So....for consideration....


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Plus it can be funny when you say your version of "I'm Batman!" and the reply is "Never heard of you." ^_^


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Or the evil ranger type goes "AWESOME, I have Favored Enemy: Bats"


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I use my vigilante's social identity as a back up nobody when I need to go incognito. Good for surprises and casing places. There are plenty of of abilities to support that, too.


technarken wrote:
Am I unreasonable to be a bit peeved that they can react that quickly when it's to crack down on finesse builds?

Yes, yes you are.

Down with finesse builds!


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
That is nice that you have one vigilante build you like.

That's not a build. That's just a basic overview of the chassis.

Quote:
But it doesn't change the fact the class is a single city focused dual identity super hero class that is designed for a single city focused adventure or at least as an interesting NPC in one city of an adventure. That is still very niche. It also doesn't help that many aspects/options of the class are focused on how popular/infamous you are.

Dual Identity is an incredibly minor class feature in terms of overall mechanics and the city specific stuff is a talent tree you can just... not take.

Your vigilante is required to be that as much as a Barbarian is required to be a shirtless muscleman in a loincloth as much as a Wizard is required to be old and have a giant beard.


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

Gotta agree with Rysky here. The vigilante is a chassis, around which an infinite array of character ideas can be wrapped around. Ignore the trappings, and enjoy the mechanical benefits to create the character you want.

I'm not even sure it is "designed" for a "single city focused adventure" solely - sure, you could use it for that, but it is so much more.

Completely agreed. The only mechanical thing that the vigilante is designed to do is "martial class that is also competent in social situations". So like I'd play most knights as a vigilante to differentiate their courtly selves from the professional they are on the battlefield. Same thing with like even a WW1 soldier.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

Gotta agree with Rysky here. The vigilante is a chassis, around which an infinite array of character ideas can be wrapped around. Ignore the trappings, and enjoy the mechanical benefits to create the character you want.

I'm not even sure it is "designed" for a "single city focused adventure" solely - sure, you could use it for that, but it is so much more.

Completely agreed. The only mechanical thing that the vigilante is designed to do is "martial class that is also competent in social situations". So like I'd play most knights as a vigilante to differentiate their courtly selves from the professional they are on the battlefield. Same thing with like even a WW1 soldier.

Pretty much how I play mine.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

40 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

Happy Holidays!!


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thank you for taking time from your holiday season to bring us up to speed and look forward to the insight and wisdom you may bring.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

*hugs*


Thank you Mr. Bulmahn for taking time from your holiday to post and also happy holidays.


Thank you VERY MUCH Jason for posting that.
I think that in many cases just knowing that people are being heard makes a big difference.

Looking foreword to 2018 and what Paizo has to offer ;)


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

Happy holidays! Thanks for chiming in Jason, it's always good to know you are listening! Especially to the rambles - these days it feels like 80% of my posts are rambles. ;)


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

thanks for the update


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Eggnog is for N00bs! Get him!

Happy Holidays Mr. B! Hope you are enjoying the time at home.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

Thanks for the response, good sir, and I'm glad there will be discussion about the class moving forward (as well as maybe playtesting for future products? Wishful thinking on my part, perhaps..). Who knows what the discussion will precisely be about, but I certainly hope it will be for the class's better.

Cheers and happy holidays.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Hey there folks,

Just an fyi, most of us are out of the office on break right now. I am in fact, typing this from home while sipping some eggnog.

Anyway... couple of things.

1. We didn't do a playtest for the shifter due to the its timing. It was going through its paces right during the ramp for Starfinder and we didn't want to pull focus. That said, it got a fair bit of internal work. In retrospect, this may not have been best for the class.

2. We will have more to talk about on the Shifter in the coming weeks once we are all back in the office.

3. Its been pointed out that I have been pretty quiet here on the boards, which is true. Much of my work these days is on stuff far flung into the future, and by the time any of my work hits your hands, its over a year past my desk. Makes it kind of tricky to stay informed. I still read the boards frequently, but I try not to get drawn into too many discussions, leaving that instead to those who are closer to the work. That said.. it is something I am hoping to change in the coming year.

