I wish I could play a game with you. I think it would benefit my DM and player skills. Lol.
You have some intricate newspapers there :) I like the startoff concept. Would I be correct in assuming that the "new" news is how the party sorta decides to pursue that sessions adventures? You have the threads for multiple adventure hooks and the party pursues what interests them?- Because that is AWESOME!
Dear Ashiel....
So... What's in the box?
lol, I will be surprised if Ashiel knows :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Ashiel....
So... What's in the box?
Hope?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As in the abstract concept which prevents mankind from wallowing in sorrow and misery?
Or the evil daughter of the cruel Dahak who killed all she saw and was felled by a Warrior Princess?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Ashiel....
So... What's in the box?
I know this one...
It's a cat who's current state is in question...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Superman vs Goku?
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Deathbattle covered that one.
Aang the Avatar vs. Captain Planet?
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Deathbattle covered that one.
Deathbattle's coverage of it was also full of crap. If I recall correctly, the calculated his strength and speed as he existed after he went through training on King Kai's planet and then sent those numbers through the super saiyan formula. They didn't however, calculate him based off of Goku as he existed when he fought Majin Buu or even Cell or Frieza. God forbid they use the version from GT who was able to fight Uub to a draw without going Super Saiyan (and Uub was noted to be as powerful as Kid Buu was), so that means non-super saiyan Goku in GT was stronger than super saiyan Goku at the end of DBZ.
Majin Buu lost to Kirby in a Deathbattle also.
I don't particularly hold much stock in the DBs... Rogue beat Wonder Woman. Not saying it isn't possible, but... I don't quite buy that either.
Majin Buu lost to Kirby in a Deathbattle also.
I don't particularly hold much stock in the DBs... Rogue beat Wonder Woman. Not saying it isn't possible, but... I don't quite buy that either.
Indeed. Some of them I agree with (Samus vs. Boba Fett, Toph vs Gaara), some of them I don't (Luke Skywalker vs. Harry Potter, Zelda vs. Peach) and some of them I know are wrong despite the person I wanted to win actually winning (Link vs. Cloud).
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Deathbattle covered that one.Deathbattle's coverage of it was also full of crap. If I recall correctly, the calculated his strength and speed as he existed after he went through training on King Kai's planet and then sent those numbers through the super saiyan formula. They didn't however, calculate him based off of Goku as he existed when he fought Majin Buu or even Cell or Frieza. God forbid they use the version from GT who was able to fight Uub to a draw without going Super Saiyan (and Uub was noted to be as powerful as Kid Buu was), so that means non-super saiyan Goku in GT was stronger than super saiyan Goku at the end of DBZ.
Indeed... No to mention that Superman is often shown to be severely hurt by nuclear explosions... While Goku can casually survive attacks that would explode a whole planet. I actually think Superman is a better character than Goku, but that match was incredibly biased.
Can you look at this and drop off any bits of advice you can? My first thread, and it's about running a campaign!
Hmm....
Apocalypse Mystery Wrecker Cursed (bottom of the page) Oracle, a walking Engine of Destruction.
Pros and Cons as a party member?
Just plain mean to throw at a party?
Superman vs Goku?I'd have to agree that the DB matchup seemed flawed. Even if you try to be neutral (or generous) and assume that two characters with rapidly escalating Power of Plot Necessity have roughly equivalent physical power, all but the most die hard fans should be able to admit that Supes is a really pathetic fighter...he doesn't have to be good at it because so few opponents can actually take one of his punches in his own universe. The off viewed World of Cardboard video pretty much sums up big blue in a fight.
Fighters in the DB universe actually, you know, Fight. Against opponents that are equal matches until Power of Plot kicks in.
The way I look at it is simple: if you take Superman as he is most commonly portrayed across multiple media (comics, T.V., cartoons, movies etc) and have him fight against Goku (who's portrayal has never really varied), then Goku will win nearly every time.
If, however, you take Superman as he exists in the comic books (what with the wildly varying strength of his powers or even number of powers he possesses) then Superman will win in every fight.
Ashiel what do you think about weaponized drugs and the fact that they are cheaper than poison and do not offer a save to fight the effect?
Hey Ashiel, two questions. I'm selling my Pathfinder collection, all of it!
Question 1: Wanna buy some hard backs?
Question 2: Know any place I can turn 'em over for a quick profit?
Want to get at least half of sticker price, considering many are near-mint, opened maybe once or twice, and only 2 have any real wear and tear (fraying on the corners of the cover). Want to grab as much as I can for 'em as quickly as I can so it can be put towards career training course.
Hey Ashiel. I thought id atleast tell you. That i'm deleting my account. People are to quick to play the victim and try and think everyone is trying to tell everyone else they are wrong. They want understanding but dont want to give understanding.
