lorderok's page

What I'd like to know is why there isn't a possible build for a swashbuckler with TWF. After all, many swashbucklers are "not left handed".

Thanks, TOZ. Heliopolix: I had the version of KF from the google site, which does not have the "on a failed save" wording. That makes a huge difference.

Hey, so, I was very confused by the rules for legendary items. Is there any way to ascend them other than taking the universal path ability of "legendary item"? Also, I think it would go a long way if somebody posted a detailed example legendary item.

I have 2 questions for you, Mr. Jacobs.
1: What's your take on the whole martial vs. spellcaster debate?
2: Can you please make a swashbuckler class? I think many, many people on these boards are itching to play a dashing, agile swordsman.

Yeah, that's one of the feats which is not so good. Of course, it may be a bit better if you are one of those "I want to dual-wield Bastard Swords!" types. ^^

Meh, I'll just house-rule it as reducing the penalties by 2 each and then keeping the "spend mythic to remove" for people who dual wield bastard swords, etc. Using 2 weapons that are made for that shouldn't require mythic power, but using 2 oversized ones should.

I think that a lot of the martial abilities are ruined by having to use mythic power on them. For instance, you have to use a use of mythic power to remove 2 -2 penalties, and otherwise the feat gives no benefit at all.(Mythic TWF)

magnuskn wrote:

lorderok wrote:

Well please, let me know if you see things as I do, or find some evidence to counter that, because with casters being so great in vanilla PF, I was hoping perhaps martials may find a refuge in this book.

Well, you can get more than one spell (or more than two, with Quicken Spell) per round as caster, but unless I read it incorrectly that will burn through your mythic power usages per day pretty fast. There is a multitude of cheaper ways to get extra standard actions, though, so martials can run up to their opponents and then full attack. Archers can get even more arrows in the air via Mythic Rapid Shot and Mythic Manyshot.

That's the best I got (so far), but then again it is very difficult to argue that magic characters aren't innately better than beatsticks. Some of the mythic spells rock.

you should still be limited to no more than two spell around, even with quicken spell, as quicken requires a swift action to use. and most of the archmages abilities also require swift actions to use. You only get 1 of those around. that was one of the big things in the play test that caused Amazing initiative to change. There is actual a rule in the core book that limits you to one spell a round with the exception of quicken spell or on that could be done as a swift action. it was found and that is why it was emphases under amazing initiative.

did they add something to give extra swift actions?

Coupled arcana lets you use any ability that uses mythic power as a free action with any bloodline power, hex, etc... as long as the hex, bloodline power, etc... is slower than a swift action.

lorderok wrote:

Hey, I have the PDF too, and I hope I don't get ostracized here, but...

Aren't archmages way, way way, better than any other path? Most noncaster path abilities seem to be just gimped spells, while archmages can cast a free spell not consuming spell slots that's either persistent or any spell from their spell list as a free action using only 1 point of MP doing something they'd do anyway (bardic performance, bloodline power, etc). Meanwhile champion gets an extra attack that they have to spend mythic power on. That seems way way imbalanced to me. Does anyone else agree?

Too soon for me to make an educated statement about this, I must confess.

Well please, let me know if you see things as I do, or find some evidence to counter that, because with casters being so great in vanilla PF, I was hoping perhaps martials may find a refuge in this book.

Hey, I have the PDF too, and I hope I don't get ostracized here, but...
Aren't archmages way, way way, better than any other path? Most noncaster path abilities seem to be just gimped spells, while archmages can cast a free spell not consuming spell slots that's either persistent or any spell from their spell list as a free action using only 1 point of MP doing something they'd do anyway (bardic performance, bloodline power, etc). Meanwhile champion gets an extra attack that they have to spend mythic power on. That seems way way imbalanced to me. Does anyone else agree?

So, I know this is sort of late, since i posted last yesterday, but Mythic Power Word Kill needs to be reworded, right? Isn't it incorrect as it is?

Hey guys, I'd be glad to playtest the new PDF of the rules, so here's my email:

Other than that, I'll ask around with my players who have used KF before and come back with our collective feedback.
I can tell you now, though that one particular feature, having severing strike as a rogue, means you can instantly kill anything with a head with a sneak attack with no save. It's not like I'm opposed to rogues being great but this seems a bit much.

