Got questions about rulings or need clarifications? Here you can post a question to the community and the community can help provide understanding.

Hi, I got a question. I got a player running the Malefactor and she has used this Taboo to stun multiple characters at once. If I am reading this right it means she can only use it on one NPC/Monster/Animal not Multiple. This came from the http://www.pathfindersrd.com/ any help with this would be appreciated. The ability in question is listed below:

 Malediction - As a standard action (no Aoo) you can transfer your misfortune on others
within 20ft. A malediction lasts a number of rounds equal to Wis mod, the DC to resist a
malediction is 1/2Malefactor lvl + Wis mod. List of known maledictions:
Taboo - Select 1 creature or unattended object. Creatures that attempt to make
a melee attack against, touch, or pass throughit must make a Will save or become stunned for
1 round. If they resist this malediction they become immune to it for 24 hours. This is a sonic,
mind-affecting effect. Only 1 taboo can be active at a time.
This message was last edited by the player at 02:54, Tue 29 Dec 2015.

Break it down a little bit, and it can affect multiple people who attempt to attack the target:

Taboo - Select 1 creature or unattended object. (The Target)
Creatures that attempt to make a melee attack against, touch, or pass through it (The Target) must make a Will save or become stunned for 1 round.

IE:  If you target yourself, anyone who attempts to attack you has to save or get stunned.

However this is what the actual thing says:

Taboo (Sp): With an imperious warning, a malefactor can decree a single creature within the range of this malediction to be taboo. Creatures that attempt to make a melee attack against, touch, or pass through the square occupied by a Taboo creature must make a Will save or become stunned for one round. A malefactor can also make a large or smaller unattended object taboo (Malefactors frequently use this malediction to cut off escape routes). Once a creature successfully saves against the Taboo malediction, he cannot be affected by it again for 24 hours. The malefactor can only have one taboo active at a given time. This is a sonic, mind affecting effect.

So with wording like that, I am assuming it no longer means the Malefactor but rather whomever or whatever is in line of sight of the Malefactor.

Nothing effects the Malefactor at all.  You set a particular person or place as Taboo, and whoever interacts with it has to save or get stunned.

EG:

The Malefactor(M) sets the fighter as Taboo.
If any Enemy(e), wants to attack the fighter, they have to save.
If e1 wants to use Acrobatics to move through the fighter, he also has to save.

If e1 moves around the fighter and all 3 move towards and attack M, no one has to save and no one gets stunned.



Hope this helps!

Yes, mind if I show this to my player, I will quote you if you allow me to.

Works for me, I don't mind.  Just link your player here so he can see lol

Oh I won't she is already told me everything is okay. Thank you for your information and the help.

couple players are having a discusion on Deliquescent Gloves, is it a pair or a single glove?

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-.../gloves-deliquescent

The entry has both single and plural verbage, it hasn't been an issue yet but want to figure it out before it does.  I have looked around and have found good opinions arguing both sides, has anyone seen an official word or know how its ruled in PFS?

From my reading it sounds like the Flavor text is wrong and the Game Mechanics text is correct. It should only be one glove. However, that is my interpretation of it.

Magical slot items are bought to fill the slots. Boots and gloves are bought in pairs.
This message was last edited by the GM at 23:06, Wed 30 Dec 2015.

That was my thoughts it was a pair.  I was going by the lack of a line saying that it was bought as a single glove like locking gauntlets and nothing that  says they work as a single glove normally you need both for effects to work.

Gloves of storing are bought singly as is the glowing glove.

For the storing glove it explicitly mentions that it is a single glove that takes up your entire magical glove slot.

As for the glowing glove, I would argue that it comes as a pair and is just a bad description.

Thank you for your answers, definitely will help.

Fellow Pathfinders, the spell Bestow Curse includes the following statement: "You may also invent your own curse, but it should be no more powerful than those described above."

We have a barbarian in the party that is blunt, stubborn, impulsive and greedy and he doesn't listen to the other party members when we're trying to be tactful. So as our party witch, I've devised a plan to put a curse on our musclebound pain-in-the-neck to keep him in line without crippling our party permanently. My question is this: What is a fair and balanced way to accomplish my task?

I was thinking this: "As long as this curse remains, whenever your name is called out loudly, you suffer the standard '-4 penalty on attack rolls, saves, ability checks, and skill checks' for a duration of 1 minute.

Thoughts?

It might be time to have a chat with the player concerning their behavior. If you are going to risk a player to have a -4 to attack rolls, saves, ability checks, and skill checks, it could backfire and cause the PC to get killed. If the enemy knows the barbarian's name, they could get called out and suffer the curse that you placed on them. Since there is something to go with, it could be that he has to ask 1d4 friends, starting with the party members first, what action he should do and has to do it to the best of his ability. (The curse is that he has to please his friends)

I guess it's a question about whether you're trying to teach him a lesson or actually get him killed.

As an example of a funny curse, Goblins has a good one:

http://www.goblinscomic.org/04122015/

Basically whenever the guy says "What" he punches himself in the face. You could work with the GM and the other player to come up with something similar. He doesn't have to actually attack himself but it is a way to shut him up when he punches himself in the chin.

Maybe in battle it makes him lose a standard action or something, or maybe it has no mechanical effect but just is something funny from an RP perspective (if an ally says "Shut up [Insert Name]" he pees his pants (or maybe he doesn't even pee it, his pants just get soaked with urine because of magic!)

When I am GMing I love to give players "RP" curses without actually impacting them from a mechanics perspective unless the player brings it up first. You never know how they're going to take mechanical penalties like that and to Kegsplitter's point you (probably) don't want him to be killed from your curse...

There's also always the good old Inuyasha-style "Sit, boy!"

Admittedly, making a meatshield go prone on command maybe isn't the best thing, but so long as it's specified who can give the command, you might be able to get away with it without the above mentioned problem of your enemies finding out the command word.

You could also make the activation word in some crazy, rarely used language like Sphinx or something.

Right, all of these suggestions are similar to what I'm intending.

What I'm wondering is, in a GM's opinion, are such curses legal and balanced?

For example, for the "Sit, Boy!" suggestion, should it work 'at will' or only 1 or 5 times per day? Should it cost the cursed character a standard or move or full-round action? What should be the range of the command? Does it require that the cursed character actually hear it? etc.

I feel that my GM is receptive to such an idea in flavor, but we're having trouble with balancing the mechanics.

Again, thanks in advance for the suggestions.

Write down some ideas and present them to the GM. We can give you many options but the GM have the final decision as to what they feel is balanced. They might also give you another option.

It might also be time to find another group to play with since you are coming to us and not your GM for a problem that you have with one of the players.

This. This a million times. While I'm no stranger to playing characters that aren't team players, I try to at least make things work on an OOC level. Playing greedy, selfish characters is part of the freedom of games like Pathfinder, but I still feel being able to function as a group is paramount. I hope things work out for you without having to resort to the curse, though.

What Scarecrow said. The ultimate most important thing in games like Pathfinder is the ability to work as a group. No matter how much of an evil, backstabbing bastard your character is, you should never go for the other PCs unless it's a specifically PVP game where that's an option that's been on the table since the start of the campaign.

Kill them and take their stuff.


No, but seriously, if I was the GM I would have already brutally punished the barbarian character, and no one else, for this behavior via the plot. IC solutions to OOC problems (which this 100% is) might be satisfying, but rarely work.

I guess it's not really as bad as all that; definitely not a problem OOC. The player is fine, just the character's personality. So I am, in fact, exactly looking for an IC solution to an IC problem.

And I have spoken with my own GM already. He said he wasn't sure how to balance such a curse. That's why I'm asking this forum for specific ideas that are balanced in your opinions. I 100% want to 'present a few options to my own GM', I'm just not sure where to start because the wording of the spell is so open-ended.

