>> Ask Ashiel Anything <<


Off-Topic Discussions

2,101 to 2,150 of 3,564 << first < prev | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mashallah wrote:

To be fair, I just want less obnoxious arguments on what alignment is or isn't.

As long as the rules changes achieve that, I'll be happy.

Well, the fact that there's so much trouble even nailing down what alignment is and means in this thread (or any other) is indicative of the problem. Rules should be clear because they are intended to help the game proceed along more smoothly. In the case of moral alignment, I think it does just the opposite and sows discord between those involved.

Which is why I'll be removing moral alignment and reintroducing it as a RP aid.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
If you were choosing your soul-weapon-thingy(like in RWBY-a single weapon you will then become attached to and use to kick ass) what would you choose?

Hard to say. It would definitely be a pair of blades though, maybe that hooked together to form a sword. Even better if one could turn into a shield. :D

Also, I just recently caught up on RWBY.

Fanseizures


Ashiel wrote:
Klara Meison wrote:
If you were choosing your soul-weapon-thingy(like in RWBY-a single weapon you will then become attached to and use to kick ass) what would you choose?

Hard to say. It would definitely be a pair of blades though, maybe that hooked together to form a sword. Even better if one could turn into a shield. :D

Also, I just recently caught up on RWBY.

Fanseizures

I kind of expected something like the ending to happen.

RWBY:
Because they spent so much time building up Pyrrha to be an invincible warrior, I knew that they were doing so to drive home how powerful someone was when they got defeated. Same as with Coco and team CFVE introduced at the end of season 2.

That and Pyrrha always had a sense of hopelessness around her, or something. Like she was never meant to be happy and that she would die unhappy.

Fully being aware Pyrrha was destined to die, didn't make it any easier though :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do you think that forcibly changing BBEGs for the better with liberal application of Helm of Opposite Allignment is a better, more humane alternative to killing them?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How would you handle damage values for natural attacks?
Stuff like "The natural attacks of this monster deal damage equivalent to a modern weapon its size"?


Ashiel wrote:
Mashallah wrote:

To be fair, I just want less obnoxious arguments on what alignment is or isn't.

As long as the rules changes achieve that, I'll be happy.

Well, the fact that there's so much trouble even nailing down what alignment is and means in this thread (or any other) is indicative of the problem. Rules should be clear because they are intended to help the game proceed along more smoothly. In the case of moral alignment, I think it does just the opposite and sows discord between those involved.

Which is why I'll be removing moral alignment and reintroducing it as a RP aid.

So, will you keep the outsider alignment mechanics fluffed as energies like what I mentioned earlier?

Also, if you are using alignment as mere rp, do the motivations not seem like a more rp involved method and therefore better on the rp front than law-chaos/good-evil?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Right, since this is "Ask Ashiel Anything", I might as well ask for some advice.
The thing is, I'll be running Curse of the Crimson Throne quite soon. And I'm kind of tired of alignment and want to rid of it. But a major thing in the campaign (moreover, a thing that I like thematically, so I don't want to cut it entirely) is harrowing, which is heavily alignment-dependant - all the cards have their own alignments (this I have no issue with per se) and all the mechanics related to harrowing involve alignment in one way or another. Is there some way to both have the cake (no alignments for players) and eat it (harrowing still in) here that I somehow missed?
(any potential spoilers please in the spoiler tag since my players also read this thread frequently)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
Do you think that forcibly changing BBEGs for the better with liberal application of Helm of Opposite Allignment is a better, more humane alternative to killing them?

It might be, but I'm not sure how I'd feel about it personally. It's probably a better alternative than killing them, or allowing them to threaten others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mashallah wrote:

How would you handle damage values for natural attacks?

Stuff like "The natural attacks of this monster deal damage equivalent to a modern weapon its size"?

Probably with a table listing natural attacks by size like we have now. :)


TheAlicornSage wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Mashallah wrote:

To be fair, I just want less obnoxious arguments on what alignment is or isn't.

As long as the rules changes achieve that, I'll be happy.

