(snip)But yeah, dominate is just no fun. (snip)
I've found that most people who say this just don't really understand the dominate spells. The way most people use them is starkly in contrast with how they're written. There are two key provisions to them:
1) Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus.
2) Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out.
When you take those very clear rules into effect, the vast majority of what people think Dominate can do is clearly ruled out.
(snip)But yeah, dominate is just no fun. (snip)I've found that most people who say this just don't really understand the dominate spells. The way most people use them is starkly in contrast with how they're written. There are two key provisions to them:
1) Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus.
2) Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out.When you take those very clear rules into effect, the vast majority of what people think Dominate can do is clearly ruled out.
Which is actually WHY Dominate is usually no fun.
Getting an order like "Attack your friends" is fun, even when you fail.
However, following the rules, the most common order will be "Sit in the corner".
Not fun.
8)Taking control of characters away from players.
Its there for fairness. Things like big scary dragons have supernatural abilities to instill fear into the hearts of men. So there's a mechanic for that that says no matter how much you think your character is okay with it, once faced with the reality they may be proven wrong.
I don't see this as being any different from "I swing my sword and chop his head off!" "Okay, roll." "1, but I'm really sure he cut the thing's head off!"
Its there to stop the same schoolyard "I hit you!" "No you didn't!" stuff that all the other dice rolls are there for.
7) "Required items."
How does your character know to carry all that stuff? Does he have all of the appropriate knowledge skills maxxed out so he can actually know those sorts of things? Is there a mentor around somewhere reading out the weaknesses to everything they encounter before they encounter it? Or are you just metagaming?
6)The perception skill.
Used to be that Search and Spot were two different skills, and people complained about having to spend too many skillpoints just to see what was in front of their face, now they're complaining that the combined skill is too useful?
5)Stuff you can't fix (at your level)
You're not supposed to be able to solve everything in the world at low levels. You get slapped with something like Blindness, its called a roleplaying hook where you have an adventure to find the cure. For me, this is like complaining that everyone can't be expected to keep a fully stocked emergency room in their garage, and how unfair it is that you have to go seek out medical treatment for more than just minor afflictions.
4)Required magic items
Its a balance thing. Either the game assumes you are going to have magic items and balances the challenges around that, making it too hard for those who don't have them, or it assumes you're running around naked and balancing for that, meaning its too easy for anyone with magic items. There is no suitable middle ground that I can see, its always going to be wrong for one group or the other so long as magic items give any kind of mechanical advantage what-so-ever.
3) Monsters with debilitating abilities on every attack.
Some monsters are dangerous and require more than just "Charge in and smash it in the face" to win. Characters that are facing a creature they've never seen before should be cautious, and ready to run away if things clearly get too difficult. Unprepared adventurers that fling themselves blindly into combat deserve what they get.
If you say its okay for the characters to magically know that they need to carry around golfbags full of weapons and tonics, why don't they know when those same opponents have dangerous abilities that need to be carefully planned for?
2)"Save or suck"
1) Save or die
Now these I will give you, as there is no good way in game to get around them unless you are another spellcaster that wants to sit there and play Counterspell.
(snip)But yeah, dominate is just no fun. (snip)I've found that most people who say this just don't really understand the dominate spells. The way most people use them is starkly in contrast with how they're written. There are two key provisions to them:
1) Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus.
2) Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out.When you take those very clear rules into effect, the vast majority of what people think Dominate can do is clearly ruled out.
Yes, there are safeguards in the dominate spell line. That "against it's nature" line has caused me almost as many headaches as alignment debates when I play or GM. Still, dominate is only the stereotypical spell of that variety. Those same provisions don't exist with otehr spells like confusion, geass, or (god forbid) magic jar.
A spell shouldn't boil down to a single roll determining whether or not a player can participate for the next 1 1/2 hours.
|
Admittedly, then this might get into a roleplaying question with the GM, such as how hard you can sell the idea that sitting out a fight goes against the very nature of your character. A Barbarian's got pretty good odds, but a Bard might be up the creek without a paddle there.
I don't know about your bard - but it'd be against my bard's very nature to be out of the lime-light for any length of time whatsoever.
Edit: It'd probably be easier to get him to spin in a circle yelling "Look at me! Look at me! Look at me!" then to go sit quietly in the corner.
Admittedly, then this might get into a roleplaying question with the GM, such as how hard you can sell the idea that sitting out a fight goes against the very nature of your character. A Barbarian's got pretty good odds, but a Bard might be up the creek without a paddle there.I don't know about your bard - but it'd be against my bard's very nature to be out of the lime-light for any length of time whatsoever.