So here is me weighing in as if this was a player in my game. Given these conditions:



I would say that this isn't an optional thing. This is a permanent "always on" effect so by that nature I would say you could punish a character by making him trip over his own tongue so he has to mumble or stutter (-6 to Charisma) or is always tripping over his own feet (-6 to Dex).

If the player is on board I think an effect that is -6 to charisma would be hilarious if RP'd right. Make him REEK of dead fish or make his voice super high pitched :P

However I would be willing to hear of underpowered curses. In that case I think that, for example, him punching himself in the face whenever you (or anyone) says a certain phrase is fine for no damage, or if you do the "Sit bow" and make him drop prone, that is in line with things. I would make it a constant effect (i.e. no limitation. You could make him sit or punch himself all day long) HOWEVER if it is not an always on effect (like my ideas with the ability scores as per RAW) I would give him a Will save every time to resist it.

---

To put this into practical terms, I was in a Star Wars game where I played a Hannibal Lector style medical droid. The rest of the crew was terrified of me (I would preform experimental surgeries on them while they slept...for their benefit of course) and so they rigged me with a restraining bolt when I was knocked out.

We had a lot of fun in that I would be trying to talk and they'd just turn me off and on. It was fun for a bit but one of the players took it too far and stopped me from doing ANYTHING, not just the creepy stuff they were trying to shock collar off of me. In the end we modified it so it was more like a dog collar "zap" rather then something that completely removed my ability to do anything.

---

That being said, something simple like "smacking yourself" would be a fun, mild curse. Mechanically I'd rule slapping yourself as a free or swift action so if it happened in combat he could still do whatever he wanted and while it technically ate up a swift action it wouldn't be a huge problem if people abused it. Making him sit on the ground or bite his tongue might be annoying if abused because that starts interfering with a player's agency.

Also a stat penalty, while severe, would again not prevent him from taking an action, just make life more difficult and THAT would be my goal as a player and a GM: to make it fun and amusing but not removing his ability to play his character.

What do y'all think of the following as a moral code for a Lawful Evil character?

1. Respect authority figures as long as they have strength to rule over the weak.
2. Act with discipline.
3. Help only those who help you maintain or improve your status.
4. Punish those who challenge authority unless they are more fit to hold that authority.

That could certainly work. Personally, I'm fond of Rich Burlew's work, especially his bit about Emotional Responses in characters.

http://www.giantitp.com/articl...gS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html

It's something I try to think about in all of my characters, unless they have a reason to be coldly logical (for example, if they're undead). But emotional, possibly irrational responses are a big part of being human. Having a code like that could certainly be handy, but it could also be possible for the character to make exceptions.

DMs, how do you handle Knowledge checks, especially in terms of players being given information about weaknesses, strategies, etc?

Do you wait for a player to ask for a Knowledge check when they encounter each and every enemy, or do you roll secretly and give players information based on the results of said roll?

What kind of information are you giving? Is it actual stats, descriptions, do you start with the more commonly known things about them and only give the more exotic qualities with higher results?

In reply to Nu_Fenix (msg # 30):

I believe that most of the monster entries include information that can be known with an appropriate Knowledge check. Most of the low DCs will give the PCs only very common information such as type. If the PC makes a higher DC, they could know about weaknesses, strategies, etc.

Also, we do not have the GM roll secretly. In fact, we make it a Free action to make the knowledge roll, so a PC can't even do it until their turn to act (and then, only if they remember to ask for it). The GM gives a general description of what the beastie looks like but usually not much more than that until a knowledge check reveals more info. Until then, it's all a mystery.

So just as a recap:



As a general rule of thumb, if it's a "basic D&D staple" monster (i.e. orcs, goblins, skeletons...the kind of monsters that show up EVERYWHERE in EVERY SYSTEM) those I qualify as "common" monsters.

Otherwise by default I use the "uncommon" difficulty of 10+CR. If it's a singular monster, one that isn't native to the plane of existence, or if I'm pulling it out of a 3rd party book that's when I go for the "rare" difficulty of 15+CR.

In general here is how I deliver information:
Special Defenses > Special Attacks > Miscellaneous Information & Abilities
Creature Type > Subtype > Specific Creature


What that means is that if the PC rolls and gets 3 pieces of information, I start with the general creature immunities and work down to the specific creature, prioritizing defenses over attacks over "other".

So take a gelatinous cube. This is a common monster (staple of D&D) so DC is 5+CR3 = 8

For 1 piece of information I reveal all the ooze special traits (mindless, immune to precision damage, blind, immune to mind-affecting spells etc.)

For the second piece I would reveal that gelatinous cubes are immune to electricity

3 pieces = it secretes a poison that paralyzes anything it touches

4 pieces = it engulfs and digests its pray whole

5 pieces (i.e. rolled 28+) I would reveal that its acid doesn't dissolve stone.

On PBP for common monsters it's pretty moot because everyone just looks them up on the d20pfsrd so I usually am fairly creative with descriptions of my "special" monsters so they have to make knowledge checks just to even figure out WHAT they're fighting :P

I let the players ask the questions they want (number of questions as per the rules, 1 if success + 1 extra per 5 over the DC).

Most ask for DR as first question,  but some like to ask the HD ; or Spec' Abilities etc..

Also, normally, if you succeed, you know "what" it is for 'free' (ie. undead, or plant, or magical beast etc. which can give some extra info' - immunity to mind affecting etc.).

Anyone have or know of a good/well-made Downtime calculator?

We're venturing into that area with a game and while I would love to complete the task by hand, let's be honest: Who wants to calculate Math by hand?  So, hopefully someone might know of something out there...

Thank you in advance!

A what? Like what are you trying to figure out, how much time is spent on activities or how much gold is being spent?

In reply to praguepride (msg # 35):

Yep!
I've seen a few really nicely built Kingsmaker calculators, while also playing around with the Herolabs version.  However, while those are nice - they're like the TI-85 Graphic Calculators; looking for something a little less complex...

My fear is I'll start using the TI-85 and then want to start a whole Kingsmaker campaign or incorporate it into my current game.


Thought someone might have something...
Otherwise, I'll just give the old Google a spin.

So, specifically, you are looking for something that figures out earned and bought capital costs, and building times, and stuff like that?

In reply to Invulnerability (msg # 37):

Yep, but I am starting to think: Maybe just go with the Kingmakers calculator and tailor that...

In a small discussion with a player, I turned down his idea, I'd like to get some other opinions.

Player (who is not a spell caster) wants to use Improved share spells ( http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/...mproved-share-spells ) to share potions with his AC beings you are treated as the caster when you drink it, then tried it with cloak of the hedge wizard because it says you use the spells.


Give him props it would be awsome if it was allowed.

In reply to Lekol (msg # 39):

I think you called it right based on the wording in the d20pfsrd definition of the feat (not spell-like abilities, 10 ranks spellcraft requisite) and the description of the cloak of the hedge wizard in the same document:


I haven't looked at the definition/description of potion effects in the d20pfsrd, but I definitely wouldn't count potion use as casting.

Bearing in mind all the online references are truncated summaries of the data in the actual books/pdfs, some creative interpretation can occur, but sounds like a major reach to me. ;-)

That being said... if it isn't PFS 'official' play, story trumps rules so if it fits and isn't completely unbalancing to the plot or other party members, then go for it!

Question on Human/Non-Human stuff. The Adoptive Parentage human alternate racial trait sacrifices the bonus feat for the weapon familiarity racial trait of the selected race. Now, with elves and dwarves, that's plain and simple. My question is this: does the Tengu "Swordtrained" racial trait count, given it provides weapon proficiency?

No, swordtrained is not a Weapon Familiarity racial trait like the Dwarves, Gnomes, Elves, etc have.