Well, the fact that there's so much trouble even nailing down what alignment is and means in this thread (or any other) is indicative of the problem. Rules should be clear because they are intended to help the game proceed along more smoothly. In the case of moral alignment, I think it does just the opposite and sows discord between those involved.

Which is why I'll be removing moral alignment and reintroducing it as a RP aid.

So, will you keep the outsider alignment mechanics fluffed as energies like what I mentioned earlier?

Basically energies, yeah.

Quote:
Also, if you are using alignment as mere rp, do the motivations not seem like a more rp involved method and therefore better on the rp front than law-chaos/good-evil?

I think both are worthwhile to a degree. Alignment rarely has anything to do with motivations outside of either extremely broad or extremely narrow definitions (such as if your motivation is to do good, broad; if your motivation is to protect the innocent, specific).

I think a section that details things like what makes a good character, or what makes an evil character, is worth having. It gives a better idea of who you want your character to be.

But of course, motivations and cultural things may play a part as well, such as devotion to an ideal, group, etc. These things are outside the realm of Good/Evil, but they can also clearly reflect who someone is.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mashallah wrote:

Right, since this is "Ask Ashiel Anything", I might as well ask for some advice.

The thing is, I'll be running Curse of the Crimson Throne quite soon. And I'm kind of tired of alignment and want to rid of it. But a major thing in the campaign (moreover, a thing that I like thematically, so I don't want to cut it entirely) is harrowing, which is heavily alignment-dependant - all the cards have their own alignments (this I have no issue with per se) and all the mechanics related to harrowing involve alignment in one way or another. Is there some way to both have the cake (no alignments for players) and eat it (harrowing still in) here that I somehow missed?
(any potential spoilers please in the spoiler tag since my players also read this thread frequently)

How about giving players secret allignments that only matter for harrowing and function exactly like neutral allignment for all other intents and purposes? I doubt the players would notice any difference.

Ashiel wrote:
TheAlicornSage wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Mashallah wrote:

To be fair, I just want less obnoxious arguments on what alignment is or isn't.

As long as the rules changes achieve that, I'll be happy.

Well, the fact that there's so much trouble even nailing down what alignment is and means in this thread (or any other) is indicative of the problem. Rules should be clear because they are intended to help the game proceed along more smoothly. In the case of moral alignment, I think it does just the opposite and sows discord between those involved.

Which is why I'll be removing moral alignment and reintroducing it as a RP aid.

So, will you keep the outsider alignment mechanics fluffed as energies like what I mentioned earlier?

Basically energies, yeah.

Quote:
Also, if you are using alignment as mere rp, do the motivations not seem like a more rp involved method and therefore better on the rp front than law-chaos/good-evil?

I think both are worthwhile to a degree. Alignment rarely has anything to do with motivations outside of either extremely broad or extremely narrow definitions (such as if your motivation is to do good, broad; if your motivation is to protect the innocent, specific).

I think a section that details things like what makes a good character, or what makes an evil character, is worth having. It gives a better idea of who you want your character to be.

But of course, motivations and cultural things may play a part as well, such as devotion to an ideal, group, etc. These things are outside the realm of Good/Evil, but they can also clearly reflect who someone is.

>Basically energies, yeah.

Would clerics be able to channel Evil, Good, Chaos or Law then?


"I think a section that details things like what makes a good character, or what makes an evil character, is worth having. It gives a better idea of who you want your character to be."

This is very difficult to get right in general because culture has such a major impact on what is considered good or evil.

Something I did before going to motivational alignment was to make "good" mean beneficiant, caring about how the consequences of one's actions affects others, vs "evil" as selfish for not caring about how others are affected. Neutral would be those that cared about a very small in-group such as family and friends but no one else. Then basically the more people you care about the more beneficiant you are and the less you care about others the more evil you are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mashallah wrote:

Right, since this is "Ask Ashiel Anything", I might as well ask for some advice.