So what is Xoverons CR?

27!

Pandora's wrote:

While you're in this thread Kirth, I have a question. During a brief pawing through of your Kirthfinder stuff, I saw that the fighter was given a metric ton of shiny new combat things. Did you add anything along the out of combat/narrative lines?

Continuing to spoiler to try and keep my chocololate out of this thread's peanut butter: ** spoiler omitted **

Hey, I'm a big fan of what you did with Kirthfinder. Is there a repository more up-to-date than TOZ's google site?

I was wondering if they still had the Feats of (ability score) universal path abilities. I wanted to know if Feat of Strength was there and what it does.

Thanks for letting me know what Mythic Wish does. Alter Fate looks really fun.

I've got to go for a while,but they do still have those, albeit under a different name.

lorderok wrote:

Sauce987654321 wrote:

lorderok wrote:

Sauce987654321 wrote:

Nothing on Mythic Wish?

What do you mean?

The Wish spell that is mythic in this book.

What do you want to know about it?

Pretty much what it does.

Mythic Adventures pg. 112

WISH
When using mythic wish to duplicate another spell, you can
duplicate a mythic spell you know (if you’re a spontaneous
caster) or have prepared (if you’re a caster who prepares spells).
If you don’t know or haven’t prepared the mythic spell, you can
expend a second use of mythic power to duplicate the mythic
version of the desired spell.
You can also produce any one of the following effects that modify
or replace effects listed in the non-mythic wish spell description:
• If you use mythic wish to remove injuries and afflictions, you
can expend a number of uses of mythic power to remove that
number of additional afflictions from all affected creatures.
• If you use mythic wish to revive the dead, you can expend
a second use of mythic power to negate the target’s
permanent negative level from the resurrection.
• Alter fate. By expending a second use of mythic power, you
can cast mythic wish as an immediate action before a 1d20
roll is attempted and choose what number you want to come
up on the die.
Augmented: If you expend two uses of mythic power, you
can cast a silent, stilled mythic wish, even if you’re helpless or
couldn’t otherwise take actions (but not unconscious).

lorderok wrote:

Sauce987654321 wrote:

Nothing on Mythic Wish?

What do you mean?

The Wish spell that is mythic in this book.

What do you want to know about it?

Nothing on Mythic Wish?

What do you mean?

lorderok wrote:

Talomyr wrote:

The wording is correct. In your example You treat a 115 HP creature as if it had 100 HP.

Yes, my point exactly. That is treating it as if its HP(115>=) is lowered by the tier*5 (15) to 100>=.

With the book's wording, it's treating the creature's HP(85>=) as if it were raised by the tier*5(15) to 100>=.

Can you post the actual language?

I did in my original post, it's in quotes.

The wording is correct. In your example You treat a 115 HP creature as if it had 100 HP.

Yes, my point exactly. That is treating it as if its HP(115>=) is lowered by the tier*5 (15) to 100>=.

With the book's wording, it's treating the creature's HP(85>=) as if it were raised by the tier*5(15) to 100>=.

What if anyone who plays a martial class gets to gestalt into another one for free? That SEEMS like it might work.

I was looking over the pdf, and besides seeing that casters have a massive upper hand as usual, I noticed an error in the mythic spells part. On page 103 it says "POWER WORD KILL
Treat the target’s current hit point total as though it were
lowered by 5 times your tier. For example, a 3rd-tier archmage
casting mythic power word kill would instantly kill a creature
with 85 hit points or fewer."
This is incorrect, they did the math backwards. It would instantly kill a creature with 115 HP or fewer, as lowering the 101 hit point threshold makes the spell weaker.

I don't see the issue with the NPC. It's not like everyone has to follow all rules and content exactly and to a T. The characters could just as easily be any other race or gender. All it would require is a little bit of work on the DM's part. Their relationship would remain. If a DM feels like they couldn't properly portray the relationship/character(s) or if they don't agree with it, they can change it for the game. I personally find the relationship interesting and despite that, I doubt the whole "trans" issue will even come up in my game.