In reply to Lekol (msg # 39):

Personally, I enjoy this site:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/

And from there:  http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG...mproved-share-spells


After all that:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG...-of-the-hedge-wizard

Which is:


After all of that, I'd say: Yes, but they'd need to have the 10 ranks of Spellcraft.
Personally, your answer is completely fine - we're talking about syntax within English requiring a rather unique 'jump'.  Because the Wearer of the Cloak would-be considered: a Spell Caster.  And the argument of: Drinking the potion would-be channeled through his body.  And then, here's the jump: Utilizing any 'traits', 'flaws', and 'feats' one may have...

However, I have a hard time seeing a non-Spell Caster with 10 Ranks along with starting to call all party-members: "animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount." to fulfill the second requirement of the Feat.  Then again, Warriors/Fighters are not known for their Intelligence and probably would call all party-members: animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount.  Especially if they're a Dwarf...
Halfling Cannonballs, ring a bell for anyone?!?
This message was last edited by the player at 15:17, Sat 19 Mar 2016.

To LittleJumbo's point, I would rule that a potion is not "cast" (i.e. you can't counterspell a potion) so potions would not work.

Cloak of the Hedge Wizard would not work because it grants the spell-like ability to cast the spells. Key phrases:

From Improved Share Spell:

From Cloak of the Hedge Wizard


It's kind of in the grey area but my interpretation is that magic items give you spell-like abilities, they don't allow non-casters to suddenly cast spells...

This bypasses other restrictions like magical failure from armor etc.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:19, Sun 20 Mar 2016.

Assuming this is the correct thread for this:
Game Design/History Question:
Recently had the opportunity to build a 'new' character and I noticed: all weapons come in all sizes...
When did this change?!?

Working on updating Udo and now I can utilize a two-handed weapon...
At size: Small!  It's awesome!  Yeah, yeah, I do less damage but this was not an option when I first built him.

Depends on which edition you were playing in previously... I mean, in 3.0, it's all a matter of relative sizes. A Longsword to a human is a Greatsword to a halfling, and vice-versa. I think 3.5 made it make more sense. You CAN wield things that aren't properly made for someone your size (For example, you can wield a Greatsword sized for a Small user as a Longsword, if you're Medium sized), but you take a -2 penalty because the grips aren't properly proportioned to your hand and such.

Pathfinder, AFAIK, just kept using the same system that 3.5 did. It's one of the reasons why it's called 3.75 by some. To be honest, the biggest differences between Pathfinder and 3.5 seem to be the skill system, which eventually gets the same numbers via a different method (and one that, to me, makes more sense), and the combat maneuver system. Admittedly, I have things I do and don't like about CMB and CMD, but I honestly have yet to see any system in which special maneuvers (grappling especially) isn't a tangled mess.

FFG's Star Wars system comes to mind. As part of your rolls you can either gain "successes" or "advantages". Successes actually mean that you hit, deal more damage etc. but advantages can be 'spent' to just straight up inflict status effects, like grappling/tripping an opponent. It's all abstracted so there isn't a huge mini-game around grappling, you just 'do' it. Then your opponent can spend their advantages to unflict those statuses :P

To little Jumbo: Yeah, it's been that way since D&D 3.5.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 48):

Hmm...
There must've been something wrong within the rule-set for Hero Labs that was recently fixed.  I remember when choosing: Show only Legal Equipment Options - none of the two-handed options were available.

Not complaining, but now: Watch-out!
Wait, you're not in that game so; never mind!

In reply to praguepride (msg # 48):
Huh. I haven't played that one. The only Star Wars system I'm familiar with (and even then only vaguely) is a d6-based game.

Not to get too far into non-pathfinder stuff but just read this thread for my summary on all the Star Wars game systems

link to a message in another game

Looking for a survey of how you would play this with a summoned swarm.
Question 1
xx
x32
1
x=swarm
3=creature already in swarm
1 and 2=creatures outside swarm

A)swarm must remain where it is attacking 3
B)swarm may move to engulf/attack 1 and 2 as well as 3

Question 2
xx 3
xx12

A)swarm my only move and engulf 1
B)swarm may move to engulf 1, 2 and 3

Swarm can move to catch more people, yes. I'd actually say it's obligated to do so if not controlled - the swarm spaces with nothing in them want to get at things to gnaw.

Ditto what Sleeping Darkness said. If the summoner isn't specifically ordering them to only gnaw on the one person, then the hungry/ornery bugs want to have more things to swarm on and sting/bite/etc.

Hey all, I have a question that's been banging around in the back of my head for a while. It pertains to the mythic universal path ability Divine Source.



My question is, when you take the ability the 2nd or 3rd time, can you choose any subdomain, or does it have to be a subdomain for a domain you already picked?

By RAW, any subdomain, but this leads to confusing and unusable results, since subdomains are replacers and you also by RAW have no reason to expect the features that AREN'T replaced, so you're gaining half a domain.

By RAI, subdomains for domains you either have already picked or are picking as part of the feature.

Thanks for the quick reply. Sounds right. I had been thinking about it from the PC's perspective, not the worshiper's. Makes much more sense with the RAI method.

Okay I'm getting into my first combat in a Pathfinder game as a ruid, and I just wildshaped into a Dire Tiger. We start at level 6 in this campaign, so right now my wild form is effectively Beast Shape II. Given the sheet for a Dire Tiger...

What do I use off of that? Do I use the physical stats of the Tiger or me? What about the attacks? ADo those stay the same or are they changed?

I just need a quick rundown of what off that sheet I need to pay attention to.

Thank you!

You get the following changes to your physical stats
+4 size bonus to your Strength, a -2 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +4 natural armor bonus.

And the below as well.

If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: climb 60 feet, fly 60 feet (good maneuverability), swim 60 feet, darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, scent, grab, pounce, and trip.

--

All taken from the Beast Shape spell, of which Wild Shape mimics its function of.

A link to the spell itself.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/beast-shape

I read that, yeah, but I was wondering how the rest of the sheet is affected. I assume I gain the natural attacks of the tiger, even though those weren't specifically mentioned. Is there anything else the spell does that isn't explicitly mentioned there?

You take on the natural attacks of the creature and I think you get the base movement speed as well(the non flying, climb, swim or burrow speed)

Quick question is it only Fatigued and Shaken that stack up to a worse condition?  Dose Sickened become Nauseated or Dazzled to Daze or any of the others stack?
This message was last edited by the player at 14:02, Mon 11 July 2016.

As far as I can recall conditions always stack into worse ones unless otherwise specified.  I may be mistaken about that though.

Thats what I thought, but can't find any progression info besides fatigue and shaken.  Reason this came up is a character is wanting to use Dirty tricks which look fun but adds a little debuff execpt shaken progression, it makes sense that sickened a couple time should net you nauseated.

Does a Half-Elf with Multi-talented get twice the Favored Class Bonus ranks each level in a Gestalt game in which the half-elf is playing its two favored classes?

In reply to LivingScarecrow (msg # 65):

I would say no.  Gestalt doesn't double anything, it just gives the best of both worlds.

If it was my game, I'd let the half-elf choose to use 2 of the options available to them, but they couldn't double up. So, they could choose +1 HP and +1 skill, or +1 skill or HP and whatever one class gives half-elves, or they could get the alternate favored class bonus from both of their classes. After all, it's not like you can't get +1 HP and +1 skill as your Favored Class Bonus by taking a feat.

That's what I would do as well.

Heya - One thing I'm never very good at judging is the difficulty / CR / XP awards for traps and puzzles.  Can anyone help me figure out how to do that?

I'm looking for a first-level cleric spell that does something similar to Create Food and Water.   While I've found third party spells that seem close, there's nothing that can be used to say: create a reusable wonderous item.

To create something like a sustaining spoon or ring of sustenance, but with CL1 instead of CL5? Seems hard to do!

