|
OK.If a creature has Grab and Constrict with Greater Grapple does he get the following actions.
Round 1. Attempts and succeed with grapple attempt so he applies his bite damage in the case of a constrictor snake, then his constrict damage.
Round 2. As a move action reapplies the grapple and succeeds thus applying the damage (of the bite) portion instead of pin or move as well as the constrict damage. Then as a standard action does the above bite and constrict again without needing a roll.
Or am I totally off with how the feat works in regard to those 2 abilities?
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are Unspeakable Futures any closer to being published than when I bugged you last time about that project?
Can you tell us what races do you allow in that game?
How does magic work?
Nope. Despite the fact that I need to get in gear and prepare for an Unspeakable Futures game I'll be running in a few weeks at Paizocon, I haven't touched the rules since the last time we spoke on the subject.
In Unspeakable Futures, the race options are: human, android, fosterling (basically the same as a mutant but from Lovecraftian influences, not radiation), deep one hybrid, half-ghoul, troglodyte (as in barbaric cavemen inspired by the Hadals of Jeff Long's "The Descent," not the smelly D&D lizard dudes), and serpentfolk.
Magic works the same way it does in Pathfinder. There's three spellcasting classes—cabalists (mostly do summoning and necromancy, Int-based caster), espers (mostly do mind-affecting and telekinetic and psionic type magic, Cha-based caster), and mystics (mostly do nature-themed and healing magic, Wis-based caster).
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Nope. Despite the fact that I need to get in gear and prepare for an Unspeakable Futures game I'll be running in a few weeks at Paizocon, I haven't touched the rules since the last time we spoke on the subject.
In Unspeakable Futures, the race options are: human, android, fosterling (basically the same as a mutant but from Lovecraftian influences, not radiation), deep one hybrid, half-ghoul, troglodyte (as in barbaric cavemen inspired by the Hadals of Jeff Long's "The Descent," not the smelly D&D lizard dudes), and serpentfolk.
Magic works the same way it does in Pathfinder. There's three spellcasting classes—cabalists (mostly do summoning and necromancy, Int-based caster), espers (mostly do mind-affecting and telekinetic and psionic type magic, Cha-based caster), and mystics (mostly do nature-themed and healing magic, Wis-based caster).
If I get into your Unspeakable Futures game at PaizoCon, can I play an android? :D
Why no beastairy II monsters used for Sorcerer bloodlines like Aeons, Daemons, etc. for Ultimate magic?
|
Creative Director
|
What is the next product being released that has prestige classes in it?
Out of all the classes that got boosts in ultimate magic what do you think gained the most benefit from the release?
What is your favorite spell out of ultimate magic?
What class do you think will receive the biggest boost when Ultimate Combat hits the streets in a few months?
Inner Sea Magic is gonna have a couple of prestige classes.
I'm not really interested in contributing to the arms race element of "which class won?" in Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat... also, I'm actually not familiar enough with Ultimate Magic to make an informed judgement on this topic anyway—most of my time is spent on the other books we do, not the rulebooks.
|
Creative Director
|
If I get into your Unspeakable Futures game at PaizoCon, can I play an android? :DNope. Despite the fact that I need to get in gear and prepare for an Unspeakable Futures game I'll be running in a few weeks at Paizocon, I haven't touched the rules since the last time we spoke on the subject.
In Unspeakable Futures, the race options are: human, android, fosterling (basically the same as a mutant but from Lovecraftian influences, not radiation), deep one hybrid, half-ghoul, troglodyte (as in barbaric cavemen inspired by the Hadals of Jeff Long's "The Descent," not the smelly D&D lizard dudes), and serpentfolk.
Magic works the same way it does in Pathfinder. There's three spellcasting classes—cabalists (mostly do summoning and necromancy, Int-based caster), espers (mostly do mind-affecting and telekinetic and psionic type magic, Cha-based caster), and mystics (mostly do nature-themed and healing magic, Wis-based caster).
I'll be providing characters for that game, and I'm not sure yet if any of them will be androids. If one of them IS an android, you'll have to just grab the android PC faster than your fellow players!
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why no beastairy II monsters used for Sorcerer bloodlines like Aeons, Daemons, etc. for Ultimate magic?