They want their cake and to eat it too. They poke and make fun in other threads. I litterly cant deal with it. You were a nice person to talk too and i might still keep in contact thru my Fiance. Everyone is to self centered and gets to hurt without trying to take things differently. They think they are in the right and tell you 'dont you understand your wrong' without trying to understand how they are wrong too. they think you are playing the victim when you aren't.
I mentally cannot take this anymore. I stuck around for you i tried for you. I cant do it so i'm out. I hope you have a nice day and everything.
Edit. Or not... Since apparently you can't delete your account here. Either way, I'm gone.
Wait, here's a question! Why won't they let people delete their account?
There. On topic.
Off Topic is a realm of the forums that's not lightly traveled.
Off Topic is a realm of the forums that's not lightly traveled.
Knowing what this is related to... Your point? She was saying goodbye to a friend (who doesn't seem to check her PMs that much anymore ), and rather than leave said friend guessing, explained why.
Besides. When others involved in an event perpetrate thinly veiled insults against one in another thread, it's open season, no? "Do unto others" as they say?
That said... If anyone's got an idea of how I can offload my 2nd edition and 3.X merch quickly and for the highest profit, I'd love to know. Since I think it's against TOS to sell stuff on these forums... It usually is.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I am aware of the dog pile in the LGBT thread. That happens to folks in those threads more times than I can count.
This was not an attack.
I was only stating that the Off Topic forum is rough, half-quoting a line from Star Wars.
Cool yur jets.
EDIT: Which...doesn't matter anyway. That thread is in the Gamer Talk section, not Off Topic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, here's a question! Why won't they let people delete their account?
There. On topic.
The staff will do that for you if you request it in Website Feedback forum.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish I was as smart as Orthos and avoided those threads like the plague...
∅ button, Focus, and Ignore User script are your friends.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed, he often does...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, lots of posts. Sorry I've been inactive, I've been really busy at work. Had a couple of days off but lost them 'cause a co-worker's family member was in an auto-accident so they called out (understandable of course). I'll try to catch up and respond to everything ASAP. ^.^"
Off to work again! D:
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish I could play a game with you. I think it would benefit my DM and player skills. Lol.
Thanks. :P
You have some intricate newspapers there :) I like the startoff concept. Would I be correct in assuming that the "new" news is how the party sorta decides to pursue that sessions adventures? You have the threads for multiple adventure hooks and the party pursues what interests them?
Yes. :)
Because that is AWESOME!
Thanks. They liked the idea too. :)
As in the abstract concept which prevents mankind from wallowing in sorrow and misery?
Yep. Final Fantasy VI (III in America) had a simplified retelling of Pandora's Box and it kind of stuck with me. The last thing to leave the box was a shining ray of Hope against all the evils that were released into the world.
Superman vs Goku?
Goku, definitely. Superman probably would have whupped him in the Dragonball Era. However, by the time Goku fought Vegeta for the first time in Dragonball Z, Vegeta could simply blow up entire planets just because he wanted to. Post-Vegeta battle, Goku pretty much trumps superman at virtually everything beyond seeing through walls and makes it look cool. Superman doesn't even make it look cool, but in all fairness it's hard to look cool compared to a guy in a martial arts Gi who has flaming ki radiating from him like a small star, when you're wearing your underwear on the wrong side of your leotard.
Post-Namek, supes never would have a chance because the only reason he's stronger than your average human is because our "yellow sun" has some sort of super-empowering effect on Kryptonians. Goku can literally transport himself and anyone who punches him not merely to any other place he knows of in the universe but also across planar dimensions. Which means that the fight would go something like this.
GG supes. GG.
Aang the Avatar vs. Captain Planet?
Given that Captain Planet is made of the elements and Aang bends every element that he is made of, I would put my money on Aang. >_>
Can you look at this and drop off any bits of advice you can? My first thread, and it's about running a campaign!
Yep. I'll post in it as soon as this one is done. ^_^
Ashiel what do you think about weaponized drugs and the fact that they are cheaper than poison and do not offer a save to fight the effect?
Drugs, Poisons, and Lots of Crap
To answer this question fully, I need to go ahead and say I think Poison in Pathfinder sucks ass. Like giant purebred donkey ass. The problem with poison is threefold. One, the stuff is near useless baring a few exceptions (it doesn't have enough bite), it's way too expensive (seriously, the writers never bothered to even look at what some of these poisons are. Many of them are as cheap and common as weeds, usually because they are weeds), and finally because I find their mechanics clunky, counter intuitive, and require too much time to resolve.I'm also not a big fan of drugs in Pathfinder as they are presented (they should definitely have a fortitude save involved to avoid getting penalties because people can and do build up tolerances to drugs and it seems a bit bizarre that a whale-sized dragon can get as cronked on the same amount of crank as a halfling). That's...weird. (o_o)
I also think the drugs are too expensive too, for much the same reasons. Most commonplace drugs that you'd see people using (such as tobacco, marijuana, etc) are actually things that would probably be very cheap (Tobacco in a drug and it's only 5sp for a pound of it). Only the stuff requiring a chemist to create (like heroine which is made from opium) should be somewhat expensive and we really need to think in terms of commoners here. 25 gp (125% of a laborer's monthly wages) for a single dose of Opium is ****ing stupid (heroine is a chemically refined version of opium, but opium itself just oozes out of poppies when you cut their flower pods).
