Overland travel times are inaccurate. 3.4mph is the translation from 30ft per round (6 seconds) yet in 8 hours you travel far less than 3.4mph would suggest.
I'm confused about this, since the distance for 1 day of overland travel is 24 miles. Adding in time to take breaks, eat, etc. 24 miles in one day is certainly reasonable, especially if you carrying any amount of gear and not traveling by roads.
That 30 feet per round is the equivalent to a standard military "quick time" march. It's very difficult to maintain on anything other than flat clear terrain.
Actually, that core book overland per day number assumes 8 hours a day of walking. And it already assumes you are using roads, if you check. Look at the terrain modifiers (page 172). Check Trackless, or even Road/Trail category.
In one day, you should be able to make 27 miles, assuming you travel for 8 hours and you have no terrain modifiers.
I personally think that Disable Device should logically include the ability to craft traps already, since if you know how to dismantle a trap, you should be able to make one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally think that Disable Device should logically include the ability to craft traps already, since if you know how to dismantle a trap, you should be able to make one.
If I could assemble everything I can disassemble, I would get paid a whole lot more than I do.
Or maybe Doctors would just get paid a lot less.
*shrug* I'm fine with either happening.
I personally think that Disable Device should logically include the ability to craft traps already, since if you know how to dismantle a trap, you should be able to make one.If I could assemble everything I can disassemble, I would get paid a whole lot more than I do.
Or maybe Doctors would just get paid a lot less.
*shrug* I'm fine with either happening.
I'm not sure I want to know what you are disassembling.
BTW if the ability to disassemble something gives the ability to assemble it, does that make butchers veterinarians?
|
Nah, less math, and less encumbrance as well. Remember that they use the base 10 system. Magic items are so ludicrously expensive that the only way you'd have the moolah to buy them and NOT be crippled by the weight is through pp.
Nope, the APG (if you look at it) is more of a all around book, meant to add onto the core book. No other book is that general, nor does any other book have as many base classes or alternate base classes. The only other one that comes close is the Ultimate Equipment book.
Those weights I mention are of actual fighting arms from the period, not using modern steel.
Just because items are priced in gold doesn't stop you from paying in platinum. Otherwise, it's like saying you have to pay for your groceries with $1 bills instead of the $20 in your pocket. Putting the prices in gp just keeps the pricing "scheme" standardised.
Please reference the entry you're replying too in your post, I'm getting confused with the 5-6 secondary storylines in this thread. I'm too ADHD to follow this very well.
Several of these I've already house ruled. I will post mine when I get back from the salt mines...
But that doesn't mean that I can't criticize these latter two as silly and/or dysfunctional also - when the lowest XP prize in the game is basically 200 xp, there is no need for that not to simply be a "2" instead - these inflated values are a holdover from when 1 gp gave you 1 xp.
While I would like to agree with you in principle (I'm all for deflation), my experience with Kingmaker and Hex Exploration has proven this statement quite false.
(Generally receiving increments of 25 XP.)
But that doesn't mean that I can't criticize these latter two as silly and/or dysfunctional also - when the lowest XP prize in the game is basically 200 xp, there is no need for that not to simply be a "2" instead - these inflated values are a holdover from when 1 gp gave you 1 xp.While I would like to agree with you in principle (I'm all for deflation), my experience with Kingmaker and Hex Exploration has proven this statement quite false.
(Generally receiving increments of 25 XP.)
Huh. Okay - I didn't realize that (and I played through part of 'Kingmaker'). So - I'll buy that as a reason for the current system of XP values.
Thanks, and kind regards.
Play on, Paizo Nation!
Hey, no problem. I mean, I certainly don't know all the ways they use the rules in all the APs either, so, you know, I figured I'd let you know. :)
Overland travel times are inaccurate. 3.4mph is the translation from 30ft per round (6 seconds) yet in 8 hours you travel far less than 3.4mph would suggest.
I'm confused about this, since the distance for 1 day of overland travel is 24 miles. Adding in time to take breaks, eat, etc. 24 miles in one day is certainly reasonable, especially if you carrying any amount of gear and not traveling by roads.