My thoughts are along the lines of this:
It would produce something like a biscuit or bread cake (possibly similar to lembas bread) that would feed one person and would have a duration of 1 hour/level (after which point the food would turn to dust).

The best I can come up with off the top of my head is Dream Feast:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/...pells/d/dream-feast/

I've already checked that list and there's nothing there like I want to use.   I'm probably going to end up making up the spell I want, I just want some feedback on if the general idea is in the right level range.

Well if the item can only be used 1x daily, then modelling your spell off Dream Feast but having a physical meal decay as you described could work.  How many people were you wanting it to feed?  For a 1st level spell, I would think only one.

Did you look at Goodberry as a comparison?

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/g/goodberry/



I'd want to read the actual item description, not just the d20PFSRD version, but I would say Goodberry but only feeds one person and the created food decays as you described usable 1x Daily would merit the low-level variant.  Maybe a 'jam jar' that turns fruits/berries into a sustaining jelly?
This message was last edited by the player at 22:11, Sun 07 May 2017.

I did not look at Goodberry, but it's closer to what I had in mind.    While I'm designing a campaign world that underwent an extended period of large scale warfare (around 300 years), so I'm probably going to need a few custom spells.   I've already determined that there would be some sort of clinic with a Regeneration spell available via wondrous item, so a cheap/easy way to take care of food problems also jumps to mind.   Hence I was thinking about a first-level spell that would take care of that, while biscuits might not be something you'd want to eat every day for the rest of your life, it might make a good fall back source.

Dream feast still sounds like it would work. You enchant that on a sleep mask or pillow or something and anyone who rests there would wake up with a full belly. Given that it only requires a minimum of 1 hour of rest you could feed 24 soldiers off of a single item.

You could almost make it a cultural twist where the galley and barracks are merged together.

Then again no matter what having a first level wonderous item is going to be prohibitively expensive to feed an army. Compared to something dirt cheap like Wandermeals

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipm...C-Rations-Wandermeal

Even if you made a magic item like that dirt cheap at 100gp per, you could feed 10,000 troops for a day with wandermeals instead of using this magical item. At the point where you're limiting it to senior officers or elite crews then it still might be easier to just have bags of holding with tons of food inside rather then try to feed each individual soldier magically. That's just my two cents though...
This message was last edited by the player at 16:05, Mon 08 May 2017.

I came up with this:

---

Mystic's Loaf
School conjuration (creation); Level cleric 1
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect food to sustain one human/level for 24 hours
Duration 1 hour; see text
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
The spell creates a simple biscuit or small loaf – highly nourishing, and just a bit sweet rather than bland.    Food so created turns to dust if not consumed within an hour.

Actually that brings up the question about why they let Create Water be a 0-level orison while anything food related is at least a 1st level spell. Anyway seems fine in my book.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 79):

My biggest "ugh" about Create Food and Water is that you get what basically amounts to as gruel (or porridge).

If this has been covered elsewhere, I'd love to hear the DM's opinion's here on the use of Save or Die or Save or Suck spells against players? This came up on recent episode of the Glass Cannon Podcast and it was an interesting debate.

IMO save or suck spells are kinda poor spell design in general. I get the point of them but in many ways it puts way too much power into the RNG which is GREAT if you want a super-lethal campaign and CRAPPY when you want a 'fun' game. Obviously your definition of fun varies from person to person but personally I don't like them because I don't want a combat encounter to be entirely determined by a single roll of the die (from a player OR gm perspective).

Then again save or suck/die spells have created some of the more iconic moments of my game history like the time that an elder dragon failed every single saving throw against a save or die spell and ended up having a bunch of 9th level characters get a dragon hoarde.

Personally I think the best way to use them is
A) A threat that the PCs can be forewarned about ahead of time and can prepare appropriately. If they know they're going to be facing a lich or a medusa then like the heroes of legend they should be able to take appropriate precautions ahead of time so it becomes less "save or die" and more "prepare or die".

B) THE BIG BAD BOSS FIGHT. I wouldn't put too much stock into them but make a big deal about it narratively. Don't just let a bosses' save or suck spell start and end with a die roll. Really build up the tension that the spirit of death itself is coming forth from his hand and the target feels his soul being ripped from his body. Stop the fight and really make it an epic kind of thing so that when they save there is a real sense of accomplishment and if they die there is at least glory to it. You really don't want it to end up like this:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0456.html


In my closing thoughts Save vs. Die needs to be taken with careful consideration from a GM perspective because overall the challenge of the PCs tends to be resource management. If the PC chooses save vs. suck spells then they are taking real risks that they are ineffective in combat and burn through resources that might have otherwise been used to aid the combat. From a GM side with unlimited resources it is trivial to throw wave after wave of enemies and just wait for the PC to fail a die roll to 'win'. Ambushing a PC with save vs. suck (without giving them hints or warnings like in A) is crappy, ranging on really really bad GMing if it slides to save vs. die.

THEN AGAIN Save vs. Suck is a great way to beef up lower level enemies. Having zombies or skeletons in the middle of a Stinking Cloud effect helps put a challenging twist on <1 CR opponents but the key is that if the PCs DO save then it is an easy encounter and if they don't it becomes level appropriate. The problem comes when it starts as a challenging encounter and if every PC fails their initial save it becomes a TPK encounter, that's when the GM has done a poor job imo.

Never really realized that "save or suck" is a thing, thanks for the discussion here :) I often find it hard playing wizards as a GM, like boss wizards... Feels like they have to be played like a magic the gathering blue control deck, with at least three spells taking effect without interruption and saves before they actually could have any control over the fight - and several effects being entirely up to RNG (either saves, or initiative).

Any advice on this? Also, could you specify further what "save or suck" would be?

From the wizard bosses I've played as a DM, I've many times seen enchantment spells that on a failed save take any potential from the targeted PC (hold person, dominate person)... And tactics like "stay 20 feet above the PCs" that make melee fighters have to switch to tactics where they lack versatility and perhaps cannot be very effective at all. Most of these fights I end up disabling the melee fighters (because they will threaten and interrupt spell casting, deal a lot of damage, and be vulnerable to both magically created distance (e.g. fly) and to will saves (echantments) ). It pretty much ends up in a scenario where if things go my way - one or several PCs will mostly be waiting for others to handle the fight... If they don't go my way, the wizard will be cornered and unable to do much of anything. Sort of an expanded save-or-suck, is my association :)

And I do play mostly pre-written paizo stuff. I'd prefer a fight where there would be waves of damage and effects going back and forth, where everyone could contribute... Something building tension, where every pc turn is very important.

By "Save or Suck" I meant any spell that effectively disables one or more members of the PC party from Color Spray to Feeblemind and anywhere in between.

That's what I thought... And that's the tactics most paizo wizards seem to be using! Although in the case of flying away or so, it might be more up to PCs to make sure they have several tactical options.

A quick rundown of save or suck examples by level (note this is not all inclusive)

Low Level: Sleep and Color Spray. Both of these could result in a TPK if everyone fails their saves. Both are ALSO known as encounter enders from a GM perspective and beware a sorcerer with spell focus enchantment as they can get DC 16-20 sleep spells.

One thing of note that everyone always mistakes is that sleep is a 1 round cast, same as summoning so you can disrupt it.

Honorable Mentions: Charm and Hold spells of various kinds. The difference being these can only hit specific people. Could still be bad if you charm the party tank or hold the party's DPS glass cannon but one spell won't take down the whole party.


Mid Level: Confusion. Again if the whole party fails you're going to have a bad time facing this spell when the fighter starts using the wizard as an impromptu weapon to club your rogue to pieces.

Phantasmal Killer: A bad spell for a player and a mean spell for a GM. Two bad saves and a dead character? No thanks.

Icy Prison: Trap a character and ALSO deal tons of cold damage? Blech...

