| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was pleasantly surprised to see the Starstone Cathedral explicitly called out as a megadungeon. I don't know if that's old news, nor did I really have any firm idea as to what I expected. Gives me hope that one day ill own two paizo megadungeons, though. :)
...Is that some Seer's Soap? If it's not, it's very similar.
Also, Summon Deadfall only allows saves from creatures on the outermost affected squares... That makes sense, but it kinda makes you wonder why more things aren't that way (though I guess in this case you can decrease the power to increase the area).
|
I was pleasantly surprised to see the Starstone Cathedral explicitly called out as a megadungeon. I don't know if that's old news, nor did I really have any firm idea as to what I expected. Gives me hope that one day ill own two paizo megadungeons, though. :)
I'm pretty sure that Paizo has said one day they will do a Test of the Starstone thing, and implied that it will be less an adventure as an assortment of challenges and ideas. I think it's "on the list" proverbally with Epic material.
I got the product. I was not all that impressed with it.
Why not? Right a review? I found out recently that honest reviews are an important factor when it comee to deciding what the people want and what future products should include or avoid. Not sure how true it is, but I someone asked for reviews.
This is true. We take reviews posted on our product pages very seriously, and they have a lot of influence on how we choose to do future products in the same line. The more reviews a given product has, the better idea we have of what works and what needs work.
I have one question. Why are none of the spells usable by the alchemist?
In general, alchemists gain access to a very limited number of spells. Since parts of this book were already very alchemist-heavy (new alchemical items, new alchemist discoveries, a new alchemist archetype), we chose to concentrate on other classes in the Spells section.
So, if I am reading those archetypes on D20PFSRD correctly, only the Trapbreaker alchemist gains Trapfinding, while the other two archetypes gain abilities to spot traps easier, but no way of spotting magical traps ( i.e. Trapfinding ). That's... weird.
Does the book include a "You gain Trapfinding" feat, or was that lack of ability to spot magical traps for trap-centered archetypes intentional?
And yes, Trap Breaker and Vivisectionist are strangely compatible, although you end up trading all your poison abilities for trapfinding.
Forgive me if I'm missing something, but how are Trap Breaker and Vivisectionist at all compatible? Trap Breaker relies heavily on the Bomb ability, which Vivisectionist loses entirely in favor of Sneak Attack...
It's one of those bizarre situations where the rules allow it even though it shouldn't work.
The two archetypes don't replace or modify the same abilities, so by the rules of archetypes they can both be taken. However, the loss of bombs as a result causes most of the Trap Breaker's abilities to become non-functional. So you could in theory take them both, but all of the Trap Breaker's replacement abilities would cease to work without bombs to use them with.
THAT SAID... Trap Breaker does give you Trapfinding, which combined with Vivisectionist basically makes you as good or better at doing Rogue stuff as an actual Rogue, plus you still get extracts and mutagen on top of it.
Hahahaha
There's a Summon Thwomp spell!
With art!
Glad I'm not the only one to notice that.
I got the product. I was not all that impressed with it.
Definitely, write a review, I did, and I admit it was not glowing. In part because this felt like 'another' Dungeoneer Guide (kind of like 'another' Hero Point rules system) and in part because, well, some of the things just didn't make sense. Pretty much all of the spells, some of the feats, and my favorite part of the book, the archetypes, had questionable elements. Like trap oriented archetypes that didn't seem to be able to find traps they were supposedly optimized for. I'm not sure if it was intentional, poor design, or a mistake. If it was intentional, they really should have included a side bar explaining such a bizarre choice. That's like granting someone access to spells in a spell book but requiring them to multiclass in order to be able to cast them.
At least it wasn't as bad as the atrocity that was Dungeonscape :P
Still, the Torch Handling feat has to be the most conceptually ridiculous feat I've ever seen. "I know how to hold a torch so much better that it shines brighter and longer than if you held it." It kind of made my brain hurt.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How about, 'I know how to maintain a torch so that it works more efficiently'?
"Oh, one of those rag torches? Is that completely hemp? No cotton? Well, if I just twist it like this and add some of that stuff in the blue bag to the fuel there... hmm, yep, that looks about right. Okay, light that sucker!"
"Wow, look at it go!"
How about, 'I know how to maintain a torch so that it works more efficiently'?
"Oh, one of those rag torches? Is that completely hemp? No cotton? Well, if I just twist it like this and add some of that stuff in the blue bag to the fuel there... hmm, yep, that looks about right. Okay, light that sucker!"