That 30 feet per round is the equivalent to a standard military "quick time" march. It's very difficult to maintain on anything other than flat clear terrain.
Actually, that core book overland per day number assumes 8 hours a day of walking. And it already assumes you are using roads, if you check. Look at the terrain modifiers (page 172). Check Trackless, or even Road/Trail category.
In one day, you should be able to make 27 miles, assuming you travel for 8 hours and you have no terrain modifiers.
You are assuming that the road is straight, most roads have a little wind to them.
You are assuming that you are walking 30 feet/6 seconds every single second for the whole 8 hours no distractions or pauses.Even with all of this, do you really have a problem with a less that 15% difference?
I just litter the dungeon with false positives and use lead or thick walls to block parts of it. The people designing he dungeon obviously know about that little detect magic trick.
Player: Hey I found something. I go check it out.
DM: While walking over to check out the ring with magic aura on it, you step past the end of the wall, and the fireball trap that was around the corner goes off...The PC would have spotted the trap TRIGGER. You can't have them triggering a trap that they can’t spot the trigger of. That’s not how Trapfinding/Perception works. If the trap is a fireball wand 200 feet away, the rogue will spot the trigger for that wand 5’ away.
Thus your idea doesn’t work.
And? I don't have a problem with someone finding the trap with perception. If they have a trapfinding rogue(or someone with high perception) looking for trap triggers, great. That is what they are supposed to do to find traps.
I do have a problem with the players automatically finding every magic thing in the dungeon just by sustaining a level 0 spell. Hence, my countermeasures would foil just that.
My favorite trap: Fireball spell, trigger detect magic.
If the player can detect it with detect magic, then it can detect them and they have a magic spell active. Meanwhile a clever rogue with a good perception check might have noticed other signs, like singe marks on the walls, lead shielding to focus the cone of the detection spell, etc.
My favorite trap: Fireball spell, trigger detect magic.
If the player can detect it with detect magic, then it can detect them and they have a magic spell active. Meanwhile a clever rogue with a good perception check might have noticed other signs, like singe marks on the walls, lead shielding to focus the cone of the detection spell, etc.
But what if the Rogue has a magic item? (And she probably will have at least one by 2nd or 3rd level.
Does she get blasted because the trap detected her items?
My favorite trap: Fireball spell, trigger detect magic.
If the player can detect it with detect magic, then it can detect them and they have a magic spell active. Meanwhile a clever rogue with a good perception check might have noticed other signs, like singe marks on the walls, lead shielding to focus the cone of the detection spell, etc.
But what if the Rogue has a magic item? (And she probably will have at least one by 2nd or 3rd level.
Does she get blasted because the trap detected her items?
The assumption around traps is that there are signs of a trap that do not require you to be in the killzone to notice(Like singe marks and lead sheets on the wall). I would assume that since the trap has a DC to notice and disarm, a rogue can notice and disarm it without setting it off.
The trap is mainly for catching players who think that Detect Magic will automagically find every magic trap for them.
My favorite trap: Fireball spell, trigger detect magic.
If the player can detect it with detect magic, then it can detect them and they have a magic spell active. Meanwhile a clever rogue with a good perception check might have noticed other signs, like singe marks on the walls, lead shielding to focus the cone of the detection spell, etc.
But what if the Rogue has a magic item? (And she probably will have at least one by 2nd or 3rd level.
Does she get blasted because the trap detected her items?The assumption around traps is that there are signs of a trap that do not require you to be in the killzone to notice(Like singe marks and lead sheets on the wall). I would assume that since the trap has a DC to notice and disarm, a rogue can notice and disarm it without setting it off.
The trap is mainly for catching players who think that Detect Magic will automagically find every magic trap for them.
Right, it’s not the trap you are spotting so much as the trigger. In many cases, this distinction isn’t important, but here it’s critical.
To stretch the analogy, if there was a ballista aimed at a spot in the road form 1000’ away, so that if you hit the trip wire, it would go off-you would not be getting perception minuses to spot something 1000’ away, just the tripwire at your feet.