The thing is, I'll be running Curse of the Crimson Throne quite soon. And I'm kind of tired of alignment and want to rid of it. But a major thing in the campaign (moreover, a thing that I like thematically, so I don't want to cut it entirely) is harrowing, which is heavily alignment-dependant - all the cards have their own alignments (this I have no issue with per se) and all the mechanics related to harrowing involve alignment in one way or another. Is there some way to both have the cake (no alignments for players) and eat it (harrowing still in) here that I somehow missed?
(any potential spoilers please in the spoiler tag since my players also read this thread frequently)

I'll need to re-read the harrowing rules but off the top of my head you could probably replace it with something else, like a particular sign a character was born under or something. I'll need to re-read it though. (^-^);


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:

>Basically energies, yeah.

Would clerics be able to channel Evil, Good, Chaos or Law then?

You technically do each time you cast holy smite or protection from evil, but yeah theoretically that could be a thing. I'll fluff it up but essentially the mechanical things (like spells or magic items) tied to an alignment will draw upon the primal essence of that thing.

Essentially some planes of existence are the sources of good and evil (and theoretically law and chaos) in much the way the elemental planes are for the elements, or the positive/negative planes for life and unlife. Now these planes could be the source of these things, or the planes themselves may be fueled by the souls who generate good and evil energies through their actions (who knows? :P), but when someone's wielding a sword that's [Evil], it's evil in the same way that someone born from the pits of Hell is [Evil].


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
Mashallah wrote:

Right, since this is "Ask Ashiel Anything", I might as well ask for some advice.

The thing is, I'll be running Curse of the Crimson Throne quite soon. And I'm kind of tired of alignment and want to rid of it. But a major thing in the campaign (moreover, a thing that I like thematically, so I don't want to cut it entirely) is harrowing, which is heavily alignment-dependant - all the cards have their own alignments (this I have no issue with per se) and all the mechanics related to harrowing involve alignment in one way or another. Is there some way to both have the cake (no alignments for players) and eat it (harrowing still in) here that I somehow missed?
(any potential spoilers please in the spoiler tag since my players also read this thread frequently)
How about giving players secret allignments that only matter for harrowing and function exactly like neutral allignment for all other intents and purposes? I doubt the players would notice any difference.

I actually like this solution.

Simple and neat.

Ashiel wrote:
I'll need to re-read the harrowing rules but off the top of my head you could probably replace it with something else, like a particular sign a character was born under or something. I'll need to re-read it though. (^-^);

Sure. And the idea of signs at a glance kinda works as a way to fluff Klara's suggestion, I think.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Dear Great and Powerful Ashiel,

How does it feel to have a fanclub?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ashiel, is there a question you always wanted to be asked in this thread, but nobody ever did ask it?


Honestly, the harrow deck feels like a pathetic and cheap knock off sold by a greasy snake oil salesman. I see how it fits nicely with mechanics, but knowing something of tarot makes harrow just pale in comparison to the depth and beauty of tarot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fortunately, I like harrow and am not particularly interested in tarot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:

Dear Great and Powerful Ashiel,

How does it feel to have a fanclub?

Honestly it feels pretty amazing. I never would have expected it and it's still a weird feeling when I meet people who already knew of my existence due to the boards or things I've worked on. (0o0)

It can also be a little intimidating at times because I don't ever want to let anyone down, or dishonor their kindness in any way. (^~^);

If I have my way though, one day (I don't know when), I'm going to get T-Shirts made to send to all my Paizo friends for fun. (~-^)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
Ashiel, is there a question you always wanted to be asked in this thread, but nobody ever did ask it?

That's a good question. I can't think of any off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure I've thought of a few in the past. I just can't remember any of them. (^~^);


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I was promised a t-shirt, if I recall :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:
I was promised a t-shirt, if I recall :P

That's right. When I feel like I've achieved something noteworthy, I'll splurge a bit and go get some t-shirts. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Just work on D20 Legends. I'll take that in lieu of a t-shirt.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:
Just work on D20 Legends. I'll take that in lieu of a t-shirt.

I've been asking my boss at work to cut my hours back from 40 to about 20 so I'll have more time to work on it. At the moment she's a bit stuck since she's trying to get a couple of new people hired, but until then, I'm needed to keep the place running. (o_o);


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I know the feels.
But don't adversely affect your income on my account :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who is, in your opinion, the scariest enemy in the pathfinder bestiary? What about the scariest enemy relative to their CR rating?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Stirge has my vote.


Klara Meison wrote:
What about the scariest enemy relative to their CR rating?

I'm no Ashiel, and it's not quite from a bestiary, but here's my pitch.


Kryzbyn wrote:
Stirge has my vote.

Yup. That or shadows or ghouls (or ghasts).

The seugathi and succubus are pretty terrifying for their CRs, but shadows, ghouls (ghasts), and stirge are the ones most terrifying for me, personally, to encounter.

Unless we're talking my psion/wizard, who has an irrational fear loathing of oozes and vermin - the only two enemies that can't be made friends and turn every combat with them into a slog or "avoid it" nonsense (which he can't do, as he's making the lands safe for others).

EDIT: Or gigantean cats.


What about one-trick-ponies with a fun trick like Beguilers?
That is, for the example of Beguiler, a character who is really good at illusions (much better than the average spellcaster) at the cost of being underwhelming at almost everything else. How difficult would such concepts be to implement in D20 Legends?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:
Stirge has my vote.

Yup. That or shadows or ghouls (or ghasts).

The seugathi and succubus are pretty terrifying for their CRs, but shadows, ghouls (ghasts), and stirge are the ones most terrifying for me, personally, to encounter.

Unless we're talking my psion/wizard, who has an irrational fear loathing of oozes and vermin - the only two enemies that can't be made friends and turn every combat with them into a slog or "avoid it" nonsense (which he can't do, as he's making the lands safe for others).

EDIT: Or gigantean cats.

Ghaele Azata is one that always comes to mind for me. That thing has the potential to stomp up and down many things above its CR. Even way above its CR.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mashallah wrote:
Klara Meison wrote:
What about the scariest enemy relative to their CR rating?
I'm no Ashiel, and it's not quite from a bestiary, but here's my pitch.

And a bit of my explanation on why I chose that one:

It's CR 3, has 60 movement speed, and can pounce for 35 damage.
When they face a singular CR 3 enemy, the players are supposed to be at most level 2 each (CR=APL+1). At level 2, the players likely wouldn't have any alternate movement modes to be able to outkite a 60ft speed beast with pounce and +26 jump. Hiding from it is also difficult due to scent and +10 perception.
Moreover, it's undead, making it immune to common low level tricks like sleep or colour spray, while the movement speed combined with +10 initiative all but ensures it will kill at least one or two party members before it's put down, even with positive energy channeling on the table.
It's really hard to manage it without resorting to alternate movement modes like flight, which are exceedingly rare at low levels where CR 3 critters are common.
All in all, it's IMO absurdly strong offensively for CR 3 and potentially a TPK against an unprepared party. Not quite That Damn Crab, but rather close.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
Who is, in your opinion, the scariest enemy in the pathfinder bestiary? What about the scariest enemy relative to their CR rating?

Depends on your definition of scary. If we're talking "rawr, I'm a monster" scary, pit fiends are a big favorite of mine as they have the guns and the bells to challenge high level parties.

If we're talking nightmare fuel scary, Succubi are a personal favorite because of the sorts of havoc that they can wreak outside of a combat environment, and the sort of terrible stalking they can do as well. They are ideal for tormenting not only you, but everyone that you love, because they don't eat, nor sleep. They can remain ethereal indefinitely, they can charm people indefinitely, they have telepathy (so they can charm and manipulate people even when you aren't aware of their existence), they can look like anyone, be anyone, etc. They could make your wife drown your child in the bath. They could coup de grace a sleeping individual with the vampiric touch and be gone in an instant. They can ruin lives, reputations, and dreams without ever even getting violent. Or bait people into violence (like tricking people into murdering someone else, such as by making them believe their best friend's sleeping with their spouse).

If we're talking relative to CR...anything that's a high CR with the Skeletal Champion template added to it. Because that template is stupid. To put it into perspective...

A pit fiend has 20 HD. A skeletal champion pit fiend is CR 9. Aside from some loss in natural armor and BAB and such, it's still a pit fiend, complete with all its SLAs, summoning, etc. Even lower-CR things get goofy with skeletal champions. Toss the template on a dragon and listen to the screams.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Klara Meison wrote:
Who is, in your opinion, the scariest enemy in the pathfinder bestiary? What about the scariest enemy relative to their CR rating?

Depends on your definition of scary. If we're talking "rawr, I'm a monster" scary, pit fiends are a big favorite of mine as they have the guns and the bells to challenge high level parties.

If we're talking nightmare fuel scary, Succubi are a personal favorite because of the sorts of havoc that they can wreak outside of a combat environment, and the sort of terrible stalking they can do as well. They are ideal for tormenting not only you, but everyone that you love, because they don't eat, nor sleep. They can remain ethereal indefinitely, they can charm people indefinitely, they have telepathy (so they can charm and manipulate people even when you aren't aware of their existence), they can look like anyone, be anyone, etc. They could make your wife drown your child in the bath. They could coup de grace a sleeping individual with the vampiric touch and be gone in an instant. They can ruin lives, reputations, and dreams without ever even getting violent. Or bait people into violence (like tricking people into murdering someone else, such as by making them believe their best friend's sleeping with their spouse).

If we're talking relative to CR...anything that's a high CR with the Skeletal Champion template added to it. Because that template is stupid. To put it into perspective...

A pit fiend has 20 HD. A skeletal champion pit fiend is CR 9. Aside from some loss in natural armor and BAB and such, it's still a pit fiend, complete with all its SLAs, summoning, etc. Even lower-CR things get goofy with skeletal champions. Toss the template on a dragon and listen to the screams.

Well, sure, you can also add the Young template several times to the Skeletal Champion Balor, reducing its CR while arguably making it only stronger by the template addition. But that's cheesy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Klara Meison wrote:
Ashiel, is there a question you always wanted to be asked in this thread, but nobody ever did ask it?
That's a good question. I can't think of any off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure I've thought of a few in the past. I just can't remember any of them. (^~^);

Well, if you ever come up with any in the future, feel free to pretend that I asked them in PM and answer them here. Your posts are always a good read.

What is the worst class in pathfinder? I am split between Fighter, Rogue and Monk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Shouldn't you specify a metric? Being worst in one way might not be worst in another. Overly obvious example, combat power vs diplomatic power vs flavor/fluff.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Klara Meison wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Klara Meison wrote:
Ashiel, is there a question you always wanted to be asked in this thread, but nobody ever did ask it?
That's a good question. I can't think of any off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure I've thought of a few in the past. I just can't remember any of them. (^~^);

Well, if you ever come up with any in the future, feel free to pretend that I asked them in PM and answer them here. Your posts are always a good read.

What is the worst class in pathfinder? I am split between Fighter, Rogue and Monk.

How about the Brute Vigilante archetype?

A worse Fighter who has to make will saves against a DC of 20+level/2 in order to avoid attacking allies, gaining only a worse version of Rage in return for that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheAlicornSage wrote:
Shouldn't you specify a metric? Being worst in one way might not be worst in another. Overly obvious example, combat power vs diplomatic power vs flavor/fluff.

I prefer to ask open-ended questions, where person who is answering can decide on the metric themselves. Makes the answers more interesting and telling of how the person thinks.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to go with Fighter for the following reasons.

1. The class is intended to be the generic warrior guy, soldier of fortune, mercenary, whatever you want it to be, but it's actually terrible at being a generic fill in the blanks class. Pick virtually any character concept, even one as basic and generic as "farmboy picked up a sword" or "a soldier from an army" and the other classes will fill it better (thanks to skills and stuff).

2. The Fighter actively makes the game worse because at least part of the system has been designed with the idea that it exists. The fighter and their bonus feats are one of the largest reasons we have these god-awful feat trees that keep the better classes from picking up interesting things like whirlwind attack. These feat trees are simultaneously an attempt to make Fighters seem more special (because they can qualify earlier) while also being their greatest weakness (you can't do anything worthwhile because you gotta spend 1/2 your class features to do a thing).

