely fail a saving throw or skill check, so I see little reason to not allow you to purposely fail an attack. If you want to critically fail the attack, go for it.


Steal voice isn't perfect, but it is permanent until removed, so might be worthwhile for recurring NPCs/ an obnoxious PC.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Edition War: What Bloodrealm is trying to start. When a poster talks derogatorily about a certain iteration of D&D, expecting people to come defend it (I had no qualms with 5E, wasn't my favorite system, but it's nice for when you want a rules-lite game) so that they can continue to attack it. Also can be used when comparing different RPGs to each other (such as Call of Chuthulu vs Pathfinder as favorite system) when done in a negative and baiting manner.


Wonderstell wrote:

....
[snip]

Doesn't matter.

Blistering Feint wrote:

Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, Ifrit.

Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on feint checks made while wielding a weapon that deals fire damage. Anytime you successfully feint a creature while using such a weapon, you may deal its fire damage to the enemy.

Anytime you successfully feint a creature while using such a weapon

=/=

Anytime you successfully feint a creature with such a weapon

The counter argument being that you should probably have to be actually using a thing to be considered to be using it. If I'm just holding a pen in my hand and not writing anything down, I'm not exactly using it, am I? I don't see why the same logic shouldn't apply here.

Anyway, to get back on topic, as far as genocidal effects go, 3.5 had the good old locate city bomb which if you're comfortable adding 3.5 back into your pathfinder, can produce hilariously overpowered results.


The Sideromancer wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:
Kalridian wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:

For killing an army of commoners, there's nothing more effective than the Blistering Feint/Distracting Cloak/Battle Poi combo.

Just let your BBEG stand completely visible in the middle of the army, presumably on a flying mount, and then he'll feint everyone at the same time... dealing "the weapon's fire damage" to everyone who can see the BBEG. Twice.

So.

Number of commoners affected: Everyone who aren't blind.

Investment: 4 feats and being of a certain race (5 feats if Human).

Damage: (1d8 + Str + Weapon Enchantment)x2

A fighter or brawler could pull this off at level 3.

That is an incredibly cheesy abuse of the weird RAW for feint and no sane GM should allow it on his table, neither on Player nor on NPC side.

I know it works RAW, but come on...

Hey, OP wanted the atom bomb of pathfinder.

So I gave him the most disgusting weapon I know of.

Cheese

Does that even work though? I'd assume that the cloak counts as the "weapon" you are feinting with so Blistering Feint shouldn't apply unless the cloak itself deals fire damage.
So pay the extra cost to reslot it to weapon.

Distracting in this case comes from Equipment Trick (Cloak) - Distracting Cloak, not the Distracting weapon property. You can't reassign feats to weapons they can't affect. Again, this is moot as soon as you have fire damage on the cloak, but I'm trying to figure out if battle poi (or any other fire damage weapon) are actually relevant for this exploit.


Wonderstell wrote:
Kalridian wrote:
Wonderstell wrote:

For killing an army of commoners, there's nothing more effective than the Blistering Feint/Distracting Cloak/Battle Poi combo.

Just let your BBEG stand completely visible in the middle of the army, presumably on a flying mount, and then he'll feint everyone at the same time... dealing "the weapon's fire damage" to everyone who can see the BBEG. Twice.

So.

Number of commoners affected: Everyone who aren't blind.

Investment: 4 feats and being of a certain race (5 feats if Human).

Damage: (1d8 + Str + Weapon Enchantment)x2

A fighter or brawler could pull this off at level 3.

That is an incredibly cheesy abuse of the weird RAW for feint and no sane GM should allow it on his table, neither on Player nor on NPC side.

I know it works RAW, but come on...

Hey, OP wanted the atom bomb of pathfinder.

So I gave him the most disgusting weapon I know of.

Cheese

Does that even work though? I'd assume that the cloak counts as the "weapon" you are feinting with so Blistering Feint shouldn't apply unless the cloak itself deals fire damage.


Roll With It is another good feat for this concept. As far as weapons go, something like boluses, flying talons or dwarven dorn dergars would probably be your best bet since it takes a special kind of person to use something so janky. Really any weapon that is mostly chain/rope would do.


Squiggit wrote:
That's been my experience too, Claxon. I've never seen that rage power taken by.. anyone ever.

I mean, I snagged the extra DR for Badoomdoom but that was more as a thought experiment than anything else. If I were to actually play him I'd absolutely not bother with sinking rage powers into DR and pick up something more exciting instead.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mine would probably be mage hand or prestidigitation. I like cantrips, being able to do little things all day every day appeals to me way more than doing a big flashy thing only a couple times per day.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

I read the title as "Your mom's favorite spell?"