Because when Ultimate Magic was being written and designed, the monsters for Bestiary II weren't publicly available for the freelancers working on Ultimate Magic for one thing. For another, we didn't have room to do that many bloodlines.
They're from Gothenburg, so the odds of them being good are um ...good.
Ok so that is why no Beastairy II bloodlines in the UMB. Also find it funny the Marid Bloodline grants immunity to cold but the creature itself doesn't have it unless that was a mistake in my book.
|
Creative Director
|
How come we don't hear a lot about Fire Giants in Golarion? Are there very many organized Fire Giants of note? Will we see any make an appearance in an AP anytime in the future you can forsee? I think I vaguely remember them showing up in one the installments of legacy of Fire ever so briefly.
Because we just haven't done much with fire giants yet. There were a fair amount of them in the penultimate Legacy of Fire, though. We will do more with them some day.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok so that is why no Beastairy II bloodlines in the UMB. Also find it funny the Marid Bloodline grants immunity to cold but the creature itself doesn't have it unless that was a mistake in my book.
There were no Bestiary II bloodlines in Ultimate Magic partially because Bestiary II was still being created off when we first outlined Ultimate Magic and had the freelancers start working on it, but mostly because we didn't have room for them. Adding a bloodline for one new outsider race would more or less force us to add bloodlines for all of them, which would have probably been: aeon, agathion, daemon, inevitable, and qlippoth at the minimum. Which would have bloated the sorcerer section by a minimum of three pages, probably, which would have either meant the sorcerer would have a weirdly huge section (which would make fans of other spellcasting classes jealous) or would have forced us to drop the sorcerer archetypes we DID have room to do.
1)Will you guys make seperate bloodlines for Agathions, Archons, and Azatas or will you make them archtypes for the Celestial bloodline?
2)Are the beings that rule the first world full god level power or demi powers.
3)The article about the Oni that is in the first jade empire AP, will it talk about there Oni lords/kings/gods? about there origin in the world of Golarion? or at least about many different types?
4)Have you seen Thor yet?
5)Will we ever new Oracle revelations for old mysteries like life, flame, heavens, etc.?
Are you looking forward to Terra Nova?Of COURSE!!! :-D
Doesn't Fox cancel all good shows after 1.5 seasons?
Doesn't Fox cancel all good shows after 1.5 seasons?
It depends on how good the show is. For instance, Firefly wasn't even given a full season.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1)Will you guys make seperate bloodlines for Agathions, Archons, and Azatas or will you make them archtypes for the Celestial bloodline?
2)Are the beings that rule the first world full god level power or demi powers.
3)The article about the Oni that is in the first jade empire AP, will it talk about there Oni lords/kings/gods? about there origin in the world of Golarion? or at least about many different types?
4)Have you seen Thor yet?
5)Will we ever new Oracle revelations for old mysteries like life, flame, heavens, etc.?
1) Don't know yet. It makes more sense that they'd be bloodlines more than archetypes, though.
2) Both.
3) It'll talk about their origins, history, legends and will list the most common 11 or so of oni types. It doesn't have much to say on "oni lords" at all.
4) Yes.
5) Unlikely. I like thinking that a mystery is presented in complete format, in the same way I like thinking that clerical domains or wizardly schools are complete. New mysteries are guaranteed. New revelations for old mysteries? I doubt it.
|
Creative Director
|
Doesn't Fox cancel all good shows after 1.5 seasons?Are you looking forward to Terra Nova?Of COURSE!!! :-D
Not always. Fringe is heading into its 4th season. 24 went for like 7 or 8 seasons. X-Files went for 9 or so.
And until I see Terra Nova... I'm not willing to call it a "good show." :-P
|
I know it's well off in the future, but how do you think Pathfinder v.2 would work as a 320 page "Ultimate Errata" vs. a 500+ page book that could likely reprint much of the same content? I think it could prevent/lessen a lot of the 3.0->3.5 "it's similar but different enough we're reprinting all the books" problem often complained about. It could also leave the core product intact, while making changes or expanding on things that come up often in the community (expanded uses for CHA, stealth rules clarification, craft rules, economy overhaul) as well as adjusting RAW to match RAI (would help clear up the [evil] arguments that have cropped up lately, among others).