Ultimately I feel like the drug rules don't really emulate drugs well enough to warrant using them (but there's no other non-homebrew alternative) and the fact they're relatively easy to weaponize (no Fort save vs ability damage) is good example of why they need work.
On the Subject of Poisons
As I noted, I think poisons in Pathfinder have a lot of serious issues.
1. Too expensive.
2. Too clunky (you have to make way too many saves, especially when multiple poisons are being tossed around).
3. Too weak (you get a save to resist being poisoned, then each round you get a new save to end the effects, so it's very likely that even if they fail the initial save the poison will never make any meaningful contribution to the hindrance of the victim).
Here are some alternative poison rules I've used for poisons in PF (works for poisons in 3.5 as well).
1. Total the maximum damage that a poison can inflict over its full duration. For example, black adder venom deals up to 12 Con damage over 6 rounds.
2. Divide the maximum Con damage by the duration to find how much it inflicts each round. Using black adder venom, 12 divided by 6 = 2 Con / round.
3. Failing the initial save means you suffer the first 50% of the duration (2 Con / round for 3 rounds). Then you get a 2nd save or you take the other 6 con damage over the next 3 rounds (2 Con / round for 3 rounds).
Commoner vs the Rattlesnake
In Pathfinder, an average commoner (+0 Fortitude) who is bitten by a rattlesnake (tiny viper) is virtually never going to die. The maximum Con damage the bite can inflict on the commoner is 12 (enough to kill our 10-11 Con commoner) but the Commoner gets no less than 6 saving throws and the average poison damage is only 9 Con if all saves are failed. In other words, the commoner has to be extremely super-duper unlucky for a bite from a cobra, rattlesnake, copperhead, adder, or similarly super-dangerous snake to actually have their life be in danger.
If we assumed we always dealt 2 Con on the 1d2, our Commoner has these odds.
50% to suffer no effect from the poison (+0 vs DC 11).
45% to end the effect of the poison after the first round (taking no more than 2 Con).
40% to end the effect of the poison after the second round (taking no more than 4 Con damage).
35% to end the effect of the poison after the third round (taking no more than 6 Con damage).
30% to end the effect of the poison after the fourth round (taking no more than 8 Con damage).
25% to end the effect of the poison after the fifth round (thus preventing his death at 10 Con damage).
This means if the snake deals maximum Con damage, the Commoner only has something like a 5% chance to actually die from being bitten by a poisonous viper. CR 1/2 my ass! (>_<)
If we use the alternative method, our Commoner's life is actually in much more serious danger.
50% chance to ignore the poison (+0 vs DC 11).
35% chance after failing the first time to ignore the second half of the damage (-3 vs DC 11) and thus be very ill rather than dead.
If our commoner is bitten by a viper, he's got about a 32-33% chance of strait up dying because Poison is Bad(TM).
There's no hard and fast way to make poison costs make any sense. Frankly you'll just need to adjust them for your campaign. Generally speaking, even if you instead said that their price in GP was now price in Copper Pieces, most of them would still be grossly overpriced for what they are (like arsenic, hemlock, belladonna [also known as deadly nightshade], and wolfsbane [also known as woman's bane, queen of all poisons, or aconite]), while others would be grossly underpriced (drow poison is probably the strongest poison on the list for its price vs awesomeness in general).
If Ashiel Could Revise...
If I could have it the way I wanted it rather than simple patchwork, I'd probably want poisons in general to be far more dangerous but have drastically increased durations. You basically cannot emulate reality very well with any of the poisons in Pathfinder. Ignoring our viper-venom guzzling commoners for a moment, even if we increase the lethality of a poison by reducing the number of saves allowed and thus allowing you to actually get a big score when the initial save is failed, we still can't have situations where someone has been poisoned and you need to go fetch someone to help keep them from dying or administer some sort of long-term care.
For example, whether using the generic Pathfinder or the patch-job, everything is over and done with in 30 seconds. Either the commoner dies in 6 rounds or he doesn't. In actuality, it should probably take very little time for the commoner to become horribly debilitated but more time for him to actually keel over. Because of this, I'd really like to implement more long-term dangers for poisons.
For example, I think I'd prefer to see the duration on a viper's venom be measured in minutes (or perhaps longer) and spread out over more time, which would mean that if you were bitten by a viper during your journey, now would be a good time to camp down and try to tend to your condition and make sure you didn't succumb the the venom over the next few hours or something. Life threatening but not in the 30-second timebomb sort of way. I'd also like the Heal skill to not suck eggs and have meaningful usage in treating poisons (as opposed to its over-glorified aid-another bonus).