3. The Fighter prides itself of being the best class for newbies while in fact being the worst class for newbies. Not only does it teach you nothing about the game that every other class doesn't already (roll a d20, pick feats) but it's a class that is extremely unforgiving of mistakes and requires high system mastery to stand next to its peers in any reasonable sense.

4. The fighter is actually terrible at fighting. It is decent (not great) at physical offense and defense (specifically weapon attack rolls and armor class) and has okay Fortitude saves. However, in fantasy combat (or even pretty mundane combat with a few gimmicky tricks like alchemical weapons) there is far more to combat than a simple attack roll and armor class. The Fighter has no answer for anything else. If it's not directly targeting the fighter's AC, the Fighter has no defense against it. If the Fighter cannot directly engage it with his favorite weapon, the Fighter has nothing to bring to bear against it.

5. It's the most gear reliant class in the game while also being the least self-sufficient when it comes to acquiring said gear (even a Rogue with the minor magic talent can, RAW, take item creation feats).

6. It's one of the worst classes in the game for team-play. Aside from making attack rolls and getting hit (things summons, animal companions, and animated minions can do while being more expendable), the Fighter brings nothing to the team in terms of added resources or tricks (Paladins and Rangers bring additional spell and utility resources, can share class features with friends, etc; Barbarians can function as antimagic ubertanks and have unique tricks like Spell Sunder; even Rogues for all their ilk can be built to perform team setups, produce magic items, and get passive Perceptions vs traps).

...

The Rogue and Monk have a lot of issues, with the main being both are built like spellcasters but lack spellcasting (seriously you can take a Rogue and Monk and drop 3/4 spellcasting on them and instantly they'll feel like real classes), and in the case of the Rogue, he probably needs to be a full BAB class and have better Rogue talents (this would distinguish him from the Bard).

However, they aren't the disease on the game that is the Fighter. Though the Rogue does get a bit of a stinkeye glare from me for being the reason you have to have a specific class feature to disable magic traps with Disable Device.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, thought I'd share some art.

Victorian corset dress thingy.

Painted, practice, practice, practice.

Roguish sketch-doodle.

Red hair, freckles.

As before, but pre-paint.

Stick-hair, and stick hair on steroids (my friend "enhanced" the doodle :P).

Dwaaaarf!

A painting from a couple weeks ago (the background's just a ball room image) which shows how much ass I am at painting and the ongoing evolution.

Muscles guy (can't decide where I want to take it, but it needs more swords I think).

Also, before anyone asks about why a number of my sketches have ladies with giant t&#*. I will explain it as I explained it to a friend of mine.

Me: "Well, some artists draw birds."
Him: "Yeah, and?"
Me: "Why do you think they draw birds?"
Him: "Because they like birds?"
Me: :3


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Here's a pic I did for my maftet character on the boards...
LINK

I had the idea to draw him out...then lost interest when I couldn't get the wings correct (correct = "to my liking").
Then I messed it up by coloring it...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nice. What took the longest, the tats? :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Yeah...I looked up a Norn tattoo pattern from Guild Wars 2 and used it for a "template".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cool. :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Here's some other generic stuff. I'm better at mecha than ppl :P
Photobucket Library
It's pretty obvious what I've drawn vs. other junk I've stuck there.


I really like this one a lot. The others are good too, but this one jumped out at me first (it must have high Initiative). :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

That was for a character for a post 20 gestalt mythic game. He was a Soulknife/Psiwarrior with the Dark Tempest PrC. Rather destructive ;)
Never got to play him though. Game fell apart before it began.
It was kind of like Traveller...except the universe died during creation :P
I used a pic I found online for a Sith Sorcerer from SWTOR for the basis, went from there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The Helena pics are my favs so far...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

She looks really...uhhh...friendly. (!-!)
Hopes she doesn't rip out my organs. Smile and nod, yes...

2,101 to 2,150 of 3,564 << first < prev | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >> Ask Ashiel Anything << All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.