Just thought I would offer up some thoughts. We are still listening. We still care about your thoughts and ideas. We want your criticisms, your suggestions, and your rambles. We may not have the time needed to comment everywhere, but we do hear you.

Have a happy holidays everybody.

Happy Holidays


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Hey there folks

Howdy! Your post was what I was hoping to hear. I'll try to be patient for future updates. ;)

Squiggit wrote:
Dual Identity is an incredibly minor class feature in terms of overall mechanics and the city specific stuff is a talent tree you can just... not take.

What bothers me is that I MUST have it. How did I learn this skill/ability as a single ID vigilante? That and several talents require a certain ID to use, it continues to have an impact even if ignored. It's irksome on an otherwise solid class.

PS: Vigilante also makes me think of another option that out shifts the shifter [and another option for a martial shifting class]: the Agathiel. You get the option of a bite, gore, 2 claws or 2 slam for your non-shifted attacks, you get unlimited time in your shape [one only though and limited on gained abilities though up to beast shape IV ]all while wearing your normal equipment...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I feel like the Obscurity talent (from Blood of the Beasts) exists to solve the "how does the single ID vigilante work" issue since probably every adventurer would like the ability to, sometimes, be completely unremarkable from time to time. The Vigilante with the obscurity talent is just practiced at this- you have [Whatever, the adventurer] as your vigilante identity and [pay absolutely no attention to this filthy commoner] as your social identity.

The one bugaboo is Social Grace, which is probably the best social talent, and requires you to be in your social identity, but for things like "Case the Joint" being the wholly ordinary person who is there for reasons no one cares about seems to make sense.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Companion to the Lonely is an awesome Social Talent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Companion to the Lonely is an awesome Social Talent.

The issue with this one is the "acts of physical pleasure" it requires. Not every game/group is comfortable with that. Add to that that it puts the character in a vulnerable position and you have more games it's not easy to use it in.

If you can work out the logistics though, the benefits are pretty good.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yep, not an issue with my groups :3

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

I suspect many games will be all right with simply glossing over the details. It's not like we don't have the (arguably much more explicit and unskippable) Calistrian deific obedience, or the seducer witch (who incentivizes the party to actively participate in her activities). Among others, of course.


Rysky wrote:
Yep, not an issue with my groups :3

Just pointing out it's awesomeness can vary depending on the group.

Kalindlara wrote:
I suspect many games will be all right with simply glossing over the details. It's not like we don't have the (arguably much more explicit and unskippable) Calistrian deific obedience, or the seducer witch (who incentivizes the party to actively participate in her activities). Among others, of course.

As I said to Rysky, I'm just pointing out it's awesomeness isn't universal. That and even in games where it's cool, you have to plan ahead if you wish to use this and you're away from civilization: Are the other players cool with 'helping' even in a 'fade to black' sense? It's not a talent that you can take and assume it just works.

Calistrian deific obedience: this allows for a different obedience "If no suitable partner is available", so it's really not the same.

seducer witch: For this archetype, it's just a matter of DC/save buffs with the core abilities working without any "acts of physical pleasure". So it too isn't really the same either. ;)

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Forgot there was a secondary option for the obedience. I guess that shows what kind of life I live.

Regarding the seducer, though... I feel like "willing sexual relations" is about as unambiguous as it gets.

They're both even more explicit than CttL, in fact, which doesn't specify sexual pleasure.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

In any case, your point is taken. Fortunately, CttL is even easier to avoid than either of those options.


Kalindlara wrote:

Forgot there was a secondary option for the obedience. I guess that shows what kind of life I live.

Regarding the seducer, though... I feel like "willing sexual relations" is about as unambiguous as it gets.

That "willing sexual relations" is simply for a DC/save buff: Fey Charm +1DC, Seducer’s Kiss +2DC, Garden of Delight +2 saves. The base, underlying abilities work and work well without those though, which was my point. You can still charm hex & stagger[with other bonuses] and tiny hut even in games that don't allow "willing sexual relations": IMO "willing sexual relations" is for a pure bonus and not a requirement for the archetype.

