A Mu Spore Walks into a bar... and nobody notices


General Discussion

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Uh lets see maybe not an attack bonus but skill modifiers and weapon damage. AC probably doesn't matter since mosnters are built different but If PC's get the option of playing larger races then i probably should have some effect.

Hmm I wonder If just a flat extra die (to damage) for going bigger would be to much?

Skills, seems like size would only effect some some skills. As for weapon damage, yeah, a simple extra die of weapon damage for each size larger than Medium, could work.

I think that's sort of already happening, since larger creatures tend to be higher level so size already has a correlation with damage dice.

But from what I've seen of the bestiary, larger creatures get larger static damage modifiers instead of more damage dice than equal level smaller creatures. That's also consistent with how Enlarge and giant totem barbarians work.

Monster damage seems a bit arbitrary, like + 2 x Str mod to some attacks, and/or double or more weapon damage dice.
Maybe, but it is hard to say that when we know there are rules to monster building we haven't gotten yet.

True, and I am not saying monsters should be built like PCs (I hope not), but some sort of guide would be nice, like, have some idea where the numbers comes from (extra weapon damage dice, ability modifier multiplication, etc).

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd be on board with monsters being listed with particular skills at lower amounts than their Untrained bonus would give them (say, Stealth +5 on the Mu Spore, for example). Real weaknesses. This would be Stealth on many larger creatures, but would just be a good mechanic to have around and in-use to make certain creatures work the way they should.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
I'd be on board with monsters being listed with particular skills at lower amounts than their Untrained bonus would give them (say, Stealth +5 on the Mu Spore, for example). Real weaknesses. This would be Stealth on many larger creatures, but would just be a good mechanic to have around and in-use to make certain creatures work the way they should.

You are definitely into the skill dilemma! I agree, I just have never been that into Skills, in D&D (not quite the game for it), but hopefully they address this.


Vic Ferrari wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Uh lets see maybe not an attack bonus but skill modifiers and weapon damage. AC probably doesn't matter since mosnters are built different but If PC's get the option of playing larger races then i probably should have some effect.

Hmm I wonder If just a flat extra die (to damage) for going bigger would be to much?

Skills, seems like size would only effect some some skills. As for weapon damage, yeah, a simple extra die of weapon damage for each size larger than Medium, could work.

I think that's sort of already happening, since larger creatures tend to be higher level so size already has a correlation with damage dice.

But from what I've seen of the bestiary, larger creatures get larger static damage modifiers instead of more damage dice than equal level smaller creatures. That's also consistent with how Enlarge and giant totem barbarians work.

Monster damage seems a bit arbitrary, like + 2 x Str mod to some attacks, and/or double or more weapon damage dice.
Maybe, but it is hard to say that when we know there are rules to monster building we haven't gotten yet.
True, and I am not saying monsters should be built like PCs (I hope not), but some sort of guide would be nice, like, have some idea where the numbers comes from (extra weapon damage dice, ability modifier multiplication, etc).

No way to know for sure until they release the actual monster creation rules, but I assume it functions like the Unchained Monster Creation rules (I believe the Starfinder ones were also similar) - a monster's expected damage is based on their CR/Level and their role (Combatant, Spellcaster, or Expert in the Unchained rules), and then they make whatever attacks dealing whatever damage they need to reach that, subject to common sense on the part of the designer.


FowlJ wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:

Uh lets see maybe not an attack bonus but skill modifiers and weapon damage. AC probably doesn't matter since mosnters are built different but If PC's get the option of playing larger races then i probably should have some effect.

Hmm I wonder If just a flat extra die (to damage) for going bigger would be to much?

Skills, seems like size would only effect some some skills. As for weapon damage, yeah, a simple extra die of weapon damage for each size larger than Medium, could work.

I think that's sort of already happening, since larger creatures tend to be higher level so size already has a correlation with damage dice.

But from what I've seen of the bestiary, larger creatures get larger static damage modifiers instead of more damage dice than equal level smaller creatures. That's also consistent with how Enlarge and giant totem barbarians work.

Monster damage seems a bit arbitrary, like + 2 x Str mod to some attacks, and/or double or more weapon damage dice.
Maybe, but it is hard to say that when we know there are rules to monster building we haven't gotten yet.
True, and I am not saying monsters should be built like PCs (I hope not), but some sort of guide would be nice, like, have some idea where the numbers comes from (extra weapon damage dice, ability modifier multiplication, etc).
No way to know for sure until they release the actual monster creation rules, but I assume it functions like the Unchained Monster Creation rules (I believe the Starfinder ones were also similar) - a monster's expected damage is based on their CR/Level and their role (Combatant, Spellcaster, or Expert in the Unchained rules), and then they make whatever attacks dealing whatever damage they need to reach that, subject to common sense on the part of the designer.

Yeah, like additional weapon damage dice per monster level, and some other formulae for multiplying ability score modifiers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:

I literally just watched a video where someone shot a crossbow twice in 6 seconds

Literally survived a fall from the stratosphere

~sigh~ I didn't think I had to be this specific, but if you want to be pedantic:

"Anyone who picks up a crossbow can fire it twice in six seconds regardless of training, and anyone above a certain level has a 100% chance of surviving a fall from space, naked".

And even though you didn't mention the last one:

"Any creature capable of flight can make instant 180 degree turns regardless of skill or training".


I don't mind so much for the monster entries but If the option of playing a larger race comes up in a later book I would like there to be some solid rules to it.


MaxAstro wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:

I literally just watched a video where someone shot a crossbow twice in 6 seconds

Literally survived a fall from the stratosphere

~sigh~ I didn't think I had to be this specific, but if you want to be pedantic:

"Anyone who picks up a crossbow can fire it twice in six seconds regardless of training, and anyone above a certain level has a 100% chance of surviving a fall from space, naked".

And even though you didn't mention the last one:

"Any creature capable of flight can make instant 180 degree turns regardless of skill or training".

i mean, i understand why people would consider it outlandish for normal, average earth humans to do any of that with any sort of regularity or without sheer, blind luck--but isn't the entire point of playing a fantasy game as crazy adventurers in a magical world to defy the normal, boring reality we have to live in? you're literally playing a hero- or possibly even god-in-waiting, chosen by destiny to save the world or right supernatural wrongs or whathaveyou.

on a more direct note, i see no reason why a player character who is in 100% of cases either a trained warrior or studied spellcaster couldn't do things that a trained warrior or studied spellcaster could do, and have that be considered the "normal" baseline. because you're an adventuerer--that IS the normal baseline. everything below that is commoner status (and if monsters are now adhering to completely different rules than PCs now, why not NPCs as well?).

i also don't see why the twenty ton MAGICAL DRAGON has to adhere to earth logic/physics. so long as it suits the FANTASY world they're trying to portray.

...and in that same vein, paizo needs to really sit down and hammer that out both in-office and with the community, since people are getting all sorts of mixed signals on their intent over things like "a 1E character should wake up in 2E and be able to accomplish the same things" (which is currently completely false for a number of classes, like spellcasters or paladins), and other statements.

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / A Mu Spore Walks into a bar... and nobody notices All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion