Ashiel's Guide to Adventure Preparation


Advice

151 to 200 of 331 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
VRMH wrote:

Know that your efforts are appreciated.

Now rest, before the inevitable barrage of complaints, rebuttals and nay-sayings begins...

I thank you. I must beget my feasting that I shall have my strength for when the demons arrive. *smears peanut butter on bagels ominously*


Ashiel wrote:

*flops down on the desk* Bwhaaaaaaaaa! Q.Q

So...much...typing...even for me. *exhausted*

I give you, friends, colleagues, associates, and enemies, the very first (incomplete) draft of Ashiel's Adventuring Guidebook - Google Docs PDF.

*falls down and crawls to the kitchen*

Added to the Guide to the Guides


1 person marked this as a favorite.
harmor wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

*flops down on the desk* Bwhaaaaaaaaa! Q.Q

So...much...typing...even for me. *exhausted*

I give you, friends, colleagues, associates, and enemies, the very first (incomplete) draft of Ashiel's Adventuring Guidebook - Google Docs PDF.

*falls down and crawls to the kitchen*

Added to the Guide to the Guides

Thank you Harmor! Hopefully I'll have the next version up within the week. I haven't even begun to discuss tactics, wondrous items, party compositions, and so forth. Hmm, this could take a while. o.o"


I remember back in the 80's there was an awesome adventurers guide that was RPG generic full of traps tricks and tactics for adventurers, ran to about 300 pages and was amazing... buggered if I can remember the name or the author.

Geez it was good though.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

That font and the size of it you are using in the yellow sidebars is painful on the eyes. Can you change the size and possibly the background and/or the font itself?

You might want to make a couple asides on PFS rules for balance. WHile it's nice that you noted that using off-class lists for scrolls and stuff is cheese, in PFS all such items are priced off the cleric/wiz/druid lists, NOT ranger/paladin/bard/summoner, etc, for precisely the reasons you go into. Just telling people to head right into abusing the rules is not a good idea. Perhaps all magic items are FORCED to use the primary class systems when made into magic items?

Another alternative is to state that Lesser Restoration, 1st level spell off the Paladin list, is obviously a different spell then Lesser Restoration, 2nd level spell off the cleric list, and the effects are only usable by those people with the spell on their list. Thus, the only people who could make those oils/scrolls/wands are those with the spells being abused, and they are also the only ones who could use them. Since almost no paladins, rangers, summoners etc take item creation feats, and they would be the only ones who could profit from them, the default spell levels for everything must be used.

You might also want to emphasize very strongly that Fabricate is a hugely abusable spell as far as wealth creation goes. Being able to insta-forge a suit of adamantine plate out of raw materials for 11k gp instant cash can start breaking campaigns. Your use of it with jewelry isn't much different. It's a great idea...but it could break a campaign REALLY fast, since you are tripling the value of your loot before halving it, winding up with 150% cash really fast...

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's so beautiful, you should put an OGL statement at the end.

If I'm starting an RPG company using people on these boards that aren't already a clear-cut member of such a company, I'm picking you and Kirth and Alex Kilcoyne.

If I thought any of you might take me up on it, I'd actually propose it.


The premade adventure kits are an especially nice touch. Thanks for putting this together!


Jeremiziah wrote:

It's so beautiful, you should put an OGL statement at the end.

If I'm starting an RPG company using people on these boards that aren't already a clear-cut member of such a company, I'm picking you and Kirth and Alex Kilcoyne.

If I thought any of you might take me up on it, I'd actually propose it.

Where can I sign? :P

EDIT:

Ahalflingnotahobbit wrote:
The premade adventure kits are an especially nice touch. Thanks for putting this together!

You're very welcome. I'm glad you like it. It's far from finished, but I plan to add a lot more stuff.

Aelriynth wrote:
That font and the size of it you are using in the yellow sidebars is painful on the eyes. Can you change the size and possibly the background and/or the font itself?

Sure, I'll try to change it to something more appealing in the next installment. I was reading it in FoxitReader with size set to Fit-Width, and it seemed easy to read to me at the time.

Quote:
You might want to make a couple asides on PFS rules for balance. WHile it's nice that you noted that using off-class lists for scrolls and stuff is cheese, in PFS all such items are priced off the cleric/wiz/druid lists, NOT ranger/paladin/bard/summoner, etc, for precisely the reasons you go into. Just telling people to head right into abusing the rules is not a good idea. Perhaps all magic items are FORCED to use the primary class systems when made into magic items?

I would need to re-download and re-read all the PFS rules, which I admittedly couldn't give two coppers about; but will consider including any side-bar information possible if there is a lot of interest. In the spirit of honesty, I actually do not mind 50 gp potions of lesser restoration and the like. The summoner spell list bothers me because it digs a knife into my game-design nerve and twists it like it's fun. The Paladin and Ranger spells are fine to me because they are to the other casters what cleric is to wizard. One spell level difference (ranger delay poison is to regular delay poison what cleric animate dead is to wizard animate dead). The summoner is the guy whose spell list from 2nd through 6th level spells are sporting higher level spells like they were going out of style.

Likewise, I'm kind of anal about completeness. RAW, such things are legal. I pointed out what I feel is pretty bad, but I included it because that's what Paizo did to the game. I just presented it as it was. Paizo puts other stuff out that kind of bugs me. Like the Advanced Player's guide has a continual flame ioun stone that is created as a Wondrous Item with a market price of 75 gp, which makes it less expensive than a continual flame torch, but it cannot be dispelled or anything 'cause it's a magic item (you'd need to disjoin it). It's really minor, but it bugs me, and shows blatant disregard for what's already in the core.

There is no rule for what you propose. It would be a fine house rule, I suppose (at least as far as the summoner is concerned), but that's outside of the scope of the guide at the moment.

Quote:
You might also want to emphasize very strongly that Fabricate is a hugely abusable spell as far as wealth creation goes. Being able to insta-forge a suit of adamantine plate out of raw materials for 11k gp instant cash can start breaking campaigns. Your use of it with jewelry isn't much different. It's a great idea...but it could break a campaign REALLY fast, since you are tripling the value of your loot before halving it, winding up with 150% cash really fast...

Oh definitely. I've got a few fabricate tricks, including one that involves eschew materials which will be making it into the guide. I'll also include a side bar discussing the dangers of infinite money loops and such; as well as including my suggestion for dealing with them. Frankly, money means very little by the time you get fabricate. By that point, the gear you want is beyond the 16,000 gp limit of the core population center values; so you're either making your own stuff or getting NPCs to do it.

Infinite money has been around since 3E launched. They still haven't ironed it out. I doubt they ever will. Someone will always figure out how to somehow market magic to turn a serious profit. That's to be expected. Magic creates something from nothing, and provides infinite amounts of energy. It's hard to argue that someone who can create a world cannot make coin without slaying monsters. :P

Quote:
Another alternative is to state that Lesser Restoration, 1st level spell off the Paladin list, is obviously a different spell then Lesser Restoration, 2nd level spell off the cleric list, and the effects are only usable by those people with the spell on their list. Thus, the only people who could make those oils/scrolls/wands are those with the spells being abused, and they are also the only ones who could use them. Since almost no paladins, rangers, summoners etc take item creation feats, and they would be the only ones who could profit from them, the default spell levels for everything must be used.

I think this is highly subjective. Almost all Paladins, Rangers, and casters in my tabletop group take item creation feats. They're a good way to contribute to the party even during downtime, and prepare. A ranger that can poop out a few scrolls or potions each day is a handy man to have. Likewise, since you can legally share Item Creation feats, a full party only needs Brew Potion, Craft Wondrous, Craft Wand, and Craft Magic Arms & Armor on 1 person each.

My current tabletop campaign includes 1 Paladin, 1 Wizard, 1 Psychic Monk, 1 Psychic Warrior. All are casters, and all of them, I believe, will end up with some item creation feats. The Paladin is only 4th level, and is already planning to pick up Craft Wondrous at 7th, and Craft Magic Arms & Armor at 9th. The wizard has Scribe Scroll, Craft Wondrous, and is going for Craft Wand, and plans for Craft Rod, Staffs (we use modified non-sucky staffs), but plans to buy most potions.

Like I said, I'm not out to tell people how they should play their game. I'm out to share some ideas. What people do with those ideas is up to them and their respective groups.


I would like to point out Wandermeal as a way to extend food rations. 1cp a serving and you only need to eat real food once every week to dodge the fort save.

That makes it about 3cp per day vs 5sp a day for trail rations or even Ashiel's Meal Plan.

Also is it Craft(Meals), or profession(cook) to cook? My groups have generally used the later


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Craft (sammich).


Craft (Culinary)


Blackfingers paste is good, 50gp for 1 hour with the poison use feature.

The stain is a tell, but if you prepoison arrows or daggers ahead of time, all at once, they will keep.

My favorite gem is thistle arrows + woundweal.


That is absolutely beautiful Ashiel. Wonderfully laid out and organized. Nice writing too.

Top notch work.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:

That is absolutely beautiful Ashiel. Wonderfully laid out and organized. Nice writing too.

Top notch work.

Thank you, Adamantine Dragon. ^-^

For those curious about Craft or Profession, I think either works. I generally opt for Craft 'cause I like characters with good Intelligence scores generally, and Crafting is the go-to skill for a skill that creates something. Taking the raw ingredients and turning them into something more appealing or useful is more or less the default use of Craft. Most of my +Int characters tend to do stuff like draw, paint, cook, sculpt, write, and/or have hobbies and such. :)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm sad my stuff didn't get added in ;)


digga-dotted


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ashiel, awesome work. As soon as I get a printer, I plan on printing it out. Excellent read, the parts I had time for. Looking forward to future updates!

Edit: Now that I think about it, I may draft you if I ever get my gaming company up and running. Sadly it takes money to make money, as well as getting those pesky business licenses and what not... *grumble*

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

What was the name of the 3.5 book that had all the starting packages for different classes?

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

For further inspiration, may I suggest digging up a copy of Dragon #331?


Don't think it has been mentioned before:

For all the good-aligned sorcerers, oracles and bards out there: potion of Bestow Grace.
Get your cha-bonus on all saves for 4 minutes, for only 400 gp.
(Taking your probably obscenely high cha into account, compare that to the price of a robe of resistance with an equal bonus... Oh and btw, it's a sacred bonus, so it even stacks with those robes.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Had a good addendum to the oils of magic weapon. When a weapon is enchanted, the enchanter gets to choose whether or not it glows, per the light spell, when activated. Stuck in the dark with stupid human vision? Not the best use of resources, but ten minutes of light and having a weapon readied with the same hand isn't too shabby. This actually saved us a lot of frustration last night. First session of Council of Thieves, no on thought to bring a torch. Once we were in the sewers my magus was able to light our way through combat, at least, by using arcane pool to make my sword magical.

Edit - love the google doc, by the way. I pointed all the folks I game with to this thread, now I've got some printing to do, it looks like.


Odraude wrote:
I'm sad my stuff didn't get added in ;)

Don't fret just yet. I'm still trying to get my advice down, and then I can begin working through everyone elses' advice and giving proper credit where it is due. I truly do not wish to claim the ideas of others as my own, you see. ^-^"

I'd like to give proper credit. :)

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

Ashiel, awesome work. As soon as I get a printer, I plan on printing it out. Excellent read, the parts I had time for. Looking forward to future updates!

Edit: Now that I think about it, I may draft you if I ever get my gaming company up and running. Sadly it takes money to make money, as well as getting those pesky business licenses and what not... *grumble*

Thank you, once again, Artemis. Too bad you don't live in North Carolina. In my area we do not need a business license to operate a business; only a lesser license and only then if we're operating inside of a larger city. Running a business out of your home-office, for example, requires no license here.

I really wish I could get a freelance RPG writing deal, though. I've done a number of RPG projects for people by request, and one person liked my gunslinger writeup enough to send me a tip as a thank you (I was so proud, I smiled for a week I'm sure :D).

If you'd like to see some samples, here's one of the more exotic writeups I did for a friend about two years ago: Pheonix Racial Progression. There's also the recently revised Gunslinger, which I made as an example during the Paizo Ultimate Combat Playtest; after my less than stellar review of the gunslinger alpha and beta versions. While Paizo listened nary a bit, the gunslinger has been a popular class in my online and tabletop games alike. EDIT: Actually, I take that back. I specifically remember Erik Mona giving some wonderful words of encouragement, and noting he was listening. :)


Cyberwolf2xs wrote:

Don't think it has been mentioned before:

For all the good-aligned sorcerers, oracles and bards out there: potion of Bestow Grace.
Get your cha-bonus on all saves for 4 minutes, for only 400 gp.
(Taking your probably obscenely high cha into account, compare that to the price of a robe of resistance with an equal bonus... Oh and btw, it's a sacred bonus, so it even stacks with those robes.)

Oh my god yes. Bestow grace is a silly-awesome spell. ^.^"

devil.in.mexico13 wrote:
love the google doc, by the way. I pointed all the folks I game with to this thread, now I've got some printing to do, it looks like.

Thanks again. ^-^


Ashiel wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I'm sad my stuff didn't get added in ;)

Don't fret just yet. I'm still trying to get my advice down, and then I can begin working through everyone elses' advice and giving proper credit where it is due. I truly do not wish to claim the ideas of others as my own, you see. ^-^"

I'd like to give proper credit. :)

Artemis Moonstar wrote:

Ashiel, awesome work. As soon as I get a printer, I plan on printing it out. Excellent read, the parts I had time for. Looking forward to future updates!

Edit: Now that I think about it, I may draft you if I ever get my gaming company up and running. Sadly it takes money to make money, as well as getting those pesky business licenses and what not... *grumble*

Thank you, once again, Artemis. Too bad you don't live in North Carolina. In my area we do not need a business license to operate a business; only a lesser license and only then if we're operating inside of a larger city. Running a business out of your home-office, for example, requires no license here.

I really wish I could get a freelance RPG writing deal, though. I've done a number of RPG projects for people by request, and one person liked my gunslinger writeup enough to send me a tip as a thank you (I was so proud, I smiled for a week I'm sure :D).

If you'd like to see some samples, here's one of the more exotic writeups I did for a friend about two years ago: Pheonix Racial Progression. There's also the recently revised Gunslinger, which I made as an example during the Paizo Ultimate Combat Playtest; after my less than stellar review of the gunslinger alpha and beta versions. While Paizo listened nary a bit, the gunslinger has been a popular class in my online and tabletop games alike. EDIT: Actually, I take that back. I specifically remember Erik Mona giving some wonderful words of encouragement, and noting he was listening. :)

Lucky! But, far as I can tell, and as far as official sources have told me, California requires a business license if I plan on selling anything, even over the net. Still, soon as life stops trying to bleed my broke ass dry and sending me and my family screaming into the burning hell of deeper debt... Or if the economy happens to let up here and I can snag a #$95ing job, lol. I'll have to jump on that. It's only like, last I checked, just under 100 bucks for the one I need. Trademark and Copyrights, however, are going to be killer, but those can be snagged at a later point in time. In the mean time, I really should pick one project and force myself to focus on it. I've been so stressed and scatter-brained lately I find myself working on each project I've got going bit by itty bit. A note here, a new ability there, a mechanic over yonder, plot background back that way....