Hey Ashiel, two questions. I'm selling my Pathfinder collection, all of it!
Question 1: Wanna buy some hard backs?
Possibly. :o
Question 2: Know any place I can turn 'em over for a quick profit?
Not a clue. :\
Want to get at least half of sticker price, considering many are near-mint, opened maybe once or twice, and only 2 have any real wear and tear (fraying on the corners of the cover). Want to grab as much as I can for 'em as quickly as I can so it can be put towards career training course.
Well, I'll probably be tossing some more you way soon (got paid again), so you might not have to sell them all off, depending on how much time and/or patience you have available.
Time for post #2...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Ashiel. I thought id atleast tell you. That i'm deleting my account. People are to quick to play the victim and try and think everyone is trying to tell everyone else they are wrong. They want understanding but dont want to give understanding.
They want their cake and to eat it too. They poke and make fun in other threads. I litterly cant deal with it. You were a nice person to talk too and i might still keep in contact thru my Fiance. Everyone is to self centered and gets to hurt without trying to take things differently. They think they are in the right and tell you 'dont you understand your wrong' without trying to understand how they are wrong too. they think you are playing the victim when you aren't.
Sounds like you've been hanging out in the Mos Eisley of our forums. Certain boards are wretched hives of scum and villainy if there ever was, but don't give up on the galaxy just because some of it belongs to the Hutts. :P
I mentally cannot take this anymore. I stuck around for you i tried for you. I cant do it so i'm out. I hope you have a nice day and everything.
Well, in the end you must do what makes you happiest. Hope to see ya again, but if not, fare thee well. :)
Edit. Or not... Since apparently you can't delete your account here. Either way, I'm gone.
Wait, here's a question! Why won't they let people delete their account?
There. On topic.
Because as much as I love the community, these forums suck. I stick around for the people and conversations, not because the forums themselves are good. For an example of a good forum, check out Giant in the Playground. They have these crazy new things like FORMATTING and-and-and SUBFORUMS! It doesn't require you to scroll 30 minutes to reach gamer-talk or off-topic stuff. >_>
Oh, and EDITING. Like, you can actually write guides and such on there, for real. Here you can't edit past 1 hour (there used to be a bug that I used to edit after the 1 hour mark but it was fixed, unfortunately).
Here you have to start an entirely new thread to update something. So if you want to make a thread that functions as an index for lots of other threads of a given type (such as guides or advice pieces or something) you have to re-invent the wheel and have everyone update their bookmarks every...***-****ed...time... (>_<)
Should I play the Mass Effect Trilogy or Pillars of Eternity first?
Unfortunately I've played neither so I can't rightly say. I did get ME 1&2 on Steam during a sale recently because they were highly recommended by a friend of mine but I haven't actually played them.
HOWEVER, I've been dying to get my hands on Pillars of Eternity since Obsidian started their kickstarter. I've wanted this game to do amazingly for multiple reasons (I want to see more Baldur's Gate-style games, and I am enamored with the roads Obsidian and a few others are pioneering in the industry by having the fans be the producers). I've been so busy working lately that I didn't even realized it was out yet!
I now must go buy it off Steam. Thank you. (6o6)
I am aware of the dog pile in the LGBT thread. That happens to folks in those threads more times than I can count.
In my business I've apparently missed something. (o_o);
Yeah. Read the thread. Someone offered an opinion, and got pounced on.
I will not judge the intent nor the delivery of said opinion, nor the reaction to it.
I was lucky. I asked what I know are horribly offensive questions, but Crystal was patient enough to answer them, and politely inform me of why those questions were rude, which totally makes sense to me now.
Other folks, have not been so lucky in asking, nor patient in answering.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. Read the thread. Someone offered an opinion, and got pounced on.
I will not judge the intent nor the delivery of said opinion, nor the reaction to it.I was lucky. I asked what I know are horribly offensive questions, but Crystal was patient enough to answer them, and politely inform me of why those questions were rude, which totally makes sense to me now.
Other folks, have not been so lucky in asking, nor patient in answering.
The quote from the beginning of Baldur's Gate, by Mr. Friedrich Nietzsche unfortunately sums up a lot of what I've seen as the LGBT community (and virtually every social justice warrior ever). It's one of the reasons that despite having reasons to be part of such a community (and supporting ideals of fairness) I have little interest in being counted among them.
Unfortunately.
I like the way you think of poisons. I DM a game with a Vishkanya who wanted to use poisons (you know... what with making them and everything) BUT then EVERYTHING I threw up against them (inadvertently, I wasn't TRYING to but it just kept happening) had poison immunity (seems like a big outsider thing). I started to mediate it: like now there is this and this and this that don't have poison immunity and she walked right over them... The balance was hard to find.
Thanks for the thoughts though :)
Ashiel, you are SO awesome!
Can you tell me a story?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the way you think of poisons. I DM a game with a Vishkanya who wanted to use poisons (you know... what with making them and everything) BUT then EVERYTHING I threw up against them (inadvertently, I wasn't TRYING to but it just kept happening) had poison immunity (seems like a big outsider thing). I started to mediate it: like now there is this and this and this that don't have poison immunity and she walked right over them... The balance was hard to find.
Thanks for the thoughts though :)
You're welcome. (^_^)
Ashiel, you are SO awesome!
Dawww! (^///^)
Can you tell me a story?
Let me tell you a story about a young woman that died a heroine, then lived a monster...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was a solid story. I enjoyed it. I like the part about the tedious dressmaker and Varisa's (spoilers) confident body image.
Kudos!
You seem to be able to make things work. Do you have an archetype combining Gunslinging and Hexes into a usable class? Cuz I think Bullet Hexes would be cool :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was a solid story. I enjoyed it. I like the part about the tedious dressmaker and Varisa's (spoilers) confident body image.
Kudos!
Thanks. I really need to finish it. Threw down all of that in a couple of days but then have been too busy with stuff to write about it more (due to my workload lately, any moment I'm not working, I'm either spending with my family, or spending with my online D&D group).
Also, the scene with the dressmaker was super fun to write about. :3
You seem to be able to make things work. Do you have an archetype combining Gunslinging and Hexes into a usable class? Cuz I think Bullet Hexes would be cool :)
I don't...yet. (6_6)
Admittedly I'm not much of a fan of the Paizo Gunslinger. I wasn't when it was put out during the playtest and honestly not enough was changed to make me like it. :(
Doesn't have to be a gunslinger... Just someone who uses guns and hexes. and now the only thing I can think of is: Bullet Witch... ugh!
Also- something that I now can't stop thinking about- Pregnancy. This is a pretty universal concept (I assume you were the product of conception at some point in your past? I was also.) There aren't really rules for it... and I want some!
I want escort quests with the princess who got knocked up by a dragon (hmmmm... would she lay an egg?)
I want the dual wielding paladin who doesn't care how many people she kills because she can make more in her belly!
I also don't like the gunslinger... only because guns are these awesome weapons that suck... Kinda like the whip.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't have to be a gunslinger... Just someone who uses guns and hexes. and now the only thing I can think of is: Bullet Witch... ugh!
Hey, that's something I can get behind. The idea of mixing magic and muskets (or other firearms) is one I've liked a long time (also, guns that shoot magic). One of the earliest campaigns I ran that featured guns involved my brother's bard who dual-wielded pistols. :D
My brother wants me to do a 2nd Edition for my gunslinger and when I do, I want to include some options for other classes like alchemists, rangers, etc, and include some gunmage prestige classes.
Also- something that I now can't stop thinking about- Pregnancy. This is a pretty universal concept (I assume you were the product of conception at some point in your past? I was also.) There aren't really rules for it... and I want some!
I've written a lot of rules before but I haven't written anything for this yet. I've had pregnant NPCs and such before though (in fact, one of the PCs in my current game wanted to stay in a city so they could see a baby when it arrived) but that's pretty much plot-power only. :o
If it were something that my PCs were interested in, I'd give it a go. My initial worry is that including rules for such things in a fantasy RPG that mostly involves slaying orcs, ogres, and vampires might naturally result in some grimdark stuff that reminds you where most half-orcs, half-giants, and dhampir come from (and most PCs would not enjoy that, though I seriously think the same PC who wanted to stick around and see the baby would actually be fine getting ravished by a vampire). It's definitely not the thing most think of when they think Sword & Sorcery-style RPGs. Unfortunately it would probably remind people more of the Book of Erotic Fantasy, Arcane Guide of Nymphology, or -- God forbid -- F.A.T.A.L.
It's hard to deny that there is a (perhaps small) appreciation for mechanics for such things. Unfortunately, I don't think I've ever seen any rules or products that worked well (mostly due a combination of bad rules and poor taste). If I find myself with some spare time in the near future, I might see if I can pen something for you while I'm working on some other projects (like the Warlock).
I want escort quests with the princess who got knocked up by a dragon (hmmmm... would she lay an egg?)
This is actually a question that arose in my current campaign (the PCs were wondering). See, the baby that that one PC wanted to stick around for was the offspring of a human and a dragon-blooded sorceress (heavy on the dragon blood, she had a tail, claws, scales, could bite you, etc). There was some curiosity as to whether or not she was going to lay an egg (though she wanted to be around for the birth because she liked the two NPCs, not merely out of biological curiosity).
I want the dual wielding paladin who doesn't care how many people she kills because she can make more in her belly!
That's a rather hilarious explanation for a very cavalier attitude. :P
I could also see it as the primary thought process of a champion of Lamashtu in a way (that goddess is all about squeezing something out of you, even if it's nothing anyone's ever seen before).I also don't like the gunslinger... only because guns are these awesome weapons that suck... Kinda like the whip.