Do you think this method would be feasible? Why or why not?
|
Creative Director
|
I know it's well off in the future, but how do you think Pathfinder v.2 would work as a 320 page "Ultimate Errata" vs. a 500+ page book that could likely reprint much of the same content? I think it could prevent/lessen a lot of the 3.0->3.5 "it's similar but different enough we're reprinting all the books" problem often complained about. It could also leave the core product intact, while making changes or expanding on things that come up often in the community (expanded uses for CHA, stealth rules clarification, craft rules, economy overhaul) as well as adjusting RAW to match RAI (would help clear up the [evil] arguments that have cropped up lately, among others).
Do you think this method would be feasible? Why or why not?
One of the primary goals of a 2nd edition of Pathfinder will be to bring back and consolidate and, where possible, simplify and improve. A 320 page "Ultimate Errata" book does exactly the opposite. It essentially makes a 800+ page book split over two books, about half of which is more or less nonsense until you learn the wrong way to do things and then you can go find out the right way. FAR too complicated and heinous and unattractive in my opinion. Having to check two immense books for every single rule to find out which version is right makes me kinda sick to the stomach. Add in the inevitable fact that the "Ultimate Errata" book would itself have errata and the end result is just good old-fashioned nightmare fuel.
Would a fog cloud spell block you from seeing any light at all like from a glitterdust spell or daylight spell?
If using words of power as a sorcerer, would the human favored class bonus from the APG grant a new spell or would it give you a new effect or meta word?
|
Creative Director
|
I'm not sure if this has been asked already, but are there any plans for a an improvement of the crafting system in PF?
No plans. (and frankly, I don't think it's as broken as people like to say it is... poison's an exception, but that's because it's unusually expensive and probably should have been handled like a magic item with a feat instead of "Craft alchemy.")
|
Creative Director
|
How much is a range increment? In the sense that going beyond a weapon's first range increment enacts a penalty for every additional increment. How do we figure how big one of these additional increments are? Does it mean the base range just again? Because if so, then I only take a -2 penalty for shooting 160 feet with a rifle. A friend told me that each increment is only ten feet if you go beyond the base.
Question that has nothing to do with paizo: Why do video game companies like, oh say..gamestop, charge canadians 5 dollars more on items off the base price than they charge americans, even when the canadian dollar is three cents above the USD? And this is before taxes and shipping. Logically, when we are talking base price, shouldn't the people with the currency worth more be paying less or is this just a form of price gouging? Remember, I said this has nothing to do with Paizo. I like you guys.
A range increment is different for every weapon. If a weapon has a range increment of 30 feet, then you take a -2 penalty from range for 31 to 60 feet, a -4 penalty for range 61 to 90 feet, and so on.
The price differences between countries isn't something I really have any insight on. My only guess would be it's something to do with exchange rates and trying to make a bit more money from exports.
When a cave druid with natural spell that wildshapes into ooze from casts a spell what do you think the verbal components sound like? I really cannot think of a good way to describe this kind of sound or think about it.
|
Creative Director
|
I'm not sure if this has been asked already, but are there any plans for a an improvement of the crafting system in PF?No plans. (and frankly, I don't think it's as broken as people like to say it is... poison's an exception, but that's because it's unusually expensive and probably should have been handled like a magic item with a feat instead of "Craft alchemy.")What are people saying about crafting poisons? Knowing this site there are probably hundreds of threads on it but can you just sum up the main points?
As someone who crafts poisons I'd like to see what opposition people have to it.
The Craft skills were designed to simulate the creation of mundane objects like weapons, shoes, and barrels. Very few of those mundane objects cost more than a few hundred gold pieces. The rules use the object's gp value to help set how long it takes to build the objects—the more expensive the object, the longer it takes. For objects that cost only a few hundred gold, that generally works out okay.
But poisons aren't priced as if they were mundane objects. They're priced a lot more like they were magic items, because they have significant effects in combat. So poisons tend to cost a LOT per dose. Most poisons will cost more than a thousand for a bottle of a dozen or so doses, and a lot of poisons cost well over a thousand gp PER dose. As a result, the time it takes to craft poison with Craft (alchemy) is ridiculously long... and it breaks verisimilitude to think that it takes about twice as long to, say, distill a single dose of wyvern poison than it does to build a full suit of plate mail armor. It shouldn't take weeks or months to make a single dose of wyvern poison.