Awesome reads, by the way. I like the phoenix, and may have to try and use that at some point in an upcoming campaign. I'll give the gunslinger a more thorough read a bit later, for so far I like it :). But, as to not detract from this thread too much more, I'm firin off a PM at'cha.

Sczarni RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

I am totally going to abuse this in my Legacy of fire game. My ratfolk witch would totally think of all of this.

My little addition (if I may,):

Break Out King
While casting spells while grappled is difficult, you can still use spells to break a grappler's grasp on you or an ally. Using the daze and daze monster spells can prevent someone from maintaining a grapple, and thus force them to let go. The spell has a will save as well, so most of the grapple heavy foes are vulnerable to those spells. Daze can also break concentration of spells, as the target is unable to take a standard action to concentrate.

Keep in Communication
One of the best and yet overlooked 0-levels spells is message. You do not need line of sight or line effect, just an open path that leads back to your intended target. As long as you know where they are, and they are in range you can send a good sized message to them. They can also respond. Also, you can use the spell right next to your target and not have to worry about anyone else listening in. It is DC 25 to overhear a message if you are standing next to the person sending it, so you can bet only your target will hear that secret or sensitive information you needed them to hear. Want to expand your uses of this spell? Have the target be the guard down the hall and around the corner, and see if you can lure him into an ambush or a trap. Use the spell to plan before you kick down a door, ensuring that the orcs on the other side don't hear you argue and get ready. Secretly flirt with the princess while you are visiting the king. Hand a wand of this to your party scout and have them use this to check in while he out of sight, and use it to let him know he needs to hurry back. The uses are endless, so don't ignore this spell.

Silver Crusade

Ashiel, I haven't read everything in this thread yet but wanted to thank you for bringing up the Catch Off Guard feat in regard to staff-fighting with polearms. That you can't staff-fight with them by default has been annoying the hell out of me for a few months now, and you've found a pretty good solution; doubly so if the DM agrees the whole weapon is enchanted and not just its primary striking head (do we have any rules on that?).

This addresses one of my major problems with using polearms, or at least is very close to a solution. I've wanted to use them more and more with my characters, but kept stumbling on there being no obvious mechanic for staff-fighting with them once the opponent slips past your 10' Reach. A Cestus makes a decent equivalent, but... mngh. You may be onto a slick solution here, so thank you.

Sczarni RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

Celestial Pegasus wrote:

Ashiel, I haven't read everything in this thread yet but wanted to thank you for bringing up the Catch Off Guard feat in regard to staff-fighting with polearms. That you can't staff-fight with them by default has been annoying the hell out of me for a few months now, and you've found a pretty good solution; doubly so if the DM agrees the whole weapon is enchanted and not just its primary striking head (do we have any rules on that?).

This addresses one of my major problems with using polearms, or at least is very close to a solution. I've wanted to use them more and more with my characters, but kept stumbling on there being no obvious mechanic for staff-fighting with them once the opponent slips past your 10' Reach. A Cestus makes a decent equivalent, but... mngh. You may be onto a slick solution here, so thank you.

Unfortunately, I think only the striking head is enchanted. The reason comes from double weapons, where enchanting one end doesn't enchant the entire weapon. That is the ruling I would take with Catch Off Guard and polearms at my table. Other rulings may vary.

Silver Crusade

Caleb: Yeah, and it makes sense. Oh well. This is still a way to get 2-handed bludgeoning damage (compatible with Power Attack, even!) out of the polearm, where one would normally instead be stuck with just the Cestus/Bladed Gauntlet. Mind, carrying those weapons remains wise... but Ashiel's idea lets me finally deal with the one thing that had been really, really annoying me about polearms in Pathfinder.


CalebTGordan wrote:

Keep in Communication

One of the best and yet overlooked 0-levels spells is message. You do not need line of sight or line effect, just an open path that leads back to your intended target. As long as you know where they are, and they are in range you can send a good sized message to them. They can also respond. Also, you can use the spell right next to your target and not have to worry about anyone else listening in. It is DC 25 to overhear a message if you are standing next to the person sending it, so you can bet only your target will hear that secret or sensitive information you needed them to hear. Want to expand your uses of this spell? Have the target be the guard down the hall and around the corner, and see if you can lure him into an ambush or a trap. Use the spell to plan before you kick down a door, ensuring that the orcs on the other side don't hear you argue and get ready. Secretly flirt with the princess while you are visiting the king. Hand a wand of this to your party scout and have them use this to check in while he out of sight, and use it to let him know he needs to hurry back. The uses are endless, so don't ignore this spell.
Um, I don't think this is true...
Message wrote:

Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)

Targets one creature/level
Duration 10 min./level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

You can whisper messages and receive whispered replies. Those nearby can hear these messages with a DC 25 Perception check. You point your finger at each creature you want to receive the message. When you whisper, the whispered message is audible to all targeted creatures within range. Magical silence, 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal (or a thin sheet of lead), or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks the spell. The message does not have to travel in a straight line. It can circumvent a barrier if there is an open path between you and the subject, and the path's entire length lies within the spell's range. The creatures that receive the message can whisper a reply that you hear. The spell transmits sound, not meaning; it doesn't transcend language barriers. To speak a message, you must mouth the words and whisper.