That's pretty much my whole beef with the gunslinger too. The firearm mechanics are horrible and that directly makes the class horrible. One, you cannot realistically play with non-gunslinger classes (I like guns where all the traditional classes and NPC classes can use them too), a massive load of their class features just go into making their guns less stupid (as opposed to doing cool and awesome stuff), etc.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like posting these questions to you because the response is very thought out and filled with information :) You are like my DnD (PF) guru!
I actually DO remember lots of the information from Book of Erotic Fantasy. I had a player who was a... I think the class was Kundala? In a campaign once. She chose different members of the party to help her with her spells each morning. I can specifically remember reading stuff about pregnancy and going: "This will never be useful." Lol, my younger self was VERY concerned with POWER GAMING!
I think about Piper Halliwell and the whole "pregnancy" arc that Charmed went through and I was like: "This would be a cool proposition." And like... babies gotta come from somewhere.
The Paladin quote is really a line from Order of the Stick... and she redeemed (I mostly find the alignment restriction to be TOO restricting... like... Code of Conduct OR LG- both is excessive, but I suppose it has its place in gaming) paladins for me. Don't mess with that momma! :)
AH! Now that the pleasantries and praise are done (I have more, but I DO have a question also) I was wondering if you had/have any thoughts on Skill based casting?
My group REALLY likes the show Fairy Tail and the vancian magic system is not exactly great for that. I looked at Spheres of Power and found some very cool stuff in a pseudo-point based system and Psionics is mana-based (which is better than Vancian but not QUITE right). I think a skill based system might work but I haven't seen one since the True Namer from Tome of Magic (3.5) and was wondering if you might have some thoughts or ideas?
I also think this would be a good concept to use with a Reyvateil type of class, but... sadly I know of no way to adequately feature their abilities :(
I made a homebrewed class for 3.5 called gnomish inquisitor. They had GUNNs, which were basically just revolvers that did 1d6 damage.
They got medium BAB, Medium armor, all simple weapons and GUNNs, FoB with their GUNNs, and did increased damage as they leveled. They also got some metaphysical stuff (ala the Gunslinger from the Dark Tower) like turning undead and limited healing, and some gun trick things, like "fanning the hammer" that did GUNN damage to a 30' cone in front of them. They played a similar role to the Inquisitor that Paizo released. They were just as MAD as a monk, but we roll 2 columns of 4d6 6 times, re-rolling 1's, and pick the best of the two columns, assign as you like, so MAD or SAD never really is a concern, anyway.
Anyone could be a GI, it's just that gnomes were the ones who invented the GUNN, so the name has stuck even for non-gnome GIs.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like posting these questions to you because the response is very thought out and filled with information :) You are like my DnD (PF) guru!
I actually DO remember lots of the information from Book of Erotic Fantasy. I had a player who was a... I think the class was Kundala? In a campaign once. She chose different members of the party to help her with her spells each morning. I can specifically remember reading stuff about pregnancy and going: "This will never be useful." Lol, my younger self was VERY concerned with POWER GAMING!
I think about Piper Halliwell and the whole "pregnancy" arc that Charmed went through and I was like: "This would be a cool proposition." And like... babies gotta come from somewhere.
The Paladin quote is really a line from Order of the Stick... and she redeemed (I mostly find the alignment restriction to be TOO restricting... like... Code of Conduct OR LG- both is excessive, but I suppose it has its place in gaming) paladins for me. Don't mess with that momma! :)
AH! Now that the pleasantries and praise are done (I have more, but I DO have a question also) I was wondering if you had/have any thoughts on Skill based casting?
My group REALLY likes the show Fairy Tail and the vancian magic system is not exactly great for that. I looked at Spheres of Power and found some very cool stuff in a pseudo-point based system and Psionics is mana-based (which is better than Vancian but not QUITE right). I think a skill based system might work but I haven't seen one since the True Namer from Tome of Magic (3.5) and was wondering if you might have some thoughts or ideas?
I also think this would be a good concept to use with a Reyvateil type of class, but... sadly I know of no way to adequately feature their abilities :(
I haven't tried Ultimate Truenaming (which 137ben suggested), but I did use a skill-based casting system in a campaign I ran years ago. Here's a revised version.
Casting Checks: When you cast a spell you make a casting check (1d20 + your caster level + your key ability modifier) against the DC of the spell you're attempting to cast. Success means you cast the spell. Failure means that the attempt to cast fails and you may suffer spellburn (see optional rules below).
You may attempt to cast any spell that you know (see class changes).
Taking 10: You may choose to take-10 on your casting check (even in combat). You cannot take-10 while being threatened in melee.