Stinking Cloud: Ugh..nauseated is an awful condition as it eliminates attacking. A possibly 5 round duration before metamagics means this could take key players out of the battle before it even starts.

High Level: finger of death is a nasty one. Fail your save and you take 90+ pts of damage BAM. Banshee's wail is the same thing except it hits everyone.

Honestly there are so many at this point not going to try and list them all but basically if you look at Illusion or Necromancy there are a bunch of "save or die" or "save or get dealt hundreds of damage" spells. A lot of necromancy is just 10 pts per level which at this level is potentially 90-130+ automatic damage.

In reply to triggersadness (msg # 84):

I can do much the same thing with negative channeling.   Dice help the NPCs that confront an 8th level death cleric....

Confusion can be really tough even if you only have a couple PCs fail and then start attacking their own party.

Can you Fight Defensively whilst using Aid Another in combat?

Can you use Combat Expertise whilst using Aid Another in combat?

Relavent blurbs:






Seems like the answer is yes. If you use aid another and make a melee combat check you can apply all the normal modifiers you otherwise would to the check. You could power attack although it would be a waste.

Huzzah!

Cheers praguepride!

I have what may be a stupid question. Are there multiple editions of Pathfinder?

In reply to Big Brother (msg # 92):

I suppose that somewhat depends on what you mean by "editions". For instance, I have one of the first printed copies of the Core book, but later copies have some things that are worded a little differently or spelling mistakes corrected, etc. If that is what you mean by editions, then yes, there are multiple editions.


If you mean multiple editions the way, say, that there is AD&D, 3.5, 5th edition then no, there isn't multiple editions. It's just pathfinder, and there are multiple books like Ultimate Equipment, Ultimate Magic, etc, but not different editions.

Nope, I meant the latter sense. (Although I wish WoD would do a better job releasing new "editions" in the former sense and correct spelling ;)

Thanks, LJ!

No worries! Happy to help!

One thing I discovered when I started looking deeper into Pathfinder is that their original sourcebooks were for 3.5 before the PF system was fully developed.  A bit of research can tell you where the switch occurred (I don't remember offhand).

The switch happened when WotC announced they were working on a 4th edition, and were effectively discontinuing support for 3.x at that time. (4E was still in development -- not even playtesting -- at the time.) They also stopped the print editions of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines, both of which were being published by Paizo.

The Paizo staff felt that 3.5 was still a perfectly viable system, and thanks to the OGL they had a way to continue support for it -- by making their own variant on it. They took the SRD and expanded on it, changing things they found problematic (like grappling and magic-item creation).

Technically, if there's something in a 3.5 book that doesn't have a Pathfinder conversion, you should still be able to use it as-is. That was the intention. But there are some things that Paizo can't rewrite, because they fall under WotC's intellectual property. That's why you don't see beholders or mind flayers in PF. (Not officially, anyway.)

So if I run a game, using my PDF copy of the PF, I can still use the dr20-whatsits?

It's mostly compatible although the balance has been tweaked quite a bit. If you play fast and loose then there isn't a lot of thought that has to be done but if you're looking at some big epic fights it might be worthwhile to double check abilities and such to make sure things were eliminated or re-worded.

Pfft. If the PCs wanted to live they should have stayed at home. ;)

LOL I am so tempted to invite you to a game I'm putting together, just so I can use that line on you...

I'm game, if you don't me playing a suicidalish character. :) My catch-phrase will probably have to be "If I'd wanted to stay alive I'd have stayed in my village!" :)

That's funny, I need to remember that line.

So joking aside this is the reason why the world isn't full of adventurers. In theory the PC's represent the 1% of the 1% of the world that is actually successful at being murder-hobos.

Putting it into modern perspectives, you could make a lot of money as a for-profit mercenary working in war zones like Afghanistan or Africa. You have these wealthy governments willing to just shower you with money if you can just make their problems go away but my guess is that has very little appeal to most people here.

For every adventuring party that succeeds there are probably 10 that die horrible deaths. 0-level funnel games are a great way of representing this.

And 10 that get to level two or three, find one magic item, then live out a couple of years of their lives as bandits or cruel leaders of small villages or cults as the temptations of their new powers and easy money/reputation/social power becomes too great :)

In reply to Ventrikel (msg # 105):

Except for the fact that PFRPG, D&D, and almost any other RPG is more reflective of heroes from fiction (books, folktales, movies) and as such the PCs are more reflective of the extraordinary abilities and accomplishments of heroic individuals from those tales in a world of 'average' folks otherwise.

True, most games just turn into murder-hobo escapades, but that is mostly due to the 'observer' Players not fully investing into the lives of their characters.  Mostly, we jump from action sequence to action sequence for experience and power gains rather than look at the longer term (and possibly more mundane/boring) route of helping build up a village or town, gaining experience by overcoming a problem through wits instead of combat (even OD&D allowed for experience to be gained by outwitting a creature or villain, death or killing it wasn't the only way to level) via adjudicating the disputes of subjects was too much like day to day reality and not the escapism that drives the hobby.

As such, it isn't really a valid comparison to modern mercenaries, as there are many more adventurers in the world by comparison.  (Unless of course, you treat each new party as being in their own unique reality/realm without any impact from previous campaigns or carryover to future ones.  But in that case, there would be no 'retired warriors' as tavern owners, no high-ranking wizards to seek out for training and few if any priests capable of restoring lost limbs or raising the dead, as these were certainly previous seekers of adventure and fortune.)

Just a thought.  :)

As a bit of a random aside, my wife is actually running a game for me in which the world has just suffered it's "final" great war between the forces of light and darkness, with all of the great arch demons being sealed away in a great battle.

Turns out my character is the decedent of a long line of Dukes and has recently reclaimed his Duchy...after it was abandoned 300 years ago. Its...been interesting trying to rebuild. I've inherited something like 5M gp...and am spending them like water trying to rebuild the duchy in various ways.
All while getting to contend with neighbors who are either locked in 3 way civil wars, traitors to the High King, or who's lands are also abandoned and thus are the refuges of those things less scrupulous. It's definitely an adventure even without the combat!

In reply to Lord_Johnny (msg # 107):

*applauds*


It's funny, one of my fondest gaming moments was when my naive character wandering from home for the first time was invited to dine at a noble's manor.  The GM gave vivid descriptions of a seven course meal along with all the amenities that would seem commonplace to a noble but extravagant for a villager like my character.  It was a lot of fun and was entirely a social interaction.

Similarly, in the game I'm currently running one of the PC's played right in-character and caught me off-guard when as a noble he called a tribunal in a small village in order to settle disputes that were causing dissension.  It might've gone a bit slow, but overall I thought it was a clever approach to the problem at hand.

PCs rarely if ever flee, in my experience.
Probably partly because it's tough with the rules: withdraw, and the enemies will charge you with bonus to hit. Run, and they get AoOs and diminished AC to counteract increased range. But also because few campaigns are built in a way that lets the pcs meet a very high level enemy in a threatening situation that they should not be able to beat. The players in my campaign do think in rational, strategic, and in character ways and for sure don't want to just kill everything...
But I want to make them flee.
They have an obvious enemy with many underlings, the most common of which have already fallen at the axes, swords and fireballs of my players. They have been talking about infiltrating and attacking the organization of this enemy... But they won't make it if they do. Where our story is at now, I want to harass them and make them feel like they have to find safer places, more allies, better strategies. There are many situations this can happen in, many levels in they've built connections and lives. The burial site of a former PC, social gatherings, meeting with their strongest allies - such situations could easily be made unsafe and uncomfortable with the help of this enemy organization. Even their home? One PC just invested in a building to use for living in, researching, and probably to aid others in need. But I'm not sure what the outcome would be of repeated attacks.