I've always found this spell to be largely useless really. You have to point your finger at the person you want to receive the message, and, contrary to what you said, it does not go around corners unless you can target them. It will circumvent a barrier, such as a tower shield providing cover or to someone inside a house, but visible through a window, but it doesn't go around corners as you can't target them.


weren't you "looking into google docs" at the beginning of the thread?
This is awesomely made, steep learning curve of yours.

However some pictures might lighten up the text, a torch for the light trick or something like that, only for the most important things or for those you most easily find pictures.

the text in the yellow boxes (especially the titles) are not as easily readable as the rest. Also the text blocks in there are somewhat overwhelming.

spelling mistake water sactum "acid of alchemical fire" should be "or".
Will comment on all the new tricks later.

Sczarni RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

Tels wrote:

Um, I don't think this is true...

Hmmm... yeah it does seem that way, but then again...

Man this is a tough call. In one respect, you do need to be able to at least see someone to target them. On the other hand, why put in the bits about going around barriers and how certain materials block it if you couldn't cast this spell without line of sight?

More research needs to be done.

AHH! Okay, I get what is going on. The duration is the key here, which is 10 min./level. That is pretty long, and makes this just as powerful as I was making it out to be, but in a different way. I wish I was 10 minutes quicker to pick up on this because then I would be able to edit my first post.

Here is how I would rewrite this then:
Keep in Communication
One of the best and yet overlooked 0-levels spells is message. The duration is impressively long at 10 minutes/level, and if your party is separated you can still use this to communicate as long as there is an open path between the caster and the lost party member. This means you can have someone scouting ahead, at most 100 + 10 ft./level, and you can keep in communication with them without yelling or doubling back. You can also use this spell to have private conversations in crowded, public, or dangerous places without worrying about someone overhearing you. Anyone not targeted by the spell standing next to you needs a DC 25 perception check to overhear your side of the message, which makes it highly unlikely that your communications will be intercepted. So if you are gathered together in a tavern but don't want the rival parties to hear about the dungeon you want to finish clearing of all its treasure, use this spell. You can also use this to great effect on enemies. You do need to see them to target them, but you can easily retreat around a corner to spook them out, and possibly convince them they have voices in their heads. At the very least you could trick them into an ambush or trap. You can also use this for other, more entertaining, purposes. Flirting with the princess while in the kings court, covertly ordering drinks from the bar, or even casting it on someone right before they go into their tent so you can keep pestering them are all good, fun uses for this spell. The possibilities are endless, so don't ignore this spell.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Celestial Pegasus wrote:

Ashiel, I haven't read everything in this thread yet but wanted to thank you for bringing up the Catch Off Guard feat in regard to staff-fighting with polearms. That you can't staff-fight with them by default has been annoying the hell out of me for a few months now, and you've found a pretty good solution; doubly so if the DM agrees the whole weapon is enchanted and not just its primary striking head (do we have any rules on that?).

This addresses one of my major problems with using polearms, or at least is very close to a solution. I've wanted to use them more and more with my characters, but kept stumbling on there being no obvious mechanic for staff-fighting with them once the opponent slips past your 10' Reach. A Cestus makes a decent equivalent, but... mngh. You may be onto a slick solution here, so thank you.

While Caleb's house rule is fair, it's neither RAW nor needed. The only weapons that are enhanced in different places are double weapons, which pole-arms are not. If they were double weapons, then the Catch of Guard feat would not be needed, because you would just strike with the shaft end. Because it's not a double weapon, the spear itself is enhanced entirely. To further demonstrate this fact using the rules, a +5 longspear increases the hardness and HP of the entire spear, not just the blade portion. If the entire weapon was not enhanced, then it would be just as easy to break or destroy a +5 longspear as it would a mundane longspear; since you would be striking the shaft. Thus, the shaft is a +5 weapon as well. Double weapons can have ends that are easier to break.

Another example is someone can use the catch off guard feat to make use of a weapon they have no idea how to use, to overcome the DR of certain enemies. For example, an Expert NPC with catch off guard could pickup a +1 longsword, which he lacks proficiency for, and wield it as an improvised weapon. Obviously he will not be fighting with that longsword to its full capabilities, and is instead wielding it as an improvised weapon when making his attacks. The weapon is still a +1 weapon and would penetrate DR/magic. There's nothing in the core rules that I can find that suggests that say, pommeling your opponent with your longsword stops you from getting the longsword's special abilities.