So I asked her. Her response: "Whatever kills them the fastest." O_o


1. Bards - Forever and always. Not only are they extremely well balanced and able to fill any party niche while helping their allies to succeed, but the style of roleplay that bards naturally tend to gravitate towards is incredibly healthy for the gaming table to include in moderation (which is nice since you rarely want two bards in a party anyway unless you're going full musical troupe).

2. Clerics - While mechanically I like oracles just a tiny bit more, having deific ties baked into the class (get your filthy cleric of philosophy away from my table) gives less experienced roleplayers a crutch to fall back on and more experienced roleplayers an additional tool to make their character shine even brighter. The high power ceiling doesn't hurt either.

3. Barbarians - The most mechanically solid and diverse of the non-casters without having to rely on items (although WMH may have made fighters more diverse when fully decked out), barbarians are great at pretty much all levels of play if you wanna play murderface.

Honorable mentions: Inquisitor (basically the divine bard), Vigilante (I like my RP, okay?) and Druid (great at everything and has that fantastic nature vibe - also my longest running character was a druid so I have a little bit of personal bias)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo that my phone alarm didn't go off this morning so I was 20 minutes late for work. NOT cool Cosmo, not cool.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dr. Lobotomy continues to be my favorite name for any blade I've seen.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Do... do people still ask for favorites on this thread? Because if so, I'm a little hurt that Tacticslion hasn't favorited my post on the Blame Cosmo thread yet. If that's not a thing I'll just go then... abandons thread


johnnythexxxiv wrote:
Cosmo wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU BEEN HIDING FROM ME COSMO?!?!
...nothing
Nested spoilers Cosmo, nested spoilers. They were a thing and now they're not a thing and I didn't even get to try them out and for that I blame you.

Actually, I blame Cosmo that:
nested spoilers are totally still a thing
Spoiler:
but they're much less intuitive to use than regular spoilers it appears you can't put "quotation marks" in the header or leave the header blank

Testing:
Did I do good?
Spoiler:
I did? I did!

Testing with not including a title in the "lead" spoiler:

Spoiler:
thing[spoiler]things
[/spoiler]
Thanks Chris :)
although leaving the title blank in the top spoiler seems to not format properly


Yeah, not sure where I'm going wrong but it's not working for me. Sans asterisks I'm typing [*spoiler="whatever I want to call it (should be able to be left blank)"] the first bit of info [*spoiler] the second bit of info [/spoiler][/spoiler]

Is that secretly not how nested spoilers are done?


Cosmo wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU BEEN HIDING FROM ME COSMO?!?!
...nothing

Nested spoilers Cosmo, nested spoilers. They were a thing and now they're not a thing and I didn't even get to try them out and for that I blame you.


Ah, that would explain things. Why the change? Clearly they were a thing last year


Resurrecting a dead thread, but what's the actual coding for nested spoilers? Because try as I might, I can't get the nesting to cooperate


3 people marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
andreww wrote:
He was moderately effective at protecting people in the first encounter and generally couldn't be hit except on a 20 but was dealing single digit damage. This left the rest of the group, several of them far more squishy, taking a lot of damage as multiple enemies swarmed them.

That person built their character incorrectly.

I was going to keep on lurking, but I couldn't ignore this. YOU CAN'T BUILD A CHARACTER INCORRECTLY only sub-optimally. There is no "wrong" way to build a character unless you actually miswrite your numbers/abilities on your character sheet. Can you take X, Y or Z to make yourself more effective at whatever task you wanted to do? Sure. Are you wrong for deciding not to do it? No. Are you wrong for not knowing that you had the option to take X, Y or Z? Absolutely not. The amount of "one-true-wayism" in PFS is absolutely cancerous to the game.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo that I JUST realized that I should be pronouncing Tacticslion as Tactics-lion and not Tack-tee-cis-lee-on. I have no idea how I managed to misread that for 2 YEARS without figuring that out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chemlak wrote:

An Act of Passion

When dealing with a succubus
It isn't just a kiss
That is an act of passion
There's more to it than this.