"Wow, look at it go!"
I certainly would have much preferred that for the flavor text. Almost anything would have been better. "I carry around secret oil made from dragon turtle fat" or something would have been better than "I know how to wield a torch better than you."
Well, of course "I know how to wield a torch better than you" isn't the "flavor" (dogwhistle word, that) text at all. It's "In your grasp, a simple teach becomes a beacon," which is both a much more evocative and better-written sentence and more descriptive of the three separate mechanical (um, perhaps you'd say "crunch") things the feat does.
If you don't think some people can't handle fire better than others, well, I can only guess you haven't handled fire very often.
Well, of course "I know how to wield a torch better than you" isn't the "flavor" (dogwhistle word, that) text at all. It's "In your grasp, a simple teach becomes a beacon," which is both a much more evocative and better-written sentence and more descriptive of the three separate mechanical (um, perhaps you'd say "crunch") things the feat does.
If you don't think some people can't handle fire better than others, well, I can only guess you haven't handled fire very often.
Fire? Certainly, lighting campfires, building a proper fire, of course. But taking a torch or a lantern, the same one your buddy held, one that is premade, and some how the mere act of holding it makes it shine brighter? It just seems ridiculous.
Really? Properly keeping a lantern lit and fueled is even more of a specialized task than doing so for a torch.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know what type of lanterns you've used, but if you can show me how someone can make the same oil in a lantern burn brighter, or the same torch for that matter, then I'll happily bow to your defense of what I will have once thought to be a ridiculous concept. Until then, I'm afraid I can't really take you seriously, I've handled torches and lanterns, I've not seen any amount of care or maintenance that would enable the same one to burn brighter. One that was better treated, one with a better oil quality, sure. Nothing that merits the specialized focus and training a feat would entail.
I bought this book lately and while i was full of good expectations i have to say that i am really disappointed.
Nearly nothing useful again for rogues, even when the title hints at that.
Super heavy on alchemists, the favorite toy of someone at Paizo it seems. While those already got way too many attention for my taste and along with gunslingers turn the flavor of the game slowly into direction of steampunk, other classes go away emtpyhanded.
At least you could have given the ranger and the monk trapfinding too. Instead good abilities are traded for questinable stuff. Come on, slugs and vermin as animal companions? That could have been simply an option, but to trade away class features or feats for that?
Same as the monk, loosing evasion hurts really hard.
I will try to write my first review on this when i find more time and patience.
|
@ Doom: Take a group of people, and a light source. Give the light to the person in the middle of the group. Have them hold it low, then high. Then tell me that it makes no difference how you hold a light source.
Also you are playing a game where someone can cast a simple spell as often as they like that temporarily causes a stone to glow as bright as that torch, and you are bothered by a Feat that allows more efficient use of a torch? I think your expectations for the game a wierd and a bit skewed.
@ Doom: Take a group of people, and a light source. Give the light to the person in the middle of the group. Have them hold it low, then high. Then tell me that it makes no difference how you hold a light source.
Also you are playing a game where someone can cast a simple spell as often as they like that temporarily causes a stone to glow as bright as that torch, and you are bothered by a Feat that allows more efficient use of a torch? I think your expectations for the game a wierd and a bit skewed.
Honestly I'm surprised people care so much. I simply consider it ridiculous and I am allowed to criticize it as such. "I trained so hard at holding a torch I am able to do it better than anyone else around!" seems a ridiculous concept to me.
A spell is magic, which explains the stone shining like a torch, but someone simply being adept at holding a torch and *that* causes it to shine light further? I mean it's not as bad as "Prone Shooter" from Ultimate Combat, which was an actual oversight of the existing material, but it strikes me as silly. No skin off your nose for it.
To that end, Hit Points strike me as a silly mechanic with a weak tacked on explanation, I still play the game though, because what I perceive as silly is vastly outweighed by what I like about it. My opinion is just that.
|
|
@ Doom: Take a group of people, and a light source. Give the light to the person in the middle of the group. Have them hold it low, then high. Then tell me that it makes no difference how you hold a light source.
Also you are playing a game where someone can cast a simple spell as often as they like that temporarily causes a stone to glow as bright as that torch, and you are bothered by a Feat that allows more efficient use of a torch? I think your expectations for the game a wierd and a bit skewed.
Honestly I'm surprised people care so much. I simply consider it ridiculous and I am allowed to criticize it as such. "I trained so hard at holding a torch I am able to do it better than anyone else around!" seems a ridiculous concept to me.