Taking 20: It is possible to take 20 while casting, but doing so requires careful pace and focus to safely harness power without risking failure (or spellburn). This is known as a ritual casting. It takes sixty times as long to preform a ritual as casting the spell normally does (thus a spell with a casting time of 1 round or less requires 1 hour). If a ritual would require greater than 1 hour of casting the caster may take breaks (for eating, resting, talking, etc) and return to finish the casting later, provided that she does not cast other spells before the ritual is complete. As with taking 10, you cannot perform a ritual casting while threatened.
Base Casting DC by Tier
Tier 1 (up to 3rd) = DC 10
Tier 2 (up to 6th) = DC 15
Tier 3 (up to 9th) = DC 20
Spell Level Adjustment
Cantrip/Orison = +0
1st = +2
2nd = +4
3rd = +6
4th = +8
5th = +10
6th = +12
7th = +14
8th = +16
9th = +18
DCs for Dummies
0 = DC 10
1st = DC 12
2nd = DC 14
3rd = DC 16
4th = DC 23
5th = DC 25
6th = DC 27
7th = DC 34
8th = DC 36
9th = DC 38
Metamagic Feats
Metamagic feats add a flat +2 per level adjustment of the feat (so extend would be +2, quicken would be +8). This means that it's easier to cast low-tier spells that are modded up with metamagic feats than it is to cast higher tier spells of the same effective level.
For example, it's easier to cast an extended haste (DC 18) than it is to cast black tentacles (DC 23). This is intentional for a couple of reasons.
You may apply as many metamagic feats you possess to a spell regardless of what the highest level spell you can cast is. Thus a 3rd level enchanter could cast a silent still charm person spell (DC 16) even though she can normally only cast 2nd level spells.
Heighten Spell: The Heighten Spell metamagic feat increases the effective spell level of the spell (and thus save DCs and other level-dependent effects) up to the maximum spell level you can cast but it doesn't increase the base tier of the spell. Its primary function is to keep save DCs relevant (and improve level-based effects) at the cost of harder casting DCs.
Damaged While Casting: If you take damage while casting a spell, you take a penalty on the casting check equal to the damage taken from the attack or hazard. If the damage comes from an ongoing effect (such as an alchemist fire or acid arrow spell), the penalty is only half the damage dealt this round.
Distracted Casting: Certain effects make it more difficult to cast spells. Apply the following adjustments to the cast DC. Multiple effects are cumulative.
Cast defensively || +2
Grappled || +1/2 the highest grappler's CMB
Vigorous motion while casting || +2
Violent motion while casting || +4 (includes vigorous motion)
Extremely violent motion while casting || +6 (includes violent motion)
Wind with rain or sleet while casting || +1
Wind with hail and debris while casting || +2 (includes rain or sleet)
Weather caused by spell || + spell level
Entangled while casting || +4
Combat Casting: The Combat Casting feat allows the caster to ignore up to 4 points worth of modifiers that hinder their ability to cast a spell. Thus a caster could cast normally while going through violent motions, ignore the effects of being entangled, or reduce the modifier from extremely violent motions from +6 to +2, or any other combination.
Disruptive and Spellbreaker Feats: The Disruptive combat feat increases the casting DC by +4 for all enemies you threaten. This stacks with the increase from casting defensively.
The Spellbreaker feat allows you to make an attack against any foe that fails to cast a spell while threatened by you (even if they weren't trying to cast defensively).
Recommended House Rule Change the prerequisites for Disruptive and Spellbreaker from Fighter 6th and 10th to BAB +6 and +10 respectively.
Converting Concentration: For other effects that would have called for a Concentration check, use the following conversions as guidelines.
DC 5 + Spell level = +1 DC
DC 10 + Spell level = +2 DC
DC 15 + Spell level = +4 DC
DC 20 + Spell Level = +6 DC
DC 25 + Spell Level = +8 DC
Etc.
Prepared Casters: Prepared casters treat any spell they currently have prepared as a known spell (essentially they are spontaneous casters that can change their known spells around).
Spontaneous Casters: Spontaneous casters treat their Spells Per Day chart as though it were their Spells Known chart for the purposes of how many 1st through 9th level spells they know.
Sorcerer Bloodlines: Bloodline spells are always treated as known spells in addition to your normal spells known. You may cast any bloodline spell of equal or lower level than your highest level spell known by your class.
Domains: Domain spells are always treated as prepared or known for their casters in addition to the caster's normal prepared or known spells. You may cast any bloodline spell of equal or lower level than your highest level spell known by your class.
Specialist Wizards: Wizards can prepare one additional spell of each level from their chosen school. Spells from banned schools require them to expend two spell slots as normal, reducing their overall versatility for every banned spell prepared.
Spontaneous X Spells: Classes that cast certain spells spontaneously (such as druids with summon nature's ally spells, or clerics with cure or inflict spells) may always cast those spells as though they were prepared.
Bonus Spells: Bonus spells add directly into your number of spells known (or prepared in the case of prepared casters).