If they'd made the craft skills the way you build magic items, folks would have complained about this as well. But they didn't—they built a bunch of feats to cover item creation, and items created by those feats take MUCH less time to create than nonmagical items of the same value created by the Craft skill.
Essentially, by falling into a weird limbo between mundane item pricing and magic item pricing, poisons ended up being unusually hard and time-consuming to build.
The most elegant solution without having to rewrite the entire crafting rules from the ground up would be to build a "Craft Poison" feat that works similar to "Brew Potion." The Master Alchemist feat from the Advanced Player's Guide provides a workable solution to the problem as well, but since this feat is hidden away inside a giant chapter about feats, a lot of folks don't know about the feat.
|
Creative Director
|
Did you ever hear of the Living Death campaign? the one that was based on the "Masque of the Red Death" rules for Gothic Earth play?I did, but I never went to conventions and don't like the feel of organized play games anyway, so I never tried it out.It's unfortunate. It was one of the most interesting styles of play, particurlarly since your areas of operation are not off the road, deserts, or dungeons but real areas of historical significance. The module writers frequently went to great lengths to research minutiae of the locations and getting to meet characters like Sitting Bull and Queen Victoria (who was clearly not amused) was quite a blast. That and preventing the Annexation of Hawaii was a good thing. :)
If you think that the nerdrage over the VOP monk was something, that crowd would have gibbered in frustation over the limits imposed by Gothic Earth play. Armor classes that for the most part never went above 14 or so, magic that's all full round casting and casting any spell leaving you open to the possibility of taint, and magic items being more things to avoid than to hoard. (each magic item you carry increases the chance to be Tainted according to it's relative power) and above all having to work within the confines of modern day law.
Nerdrage is the main reason I don't like org play, in fact. A close second is that it turns the game into too much of a competition, with most players racing to out-optimize each other.
I play the game to hang out with friends first, tell a communal story second, and create a kick-ass character third, pretty much. And an org play environment, to me, doesn't really allow the cultivation of the second one and it makes the first one pretty hard to do. I actually think I'm pretty good at optimizing characters, so I'd probably do okay in the third category... but without the first two there to keep my interest, I'd rather be doing something else.
|
Creative Director
|
Why won't Paizo expand the Summon Monster/Nature's Ally lists? Even one sentence on the creature's page saying what level of the spell is needed to summon it would be nice.
Constantly expanding summon monster lists overcomplicate the game. They make it really hard for players AND GMs to master the spells in the first place, and they also dilute the spells by making any one type of monster less likely to be summoned in the first place.
Also, word count in a monster description is at a premium. If I had to choose between a sentence that describes what level summon monster spell can be used to summon a particular monster and a sentence that gives one more interesting flavor tidbit about the monster, I'll choose the flavor tidbit every time.
Also, the summon monster lists were not arbitrarily built. Each monster on that list was picked after we looked through its powers and strengths and usages, and then assigned to a list. That's not easy, and it requires a different eye and design philosophy and skill set than actually designing monsters does. So expanding the summon monster lists is a lot trickier than a lot of folks might think.
Also, any spell that's not self contained enough to function right out of the book as-is is poorly designed. That's why we rebuilt the polymorph spells—before, when you cast polymorph, the game ground to a halt as the spellcaster started shopping through the monster books for his new form. Even if the spellcaster HAD his new form picked out, suddenly he's using two books to run one character's actions in a battle.
Summon spells already require this two-book option—expanding that to three or more would be no good. Furthermore, even if we somehow solved this problem, bloating the list of options for summon spells would STILL cause option paralysis. Spellcasters already have to scan a list of several monsters before they pick what they summon, and that takes time. Every single monster that gets added to the list increases the time it takes to shop for monsters.
Furthermore, there's nothing saying we can't invent NEW spells to summon monsters. Ultimate Magic does just this—spells like summon froghemoth allow you to summon a monster not normally on the lists, and there's a few others in the just-released Rival Guide that let you summon devils not on the lists. New spells are more interesting than bloating an old spell's options every time.
I could go on, but that more or less covers the main elements of the argument against expanding summon monster lists.
|
Creative Director
|
When a cave druid with natural spell that wildshapes into ooze from casts a spell what do you think the verbal components sound like? I really cannot think of a good way to describe this kind of sound or think about it.