A spell is magic, which explains the stone shining like a torch, but someone simply being adept at holding a torch and *that* causes it to shine light further? I mean it's not as bad as "Prone Shooter" from Ultimate Combat, which was an actual oversight of the existing material, but it strikes me as silly. No skin off your nose for it.
To that end, Hit Points strike me as a silly mechanic with a weak tacked on explanation, I still play the game though, because what I perceive as silly is vastly outweighed by what I like about it. My opinion is just that.
You have a right to your opinion. Just don't expect to go spouting off negativity without people coming to defend it. In this case, I like the Feat. Also I offered an explanation for how the Feat could work without being mystical. As for why it takes training to hold a torch higher, it is really a matter of holding that torch higher for long periods of time. Try holding, say, an aluminum bat at full extension above your head. See how long you can do that. I guarantee it will not be as long as you expect, if you have never tried it before.
You asked for a reasonable explanation of how this Feat could work. I have offered one.
I'm sad because there's no dungeoneer inquisitor archetypes :( The class really deserved a dungeoneer archetype.
|
|
Honestly I'm surprised people care so much. I simply consider it ridiculous and I am allowed to criticize it as such. "I trained so hard at holding a torch I am able to do it better than anyone else around!" seems a ridiculous concept to me.
Because you live in a modern time, where these things DON'T matter.
Pathfinder/D&D lets you believe that swinging a sword is easy, and by RAW, you can do it all day. Bull.
I have been to medieval parties where the goal is JUST to keep your heavy metal sword above a tied rope for an extended period of time. Quite entertaining to watch I must say.
Is the Dungeoneer's Handbook sort of a companion to Dungeons of Golarion?
The Dungeoneer's Handbook is meant to be a first-time dungeon delver's guide, and doesn't necessarily tie into Dungeons of Golarion.
Honestly I'm surprised people care so much. I simply consider it ridiculous and I am allowed to criticize it as such. "I trained so hard at holding a torch I am able to do it better than anyone else around!" seems a ridiculous concept to me.
It's not you. The number of apologists for that bizarre feat is a little weird.
As a neutral third party with no horse in this race, your criticism is more convincing than the defenses.
Honestly I'm surprised people care so much. I simply consider it ridiculous and I am allowed to criticize it as such. "I trained so hard at holding a torch I am able to do it better than anyone else around!" seems a ridiculous concept to me.It's not you. The number of apologists for that bizarre feat is a little weird.
As a neutral third party with no horse in this race, your criticism is more convincing than the defenses.
So you feel that every torch ever made gives off the exact same illumination? By RAW they do.
Okay, I have to pipe up about this. Where the hell is the pricing guide for dungeon guides? They go into all manner of discussion, put prices on the items, and then mention "make one with your DM of (less than 25% of the price of the cheapest example)", and then don't tell you how to figure out the price. And, unlike a particular friend of mine, I'm not so much ao an OCD math nerd to dissect it into an equation on my own. All in all, as the guy who always plays the delver of the group, I found this book to be rather un-useful.
I remember this section specifically being incredibly difficult to copyfit—that is, it was tricky to fit all of the cool info I wanted in such a tight space. Here's the formula we used to come up with the prices (and associated skill DCs) for dungeon guides:
Prices for dungeon guides may be adjusted depending on the rarity of the dungeon guide and the level of the dungeon in question. For instance, the first volume in Heroka's Saga would normally only be 800 gp, but due to the fact that only a sparse few yet remain on Golarion, the price for this first entry has become staggeringly high.
Is it me, or are Torchbearers basically interns?
Are there more of the bottom panoramas planned for this line?
Are there more of the bottom panoramas planned for this line?
Yes, though probably not as many as we've seen in previous Player Companions. While the double-truck illustrations look awesome and can convey a lot of cool information (such as when used to illustrate cities/locations), there are a couple drawbacks to them. Namely, (1) they don't translate well when using the single-page view that is the default of most PDF readers, and (2) we can't reuse the art for pretty much anything else.
Nonetheless, the double-trucks are too cool to not do, so you can expect to see more cityscapes and neat aerial views of locations in future products that warrant such art. I don't see us doing many more like the ones in Dungeoneer's Handbook, but I'm not willing to say we'll never do this kind of thing again. :]
Is it me, or are Torchbearers basically interns?
They're Adventurer Apprentices!
So, yeah pretty much.