James:
Rangers are allowed to bypass prerequisites for the Combat Style feats they take. However, it was brought up in a thread by someone that the wording might indicate that a ranger bypasses prerequisites for any Combat Style feat on their list regardless if it is taken with a Combat Style bonus feat or a regular feat.
So which is correct?
A) You may ignore prerequisites for any feat on your Combat Style feat list but only for those bonus feats (gained at 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18) gained as a ranger.
OR
B) You may ignore prerequisites for any feat on your Combat Style feat list and may use ANY feat you gain to do so (ranger feats gained at 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 AND regular feats).
Note: In Council of Thieves there is a character that is apparently using B.
Stiglor in Mother of Flies has 5 feats on the Two-Weapon combat style list but only 3 Ranger feats. Stiglor cannot normally qualify for ANY Two-Weapon style feats because he only has a 14dex.
Thanks
- Gauss
Creative Director
|
Dude, this get asked and posted almost every other months, then again, you have other/better things to remember.3) Correct. You could do that, but you'd look kind of funny doing it.Hasayfu Hung Kuen - Double Tiger-Head Steel Shields Sample I don't think he looks very silly....Agreed.
Although this is the first time I've seen a fighting style like this.
And those shields DO look more like klars than typical Pathfinder shields...
It may have been mentioned before, but this is the first time I've actually looked at footage of the fighting that I remember. And you're right, I do have better things to remember.
(Turns out I don't have a lot of interest in things like dual-shield fighting so I don't bother entering that data into my long-term memories.)
|
Creative Director
|
I know, I'm one of the people who keeps posting the video. Every few months, someone asks about dual-wield shields, and then someone claims there is no basis in reality for dual-shields, so we then link that video.Dude, this get asked and posted almost every other months, then again, you have other/better things to remember.3) Correct. You could do that, but you'd look kind of funny doing it.Hasayfu Hung Kuen - Double Tiger-Head Steel Shields Sample I don't think he looks very silly....Agreed.
Although this is the first time I've seen a fighting style like this.
And those shields DO look more like klars than typical Pathfinder shields...
That said... are there any other videos than that? I mean... if that's the only evidence of a real-world dual-shield fighting method on the Entire Internets, you should probably admit to yourself that it IS a pretty obscure method of fighting, and thus something that many folks will not know about for many posts to come.
|
Creative Director
|
Just about everyone I play with finds my summoner a pleasure to be with. But then as I've been told, I play very much against type.After finishing a certain series, my summoner received an Axebeak that he could use as a mount.
This led me to a chain of thought and I realised that I could not recreate such a mount as an Eidolon (I'm an Evolutionist) because the mount evolution is forbidden to bipeds.
While I understand perhaps that the designers were looking to stop the aesthtic ugliness of someone pigyback riding on a humanoid style eidolon, would you consider that perhaps a second look should be taken on this?
If you want an axebeak mount, play a druid.
They're better and more fun and less annoying than summoners anyway, so you'll be a better person for it in the end.
I've seen people play summoners well also. Doesn't change my opinion that I wish we'd taken a completely different design route with them, though.
|
Creative Director
|
Who is your favorite Rune Lord, and why?
That tends to shift between Sorshen, Karzoug, and Alaznist.
Sorshen because she's the closest to a bard runelord.
Karzoug because he's the one who had the largest role in my homebrew and because he's the one we've done the most with.
Alaznist because she's a demon-worshiper.
|
Creative Director
|
Would you allow Eldritch Heritage: Slyvan to get one?After finishing a certain series, my summoner received an Axebeak that he could use as a mount.
This led me to a chain of thought and I realised that I could not recreate such a mount as an Eidolon (I'm an Evolutionist) because the mount evolution is forbidden to bipeds.
While I understand perhaps that the designers were looking to stop the aesthtic ugliness of someone pigyback riding on a humanoid style eidolon, would you consider that perhaps a second look should be taken on this?
If you want an axebeak mount, play a druid.
They're better and more fun and less annoying than summoners anyway, so you'll be a better person for it in the end.
Huh?
|
Creative Director
|
James:
Rangers are allowed to bypass prerequisites for the Combat Style feats they take. However, it was brought up in a thread by someone that the wording might indicate that a ranger bypasses prerequisites for any Combat Style feat on their list regardless if it is taken with a Combat Style bonus feat or a regular feat.
So which is correct?
A) You may ignore prerequisites for any feat on your Combat Style feat list but only for those bonus feats (gained at 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18) gained as a ranger.OR
B) You may ignore prerequisites for any feat on your Combat Style feat list and may use ANY feat you gain to do so (ranger feats gained at 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 AND regular feats).