EDIT: also Fey Charm and Seducer’s Kiss is vs the participant so it has it's own set of issue past the others.


Kalindlara wrote:
They're both even more explicit than CttL, in fact, which doesn't specify sexual pleasure.

Now I totally want to make a Vigilante whose social identity is a pâtissier with max ranks in "Craft (Pastry)" (Profession(Baker)? I could never figure out which one to use). With double time I can make truly amazing cakes at inhuman speed.


Kalindlara wrote:
graystone wrote:
IMO "willing sexual relations" is for a pure bonus and not a requirement for the archetype.
Just like CttL. Huh.

I wouldn't say so, assuming your are talking about Companion to the Lonely. Companion to the Lonely is 100% useless without it's trigger of "acts of physical pleasure" while seducer's abilities work fine if that trigger doesn't activate the bonuses: as such, Companion to the Lonely is a dead space ability/talent. There is a huge difference between the entire ability not activating and a DC/save buff not activation when the main ability does.

PS: "acts of physical pleasure" is pretty clear with it also saying "purely carnal reasons" and "physical intimacy". Most DM's aren't going to let a 'sugar high' count. ;)


I'm just glad Jason chimed in to give some succour to those folks who've been quietly (and not so quietly) tensing up about the Shifter. I look forward to hearing more, and for there to be more discussion from developers - whether or not that is about the Shifter I don't really mind. I think they do an awesome job, have been hammered in the past and really just need to accept there are some gnarly and entitled folk who can be rude and... entitled.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
graystone wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
graystone wrote:
IMO "willing sexual relations" is for a pure bonus and not a requirement for the archetype.
Just like CttL. Huh.

I wouldn't say so, assuming your are talking about Companion to the Lonely. Companion to the Lonely is 100% useless without it's trigger of "acts of physical pleasure" while seducer's abilities work fine if that trigger doesn't activate the bonuses: as such, Companion to the Lonely is a dead space ability/talent. There is a huge difference between the entire ability not activating and a DC/save buff not activation when the main ability does.

PS: "acts of physical pleasure" is pretty clear with it also saying "purely carnal reasons" and "physical intimacy". Most DM's aren't going to let a 'sugar high' count. ;)

Then don't use it. I don't care.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
Then don't use it. I don't care.

It's never been about my taking it or not: it's giving people a heads up that the talent requires a talk with the DM about explicit material and how it's presented [or not] in the game. That and disagreeing with the 2 examples you're trying to draw parallels to as they both can be used without incident no matter the 'rating' of the game.


Are we talking about "dance halls" again;)


7 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
PS: "acts of physical pleasure" is pretty clear with it also saying "purely carnal reasons" and "physical intimacy". Most DM's aren't going to let a 'sugar high' count. ;)

Considering that the very first line of the talent is "Whether religiously motivated, as are followers of Arshea, Calistria, or Shelyn" I would think that the Shelynite Vigilante creating and sharing truly sublime éclairs with good conversation and tea should suffice. Shelyn is the one interested in the "courtly" kind of romance, after all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
Are we talking about "dance halls" again;)

{sings (badly):}

♫♪ "...When I, you and everyone we knew
Could believe, do, and share in what was true...
" ♫♪

Dark Archive

6 people marked this as a favorite.

[tangent] Ooh, now I want to see an ace Vigilante with Companion to the Lonely whose idea of 'physical pleasure' is a nice massage / foot-rub, or some other languidly sensual physical experience that isn't explicitly sexual. [/tangent]

Also, curses on the goblin that just got Dance Hall Days stuck in my head. Fie on thee! Curses, I say!

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Set wrote:
[tangent] Ooh, now I want to see an ace Vigilante with Companion to the Lonely whose idea of 'physical pleasure' is a nice massage / foot-rub, or some other languidly sensual physical experience that isn't explicitly sexual. [/tangent]

This is exactly what I was thinking of regarding "physical pleasure", before I realized the folly of bothering to argue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's really not much other people can do to prevent people who feel compelled to toe the line with how rude and belligerent they can be without technically breaking any rules.