My chaotic neutral "no loyalties" fighter may just be willing to accept an order to turn on his allies, especially if it comes with an offer of payment. One of the downsides of playing a chaotic neutral character.
|
My chaotic neutral "no loyalties" fighter may just be willing to accept an order to turn on his allies, especially if it comes with an offer of payment. One of the downsides of playing a chaotic neutral character.Admittedly, then this might get into a roleplaying question with the GM, such as how hard you can sell the idea that sitting out a fight goes against the very nature of your character. A Barbarian's got pretty good odds, but a Bard might be up the creek without a paddle there.I don't know about your bard - but it'd be against my bard's very nature to be out of the lime-light for any length of time whatsoever.
Of course in that case, where some gold and honeyed words would suffice, it does make you question the necessity of wasting a 'dominate' spell in the first place.
The +2 has never been an issue for me, though. Will saves go neglected a lot with my players in favor of AC and damage. You think they would've caught on by now, but somehow I still always have ECL 10 games featuring a fighter whose Will save is a piddling +4.
Neo2151 that Rage-Pouncing Barbarian(paladin smiting BBEG into oblivion also) vs the spell has been explained. If you do not agree with the assertations then explain why.
Can you give me a link(s)? I'll get back to you after I've read said explanations.
#6 for sure.
I hate Perception checks - they constantly slow the game down. Ironically enough, I miss Search being its own skill.
I also disagree that Perception checks are a DM problem. They are, without house rulings, very much a player choice and therefore can easily become a player problem. They check every room, every door, and want checks before every combat.
My suggested solution, if it's a problem, is just determine what is their perception modifier +10 and force a persistent "take 10"
But that robs you of the pleasure of watching your players squirm after rolling a 1 on a perception check on a door. "Seems legit" is one of the funniest things a GM can say.
When my players ask to search for traps, no matter what they roll, my answer is " You don't see any."
So why not just cut out the middle man and jut say "You get hit by a trap, you die"?
I would guess that Mr. Statler just does not use traps in his game.
I would guess that Mr. Statler just does not use traps in his game.
Was about to say that too.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, it keeps them guessing. Did I make the check or not? Is my 20 good enough or is the DC a 24?
I should clarify. That is only if they fail to spot a trap or one is not there.
Should probably not say "No matter what they roll" then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Take 20 can be used anytime you aren't under distraction - it typically takes 2 minutes (or longer) and means you roll the following array: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 on your skill check.
Take 20 can be used anywhere but you always accept the penalty for failure if there is one. Don't forget that you can also take 20 on a stat check (to say break open a door) - and your allies can take 10 on the assist (all assuming no one is under distraction).
Bolded problematic statement. The aid-another action explicitly calls out that you cannot take-10.
Now if your allies have a +9 to the skill or stat then it can be assumed they auto-aid.
You can help someone achieve success on a skill check by making the same kind of skill check in a cooperative effort. If you roll a 10 or higher on your check, the character you're helping gets a +2 bonus on his or her check. (You can't take 10 on a skill check to aid another.) In many cases, a character's help won't be beneficial, or only a limited number of characters can help at once.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing I hate the most?
That I lack the funds to buy it all, and lack the time to read it all and play it all and share it with all of my friends.
(Also some socio-political baggage due to RPGs-D&D-devil-thing in the 80s.)
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
(Also some socio-political baggage due to RPGs-D&D-devil-thing in the 80s.)
IT'S TIME TO LEARN THE REAL SPELLS NOW!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IT'S TIME TO LEARN THE REAL SPELLS NOW!
(Also some socio-political baggage due to RPGs-D&D-devil-thing in the 80s.)
That's my favorite chick tract.
And while looking up the link for that, I found out that IT WAS MADE INTO A MOVIE!!! OMG, yes.
|
|
No, it keeps them guessing. Did I make the check or not? Is my 20 good enough or is the DC a 24?
I should clarify. That is only if they fail to spot a trap or one is not there.
You're a big softie if you even let the players roll their perception checks to search for traps.
That's a test that was designed to be rolled behind the GM screen so the player has no idea what his result even was when you say "You don't see any!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, it keeps them guessing. Did I make the check or not? Is my 20 good enough or is the DC a 24?
I should clarify. That is only if they fail to spot a trap or one is not there.
You're a big softie if you even let the players roll their perception checks to search for traps.