My favorite trap: Fireball spell, trigger detect magic.
If the player can detect it with detect magic, then it can detect them and they have a magic spell active. Meanwhile a clever rogue with a good perception check might have noticed other signs, like singe marks on the walls, lead shielding to focus the cone of the detection spell, etc.
But what if the Rogue has a magic item? (And she probably will have at least one by 2nd or 3rd level.
Does she get blasted because the trap detected her items?The assumption around traps is that there are signs of a trap that do not require you to be in the killzone to notice(Like singe marks and lead sheets on the wall). I would assume that since the trap has a DC to notice and disarm, a rogue can notice and disarm it without setting it off.
The trap is mainly for catching players who think that Detect Magic will automagically find every magic trap for them.
Right, it’s not the trap you are spotting so much as the trigger. In many cases, this distinction isn’t important, but here it’s critical.
To stretch the analogy, if there was a ballista aimed at a spot in the road form 1000’ away, so that if you hit the trip wire, it would go off-you would not be getting perception minuses to spot something 1000’ away, just the tripwire at your feet.
Exactly, although in this particular case, you are not spotting the trigger(which is a magic spell), you are spotting the other signs of a constructed trap. A perceptive rogue would realize from the shaping of the walls and the materials used in the construction of the walls that someone was trying to control the arc of a detection spell. They might notice burn marks on the walls where the trap had gone of before. In any case, they should be able to notice these things before they actually set the trap off.
Either way, I don't see unlimited level 0 spells as gamebreaking. There are a few that are a little bit of a challenge for inexperienced DMs, but with a little advice, you can make them mostly useless. I actually prefer the reduced bookkeeping that comes from not having to keep track of level 0 spell usage.
|
Either way, I don't see unlimited level 0 spells as gamebreaking. There are a few that are a little bit of a challenge for inexperienced DMs, but with a little advice, you can make them mostly useless. I actually prefer the reduced bookkeeping that comes from not having to keep track of level 0 spell usage.
I think it's a small trade-off for the world changes they create.
Yes, they are not game breaking but they are world bending and changing (details which are left out of the core rule book).An example - say I'm running a 3.5 campaign ported over to pfrpg in a city located in an arid location. Water is scarce - but some of it can be created by casters, not enough to keep everyone in the city alive, but enough to keep themselves and a few of the important city members alive if need be should a crisis occur.
Switch over from 3.5 to Pathfinder: Spammable water by level 1 clerics. There is no need for water because the level 1 clerics in the town can (effectively) create unlimited amounts of water.
Same goes for unlimited item repair - ok, so why would a tinker or repairman even go into business with an unlimited power to repair small objects (mostly intact, 1lb/level but can repair magic items and it's a 0-level spell). So now the logical thing would be to have magical water makers in town, and magical repairmen.
So it isn't that the power is OP, it's just that it requires everyone to run things like 100% magic world. Some DMs don't like that. I don't like that - it reminds me of all the bad changes from 1st to 2nd ed AD&D (no assassins) and then the Forgotten Realms with the Time of Troubles nonsense.
This isn't a case of being uncreative or being inexperienced to deal with the changes, I just don't want to change my world, and some level 1 assumptions of how basic everyday life works for commoners - where magic is not an everyday 0-level spammable tool replacing some kinds of work (finding/securing water and repairing items specifically). So to me the assumed default power level, the world impacts (and building your world around these changes) is more annoying than anything else. These spells themselves are not overpowered.
And I wouldn't want to make the powers "mostly useless" to counter them, what’s the point in doing that?
Why even give them the power if I am going to make efforts to counter them or nullify them at every bend? I'd rather limit their use per day, but make them function the same (Detect magic could use a re-write) as they are supposed to, which is for minor utility.
Create water should create some water, maybe enough to drink for a small group or to put out a small fire - not to sustain a town or to irrigate farmlands. This is more of a style and preference issue for me than one of power.