Harnessing and controlling magical energy is a dangerous task for the uninitiated or the foolish. Such power can backfire on the caster if the caster cannot keep it under control. These backfires are hazardous and life threatening to the caster as their bodies and spirits act as living conduits for the energies that they seek to control. If their focused will is broken, so too is the flow of energy and the result can be extremely painful.
Spellburn is a mechanic to make casters wary of attempting high level magics recklessly. There are two ways to handle spellburn, and you may opt to use either, both, or none of them as is suitable for the needs of your campaign.
Spellburn as Damage: A strait-forward system. Failing to cast a spell causes the energy to overwhelm the caster's mind and body causing damage based on the amount of energy drawn for the spell. When the caster fails to cast a spell, they suffer 1d6 damage per level of the spell plus 1d6 for every +2 added by metamagic feats. The damage is then multiplied by the tier of the spell (tier 1 = x1, tier 2 = x2, tier 3 = x3).
For example, a caster who attempts to cast time stop (a tier 3, 9th level spell) would suffer 27d6 points of damage from spellburn on a failed casting. 9d6 from the spell's level multiplied by 3 for the spell's tier.
Spellburn as Strain: Uncontrolled magic shocks the mind and scorches the spirit. Failing to cast a spell causes no outward physical damage but causes an amount of ability burn to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma equal to the level of the spell that was being cast.
Ability Burn: This is a special form of ability damage that cannot be magically or psionically healed. It is caused by the use of certain psionic feats and powers. It returns only through natural healing.
To cast a spell, the caster must have a key ability score of 10 + spell level + the amount of ability burn accrued.
==================================================================
The idea behind this system is pretty simple. It's a "skill" based system that allows you to cast magic pretty much at will, while discouraging the casting of high level magic (particularly with spellburn implemented). There is no spells per day, there isn't even a mana-system.
The casting check means that concentration-affecting things are generally far more relevant. Rather than making tons of low-DC concentration checks, you can quite readily find it very difficult to get off spells (especially high level spells) if threatened or suffering from various nasty effects.
If you want to apply an additional tax onto it, you could make it more like a skill where you have a different skill for each school such as Abjuration, Conjuration, Divination, etc. Investing skill ranks into each school and having different checks for each (personally I think this might be a bit too finicky).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm... you might make 'Magic Skills' be a sub-skill of Spellcraft. In that, every rank in Spell Craft grants 5 ranks that you can apply to the magic skills which allign with the 8 schools of maigc (Universal School would function off spellcraft ranks directly) with an ability bonus determined by their casting stat.
For example, a Wizard of 5th level with 5 ranks in Spellcraft would have 25 magic skill ranks to use. He could then focus his ranks in any combination he chose, with a limit of his ranks in a magical skill not being able to surpass his ranks in Spellcraft.
So he could, for example be:
Abjuration: 3
Conjuration: 5
Divination: 1
Enchantment: 1
Evocation: 5
Illusion: 2
Necromancy: 3
Transmutation: 5
With a 20 Int, he'd have bonus ranging from +6 to +10 on his rolls when he attempts to cast spells. It would really let people diversify casters and you could see real differences in how each caster is different. So whens someone says, "Sorry, I'm not all that into Necromancy" he legitimately has difficulty casting Necromancy spells because he doesn't have the modifiers for it.
Traits and feats and stuff could be altered/created to add bonuses to the different schools. Like a trait for a +2 bonus to your Enchantment skill because your magical teacher was an Enchanter even if you yourself focus on Necromancy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Holy crap weasel! that is AWESOME!
See... I knew you would have something. I am a genius for recognizing your genius. You are welcome :)
Hmm... you might make 'Magic Skills' be a sub-skill of Spellcraft. In that, every rank in Spell Craft grants 5 ranks that you can apply to the magic skills which allign with the 8 schools of maigc (Universal School would function off spellcraft ranks directly) with an ability bonus determined by their casting stat.
For example, a Wizard of 5th level with 5 ranks in Spellcraft would have 25 magic skill ranks to use. He could then focus his ranks in any combination he chose, with a limit of his ranks in a magical skill not being able to surpass his ranks in Spellcraft.
So he could, for example be:
Abjuration: 3
Conjuration: 5
Divination: 1
Enchantment: 1
Evocation: 5
Illusion: 2
Necromancy: 3
Transmutation: 5With a 20 Int, he'd have bonus ranging from +6 to +10 on his rolls when he attempts to cast spells. It would really let people diversify casters and you could see real differences in how each caster is different. So whens someone says, "Sorry, I'm not all that into Necromancy" he legitimately has difficulty casting Necromancy spells because he doesn't have the modifiers for it.
Traits and feats and stuff could be altered/created to add bonuses to the different schools. Like a trait for a +2 bonus to your Enchantment skill because your magical teacher was an Enchanter even if you yourself focus on Necromancy.
This is really cool also! I like the idea of Specialization MEANING something. So that is groovy!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
500! \o.o/