That's a test that was designed to be rolled behind the GM screen so the player has no idea what his result even was when you say "You don't see any!"
It's less about being soft and more about not wanting to have to bother keeping track of the skill bonuses of everyone at the table. I have enough things to keep track of already.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And while looking up the link for that, I found out that IT WAS MADE INTO A MOVIE!!! OMG, yes.
Oh my gods
"No Debbie, the Necronomicon and Cthulu mythos is all TOO real!"
*Clip of Chtulu thingy in space*
Oh my gods, I lost it. I freaking lost it at that part.
IT'S TIME TO LEARN THE REAL SPELLS NOW!
(Also some socio-political baggage due to RPGs-D&D-devil-thing in the 80s.)That's my favorite chick tract.
And while looking up the link for that, I found out that IT WAS MADE INTO A MOVIE!!! OMG, yes.
My review. Sigh.
|
|
It's less about being soft and more about not wanting to have to bother keeping track of the skill bonuses of everyone at the table. I have enough things to keep track of already.No, it keeps them guessing. Did I make the check or not? Is my 20 good enough or is the DC a 24?
I should clarify. That is only if they fail to spot a trap or one is not there.
You're a big softie if you even let the players roll their perception checks to search for traps.
That's a test that was designed to be rolled behind the GM screen so the player has no idea what his result even was when you say "You don't see any!"
I don't bother keeping track either; I just ask "What's your bonus?" and then clatter the die behind the screen. Easy peasy.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
OMG... Wall of text... Eyes bleeding... Have mercy... Paragraphs... Please think about the paragraphs...
OMG... Wall of text... Eyes bleeding... Have mercy... Paragraphs... Please think about the paragraphs...
*Scrambles around on the floor for his poor eyes that fell out*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wall of text
By your profile, you're new to these forums. I'd wager that you're new to online posting in general, so I'll go easy on you:
Please use the return key to break apart your text into readable paragraphs, preferably by topic and then further paragraphing if necessary.
To help guide you with online posting, this article on how to post in Play-by-Post games is really helpful. Especially the first rule in the Posting Commandments section.
And while looking up the link for that, I found out that IT WAS MADE INTO A MOVIE!!! OMG, yes.
By the creators of The Gamers, no less.
.
.
.
.
I Just want to say about the magic items that I agree with the Belt/Headband,and possibly the ring/amulet.
Most martial classes I play usually take those, but if I'm playing a spell caster I don't take the ring/amulet of prot/nat armor, I usually take something to boost spells and what not. However, in regards to the cloak, I can honestly say I have never bought a cloak of resistance. If it was given to me by looting it then, ya, I would wear it because, hey, awesome bonus to saves, but I would rather spend my money on a Cloak of Batwings, or Cloak of Displacement.
Reason being, is that I like the effects of spells, Saves are a natural part of the game, and lets be honest... how often does one fail on a save or die spell.
[In] the current game we are playing, another person and I are Gm'ing every other book.
He got bored with his current character and decided to bring in a new one; in the first encounter of the session I attacked him with Phantasmal Killer and he died.
Was he shocked? Yes.
Did he beg and plead me to return his character to life or negate the effect? No.
Why? Because he knows that's how it goes.
In fact he probably found more fun in the fact that, [with] his character was sent by Nethys to rescue Baba Yaga, [he'd been] claiming [that] he was awesome and far superior to the rest of the PC's; thus when he died he found the hilarious irony in what had happened.
What level were they? 13 and by that level that was actually the second PC to die by a save or die spell.
Who was the first? My character when we met an
Icefrost worm (you know those things that explode when they die doing 100 damage if you fail the save, more than likely killing an 11th level PC who had been fighting it).Yes he did die because of the save or suck ability the frost worm had; wanna know why he was so close to it? Because the spell caster failed her knowledge roll and didn't know they exploded.
With proper information I'm sure my character would of been like "Ummmm, ya, no, I'm not getting anywhere near that thing."
Same thing goes for other such abilities like the Ghouls in your example.
It seems to me people just want to do the damage and kill everything as quickly as possible instead of playing smart.
If your PC's had knowledge that the ghouls could paralyze them with their attacks then your PC's could have played it smart.
"OMG room full of Ghouls, quick funnel them through the door way."
Melee classes stand to either side of the door way having the ghouls rush past allowing AoO's, or the first ghoul stops right at them and they both attack it. The second Ghoul makes it through the door but has to step through its companion to make it to a spot it can attack, thus provoking AoO's, not to mention this round it only gets one attack. All ghouls will only get 1 attack that round, all PC's can focus on 1 ghoul until its dead, allowing the rest to focus on the next, and next round take out the one that will do a full round.... You see where I'm going with this.
By the end of the combat its unlikely that any PC will be paralyzed and if so, its probably only 1 of them for failing a save they just made 3-4 times during the encounter already.
Also on the subject of SoS and SoD spells and abilities, instead of this sucking for PC's it should make it more fun, it is more challenging when a PC goes down, he can cheer them on and say "Kill the one that got me; take revenge!"-type stuff.
Ya, they have to sit there, but make it fun for them anyway.
EDITED... this time.
EDIT: Because EDITing is what I do.
EDIT 2: I mean, it's my job-description.
EDIT 3: Read my profile! It's funny, dang-it!
EDIT 4: Dropping it below my profile image, for better readability. Readability is somewhat hampered by the size and the weird compression used in quote-functions, buuuuuuu~t, it should be a tad easier, anyway. I hope!
Man, that guy is so OCD. Sheesh.
Anyway, welcome to the forums, Alric Rahl!
We can be contentious, but don't let that scare you away! (Also, I'm notable and well-known for my walls of text 'round here. Just check out my posting history! (Seriously, though, I'd recommend against checking my posting history. Waaaaaayyyyyyyyy too much.))
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isnt "Ninja Assassin" kind of redundant?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isnt "Ninja Assassin" kind of redundant?
Ninja also spied, :P sometimes anyway... before trying to kill the person they spied on.....
I hate to break it to you, but that's the a house rule. Taking any position not explicitly stated to be the case in the rules is a house rule. House rules aren't (inherently) bad, and everyone uses various house rules. But saying that you can trigger a trap just by looking for it is still a house rule.Obviously no such rule is stated, because it's too much of a blanket rule. Some traps will go off if the triggered item is poked/prodded/moved/etc. Some won't. Such a rule you're challenging me to provide would ignore that. So, obviously, it doesn't exist.
What does exist is the responsibility of the GM to adjudicate the rules as presented. Rule Zero/Common sense is presumed. The rules are meant to be situationally flexible as appropriate. As another Perception example, it's not a flat DC of -10 to "hear a battle", it's presumed to be flexible as to what constitutes "a battle" and whether the DC always has to be -10.
Rules that detail magical phenomenae that don't exist in the real world need to be explicitly spelled out. If the rule for a spell, for example, doesn't allow something, then you can't do it. That standard does not extend to the entire corpus of rules. Phenomenae that do exist in the real world don't need to be explicitly written because we have reality to tell us what happens. So, just because Perception (and trap) rules don't say a failed check can set off a trap doesn't mean it's a house rule to say it might. Common sense says it can happen, and Paizo left common sense to the GM rather than attempting to codify it. The CRB is already over 500 pages, if they tried to state how the real world works as well, it'd have been not only futile but economocially unfeasible to make a book that enormous.
Explosive runes.
Isnt "Ninja Assassin" kind of redundant?Ninja also spied, :P sometimes anyway... before trying to kill the person they spied on.....
Ninjas actually rarely ever killed.
It's messy, and makes your job harder, because now people are looking for you.Aside from the first ninjas (farmers), assassiations were rare, as the acted more like spies most of the time.
I can fish up gajin goombah's video on the subject, if you like.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Explosive runes.Requires reading, not just looking.
if they're written in a language the looker comprehends and he sees them, the way language centers in the brain work is the looker cannot "not read" them.
If you see it, the brain automatically processes it. You can NOT turn it off and see "I prepared Explosive Runes" as a series of nonsignificant scribbles if they are in fact the written form of a language you can read.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isnt "Ninja Assassin" kind of redundant?
Ninja pirate ghost.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you see it, the brain automatically processes it. You can NOT turn it off and see "I prepared Explosive Runes" as a series of nonsignificant scribbles if they are in fact the written form of a language you can read.
Then I look at it from 15ft away and trigger it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems my explosive runes went off.
Caused some more heated arguement.
'Twas supposed to be force damage, not fire!
Hmm. Needs some tweaking.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you see it, the brain automatically processes it. You can NOT turn it off and see "I prepared Explosive Runes" as a series of nonsignificant scribbles if they are in fact the written form of a language you can read.Then I look at it from 15ft away and trigger it.
Interestingly, the spell suggests that you must be next to them to read them.