I'd also rather have the cleric have access to all the 0 level spells and cast them X times a day when he needs them, vs. him picking a few and using them in an unlimited fashion. That way when they need to stabilize or detect poison they won't need to prep it, they just cast it. Just don't over your total orison limit for the day.
gouge away
Some 0-level spells are harmful when spammed, and they're almost all those with permanent effects (Mending, Create Water, PFD). This is why Cure Minor Wound in 3.5 was changed to Virtue. Detect Magic is about the only other exception.
OTOH, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with a sorcerer being able to do Ray of Frost 100 times per day.
IMC I limit the number of cantrips that can be cast in a short period, but the caster can recharge pretty easily. And Mending does a pretty shoddy job unless you take a long time over it.
Silly rule: why don't rangers and paladins get 0-level spells? A ranger can't even Know Direction, for goodness' sake.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a small trade-off for the world changes they create.
Yes, they are not game breaking but they are world bending and changing (details which are left out of the core rule book).
An example - say I'm running a 3.5 campaign ported over to pfrpg in a city located in an arid location. Water is scarce - but some of it can be created by casters, not enough to keep everyone in the city alive, but enough to keep themselves and a few of the important city members alive if need be should a crisis occur.Switch over from 3.5 to Pathfinder: Spammable water by level 1 clerics. There is no need for water because the level 1 clerics in the town can (effectively) create unlimited amounts of water.
Same goes for unlimited item repair - ok, so why would a tinker or repairman even go into business with an unlimited power to repair small objects (mostly intact, 1lb/level but can repair magic items and it's a 0-level spell). So now the logical thing would be to have magical water makers in town, and magical repairmen.
So it isn't that the power is OP, it's just that it requires everyone to run things like 100% magic world. Some DMs don't like that. I don't like that - it reminds me of all the bad changes from 1st to 2nd ed AD&D (no assassins) and then the Forgotten Realms with the Time of Troubles nonsense.
A lot of the "why are there still wells and tinkers around" logic comes from extremely modern concepts of economies of scale and globalistic thought- something that has really come into its own with the massive amount of easily accessible information we now have.
Back in the day, yes, creating water in a desert would be an amazingly valuable ability for anyone to have. But it's still a small caste of people who can do that, and they won't always want to. Very likely after a few weeks, they'll dig the entire well themselves to stop having to cast the same thing all the time- if other people didn't dig some anyway. Any day the caster gets sick, goes on vacation, gets pouty from a huge argument or commits a crime and gets himself hung, the community depending on him would similarly die.
Independence, superstition, stubborn adherence to tradition or just plain irrational dislike for the people using the magic could all factor into not adopting a totally magical economy despite the obvious benefits. There are huge advantages to using a single spoken language, a single operating system, a single programming language, and a single monetary system, but I'm pretty sure we won't see that day without world domination creating it.
That's a little bigger in scope than free cantrips (which I like), but I really wish I could illustrate to people how a certain level of inefficiency can make a world more believable, not less.
I'm pretty sure it's been pointed out before on these boards that, as written, a single cleric can't do that much, the water goes away in 24 hours unless it's been drunk (so it can't be used for irrigation), and adepts (who are presumably substantially more common than PC classes) don't have unlimited cantrips. I think the solution is to make a limitless Create Water trap, but that doesn't require at-will cantrips to be part of the campaign world.
But if you prefer the other, you can house rule it with no problem. Just like how I used to house rule in 3.5 that regardless of the caster, so long as they had access to 0-level spells, they a) received bonus 0-level spells for high ability scores, and b) always received one more bonus 0-level spell than 1st level spell (so if they would normally have one bonus 1st level, they'd get two cantrips; and if they'd normally get two bonus 1st lvl, they'd get three cantrips; and so on).
That's not a bad rule, it's just different than the base assumption. The primary reason for limitless cantrips is to help ensure a caster can always be useful - they're rarely stuck with nothing but their dagger/mace/etc anymore, which, I admit, is a gamist decision, but it certainly can work well to create interesting and dynamic worlds.
EDIT:
Some 0-level spells are harmful when spammed, and they're almost all those with permanent effects (Mending, Create Water, PFD). This is why Cure Minor Wound in 3.5 was changed to Virtue. Detect Magic is about the only other exception.