My main plan this far is to mount a large scale attack with common enemies led by a leveled up leader, on a large social, festive gathering. They've created allies who may very well join in the defense, commoners against commoners but the odds will be against the good guys. Many casualties, making even a win into a loss. In addition, the constant threat of encountering enemies wherever they go.
I could also prepare an encounter area they will likely visit in many, many levels... In case they want to attack the organization. They'd quite quickly realize the struggle they're up against only to make it inside... But I don't want this to be just "combat is too tough, lets go level up elsewhere".

How would you do this: scare the pcs into fleeing? Ideas for creating a threatening atmosphere as well as for specific encounters and stories, experiences from your own games are welcome.

In reply to Ventrikel (msg # 109):

I think that a large part of that stems from "XP=Killing stuff."

First off, increased numbers of opponents rarely scares/drives off PCs.  The players see it as a challenge and look for ways to overcome it.

Unless you wake them up in the middle of the night with a trusted servant or friend trying to usher them out to safety because the region has already fallen to the enemy, they'll want to try to take out the leaders and disorganize the larger band.

A more viable option might be to hit them where it hurts.  Have intelligent adversaries who subvert the PCs' companions.  Have them stage shake downs or unfavorable policies in the name of the PCs.  Frame them or set them up so respectable legal authorities and citizens are looking to lock them up with execution or banishment pending.

Unbeatable odds usually only happen when the PCs are alone and dreadfully outnumbered with limited resources.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 11:43, Tue 22 Aug 2017.

In reply to Hunter (msg # 110):

I need to go back and verify PF verbiage, but in the original forms the mechanic was XP gained for defeating or overcoming, killing isn't the only option.  Outsmarting a dragon via words and a binding contract or oath should be rewarded the same way a killing it.

Yes, the mentality is "kills = xp", but as GMs we have the ability to alter that perception.

(Not saying mass melees with high body counts can't be rewarding, but that we shouldn't reward only that solution.)

@Ventrikal

Context: Build up and surprise seem to be common for most people as DMs.  I've found it doesn't work so well.  Trying to make PCs play as someone who has to flee goes against the very core of most gamers.  They have to (or would have to) in real life, so why do they want to do it as a character?  How many times have you encountered players getting butthurt because of the dice?  Or because you've told them they can't play something?  I've literally had someone tell me my game wasn't for them because I wouldn't let them play a gnoll pirate with an airship.  And when I said, "No.  Nobody likes Gnolls and you'd probably end up dead and murdered within 30 minutes of game time.  There is no such thing as an airship."  I literally got called a racist.  When someone tried to come at me with a half-halfling/half dragon character, I was like, "No."  Then I had to spell it out because no wasn't an appropriate answer.  Those who play in my games quickly realize that if they play by my rules, and go through my hoops, they will end up with a really sweet character.  The guy playing the Samurai, Sugi, in my current game was all, "Meh" because the class was underpowered to him.  Until he took the time to look at the adjustments I was making to his Kai Smite, the Armor Training, and my House Rules on the Toughness feat tree.  As a 7th level character, he's sitting on a Con of 22 or 24, and has something like 150hps.  He's all like, "Bring the pain bitches, I feel none!  My name is TANK!"

That may not seem relevant to the above.  But it is.  It's the lead in.

1.  It isn't you the DM vs the Players.  It's more like Director + Actors.
2.  Trust.  If your players know you as the DM aren't going to screw them, but make them all sweet and awesome if they follow your path they're much more likely to take their lumps, bruises, and having to run away moments in stride.
3.  Communicate.  You're trying to tell them a good story.  So don't keep your cards so close to your chest.  Feel free to reveal them from time to time.  Not only does it give the players, who are actors on your set an idea of what they are supposed to do, it allows you the DM to gauge their responses ahead of time so you can be prepared for the reactions.  If something is going to bomb, you know to fix it.  If something is going to work out and the PIQ (player in question) likes it, you know you've struck gold and can then take the money and run.

Something like this is how I do it.  "Hey Selenia.  I know you're a bad ass, but I've got this idea on how I want to give you that direct line of communication to your father that you've been wanting.  I also want to introduce you to an awesome, high level potential cohort that will tie you into NPC X, Y, and player Z.  I need you to grit your teeth and bear with this just a few more posts.  Don't worry, I'm not going to wreck your life.  I just need you to have your character drop her guard for a minute.  I'll give you a PM when it's your cue to do it."
Selenia's player responded with something like this.  "Oooh.  Interesting.  Okay."

Soooo much better than a sudden surprise and a you vs me feel to it.  I personally, as a player, work that way too.  Tell me what you want me to do.  Let me know, so I can respond accordingly with my posts (etc).  I'm not worried about being surprised or not.  I'm also not going to call you out on fudging things or giving me the shaft, either, because I already know I'm supposed to get my ass kicked so the three hobgoblins that did it come off as real bad asses under the bigger bad ass boss in the next scene.

Does that make sense or help?
This message was last edited by the player at 12:26, Tue 22 Aug 2017.

In reply to bashful_batrean (msg # 111):

Excellent input! Having a trusted ally get them out of there, and if they need to experience the threat themselves, make it a more social threat rather than physical...

In reply to JediMaster007 (msg # 113):

Makes sense for sure! Takes me out of my comfort zone too, for sure! :) That is some great stuff to think about, both when it comes to working with the players to make it better for them, and when it comes to working with them to make the story better... And how to translate that into my roll20 game, with mics and all. I don't have too much time to think and respond now, but... Communication with less build up and surprise, to tell a story better - does it work as well if you talk to the whole group and not to individuals? Like, I could post in our play-by-post in between sessions, describe the threat they're experiencing. But that could just build up more of a challenge for the characters to react to. I could tell them outside the roleplaying that the situation is very threatening to their characters, and that that's an important part of the story... But I feel like I should convey that part of the story in the story. Or I could communicate to individuals, with more attention to what their characters do, how it might affect them individually. Takes more work of course, and I would leave it up to them to individually bring it up in the game.

Do both?  I personally find it doesn't matter if the whole group knows about something pertaining to one specific character unless you've got the sort that uses ooc info ic.  That's a permaban offense to me though, so my players are aware of that and don't do it.

That's one of the things I always liked about Earthdawn, and I'd treat PF the same way (even if I had to house rule it). A defeat is a defeat; that doesn't require innards all over the floor. Besides, killing a ten thousand year old dragon might be impressive, but it's nothing compared to winning a contest of wits against it.

That doesn't fix the problem of "run away = death from behind" but it does eliminate the players viewing everything as a potential fight by default. IMO, fighting should rarely be the first, and almost never the only, solution (although admittedly there are times - Horrors, in Earthdawn, for example).

I often reference other media for how to direct the scene. It is a common story arc for heroes to encounter villains too early for them to defeat so there is a big scene where they have to "escape" from the villain some how. This can be done in a variety of ways and there isn't a "right" answer but these can all go right or wrong based on the writing/tone/foreshadowing etc.

• The Deus Ex Machina - Ally Edition: The heroes are on the ropes but an ally (known or unknown) jumps in and holds off the enemy allowing them to escape. Very common way to introduce a new ally or have the guards run in.
  
  
• The Deus Ex Machina - Enemy Edition: A twist is that the heroes might not be the ONLY enemies of the big bad. As seen in Baldur's Gate 2 intro where a 3rd party (that is also evil) attacks the big bad at just the right time to cause enough of a distraction to escape. I kind of like this one better just because it helps set up another potential actor and doesn't feel quite as gimmicky as the above option.
  
  
• The Deus Ex Machina - Environmental Edition: An earthquake or a gas explosion or a tunnel collapse creates a physical barrier allowing the group to retreat thanks to the distance or danger the environment itself presents. Could also be a rogue animal attack or something like that.
  