Shake up a can of soda and open it up. Listen to a bubbler in a fish aquarium. Empty a bucket of tapioca pudding down the stairs. And then there's always the ubiquitous flatus noise!
Nerdrage is the main reason I don't like org play, in fact. A close second is that it turns the game into too much of a competition, with most players racing to out-optimize each other.
AMEN BROTHER! I hate organized play. People show up with characters built to have 7's in two or 3 stats and 18's and 16's in the other three, then throw a hissy fit if the GM doesn't let them play their 7INT character like a 14INT character. :( And the builds tend to look like a fruit salad of cherry picking level dips and feats that just jar as unnatural. And if they bother to come up with a background, it's always some torturous one in a billion thing that even a soap opera wouldn't use, and they bring the same characters back from the dead more than the average PC party. :)
I play the game to hang out with friends first, tell a communal story second, and create a kick-ass character third, pretty much. And an org play environment, to me, doesn't really allow the cultivation of the second one and it makes the first one pretty hard to do. I actually think I'm pretty good at optimizing characters, so I'd probably do okay in the third category... but without the first two there to keep my interest, I'd rather be doing something else.
And another round of Hallaluyah's was heard!
|
Creative Director
|
What one thing are you most excited to do/talk about at Paizocon?
Probalby a tie between...
1) Running "The Whaler's Bluff Incident."
2) Running "Siege of Windy Hollow."
3) Revealing what the adventure path after Jade Regent is.
4) Revealing the first few covers for the Jade Regent adventure path.
5) Watching "Super 8." (Not really a PaizoCon event, but it comes out the same day PaizoCon starts, and I've been looking forward to "Super 8" for a lot longer than I've been looking forward to PaizoCon!)
When a cave druid with natural spell that wildshapes into ooze from casts a spell what do you think the verbal components sound like? I really cannot think of a good way to describe this kind of sound or think about it.Shake up a can of soda and open it up. Listen to a bubbler in a fish aquarium. Empty a bucket of tapioca pudding down the stairs. And then there's always the ubiquitous flatus noise!
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just about everything else in the game that would grant a sorcerer generic additional spells known grants them additional words known instead. What makes the human favored class bonus different?If using words of power as a sorcerer, would the human favored class bonus from the APG grant a new spell or would it give you a new effect or meta word?Nope. Words of power are different than spells.
The fact that words of power are 100% optional and work totally differently than spells.
If your GM wants to allow it, that's fine. Since they're optional, the GM HAS to make those calls.
I actually am not all that fond at all of the words of power system, and won't be using them in my home games, so my natural inclination is to say "no" to things about them. (I think the system is too complicated. I'm not interested in turning every spellcaster's turn in play into an impromptu spell design jam session.)
|
Creative Director
|
Actually since the bulk of my organised play, especially PFS is done with a consistent group of friends, (either at conventions we both go to, or we game at each other's abode, I manage the first two with not too much effort. But I understand the lack of story ownership issue with Org play even so.
I play the game to hang out with friends first, tell a communal story second, and create a kick-ass character third, pretty much. And an org play environment, to me, doesn't really allow the cultivation of the second one and it makes the first one pretty hard to do. I actually think I'm pretty good at optimizing characters, so I'd probably do okay in the third category... but without the first two there to keep my interest, I'd rather be doing something else.
That's good news! Doesn't change my opinion, really—but maybe I just scratch the itch an org play scratches by instead playing World of Warcraft, which is a similar type of gameplay (lots of other players, big focus on optimization, and a world where your character or party won't ever really become the main character of the story).
I actually am not all that fond at all of the words of power system, and won't be using them in my home games, so my natural inclination is to say "no" to things about them. (I think the system is too complicated. I'm not interested in turning every spellcaster's turn in play into an impromptu spell design jam session.)
I'm not all that big a fan either, from a usage/gm standpoint. However, I love them as a template for researching custom spells. It's a built in 'how do I figure the level of this spell' system. And the fact it was stated that they tilted it toward underpowered for a level makes me feel better about it.
If I ever did actually use it in game, I'd modify it to require the player to only be able to use 'spells' he'd written down already. No mishmashing on the fly, either have your words written out on a sheet with results and spell levels, or don't use the system. But then, I'd only let someone I trusted to do all the work correctly and honestly do it, as I wouldn't have time to go check all their possible combos.