Just so you know, Cure Minor Wounds wasn't changed to Virtue (which existed in 3.5) it was changed to Stabilize.
Also, guys, Create Water clarifies that it disappears in one day, if not consumed.
I honestly liked Cure Minor Wounds...
Same goes for unlimited item repair - ok, so why would a tinker or repairman even go into business with an unlimited power to repair small objects (mostly intact, 1lb/level but can repair magic items and it's a 0-level spell). So now the logical thing would be to have magical water makers in town, and magical repairmen.
It costs 5gp to hire that spell caster to repair your item, that is over two weeks pay for a tinker. I think I'll pay the tinker.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only real rule I have a major issue with is +5 to crafting DC being able to overcome the 'must be level 3*X' to craft +X weapons/armor/bonus attribute items.
Well, that and I think scry and fry is too easy, but that's more of a bad spell design than a bad rule.
Last I checked that requirement wasn't by-passable...
Last I checked that requirement wasn't by-passable...
Check the FAQs, they recently updated them to indicate that basically everything is bypassable. :(
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing I can never get past with the "infinite cantrips means I cast them all day" is the sheer tedium involved. Imagine jotting down a simple math equation you could do in a couple seconds in your head. Now imagine performing that equation - not just knowing the answer, but mentally walking through the steps - 10 times a minute for 8 hours straight. No variation, just the same tedious thing over and over, distracting you from everything else you do over the course of your day. Want to check the mail? Do the equation, walk to the door, do the equation, open the door, do the equation, walk a bit, do the equation, walk to the mailbox, do the equation, open the mailbox, do the equation, remove your mail, do the equation arrghjkfblvx. It's all the tedium of writing lines as a punishment. I can't imagine any sane character that could do that for one day, let alone every day. It's like stating that your character attacks an adjacent empty square every waking round just in case of invisible foes.
|
|
The thing I can never get past with the "infinite cantrips means I cast them all day" is the sheer tedium involved. Imagine jotting down a simple math equation you could do in a couple seconds in your head. Now imagine performing that equation - not just knowing the answer, but mentally walking through the steps - 10 times a minute for 8 hours straight. No variation, just the same tedious thing over and over, distracting you from everything else you do over the course of your day. Want to check the mail? Do the equation, walk to the door, do the equation, open the door, do the equation, walk a bit, do the equation, walk to the mailbox, do the equation, open the mailbox, do the equation, remove your mail, do the equation arrghjkfblvx. It's all the tedium of writing lines as a punishment. I can't imagine any sane character that could do that for one day, let alone every day. It's like stating that your character attacks an adjacent empty square every waking round just in case of invisible foes.
And now imagine if you got paid to do it say just 20-40 times a day? You don't need to spam something an infinite time for it to break the world - just enough to eliminate the mundane, non-magical need to invest in the skills and training to do so. I don't think a tinker would stay in business if mending is readily available and spammable in any world.
I appreciate the arguments to accept the spammable spells switch from 3.5 to PFRPG, and people here are going to great length to explain, justify or modify things to accommodate that change in world expectation. I just don't think the gamist reason (spell caster should always have spells they can cast) for the change is a good enough reason for me to change +30 years of AD&D world expectations. The reasons and justifications just don't cut it for me. Should a caster always be able to cast ray of frost? Maybe if he is an evoker? I considered a mod to my 4+ caster stat modifier use per day by allowing one spammable, but I would definitely not allow (again, in my game)
spammable:
- permanent change (item repair)
- semi-permanent item creation (water - and yes, it can be used for irrigation - it can be used for anything but being stored. The water can be consumed by plants over time just like it could be drunk by people and used by animals).
So no, I'm not going to change 30 years of game/world expectation because too many people (none that I game with) complained that wizards had nothing to do after casting all their spells. That problem is mostly a cause-effect of poor resource management and those players expectations of what a wizard should be able to do, not mine or those I game with.
I also stand behind the fact that this was a poorly thought out drive-by change. I don't think they (the unfailing devs) thought any of this out beyond the gamist need for 100% spellcasting access for people who play casters with no world considerations written into the rules.