Mostly it comes down to each individual deciding not to be a jerk just because one can without having one's post scrubbed.

Scarab Sages

My Vigilante meets the Companion of the Lonely requirement through dojo time with her mentor, who passed on his mantle to her. She's on the depressive side and finds the practice in swordplay, and his advice and encouragement, very valuable for bolstering her throughout the day.

See? An hour of physical intimacy, which is physically pleasurable, with a willing partner. No sex required, nothing explicit there.

In this case there is a sexual element involved. She adores her mentor, but doesn't have any idea how he feels about her. She's very good at sublimating. There's no problem with sexual intimacy in this game, but I find the "will they or won't they ever" aspect of the relationship more interesting to play than just bangin' out a bonus.

Physical intimacy can be defined in a lot of ways outside sex. Maybe the PC's sister brushes her hair every morning.

I know the counterargument is CttL won't work at every table so it's flawed. But as I've just shown, with just a dash of imagination, and an ounce of goodwill between a player and GM, these types of issues are rarely actual issues. I don't even consider it extra work to deal with. Pathfinder is a role-playing game, a baseline expectation is mechanical aspects of characters are role played.

If you can't make CttL work at a table then, it's either because a GM is saying "CttL must involve sexual content, and sexual content is not allowed", or it's because a player is saying "I can't be bothered to role play my character if it involves any degree of creative thinking".


rdknight wrote:

My Vigilante meets the Companion of the Lonely requirement through dojo time with her mentor, who passed on his mantle to her. She's on the depressive side and finds the practice in swordplay, and his advice and encouragement, very valuable for bolstering her throughout the day.

See? An hour of physical intimacy, which is physically pleasurable, with a willing partner. No sex required, nothing explicit there.

In this case there is a sexual element involved. She adores her mentor, but doesn't have any idea how he feels about her. She's very good at sublimating. There's no problem with sexual intimacy in this game, but I find the "will they or won't they ever" aspect of the relationship more interesting to play than just bangin' out a bonus.

Physical intimacy can be defined in a lot of ways outside sex. Maybe the PC's sister brushes her hair every morning.

I know the counterargument is CttL won't work at every table so it's flawed. But as I've just shown, with just a dash of imagination, and an ounce of goodwill between a player and GM, these types of issues are rarely actual issues. I don't even consider it extra work to deal with. Pathfinder is a role-playing game, a baseline expectation is mechanical aspects of characters are role played.

If you can't make CttL work at a table then, it's either because a GM is saying "CttL must involve sexual content, and sexual content is not allowed", or it's because a player is saying "I can't be bothered to role play my character if it involves any degree of creative thinking".

It is still somewhat restrictive in many games, unless something can be worked out with another PC. Ties back into the vigilante working better in an urban base kind of game.

Less so in a more epic quest campaign - unless you're bringing that mentor or sister along on the adventure.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
graystone wrote:
PS: "acts of physical pleasure" is pretty clear with it also saying "purely carnal reasons" and "physical intimacy". Most DM's aren't going to let a 'sugar high' count. ;)
Considering that the very first line of the talent is "Whether religiously motivated, as are followers of Arshea, Calistria, or Shelyn" I would think that the Shelynite Vigilante creating and sharing truly sublime éclairs with good conversation and tea should suffice. Shelyn is the one interested in the "courtly" kind of romance, after all.

If you answer a craigslist or dating site ad that said your night would be "carnal" and full of "physical intimacy" would you expect a foot massage or scintillating conversation?

As to Shelyn: "she does not in any way discourage erotic love." She's all about love and "the proliferation of that feeling in all its forms". So IMO, the difference in deities is that Shelyn's worshipers would actually be in a relationship while Calistria's would be fine with whoever they have available: either way, 'dancing' is going to be involved. ;)

So IMO it seems kind of trying to use a loophole to try to try to avoid the actual requirement of the talent. If your DM's cool with that, great for you. I just know I'd be leary of trying to use it that way as I wouldn't expect it to fly with a lot of the DM's I've had.

Kalindlara: I wasn't trying to argue but was trying to show disagreement and a different point of view.

rdknight: No one has said the talent is flawed, just that it requires a talk with the DM to see how things are going to work.

As to 'can't make it work': there is a third option, not having a willing partner. In your example, is your master coming with you into the dungeon? to the bandit camp? To the next town? Is the PC's sister camping with them in the wilderness to brush your hair? Don't miss that this talent requires logistics in having that willing partner every day no matter where you are so if it isn't a PC in the group that willing to roleplay it with you, it might not happen consistently.

Scarab Sages

thejeff said wrote:

It is still somewhat restrictive in many games, unless something can be worked out with another PC. Ties back into the vigilante working better in an urban base kind of game.

Less so in a more epic quest campaign - unless you're bringing that mentor or sister along on the adventure.

Sigh. So I think you've missed my point. I can't write a post that will provide an example solution for every character in every possible campaign. That is up to the particular player to do.

I gave an example to show it can be done. If a player can't figure it out, they can certainly talk to other players and their GM. They can also start a thread in the Advice section here on the boards.

I'd like to point out that my solution isn't even clever. Ever read a comic book or watched a movie? Batman and Robin, The Mask of Zorro: Diego De La Vega teaching Alejandro Murrieta, Star Wars: Luke and Obi Wan. I just ripped it off and altered it slightly.

Scarab Sages

graystone said wrote:
rdknight: No one has said the talent is flawed, just that it requires a talk with the DM to see how things are going to work.

Then we're on the same page. I don't consider talking to the GM to be a burden.

graystone said wrote:
As to 'can't make it work': there is a third option, not having a willing partner. In your example, is your master coming with you into the dungeon? to the bandit camp? To the next town? Is the PC's sister camping with them in the wilderness to brush your hair? Don't miss that this talent requires logistics in having that willing partner every day no matter where you are so if it isn't a PC in the group that willing to roleplay it with you, it might not happen consistently.

Nope, it will not work if my Vigilante is out of town or whatever for more than 24 hours. There are plenty of conditional feats, rogue talents, etc. They don't work when the conditions are not met. Why is CttL being held to a higher standard of conditional availability than those?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
rdknight wrote:
Nope, it will not work if my Vigilante is out of town or whatever for more than 24 hours. There are plenty of conditional feats, rogue talents, etc. They don't work when the conditions are not met. Why is CttL being held to a higher standard of conditional availability than those?

There's been a misunderstanding. Someone said 'this talent is awesome' and I replied 'it can be, but'. I was just pointing out it WAS conditional and required a DM talk: that's it. All the rest has kind of spun out of control from there. I'm not sure where a "higher standard of conditional availability" came from.

rdknight wrote:
I don't consider talking to the GM to be a burden.

I play online with different Dm's all the time. Things that draw out the character generation can be annoying [both for me and the DM], especially when we're getting down to how individual talents work. You get too many things that need a talk and you can get passed over for someone with a 'simple' character that just works.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
rdknight wrote:
She's very good at sublimating.

So there's a physical chemistry definition of this word, which raises some questions. Is Gaseous Form that worthwhile to specialize in?


rdknight wrote:
thejeff said wrote:

It is still somewhat restrictive in many games, unless something can be worked out with another PC. Ties back into the vigilante working better in an urban base kind of game.

Less so in a more epic quest campaign - unless you're bringing that mentor or sister along on the adventure.

Sigh. So I think you've missed my point. I can't write a post that will provide an example solution for every character in every possible campaign. That is up to the particular player to do.

I gave an example to show it can be done. If a player can't figure it out, they can certainly talk to other players and their GM. They can also start a thread in the Advice section here on the boards.

I'd like to point out that my solution isn't even clever. Ever read a comic book or watched a movie? Batman and Robin, The Mask of Zorro: Diego De La Vega teaching Alejandro Murrieta, Star Wars: Luke and Obi Wan. I just ripped it off and altered it slightly.