So as far as RAW is concerned, unless someone can point something out I've missed, it's seem entirely fine RAW. It's also fine from a balance perspective, because you are spending a feat to make improvised attacks more easily. As it turns out, since only weapons being used in bizarre ways can be enhanced (you cannot have a +1 flaming barstool--unless you're a paladin--for example), it's also the only way to make Catch Off Guard a feat that remains useful past the lowest of levels and barfights.

EDIT: Just adding this as a citation about the hardness thing. A longspear is a 2 handed hafted weapon, which gives it a hardness and hit points of 5 and 10 respectively. A +5 longspear has a hardness of 15 and 60 hit points. This proves that it is the entire longspear that is being enhanced, not merely the pointy end.


Richard Leonhart wrote:
weren't you "looking into google docs" at the beginning of the thread?

It was suggested early on, and I decided to do so after the suggestions, about mid-way through the 2nd page of the thread, maybe? I may have had it up sooner, but I can't spend every moment in front of my PC. XD

Quote:
This is awesomely made, steep learning curve of yours.

Thank you. Um, what do you mean by steep learning curve? O.o

Quote:
However some pictures might lighten up the text, a torch for the light trick or something like that, only for the most important things or for those you most easily find pictures.

Good point. I'll look for some nice pictures themed as appropriate. Since this isn't a commercial project, I can slap all kinds of nice things in it under the fair use act.

Quote:
the text in the yellow boxes (especially the titles) are not as easily readable as the rest. Also the text blocks in there are somewhat overwhelming.

Aelriynth mentioned the readability issue concerning the color. In what ways are they overwhelming? I'm asking because I'm hoping to revise them for the next version, and the more info on what's wrong, the better.

Quote:

spelling mistake water sactum "acid of alchemical fire" should be "or".

Will comment on all the new tricks later.

Thank you. I'll fix that now, and it should be correct in the next version.


Double dotted..


sorry Ashiel you got me all wrong, what I meant was that I understood you as if you had no prior experience with google docs, and it is most impressing for a first try. (thus you learn very fast how to make such things) I could have entirely misunderstood you. Anyhow, not important. Nice document.

Readability for the yellow title has the problem that the text is either bold, or has a typeset that is too "fat", for the text in the yellow field it's the same problem, but a bit less so. Try a thinner font perhaps. The problem is mainly there if you zoom out a bit to show the whole page.


Ashiel,

Why are powder bombs a side bar and not their own section like other tactics?


Richard Leonhart wrote:
sorry Ashiel you got me all wrong, what I meant was that I understood you as if you had no prior experience with google docs, and it is most impressing for a first try. (thus you learn very fast how to make such things) I could have entirely misunderstood you. Anyhow, not important. Nice document.

Ah, thank you. Actually, yeah, this is the first time I've used google docs, so thanks again. ^-^

Quote:
Readability for the yellow title has the problem that the text is either bold, or has a typeset that is too "fat", for the text in the yellow field it's the same problem, but a bit less so. Try a thinner font perhaps. The problem is mainly there if you zoom out a bit to show the whole page.

Ah-ha. Well I tend to have it zoomed to width, so that could have something to do with it. I'll see what I can cook up in the next version.

Ahorsewithnoname wrote:

Ashiel,

Why are powder bombs a side bar and not their own section like other tactics?

Hmm, seems like a formatting issue that probably cropped up when I was altering some fonts and such. It's supposed to be on the same page with the explanation of flour/chalk vs invisibility and such. O.o

EDIT: Fixed. Should be fine in next upload.

EDIT 2: Until I can figure out a good replacement for the fonts in the side bars, I'd advise viewing the document zoomed in (if using google docs) or set your favorite pdf reading program to "View->Zoom->Fit Width" if you're using a reader like Adobe or Foxit; as it looks great on my end that way. ^-^"

Sczarni RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

Ashiel wrote:


...To further demonstrate this fact using the rules, a +5 longspear increases the hardness and HP of the entire spear, not just the blade portion. If the entire weapon was not enhanced, then it would be just as easy to break or destroy a +5 longspear as it would a mundane longspear; since you would be striking the shaft. Thus, the shaft is a +5 weapon as well. Double weapons can have ends that are easier to break....

But wouldn't enchanting one side of a quarterstaff increase the hardness for the entire weapon as well? The other end wouldn't have the combat benefits of +1 to attack and damage, but it would be just as hard to break. The reason why double weapons are enchanted the way they are is because they have two parts that are intended to be used for attacking. Spears and polearms have only one part intended for attacks, and thus their shafts wouldn't be enchanted the same as their heads.

I am not trying start an argument, this use of rules is grey enough that a rules calling could go either way.


CalebTGordan wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


...To further demonstrate this fact using the rules, a +5 longspear increases the hardness and HP of the entire spear, not just the blade portion. If the entire weapon was not enhanced, then it would be just as easy to break or destroy a +5 longspear as it would a mundane longspear; since you would be striking the shaft. Thus, the shaft is a +5 weapon as well. Double weapons can have ends that are easier to break....

But wouldn't enchanting one side of a quarterstaff increase the hardness for the entire weapon as well? The other end wouldn't have the combat benefits of +1 to attack and damage, but it would be just as hard to break. The reason why double weapons are enchanted the way they are is because they have two parts that are intended to be used for attacking. Spears and polearms have only one part intended for attacks, and thus their shafts wouldn't be enchanted the same as their heads.

I am not trying start an argument, this use of rules is grey enough that a rules calling could go either way.

I think, in this case, it is a meaningless distinction. There is nothing stopping you from hitting someone with the head of the weapon adjacent with you with the catch-off guard feat.


CalebTGordan wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


...To further demonstrate this fact using the rules, a +5 longspear increases the hardness and HP of the entire spear, not just the blade portion. If the entire weapon was not enhanced, then it would be just as easy to break or destroy a +5 longspear as it would a mundane longspear; since you would be striking the shaft. Thus, the shaft is a +5 weapon as well. Double weapons can have ends that are easier to break....

But wouldn't enchanting one side of a quarterstaff increase the hardness for the entire weapon as well? The other end wouldn't have the combat benefits of +1 to attack and damage, but it would be just as hard to break. The reason why double weapons are enchanted the way they are is because they have two parts that are intended to be used for attacking. Spears and polearms have only one part intended for attacks, and thus their shafts wouldn't be enchanted the same as their heads.

I am not trying start an argument, this use of rules is grey enough that a rules calling could go either way.

Last I checked, you can make double weapons out of two different types of materials, and thus double weapons have different hardness and hit point ratings for each end of the weapon. A double sword, for example, can be made out of both cold iron and adamantine, so the adamantine side has hardness 20 and the appropriate HP, and the cold-iron side has hardness 10 and the appropriate HP. Likewise, the increase to hardness and HP from the enhancement bonuses only apply to the individual "weapon"; or so it seems given the fact you have to have each end enhanced individually. Otherwise a double weapon can get an extreme amount of HP, since it counts each +1 enhancement bonus on the magic item separately.

To my knowledge, double weapons are basically two different weapons made into a single weapon that you wield as a two-handed weapon. You could sunder the cold-iron portion of a double weapon, or the adamantine portion, for example. However, you cannot sunder it as a whole weapon, since that creates problems because there is no rules governing merged hardness and HP (in the case of the cold-iron/adamantine double weapon).

Normal weapons are just that. One weapon. Ergo, if the +X enhancement on a longspear makes it harder to break the shaft, then it stands to reason it's the entire item that's enhanced, not just the pointy end.

It seems, to me, that the only reason to assume that the bonus doesn't apply for use with Catch Off Guard and thus wielding the spear in unusual ways, would be to simply deny it for sake of denying it. Since there is no balance concern, as you are burning a feat already (which is far more of an investment than simply getting spiked gauntlets or armor spikes), so I don't really see what's gained by preventing people from having both thematic and reasonable combat options.

Even longswords (AKA the bastard sword) are wielded as a whole weapon. The blade, the pommel, and even the hand guard are used as weapons in various western martial traditions; especially for close-quarter's combat. Guy moves in to close, lock blades, kick him in the 'nads or knee, twist sword driving pommel into face, etc.

Let's look at this another way. For all game purposes, a longspear is a single weapon. Just like a club. A club is a stick. A +5 club is a stick with a +5 enhancement bonus. Someone without proficiency in clubs (say a commoner) with the Catch Off Guard feat can wield that club as an improvised weapon without penalty. It's still a +5 club, so he's now wielding a +5 improvised weapon.

Liberty's Edge

While many of these are quite good (credit where credit is due, this is a major step forward from some of Ashiel's past proposals), and the presentation is high quality I do wonder if you don't get to the point of "Schrodinger's haversack" at a certain point.

The game is a game of choices, after all.


ciretose wrote:

While many of these are quite good (credit where credit is due, this is a major step forward from some of Ashiel's past proposals), and the presentation is high quality I do wonder if you don't get to the point of "Schrodinger's haversack" at a certain point.

The game is a game of choices, after all.

"Schrodinger's Haversack" is actually the goal of smart adventurers. It's like a survival hit. You want everything in a survival kit that you can get, without it becoming too cumbersome. If anything, magic items like the Haversack prove that this is an ideal pattern of thinking.

That being said, you could have access to literally every printed item in the core rulebook (including all wondrous items) and still not be assured success. Like you say, the game is a game of choices, and when you can only decide between item #1 or item #2 at a given time, you have to make the right choice.

It's better to have and not need than need and not have. There's lots of choices elsewhere in the game to be made anyway. Which route to take, which NPC to trust, which feat to take, etc.


I don't think that the point is to have everything on the list. I think the point is that everything on the list has something to add to the adventure and it is up to the player(s) to take what they need. If you are never going up against invisible creatures, then you don't need to bring flour or chalk. If you do find an invisible creature, then maybe you can use the information to do something else, like use a smoke stick or make a dust cloud.