Of her lips delicious
You certainly must beware
But other acts that she performs
Can drain your spirit bare

She might caress your stomach
Or nibble on your ear
Her tail might snake around you
And tease you from the rear

Her wings (which feel like leather)
Could satisfy your kink
And then you will be drained once more
As fast as you can blink

And while you're dealing with her
Take care you do not linger
You might not like (although you may)
The place she puts her finger

The act of passion is many things
She really isn't fussy
The succubus is probably
The epitome of "hussy"

So watch yourself, adventurer
If she is in arm's reach
Your life hangs in the balance
Your soul she just might leech

Don't allow her close to you
Resign to being a loner
Her act of passion is anything
That might give you a... thrill.

Holy f##~ that was amazing XD


So um, what in the world happened between page one and what I'm currently witnessing? Cause there's a lot of butt stuff that feels like it came out of left field....

Also, did I win the thread? Is that still a thing? I'm so confused :/


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo that it's taken 4 months of dedicated job hunting to land even a part time job that I'm grossly overqualified for. And that that job still took 3 weeks of negotiation with the store manager to come to fruition when 2 supervisors, the night manager and the assistant manager were all giving me glowing recommendations.


Playground Adventures made a Royal class a little while back and honestly I thoroughly enjoy it despite its simplistic nature and low power ceiling. It might serve as decent inspiration for what to do (or not do) with your own class.

A couple things I will say right now though, just high Reflex is the worst save progression and doesn't make thematic sense with your class so I would change that to high Will instead (especially since you have the option of becoming a 1/2 caster) or have 2 good saves (probably Reflex and Will) nevermind, just saw Forceful Persona, saves are fine and Noble Presence is too short of a duration. 3 rounds doesn't guarantee it lasts a full fight, so making it a minute or scale up from 3 rounds instead will help make the ability relevant. Aristocratic Charm comes online a little early, I would put Move Ally as the 3rd level eminence and then bump Aristocratic Charm and Command up to 5th and 7th levels. Blowing your standard action to give a single ally an extra move action is totally fair so you won't have to worry about the power level of making that come online earlier.

As far as Aura of Eminence goes, it's very unclear as to what you mean by the last sentence where you're talking about people being affected every 1d6 rounds. Is this instead of once per hour or something completely different? If it does replace the once per hour, does it also replace it for the allies within the first 30 feet? Cause it's pretty easy to read that it's only those in the 35-60 foot range that actually get the 1d6 round benefit. Also, Undying Loyalty could easily either gain a power hike or come online earlier. As it stands it's pretty meh for a 15th level ability.

Some endowments are terrifyingly powerful, particularly Quality Goods. Not being able to sell the items is a moot point when you can still stockpile them. Adamantine Full Plate costs 16650gp to purchase but with this ability you can equip the entire party with it for free AT LEVEL ONE. That's an insane bump to expected wealth by level, and as written can be done out in the middle of the wilderness where no vendors are to be found. It also nearly completely renders Deals irrelevant since you can get the vast majority of the discounted items for free anyway. Another horribly overpowered endowment is Management. The bonus is waaaaaaay too strong, especially since once again it can be taken from first level.

At the other end of the spectrum, Inspiring Persona is useless past 11th level since Aura of Eminence literally does the same thing (in a larger area and with multiple allies to boot) and Swift Eminence should be a baked in feature, not a menu option selection.

There's a lot of poorly defined math in the document, some of which I went over directly in the comments. Make sure that you're actually presenting complete abilities, if I can't tell the duration or magnitude of an ability, chances are a fair few other people can't either.


A great feat for melee goblins is Roll With It. Not only is it fantastic for damage mitigation, but it also can be used to turn yourself into a fleshy pinball!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why in the world did this get moved to conversions? It's about the awkwardness of strength beats dex when it comes to stealing things, not actually building the hulk...

To throw in my 2cp, if more classes had access to something like the Elbow Strikes ability of 4 Wind Fantasy's Daredevil Prestige Class (not sure if Paizo's printed an equivalent anywhere) then strength winning out makes all kinds of sense since you smack someone while you're stealing from them, but otherwise in and out should be easier than manhandling them into submission.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott_UAT wrote:
Lindley Court wrote:
Playground Adventures' Royal Base Class.
A class designed with younger players in mind? I actually really dig that. Added.

I really do too, it's a shame that ease of play ended up cutting into the power ceiling so much though. The class is far from unplayable, but it's definitely the least combat friendly half caster I've seen in a while. It has high skill points, a solid skill list and interesting skill buffs (some of which can be passed to allies) so it does well in social encounters and almost all of the archetypes/alternate destinies provide solid additional out of combat versatility (particularly Gifted since it makes for a strong artificer), but as far as combat goes, it's basically a spontaneous casting warpriest without fervor or divine weapon so leaves something to be desired (house ruling blessed/cursed to standard action to activate, free to maintain and/or lasts rounds per level would alleviate much of this issue). For combat light campaigns though, it's a perfectly fine choice (which I imagine most introductory campaigns for young/inexperienced players would be anyway).


andreww wrote:
Harleequin wrote:
I thought Paragon Surge got nerf slapped into next week!?
Not really, they limited it to making these same choices each time it was cast in a single day. It still gives you access to your entire spell list for a level 3 spell slot.

You also can't use it to pull off of other lists like you used to be able to.


I mean, masterwork transformation is a thing so you can always take the mug and make it masterwork and then enchant it normally.


Aelryinth wrote:

YOu're going to have to break down that Math, Johnny.

Let's see, Barbarian>

+20 BAB, +4/+4 Str, +/+6 Witch Hunter, +6/+0 Reckless Abandon.
And Come and Get me. +30/+10 with any weapon, and if you're going to bring in Gloves of Dueling, the Furious Enhancement for +32/+12. +32/+14 2hw, of course. I assume you aren't adding in Power Attack, of course...
And Come and Get me. Did I mention Come and Get Me?

Ranger: +20 BAB, +10/+10 FE, Instant Enemy. Leaden Weapon/Gravity bow for +3, so +30/+13. with any weapon.

Paladin: Let's say a 26 Cha at 20 for +8. So, +28/+20, auto confirm crits. Plus whatever your Sword bond gives you. With any weapon.

Fighter: I didn't see a weapon Spec rewrite, so WT+GWS+Gloves is +8/+10, for +28/+10 dmg, auto confirm crits at 20. Don't see a +30 dmg without using 2h power attack...and then only with a handful of weapons, as opposed to, say, IUS, Greatsword, and Longbow. Which every other class can do.
Yeah, fighter is definitely the WORST of these 4.
==================================

Negative: Reword bravery: The Fighter also gains his Bravery bonus or his Intimidate Ranks, whichever is higher, as a bonus on all Fear saves.

At level 20, I would just make the crit ranges of your chosen 3 weapons all 19-20/x4...which is the BEST possible combination they can get. Everything becomes a falcata. That way, there's no irritating variance between weapons at the ultimate level, and you don't punish someone for NOT having a falcata or naginata or falchion.

==Aelryinth

I'm reading it as Challenge (+10/+5) + Weapons Training (+4/+4 generic and +4/+4 weapon group specific) + 17th Level Weapons Training doubling (+4/+4) + Mentor (+3/+3) + Gloves of Dueling (either +2/+2 or +4/+4 if 17th level doubling applies) for +27/+22 before adding in BAB, Strength and other goodies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for somehow misplacing the mirco SD card in my 3DS when I opened it up to fix a sticky R button. It already took an hour to reassemble because of an incredibly uncooperative spring. Wasn't that enough? Did you really need to make me lose my data for half a dozen games as well?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Cosmo for not learning until last week that if you type Smurf in your post your avatar changes to a Smurf. WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU BEEN HIDING FROM ME COSMO?!?!


What's wrong with taking Pummeling Style for that single, perfect punch? Vital Strike only works well for the concept if you have virtual size increases as well, otherwise the bonus damage die really don't even begin to make up for the lost static damage that you would have been getting on a full attack. The ability to do AoE attacks would be great, it'd be awesome if any martial got a way to do that that wasn't a breath attack, but the double jump for days is a little awkward.


To be fair, Druid's are plenty strong as is, I don't think they really need more tricks. A different shapechanging class should totally be able to change into some/all of the stuff druid hasn't covered yet though.

Also, to get back to the thread topic I'd love me a class that has a focus on abberations. We have plenty of nature classes and classes with connection to the outer planes, but not really anything for our celestial neighbors.


Another option is that you could use an online tool like roll20.net to have a "fog of war" covering most of a digital map and reveal it piece by piece as the PCs explore


Since we're getting proficiency for free, sawtooth sabers are pretty solid, especially if going ranger or slayer so that you can ignore dex.

My favorite (and therefore the best in my opinion) are battle poi since they do fire damage instead of some physical damage type. There's all kinds of weird ways to get extra damage and effects in with them that you can't for other weapons.