  
• The Deus Ex Machina - Dream Sequence: PSYCHE! It was all a dream or omen. Great if you have an oracle/seer type character but basically you TPK the party, rewind to the beginning of the day and see how they react from there. This usually requires a very good explanation of why you pulled this crap. An oracle/seer is one way, if you're on a divine quest perhaps they give you a glimpse of the future. If a character has divination spells perhaps it went haywire and what the heroes did was all based upon that spell. Can also be done really poorly (see the last Twilight movie) so you'd better have some solid writing behind this one beyond "this is your mulligan"
  
  
• Big Bad's Sadistic Gloating - I could kill you but I think it's better if you live with your failure. This has to be foreshadowed as a personality trait of an arrogant big bad or one who wants a challenge. The heroes are ants in his eyes and he either doesn't want to lower himself to killing them (not as likely) or wants them to spend their lifetime building for revenge only to have him crush them again. I don't like this one very much but if you have a very specific kind of sadist or a 'bored' big bad who wants a challenge this can be an option.
  
  
• Big Bad's Incompetent Underlings - A twist on the above but better suited in most cases. The big bad could kill the players but that would be inconvenient for him for various reasons: He doesn't want to get his hands dirty, he has better places to be, he doesn't actually enjoy watching people die, he wants to give his underlings something to do etc. The underlings then move the PCs to a new location (or the bulk of the Big Bad's forces leave) and then suddenly there is an opportunity for escape. The PC's spot a dropped dagger while the underlings argue about which way to go. This would be more of a cinematic scene rather then a combat scene with lots of bluff and stealth checks rather then trying to attack ropes in combat. I like this if you are up for running a non-combat combat encounter as it can be very tense for PC's to try and free themselves from under the noses of their guardians but "dumb" PCs who just smash everything will struggle with this kind of scenario that requires subtly. This is exemplified in the tropes of the unnecessarily slow and convoluted death trap where the incompetent underling is replaced by an incompetent death chamber.
  
  
• Big Bad's Long Con - Another twist on the gloating one. In this case the Big Bad makes some speech about how he's going to let the heroes live but it's not that he wants them to take revenge but because he secretly needs them for some reason. Maybe he's setting them up to be patsies, maybe there is some barrier or obstacle in his plans that requires the group. Maybe he releases them as a favor to turn the heroes into unwilling agents for his own purpose. This was an exemplified in movies like Ocean's 12 where the big bad has the group dead-to-rights and basically says "you can die now or you can do a job for me and we'll call it even."

This message was last edited by the player at 15:47, Tue 22 Aug 2017.

Offer them a "Gift", a way to fall back, and have others take the hit.



Give them a reason to consider Running.. a Win

They are fighting an organization- give them one.

   A captive's cohort a young gentlewoman with a dueling blade, comes to ask the group to rescue a their grand-duchess.  The grand duchesses servants not (armsmen) are willing to throw up a [sacrificial] blocking action [they.. the servant are not planning on surviving.. arranging not to] the Cohort is planning on leading the counter attack.. but is drugged by the Grand Duchesses Nanny a Five year old girl with 19 Cha and only surviver and holder of the magical Blood Throne [ownership by blood] of a very small very high mountain valley duchy and the magical throne cut into the mountain.  She was gifted one level of Noble class, [yes.. she has field plate it was supposed to be play but the Nanny arranged better], and the throne gives an automatic Leadership Feat and a level bonus to that feat only. plus another such level bonus for NPC class leadership.  actually sitting on the throne gives a plus to diplomacy & ...
  The Nanny [the last and youngest of the Valley's, counter assassins] administers servants their slow-poison draughts and her own, then hands out the poisoned blades, and drugs the Cohort "Our dear Girl can't lose us all" take her with you, also.



You make the life of that little girl the treasure, she has the blood that owns the throne [blood throne].  She can hire them as Court Staff giving positions that allow them to run, groups [profession] while she
holds the throne. All that goes away if she is killed, and they just watched ?? people die to get her free.

Just a suggestion.
This message was last edited by the player at 11:55, Wed 23 Aug 2017.

You might also consider wave tactics. A hard fight, but one they can win. They have just survived the fight and hear more enemies in route. Let them spot whatever it is they are after, have time to grab it, and get out before the enemy "reinforcements" get there. If they don't choose that option...well stupidity has real world consequences too.

Haha, I might just do this! A PC with strong divination magic just entered the story... But yeah, solid writing!

The Dream Sequence can actually be a very good storytelling tool in an RPG if the players come into it knowingly. Make it clear from the onset that they're playing out a dream, or viewing a premonition, or acting out events in the distant past. Describe the situation they're in, and whether or not anything is different -- then see where they go with it.

I am not usually a fan of dream sequences because of the above mentioned poor execution. But I cede a lot of people do like them and they can be used to really get points across. Similar to the dream sequence is the villain's revelation... one in which the villain tells the pc or party what will happen if they do x,y,or z. And they see it too.

But I am a big fan of villains being right, heroes being wrong, and grey moral areas. "Shepard, doesn't the bible have something to say about killing?" "Oh it surely does, but its a might fuzzy on the subject of kneecaps."

"You know what I think of you hero? I think you're a half measure. A coward. A coward who doesn't have the guts to make the tough call. A coward who doesn't have what it takes to finish the job and put this scum six feet underground. I think you're scared. You're scared because you know the truth, paladin. You're one really bad day away from becoming me!" *queue Punisher theme with Thug Life 8-bit shades*

That is the type of stuff I do to my players. I make them defend their positions and beliefs verbally when I don't really want to thrash them in a combat scene.

A sneaky tactic I have seen used is to have the GM "cut" to a cutscene that the players get information but their characters don't.

Basically you cut to an interlude and the scene shifts to the other side of the door where there is overwhelming odds. Cut back to the PCs where suddenly everyone is feeling like maybe they should not kick the door in and maybe regroup and plan out an actual attack.

This isn't something that works for all players, some players are very committed to in-game vs. out-of-game knowledge however most players lie somewhere in between and a cutscene can both help set the mood and provide a cinematic way for the GM to say "You really don't want to do that."

Been peeping my cut scene thread have you? ;)

Noooo....
>_>
<_<
>_>
/throws smokestick and escapes in the confusion


In all seriousness I remember old, old adventure modules that used this as part of the narration that you read to your players. Shadowy scenes meant to ramp up tension and foreshadow. I think I read some in D&D and AD&D modules but honestly it's all going back 20+ years so I don't recall specifics.

What made me think of it was humorous D&D based comedies like The Gamers or Order of the Stick (like this one: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0036.html) where the reader/viewer is given information that the character's don't have.

This is called dramatic irony.

Here's a way to foreshadow a threat: let the players run some NPCs through a scene, then have the monster brutally murder them.

Explain that you're setting a scene, and give the players cards with descriptions of various NPCs. A couple guards, an innkeeper, a kid, the blacksmith. Each card has a name, the essential stats (class and level, AC, hit points, gear), a few personality traits. Let them do some roleplaying with this for a bit, then have the Monster of the Week turn up and start mauling them.

Let them try to defend themselves, but ultimately lose one by one. Play up the horror, the futility. Then, when the last NPC is dead, give the players a bit to let it soak in.

Then go back to the regular game. Try to time it so that two or three sessions later, the PCs go to the town that got attacked.

Have some distinctive equipment or scene components that would be hart to forget.  You could also potentially provide some psychometric item that causes them as characters to have nightmares portraying the scene that happened to the NPCs.

You shouldn't even have to resort to either of those. Just have the PCs run into the aftermath, and they're likely to recognize some of the elements if you describe it well enough.

(This note references this page: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classe...Combat-Style-Feat-Ex-)

I'm in a game here on RPOL where I'm trying to get something cleared up for me, and I know that the GM there watches here. I'm fine with whatever he rules (it's his game, after all). I'd just like to get some thoughts from the peanut gallery (that's you lot) on how [Ranger] Combat Styles and prerequisites work.