Note: In Council of Thieves there is a character that is apparently using B.
** spoiler omitted **Thanks
- Gauss
A is correct.
The Council of Thieves ranger is probably an error, but hardly the only one. We were still learning the new rules at that point too, remember!
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just ofr curiosity, what route?
I've seen people play summoners well also. Doesn't change my opinion that I wish we'd taken a completely different design route with them, though.
One that takes away from the player the no-holds-barred make-up-whatever-you-want rules which ends up with players inventing outsiders that often have no real place in the campaign world and are disruptive because they're awkward and weird, and one that treats the "eidolon" more like how we treat animal companions. The summoner would have choices like "Angel" or "Demon" or "Elemental," and would have base stats (like a druid's animal companion's base stats for things like "bear" or "horse") that then increase as the summoner gains levels. This would make them less prone to abuse by powergamers, less confusing to learn and play, and more organic and logical in the larger context of any world they dwell in. Oh... and I would revise their spell list so they didn't get so many higher level spells at lower levels, because that breaks a lot of magic item creation conventions.
Hello there James Jacobs. Did my last question get lost in the mix of other questions?
whats your favorite adventure you played as a player, not gm/dm. you can go old school if you want:)
|
Creative Director
|
whats your favorite adventure you played as a player, not gm/dm. you can go old school if you want:)
Hmmm... that's a tough choice, but I think I'll probably have to say it's a tie between "Gates of Firestorm Peak" (run by Jason Nelson) and "The Whispering Cairn" (run by Erik Mona).
|
Creative Director
|
Are Wildblooded options (such as Sylvan) legal for EH?Huh?Would you allow Eldritch Heritage: Slyvan to get one?After finishing a certain series, my summoner received an Axebeak that he could use as a mount.
This led me to a chain of thought and I realised that I could not recreate such a mount as an Eidolon (I'm an Evolutionist) because the mount evolution is forbidden to bipeds.
While I understand perhaps that the designers were looking to stop the aesthtic ugliness of someone pigyback riding on a humanoid style eidolon, would you consider that perhaps a second look should be taken on this?
If you want an axebeak mount, play a druid.
They're better and more fun and less annoying than summoners anyway, so you'll be a better person for it in the end.
I suppose... assuming the GM's okay with it! :P
To Repost:
What is Sarenrae's view of firearms and the use of firearms by her faithful. Heck what are the prime 20s views of them? If you don't have the time or inclination for the whole twenty. Sarenrae's view is just fine.
|
Creative Director
|
To Repost:
What is Sarenrae's view of firearms and the use of firearms by her faithful. Heck what are the prime 20s views of them? If you don't have the time or inclination for the whole twenty. Sarenrae's view is just fine.
Most of them see firearms in one of two ways—as a passing fancy, or as the next step in civilization's rise or fall.
Sarenrae sees them primarily as a distraction and a danger, since they give greater power to those who haven't earned the power, and also because they're not as graceful as a scimitar in combat. But if they help put down evil, then they're okay.
Contributor
|
If a group of Pathfinder-loving geologists were looking to do a professional-grade "Geological Survey of Golaron" (finding geological ways to explain the shape of the continents, mountain-building events, etc), is there any chance of getting to speak with one of the creators of the map/shape of the game-world (aside from the forums)?
The project is still in the planning stages, but it's something that is seriously being planned :)
(while it would be an entertaining read to go through every published gaming resource for clues we can use - it might save lots of time if we'd be able to, say, put questions in an email or somesuch...)
One that takes away from the player the no-holds-barred make-up-whatever-you-want rules which ends up with players inventing outsiders that often have no real place in the campaign world and are disruptive because they're awkward and weird, and one that treats the "eidolon" more like how we treat animal companions. The summoner would have choices like "Angel" or "Demon" or "Elemental," and would have base stats (like a druid's animal companion's base stats for things like "bear" or "horse") that then increase as the summoner gains levels. This would make them less prone to abuse by powergamers, less confusing to learn and play, and more organic and logical in the larger context of any world they dwell in. Oh... and I would revise their spell list so they didn't get so many higher level spells at lower levels, because that breaks a lot of magic item creation conventions.Just ofr curiosity, what route?
I've seen people play summoners well also. Doesn't change my opinion that I wish we'd taken a completely different design route with them, though.