It's not about what you bring. It's about what you can find on hand that would simulate what you need. These are just ideas to spring ideas forward.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I don't think that the point is to have everything on the list. I think the point is that everything on the list has something to add to the adventure and it is up to the player(s) to take what they need. If you are never going up against invisible creatures, then you don't need to bring flour or chalk. If you do find an invisible creature, then maybe you can use the information to do something else, like use a smoke stick or make a dust cloud.

It's not about what you bring. It's about what you can find on hand that would simulate what you need. These are just ideas to spring ideas forward.

Pretty much. There is no guide that can truly be complete for everything that you will run into during your adventures. Even if you had everything that is in the core rulebook, you still might not have the perfect tool or the job; or may be able to figure out a better plane with stuff on hand.

It never hurts to go prepared though. :o
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.


Words cannot express my admiration for this thread. Do we name you our queen now, Ashiel?

(I also honestly can't believe I havent posted here yet. I think I just keep getting caught up with the new ideas. What did you have in mind on the tactical front? I'm pretty stoked on that front. You've got a really good sense of what the monsters/GM can dish out so I usually don't come away from your threads without a few ideas.)


Twigs wrote:
Words cannot express my admiration for this thread. Do we name you our queen now, Ashiel?

Aww. ^.^""

Quote:
(I also honestly can't believe I havent posted here yet. I think I just keep getting caught up with the new ideas. What did you have in mind on the tactical front? I'm pretty stoked on that front. You've got a really good sense of what the monsters/GM can dish out so I usually don't come away from your threads without a few ideas.)

Well, I'm glad I give you ideas; and thank you! As for tactics; I'll probably include a rather large emphasis on teamwork related tactics. For example, one of the classic teamwork bits is the ol' stinking cloud + animate dead wizard/cleric combo. The wizard bombs an area with gas, the cleric sends in the mooks. The mooks are at a great advantage in this case, since they are immune to the cloud, but everyone caught in the cloud can end up unable to take standard or full-round actions. You can take apart some surprisingly strong enemies in this fashion, or wipe out a field of enemies. Similar combos include wizards dropping fireballs or cold AoEs in the midst of the cleric's burning or normal skeletons.

Honestly, there are few to no PCs that can do it all. Teamwork is prized and powerful.


I'm looking forward to it!

Liberty's Edge

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I don't think that the point is to have everything on the list. I think the point is that everything on the list has something to add to the adventure and it is up to the player(s) to take what they need. If you are never going up against invisible creatures, then you don't need to bring flour or chalk. If you do find an invisible creature, then maybe you can use the information to do something else, like use a smoke stick or make a dust cloud.

It's not about what you bring. It's about what you can find on hand that would simulate what you need. These are just ideas to spring ideas forward.

I don't disagree, but I also think the cost (both in gold and action economy) can get prohibitive.

These are options and alternatives, which are great. But it is kind of like any magic item, where it can do something useful if that is the useful thing you need.

Problem is, what will you need.

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

I don't think that the point is to have everything on the list. I think the point is that everything on the list has something to add to the adventure and it is up to the player(s) to take what they need. If you are never going up against invisible creatures, then you don't need to bring flour or chalk. If you do find an invisible creature, then maybe you can use the information to do something else, like use a smoke stick or make a dust cloud.

It's not about what you bring. It's about what you can find on hand that would simulate what you need. These are just ideas to spring ideas forward.

Pretty much. There is no guide that can truly be complete for everything that you will run into during your adventures. Even if you had everything that is in the core rulebook, you still might not have the perfect tool or the job; or may be able to figure out a better plane with stuff on hand.

It never hurts to go prepared though. :o
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

What is the issue I'm raising though, is that having an item is a choice to not have another item.

The amulet of continual light is a great idea. It's also a neck slot or and a move action to open it, or worse a move action to retrieve from a handy haversack and another move action to open it.

It is a great item, but by definition it precludes something else.

I think the ideas you have proposed are interesting and for the most part pretty good. But I don't want to go overboard as I think that carrying around a ton of low to moderately priced items isn't practical until you can afford a handy haversack (for the retrieval benefit in addition to the weight benefit), and even then I'm not sure the action economy loss makes them substantially better.

For flavor though, it's great.

Dark Archive

ciretose wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
*omitted*
*omitted*

What is the issue I'm raising though, is that having an item is a choice to not have another item.

The amulet of continual light is a great idea. It's also a neck slot or and a move action to open it, or worse a move action to retrieve from a handy haversack and another move action to open it.

It is a great item, but by definition it precludes something else.

I think the ideas you have proposed are interesting and for the most part pretty good. But I don't want to go overboard as I think that carrying around a ton of low to moderately priced items isn't practical until you can afford a handy haversack (for the retrieval benefit in addition to the weight benefit), and even then I'm not sure the action economy loss makes them substantially better.

For flavor though, it's great.

The amulet doesn't take up the neck slot since it is just an ordinary piece of jewelry with a spell cast on it and no actually a magic item.

In my opinion what you need to look at is what it costs you to have the item, how often you will run into a situation where you need it, and how much you will need it if the situation comes up. Based on these criteria you would evaluate everything you might want.

151 to 200 of 331 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Ashiel's Guide to Adventure Preparation All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.