HeHateMe wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:
Broken record here, but I'd love to see a Druid that can wild shape into vermin and oozes, and one that can do monstrous humanoids and giants. One that can do magical beasts would be nice as well.
Um, your wish has been Paizo's command for years now. Cave druids do oozes, mountain druids do giants and nigh on every druid does magical beasts.
Not exactly true, I'm sorry to say. Druids can do animals but not magical beasts. Cave Druid can do oozes, but the mechanics are so poorly done that it's almost universally considered a bad archetype. Goliath druids can do large humanoids but not monstrous humanoids, which are much more interesting.

Huh, I've just now realized that the "functions as beast shape III" allowing for small and medium magical beasts is actually a house rule that's been implemented by literally all of my GMs since I started gaming 4 years ago so I never actually realized that that wasn't part of the core assumption. Neat.


HeHateMe wrote:
Broken record here, but I'd love to see a Druid that can wild shape into vermin and oozes, and one that can do monstrous humanoids and giants. One that can do magical beasts would be nice as well.

Um, your wish has been Paizo's command for years now. Cave druids do oozes, mountain druids do giants and nigh on every druid does magical beasts.


swoosh wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:

Point being that they can't nova as hard.

Sure they can, they can nova fantastically hard. The biggest issue the kineticist has is that once they nova they're left with very little health and can't do much the rest of the day.

Maximum nova potential for a kineticist is spending 8 (4 twice to double ray on standard and swift) + 4 (maximize for standard&swift) + 3 (quicken) + 2 (empower for standard&swift) or 17 burn (minus reducers - you can spend a move action to reduce burn by 2 and and metakinetic master can reduce burn cost by an additional 2) to deal 140 + 10d6 + 10 + 1.5xCon damage 4 times in one round. That is a lot compared to the 10d6+Int (plus any applicable splash damage) 8 times a round that the Alchemist is getting at 20th level, but that's because Kineticist really picks up damage at 17th when you can twincast for 4 burn. At 16th, 112 + 8d6 + 8 + 1.5xCon twice a round is comparable to 8d6 + 1 + Int 8 times per round (average damage of 326 vs 312 assuming 30 in relevant stat) but doesn't account for the fact that touch AC is MUCH easier to hit than standard AC which means that the Alchemist will lose a whole lot less damage from missed attacks than the Kineticist (and even if they missed as frequently, a miss for the Kineticist halves it's damage output while it only reduces the Alchemist's by 1/8) and if the Kineticist decides to go for an elemental blast so that they can hit Touch AC as well, their base damage dips below the Alchemist's since they lose 35 damage per blast. I didn't bother with adding in splash damage to the equation since that won't actually help kill what you're focus firing easier, just the things around it (since that fluctuates it would be a bit disingenuous of me to say that there's ever going to be the perfect scenario of 8 enemies surrounding the big bad, adding an extra 704 to the Alchemist's total damage) but it is worth noting that since the Alchemist's damage is more granular, there's less wasted HP damage as the Alchemist can focus more additional attacks on other enemies (who may or may not have been softened up by splash damage already) after dropping the first one.

swoosh wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
And bombs that target touch AC, are ranged, require no special conditions or positioning to go off, get Int to damage and deal splash damage are generally much better than sneak attacks

Only the first and the last are actual advanatages over SA though (and even then situationally so), as sneak attacks can be ranged and I can't think of many situations where an Alchemist's intelligence is higher than a rogue's dex + weapon damage dice. Hell, if the rogue wants to pick up a firearm they can target touch too.

Point being, a class' nova damage being fairly comparable to the at-will damage of a class that isn't known for being particularly dominant in combat is not what I'd call 'ridiculous'.

The Rogue is known for having an insane damage ceiling, it's just that it's nigh impossible for them to actually get off a full round sneak attack. Not having to get flanking or finding a way to make the opponent flatfooted against ranged attacks is a definite plus for the Alchemist, that and the fact that the only way for the Rogue to get as many attacks as the Alchemist is getting is either through also being a thrown weapon build or through double barreled pistols (and only then if you take a feat and use cartridges), neither of which allow for Dex to damage for the Rogue without multiclassing. If you go for melee then you're not hitting Touch AC and you have one less attack on your full attack so that extra damage from weapon dice and Piranha Strike/Power Attack is going to get mitigated pretty easily.

swoosh wrote:
johnnythexxxiv wrote:
and that's before getting into how it's easier to apply status conditions with a bomb than with a knife.
True, but the argument was that an alchemist's damage was ridiculous.

And it is. 300+ on a full attack that also significantly injures nearby opponents is crazy strong. You're regularly one-shotting APL+2 and have about a 50/50 chance of one-shotting APL+3 while also clearing out mooks at the same time, which the other two classes can't do since they have single target attacks.