I can understand the spell list changes, but I really like the "Spore Creature Creator"-esque eidolon building you guys went with and I am glad you didn't go the animal companion route. I personally love the summoner and find the eidolon much more fun than a normal animal companion.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Are there any plans to release/produce more content expanding upon the caravan rules, kingdom building, exploration rules, or the township building rules presented in game mastery guide?
IANJ, but this partially answered up thread:
And the kingdom/city building stuff from Pathfinder #32 is being extensively expanded upon in the upcoming Ultimate Campaign book next Spring.
I was like WHOA! Then was saddened because I have to wait.
What is your Favorite template and do you use templates on any of your characters?I generally don't really get into the use of templates on PCs at all, because they're not intended to be things PCs can use or get access to.
My favorite template for monsters is half-fiend.
There would be 3 possible reasons for wanting to play a natural Lycanthrope over an afflicted on; 2 of which are why DMs/GMs would prefer afflictec over natural for the PCs
1) Nat DR 10/Silver vs Aff DR 5/Silver. (1/2)
2) Natural can transmit the curse of Lycanthropy, Afflicted can't. (2/2)
3) Natural can control themselves in hybrid and Animal form, afflicted "must" become NPCs during that time.
if the Campaign had a great risk of PCs becoming Lycanthropes at some point, I would probably like to start as one, a natural one; fot the 3rd reason, I wouldn't mind dropping the other two and some of the stat adjustments.
... I think the use of templates vary with the DMs/GMs tastes, but many fall into the pit of; "NPCs get the full effect while PCs are forced to get the nerfed version".
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a group of Pathfinder-loving geologists were looking to do a professional-grade "Geological Survey of Golaron" (finding geological ways to explain the shape of the continents, mountain-building events, etc), is there any chance of getting to speak with one of the creators of the map/shape of the game-world (aside from the forums)?
The project is still in the planning stages, but it's something that is seriously being planned :)
(while it would be an entertaining read to go through every published gaming resource for clues we can use - it might save lots of time if we'd be able to, say, put questions in an email or somesuch...)
I would LOVE to hear what some actual geologists thought of Golarion. Best place to talk to me is via email, at the Tuesday night chats (where you can set up private rooms), or at Gen Con or Paizocon.
|
Creative Director
|
Are there any plans to release/produce more content expanding upon the caravan rules, kingdom building, exploration rules, or the township building rules presented in game mastery guide?
Yes. There'll be a LOT more about kingdom building, exploration, and town building in the upcoming Ultimate Campaign. No plans at this point to do much with the caravan rules.
|
Creative Director
|
James did you hear about the possible new Godzilla movie?
Being a huge fan of Godzilla, yeah... I heard about it back in 2009 in fact! Maybe even earlier... can't remember for sure. But yeah... I like to think I'm pretty tuned in to Godzilla news. Looking forward to it, but I hope it doesn't make any of the hideous mistakes that the 1998 American version did.
I would LOVE to hear what some actual geologists thought of Golarion. Best place to talk to me is via email, at the Tuesday night chats (where you can set up private rooms), or at Gen Con or Paizocon.If a group of Pathfinder-loving geologists were looking to do a professional-grade "Geological Survey of Golaron" (finding geological ways to explain the shape of the continents, mountain-building events, etc), is there any chance of getting to speak with one of the creators of the map/shape of the game-world (aside from the forums)?
The project is still in the planning stages, but it's something that is seriously being planned :)
(while it would be an entertaining read to go through every published gaming resource for clues we can use - it might save lots of time if we'd be able to, say, put questions in an email or somesuch...)
Speaking of chats, where are the chat rooms? I keep hearing about them but can never find them.
Speaking of chats, where are the chat rooms? I keep hearing about them but can never find them.
I know you said you like prestige classes to world specific. So Ithink you will like what I did with the Mystic Theurge in my home game. I added to the prerequisites of the prestige class and added must be a cleric of Nethys to the description. It frustrated my players slightly but I thought it just made more sense Golarionwise. What do you think?
|
Creative Director
|
I know you said you like prestige classes to world specific. So Ithink you will like what I did with the Mystic Theurge in my home game. I added to the prerequisites of the prestige class and added must be a cleric of Nethys to the description. It frustrated my players slightly but I thought it just made more sense Golarionwise. What do you think?
The fact that it frustrated your players is not something to be ignored.
The mystic theurge is actually a pretty flavorless and utilitarian class. It's one of those prestige classes like the arcane trickster or eldritch knight that exists 99% to enable a normally difficult or tricky spellcasting multi-class combo, and doesn't really need much in the way of world-specific flavor to justify its existence. In fact, limiting it by saying you need to be a cleric of Nethys is unnecessary and legitimately frustrating, not only for your players, but eventually for you too, since you might some day want to do a mystic theurge of another deity. Nethys isn't the only deity in Golarion who is arcane caster friendly, after all!