So I see the arguments - most if not all are just "accept the change because of X/not a big deal", but in reality it's just telling me to accept the change that occurred for a reason I never agreed with first place (casters always need magic). I would rather not change world/game expectations and assumed levels of magic because of a new edition and just fix the problem with my original post solution. I'm not going to change my game assumptions because of an edition change that was made to accommodate a play style which is alien to me and my players.
Thanks to all who offered constructive actual arguments for and against spammable spells. Thematically the change doesn't work for me, but the poor implementation (actually zero implementation - their impact is not even discussed) is a non-starter for me. Spammable 0 level spells are on the world level change of adding guns to the game and saying "accept it, that's the way it is" or "you must just be a bad DM if you can't handle guns in your game", both of which would be incorrect assumptions (working on full automatic, auto-burst and pulse weapon rules/mechanics for a PA game right now as I'm typing this).
And speaking of level 0: why are there no level 0 domain spells?
You are assuming that the road is straight, most roads have a little wind to them.
You are assuming that you are walking 30 feet/6 seconds every single second for the whole 8 hours no distractions or pauses.Even with all of this, do you really have a problem with a less that 15% difference?
Yes. 3 miles a day makes a difference. Also, that 8 hours of travel time is a bit of a misnomer. There are 24 hours a day, 8 of which you need to sleep, and 12 of which are at minimum too damned dark. That still leaves 12 hours. That excess time is sucked up by cooking and eating, resting, drinking, etc. The total time you end up traveling is 8-10 hours a day, but its not constant walking since there are breaks.
Yes, most roads curve a bit, but this is a heuristic system, always has been. Therefore, that has been compensated for already.
After 12 days of travel (not uncommon when going to a new site that the adventure is made for) you get an extra days' worth of distance. That is a big deal to most players, since travel involves random encounter checks and dwindling resources.
I was thinking more of a dungeon setting. Enter a room, spend a few seconds scanning for magic, rinse and repeat with every room. Because there is no limit, there is no reason not to do that while other pcs are searching the place by hand.
Detect Magic basically highlights everything with a magical glow which means its fail-proof, compared with mundane searches by other pcs which all require DC checks. So it seems overpowered and far too revealing for an at-will cantrip.
In one of the APs there is this wizard's lair, and the AP writer writes that all the secret doors are manual, non-magical ones. Why? Because magically hidden ones are just much too easy to find.
I know you can work around the problem by making the whole dungeon glow with magic, or to store hidden magical items in lead boxes, but it seems more logical to fix the problem with the spammable spell rather than have to awkwardly design everything else around its constant use.
Perhaps Detect Magic should have been a 1st...
Actually, one could argue that the very nature of Illusion spells would prevent Detect Magic from piercing them so easily. If an Orc casts a spell to look like a human, and that spell gives off a magic aura that Detect Magic easily picks up, that negates the very reason for casting the 1st or greater level spell. Being that Detect Magic is a lowly orison, why should it be able to confound a much higher level spell anyway?
Just thought I would throw that out there. I honestly think that note should be added into the core book.
There are huge advantages to using a single spoken language, a single operating system, a single programming language, and a single monetary system, but I'm pretty sure we won't see that day without world domination creating it.
Nope. Already are starting to see a global language. See, the funny thing about languages is that they proliferate when groups of people are isolated from each other. Small differences accumulate, and eventually you are speaking an alien language to the other groups.
Now, the neat thing about modern tech is that communication is getting so readily accessible that people from wildly differing locales start talking to one another. We are doing that as I type this, in fact.
When that happens, a common language is needed. Since necessity is the mother of invention, what do you think happens when this occurs?
Right now, if you look at the numbers, Chinese and English are the two most popular. However, Chinese has a major problem because it is written identically, but pronounced and used radically differently depending on where you learned it, EVEN if you use Mandarin.
English, however, is rapidly gaining ground, and accents are disappearing or melding. The accepted version for America itself is Midwestern, elsewhere it might be the British version. Moreover, English is the linguistic equivalent of a serial mugger. It'd corner any other language in a dark corner, beat the crap out of it for whatever words it needed. This is why there are so many exceptions to the language; the custom of swiping words from other languages when necessary. And, it is relatively unique among languages to have this penchant to this extreme of a degree.