As long as you have a reach weapon, being healbot isn't that bad since you can still wrack up AoOs fairly easily. There's even a fair few ways of being both healbot and something more interesting at the same time if you're willing to get creative.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:

Well, kineticists can nova rather hard as well. So that point is moot.

Also not sure how ridiculous I'd call sneak attack with no weapon, but that's not worth getting into.

Point being that they can't nova as hard. And bombs that target touch AC, are ranged, require no special conditions or positioning to go off, get Int to damage and deal splash damage are generally much better than sneak attacks, and that's before getting into how it's easier to apply status conditions with a bomb than with a knife.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You mean to tell me I could have been getting Smurf pics this entire time?!?!?

A couple other abbreviations/forum in-jokes/well known characters that I see pop up pretty often:
CotCT or CoCT - Curse of the Crimson Throne, another excellent adventure path
JJ - James Jacobs, Creative Director of Paizo. He's very active on the forums and people often take his word as law for things that don't have a FAQ yet despite him continually reminding people that he doesn't have any greater rules authority than any of the more prolific forumites such as RavingDork or TriOmegaZero.
YMMV - Your Mileage May Vary, indicates that something that works in one campaign might not in another
AM BARBARIAN - A barbarian that uses a lance and rides around on a dire bat, doing ridiculous damage and often screaming in an ALL CAPS RAGE. Used as a counter example when people inevitably ask why martials can't have nice things
Schrodinger's Wizard - A condescending take on the Batman Wizard, used to illustrate that wizards aren't as powerful as everyone claims they are since they have to actually prepare their spell slots at some point, thus ruining their versatility for a day. Disproven by Anzyr's wizard Arkalion of the Infinite Cycle
CaGM - Come and Get Me, a rage power for mid to high level Barbarians. It's reeeeeaaaallly good, to the point of hot contention on the forums.
Cheese - using a questionable reading of the game rules for additional mechanical benefit
Cosmo - An elder god subdued by the staff at Paizo, he now works in customer service and sales, sowing chaos wherever he can. You can blame him for ALL of your problems.

Eh, that's long enough for one post, will add more later. At any rate, a late welcome to the forums MageHunter! I promise we don't bite much


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:
Insane KillMaster wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
It would nice for a class to get an actual breath weapon like how it is supposed to function, none of this 1-3/day but every 1d4 rounds. Though the damage should be more like the kineticist/rouge damage dice progression. This would be good for the bloodsavant, primalist, blu mage, and/or unchained sorcerer.

The X per day is there for balancing issues.

^ D12, full BaB, 3 good saves, 6+int mod skill points, Breath per day based on the Barbarian's "rounds of Rage per day", Breath damage based on Kineticist's/Rogue's damage dice progression, etc...

If a Kineticist can shoot a Blast every round without any cooldown, I don't see why you cannot have a breath weapon with a cooldown to compensate.

Seriously, the Kinetic Blast makes the Alchemist's Bomb look like a total joke...

The difference being that your can nova with alchemist's bombs if need be. TFWing with bombs can lead to ridiculous damage in a pinch


ProfPotts wrote:
... then make that grippli a synthesist Summoner and start his eidolon off with 18 Strength... :)

But actually though, I've had a character sitting on the back burner for ages that is basically this. She's a kobold with a natural strength score of 0 or less (either rolled a 3/4 for -1/0 or is old aged for 0) that uses her eidolon as a life support unit.


Int 6 maps out pretty much perfectly to mid grade Down Syndrome based on the bell curve of 3d6 mirroring real life IQ distribution. That's still pretty functional. That's can-work-a-minimum-wage-job-efficiently functional. You might have to remind your horse how to do certain tasks (especially if they're more complex) but for the most part the horse should be able to act independently once you teach it how to do things, but it's a horse so there's a lot of things that are simple to understand for humans that are awkward and abstract for a horse, meaning that you'll have to use handle animal more often than diplomacy to teach it how to do something the first time. After learning how to do something, I wouldn't bother with asking for another check to do the same task again unless in combat or some other stressful situation.


My Self wrote:
Rub-Eta wrote:
This actually exists in real life. Those groups are called Boy-Bands! They're really all the same, just a lot of young boys/men who's singing skills are above average. They just call themselves different names and have different personalities (just small variations of steriotypes).
John Lennon had the same build as Ringo Starr? News to me.

I'd hardly call the Beatles a boy band...

1 to 50 of 473 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>