A better route would be to design an all-new class for Nethys worshipers that lets them start adding arcane spells to their divine spellcasting list, I think.
Templates were originally created for monsters. Prestige Classes are the versions of the concepts for player characters.
Well, lycanthropy can be forced on PCs...
/said part of the thread for now.
Dear James,
What constitutes an item being "held" for the purposes of an ability like the wrecker oracle curse? The reason I ask is that I am making an oracle of Time and I planned on reflavoring the curse to be that items the character held aged into disrepair. I wanted to know whether armor is affected by the ability. My thinking is "yes" because of the word 'equipped,' but I wanted to know what you think.
Source Pathfinder Player Companion: Blood of Fiends
The destructive power of the Abyss and its teeming hordes of demons seeps from your very pores and into your belongings and surroundings.
Effect Held objects gain the broken condition when you use or equip them but regain their actual condition if employed by anyone else. If a held item is restored to unbroken condition, it becomes broken again the following round. Disable Device becomes a class skill for you and you can make Disable Device checks to destroy nonmagical traps as a move action without the need to use tools or take any action beyond simply touching it.
I have an OGL question. Let's say I am publishing something and I would like the non-setting material like monsters and feats to be open to everyone. How does one go about labeling as under the OGL? Thanks!
|
Creative Director
|
Templates were originally created for monsters. Prestige Classes are the versions of the concepts for player characters.Well, lycanthropy can be forced on PCs...
/said part of the thread for now.
So can vampirism. Or ghosting. Even lichdom.
Not necessarily the best way to treat your PCs, and it's not a great way to maintain character balance, which is why it's a good thing something like this is firmly in the hands of the GM. Where it should be.
|
Creative Director
|
Dear James,
What constitutes an item being "held" for the purposes of an ability like the wrecker oracle curse? The reason I ask is that I am making an oracle of Time and I planned on reflavoring the curse to be that items the character held aged into disrepair. I wanted to know whether armor is affected by the ability. My thinking is "yes" because of the word 'equipped,' but I wanted to know what you think.
** spoiler omitted **
"Held" means precisely that—held in your hand.
A shield would be affected by the ability, but worn armor would not be.
Wrecker is intended to affect shields, weapons, and items you carry and use in your hands (like wands, staves, and rods).
Templates were originally created for monsters. Prestige Classes are the versions of the concepts for player characters.Well, lycanthropy can be forced on PCs...
/said part of the thread for now.
So can vampirism. Or ghosting. Even lichdom.
Not necessarily the best way to treat your PCs, and it's not a great way to maintain character balance, which is why it's a good thing something like this is firmly in the hands of the GM. Where it should be.
You might have a bit too much faith/trust in Dungeons/Game Masters all over the globe.
|
Creative Director
|
I have an OGL question. Let's say I am publishing something and I would like the non-setting material like monsters and feats to be open to everyone. How does one go about labeling as under the OGL? Thanks!
By printing the OGL in the book somewhere in the book, and by printing elsewhere in the book what is and isn't open content. We print that second batch of information on the front pages of our books in the legal text under the credits.
That said... if you're not familiar with publishing laws and the like, it can't hurt to talk with a lawyer or an experienced publishing friend/contact before you go live with an open content product.
Also... I suspect that posting this same question elsewhere on these boards will get you LOTS of such advice from other publishers who maintain a presence here.
|
Creative Director
|
You might have a bit too much faith/trust in Dungeons/Game Masters all over the globe.Templates were originally created for monsters. Prestige Classes are the versions of the concepts for player characters.Well, lycanthropy can be forced on PCs...
/said part of the thread for now.
So can vampirism. Or ghosting. Even lichdom.
Not necessarily the best way to treat your PCs, and it's not a great way to maintain character balance, which is why it's a good thing something like this is firmly in the hands of the GM. Where it should be.
I have to have faith in them. I have to trust them.
Because they're the only window through which most of the players of Pathfinder adventures can see what we've done with those adventures.
A bad GM (and yes they DO exist, and in greater numbers than GMs are likely willing to admit) can ruin a great adventure really easily, and that can result in unfairly bad reviews of an adventure or even in loss of revenue when players assume the fault was with the adventure, not the GM.
So yeah. If I don't have faith in and trust the GMs out there who run Pathfinder, I'd probably lose interest in designing for the game entirely.