World domination isn't necessary to have unified systems. All you need is a lot of necessity.
There is even the talk that ALL online transactions will end up using a Standardized Currency.
Which language are you talking about? Phonetics have been around in some form since Pre-WWI and the U.N. only supported and proposed other languages and didn't actively work on one.
I wonder if he's talking about the UNL project mentioned here, which was more "computer translation project" and less "universal human language".
And it had better not be the goofy artificial language Esperanto, which was ONLY used in a single flick, one so bad that even Shatner's innate cheese factor couldn't save it.
There is even the talk that ALL online transactions will end up using a Standardized Currency.
Well, so far the number one contenders are the US dollar (which is silly given that it has no basis in real value, only by reputation and the difficulty to replicate the dollar), the Euro, or some other form of money.
I can definitely understand why the Euro was necessary. All those nations, about the physical size of USA states, and all using different currencies. Just getting into a car or train and going on holiday would become problematic! Imagine what traders have to do all the time, converting all those currencies against some sort of accepted standard currency (assuming there is one).
Too bad the Euro didn't come with responsible nation governments all using the same standards when it comes to budget. That's one of the reason why Spain, Italy, and Greece are in deep dooky now.
To use an American example, the deep South and Alaska have a disturbing tendency to soak up FAR more resources and money than they actually generate. Thus, the North and both coasts tend to funnel federal dough their way. It works because there's only one federal government, as currently paralyzed as it is even so. Another good example of how irresponsible state govts are is when Obama tried to send moolah their way to help weatherize government buildings as a means of saving money in the future. You would not BELIEVE the random crap each one spent it all on!
Actually Esperanto is fairly widespread. Though it is never used as a primary language.
And the Standardized Currency was actually going to be based on the one Japan was thinking of adopting. Though Japan decided that it would be better staying with a Physical, instead of Digital, Currency.
Their proposed was 1 Credit was around 10 or 1 Yen (can't remember which). Everyone once they got to a certain age would get a card and their Pay and everything was put on that card. The security was going to be high for them. They decided it would be to much work. For an Online Currency though... It seems like it could be wonderful.
Esperanto was used in a movie called Incubus.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I was thinking more of a dungeon setting. Enter a room, spend a few seconds scanning for magic, rinse and repeat with every room. Because there is no limit, there is no reason not to do that while other pcs are searching the place by hand.
Detect Magic basically highlights everything with a magical glow which means its fail-proof, compared with mundane searches by other pcs which all require DC checks. So it seems overpowered and far too revealing for an at-will cantrip.
Detect magic doesn't say anything about making magical fields glow - it says the caster "detects" them, which could be simply a strong gut feeling that magic is in the area. The GM has a lot of leeway in how the information is presented. A player in my game trying to find traps this way might get information like "there is a faint abjuration aura 15 feet ahead and to the right." That's all detect magic gives you - and it takes 3 rounds of concentration and a Knowledge(arcana) check to get that. It still takes a Perception check to actually find the trigger and so forth - the only thing the spell did is confirm that there is something to look for.
An illusionist who wants to fill her lair with tricks finds that magic aura is her friend. Spellcraft is much more the enemy of the combat illusionist than detect magic ever is.
Getting back to the OT, I have to chime in that the environmental rules are pretty messed up. The fact that extreme hot or cold damage is untyped means that efreeti die in the desert from heat stroke and white dragons freeze to death in their own lairs.
Magus attacking twice with a weapon and casting a spell all in one round at second level. Ridiculous.
I GM for a pretty effectively built Magus. The Barbarian soloed an entire encounter before his turn came around. The Magus is level 4, but the barbarian is only level 3. It's not all that extreme.
I think it's exceptionally powerful, but how is it dysfunctional? The rules has a job to do and it does it.
Mi lernis Esperanton in tri semajnojn antau dudek jaroj, sed mi forgesis gin. Estas facilega, sed neniu parolas gin.