And then Obi Wan dies in the middle of the first movie and Luke doesn't get to use it again :)

Which was kind of my point. It can be done, depending on the campaign and the GM's interpretation of the talent, but it's still much more situational than you're painting it. It's not just a matter of the GM forbidding it because Sex or the player not bothering to roleplay.

I'd say a large majority of campaigns I've played in involved neither a homebase we returned daily (or even monthly) or bringing a bunch of NPCs along with us. I would be hard pressed to make this work, unless as I said, I could arrange something with another PC - which doesn't always work out.


thejeff wrote:
I would be hard pressed to make this work, unless as I said, I could arrange something with another PC - which doesn't always work out.

I've seen similar abilities work with a Eidolon or Familiar. I once saw a halfling Tattooed Sorcerer with a Cassisian Angel tattoo familiar/girlfriend. That requires that the DM agrees they are willing though.

Scarab Sages

thejeff wrote:
I'd say a large majority of campaigns I've played in involved neither a homebase we returned daily (or even monthly) or bringing a bunch of NPCs along with us. I would be hard pressed to make this work, unless as I said, I could arrange something with another PC - which doesn't always work out.

As already mentioned above massages would work just fine in such cases. The vigilante doesn't even need to receive one, but only give them. I know a fair number of LMTs, including my partner, and all of them would readily describe giving a massage as (nonsexually) intimate, pleasurable, and of course who doesn't want a massage? There is no requirement that a single person only can help satisfy the requirement. And I'm sure there are other solutions as well. And this is still limiting things to zero sexual insinuation.

But I get it. Too much trouble to work something out. So I propose the following replacement:

Vigilante Social Talent: Got Out of Bed Today
Once per day, (or more, don't want to cramp your style) the vigilante can get out of bed. "Bed" may be understood to mean a bed, blanket, sleeping bag, hammock, the guts of a Tauntaun, or any other possible sleeping situation (just in case a bed is too much trouble). Afterward the Vigilante receives a a pool of moral points equal to her charisma bonus (or anybody else's if you couldn't be bothered to invest in charisma, can't make this hard to access). For the next 24 hours, the vigilante can spend a morale point as an immediate action to roll a Charisma-based skill check or a Will saving throw again after rolling the die but before learning the consequences; he must take the second result even if it is lower.

About as interesting as my aunt's mashed potatoes. But damn if it isn't always and everywhere accessible.

Or is it?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
rdknight wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I'd say a large majority of campaigns I've played in involved neither a homebase we returned daily (or even monthly) or bringing a bunch of NPCs along with us. I would be hard pressed to make this work, unless as I said, I could arrange something with another PC - which doesn't always work out.

As already mentioned above massages would work just fine in such cases. The vigilante doesn't even need to receive one, but only give them. I know a fair number of LMTs, including my partner, and all of them would readily describe giving a massage as (nonsexually) intimate, pleasurable, and of course who doesn't want a massage? There is no requirement that a single person only can help satisfy the requirement.

But I get it. Too much trouble to work something out. So I propose the following replacement:

Vigilante Social Talent: Got Out of Bed Today
Once per day, (or more, don't want to cramp your style) the vigilante can get out of bed. "Bed" may be understood to mean a bed, blanket, sleeping bag, hammock, the guts of a Tauntaun, or any other possible sleeping situation (just in case a bed is too much trouble). Afterward the Vigilante can receives a a pool of moral points equal to her charisma bonus (or anybody else's if you couldn't be bothered to invest in charisma (can't make this hard to access). For the next 24 hours, the vigilante can spend a morale point as an immediate action to roll a Charisma-based skill check or a Will saving throw again after rolling the die but before learning the consequences; he must take the second result even if it is lower.

About as interesting as my aunt's mashed potatoes. But damn if it isn't always and everywhere accessible.

Or is it?

I have no idea where you're going with this or what the massage idea has to do with anything, but I can tell you're just trying to be insulting now, so we might as well just stop.

201 to 250 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / So....for consideration.... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.