Under normal circumstances prerequisites are just that: things required to be taken before you can take something else. The situation is as follows:

I wanted my dwarven Ranger (leveling up to level 2) to take Precise Shot (Crossbow). However, I noticed it has the prerequisite Point-Black Shot, which is not listed under the Ranger Combat Styles and Feats for crossbow (it is listed for Archery - perhaps a mistake on the web page?). Furthermore, as a result of that, I am essentially required to take Deadly Aim, as either I do not meet the prerequisites or I already have the Feats offered. (I have nothing against Deadly Aim mind, I just find shooting into party members without accidentally hitting them to be both more useful and less likely to get my innocent dwarven behind kicked ;).

Ordinarily, I'd be all, "Well, guess I'm SOL." But then I also read this:



However, the prerequisite for Combat Expertise is already Int 13. What that says to me is you can take Combat Expertise without having the prerequisite Int 13. (Note that I have no interest in that particular ranger combat style for this character, but it's what caused me to think that maybe the normal rules on prerequisites didn't apply.)

Question is: am I reading it wrong? Are prerequisites overridden by the nature of the Combat Style Feat? That seems weird to me, but the only other explanation I see is that the web site has an error and Point-Blank Shot is missing.

That's the awesome thing about those feats! No need to place PBS there, just take it with a normal feat if you want it or need it later :)

Meaning on level 6 you can take Improved Precise Shot as a combat style feat, and that's normally not available until level 11. (to demonstrate an example with a, in my opinion, more extreme prerequisite)
This message was last edited by the player at 14:10, Fri 22 Sept 2017.

How did you not end up taking PBS to begin with?  As a DM I'd have pointed out to you really early on during your character creation that it's a prerequisite for almost every other ranged combat feat, and it's arguably one of the most useful feats you can take at a low level.  It's an instant +1 attack and damage on any ranged attack with any ranged weapon out to 30.  That includes... Scorching Rays, Lesser Orbs of Cold, Crossbows, Throwing Daggers, Javelins, Composite Longbows, Shortspears, etc.

All the characters are those pre-created Paizo creations. So for the answer to that you'd have to ask them, alas.

For people who BUILT THE GAME it is always surprising when they do weird weird things to their pre-constructed characters.

Just...weird weird things.

Yeah, I agree. I'd think that they'd have the best insights to how to get characters specialized. Not saying Min-Maxing, just specialized.

Well, I think a ranger can be quite specialized without PBS. With Deadly Aim taken outside of Bonus Style Feats, the ranger could still be an effective archer - while not as effective as one diving deep into the feat tree - with specialized abilites, but also take a couple of feats that are useful in other situations.

I'm not saying their choices are bad I just think that for iconic characters published everywhere they should be relatively straightforward to be easy to tweak but also showcase what that class can do.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 138):

Haha yeah, I agree :) And PBS is without a doubt on top-5 straightforward feats :P

I take this back to a previous conversation about Fighters. I personally prefer "golf club" style fighters who are good in every fight, regardless of situation. But if you -do- want to specialize in a specific style (that doesn't use magic, of course) a Fighter will still always do it better than the class "that does it."

Take the Archery Ranger... You get how many feats to help you be a boss by... lets say 8th level? As a Fighter (assuming you're using a standard race without an ECL) you have a minimum of 9. 10 if you're a human. You've also got your weapon and armor training, which is a big deal since the Ranger doesn't use heavy armor and has to burn feats for the same effects as weapon training...

Everything you can do with that bow, I can also do. I can probably do even more archery tricks than you since I didn't cough up feats for extra abilities that don't really help me out. But where you fall off is everything without that bow... while I still excel. Ok. Lets drop the bow and draw swords. I'm still going to be better. Axes? Same thing. Bare knuckles? Ha. Please. I bet you didn't even consider taking Improved Unarmed Strike. I had the feat to burn. You didn't. Thus, I do what you do, but I'm even better at it because I can do it in armor, I don't need a pet, and those extra skillpoints don't actually help in (most) combat situations.

"But Roleplaying..."  Ok. I'm with you. I don't need to be kicking something's arse every scene to roleplay. I can swill beer in the tavern, grumble about the cold in transit, and flirt with the Dryad with the best of them... and I don't need abilities on a character sheet to do it. I can do it through dint of personality and real life experience / charisma.

So... I take a "bottom tier" (whatever that is supposed to mean) character and through play proove that I am not bottom tier at all, but rather a showcase character. It has nothing to do with what game designers intended, political statements about violence, or even players who "don't like bullies." Nor is it min/maxed or broken.

In summary, if a player is trying to make a combat character that does a specific thing or follows a specific type of style, you can recommend an archery ranger, but a Fighter is still a better (and easier on the DM) choice.

Those are my ten cents anyway (because my two cents is free).

No doubt Jedi, I think the main benefit of the Ranger is actually all the skill ranks. The biggest weakness of a fighter is their lack of class skills and skills per level.

The ranger is a historically complicated class and as far as pure combat goes, is a tier below fighter in my opinion.

As you’ve said before mechanics aren’t as important as how you play the role.

So, I've been trying to find something like this, and it's really hard to find. Is there a legit, RAW way to become an object? Like, Polymorph, but as an object? I want to make a character who can hide as a barrel, or a coat rack, or whatever. Think Prop Hunt in Pathfinder.

You'd need something like http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/...olymorph-any-object/.    I don't recall anything like it in the race guide, but you might convince a really forgiving GM to let you have it as a rogue talent or something.
This message was last edited by the player at 04:17, Tue 21 Nov 2017.

In reply to Hunter (msg # 143):

Yeah, I did find that spell. It's 8th level, and this game starts us at level 1 and ends around level 10. This DM is a friend that I can easily convince to let me do anything, but I don't want to get anything unbalanced. And ideas on how to make that a balanced ability I could get?

Still open to RAW ways, if anyone has one, for a lower level to turn himself into an object temporarily

You could just ask your DM to house rule it, maybe with a limited time of effect and/or as a stealth check to determine how good the transformation is.

Very very expensive, but it is possible to craft an item to cast this spell at will.

Maybe you could happen upon a cloak someone created and left laying around where they shouldn't of. you know, in a vault behind locked doors and armed guards?

Check http://www.d20pfsrd.com/Magic-...ating-Wondrous-Items for details, but as a guide, it will be a wonderous item, with command word spell effect.  For an 8th level spell, this will be aprox 250k work of gold.

Easiest option is to get away from polymorph effects to illusions for a similar effect.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 02:26, Thu 23 Nov 2017.

quick question rolling a master summoner,  my google/faq foo may be off or I am just over thinking it,  the eidolon's evolutions do they open up on my actual level or the adjusted level used for evo points and the such?

thank you

Short: The Eidolon evolutions open up at certain Summoner levels (not Eidolon levels).

Example: The Eidolon Table shows how many evolution points you have to spend on your eidolon, using your summoner level divided by 2, rounded down. So a level 9 Master Summoner has a level 4 Eidolon, but it can still take the Large evolution, which requires a level 8 Summoner.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:58, Sat 09 Dec 2017.

That's what I thought but hate to spend time working a build out just get shot down, any FAQ or is it just common knowledge?

The text in the evolution specifically mentions the required Summoner level. (As opposed to character level, Eidolon level, etc).

Thank you

I need to bother the community again same charracter as above is doing a solo campaign of sorts I plan on taking Leadership to increase the "party size" and just fill out skills and such that need shoring up.  For the cohort I am restricted to NPC classes so of course will be choosing the Adept while building the familiar ran across the Rattling for cheese I think that would be awesome to use but it's ability to use scrolls is not defined well.  Would it use Master's CL? I doubt it would be the SLA CL, animals base HD?

Any ideas or shared knowledge is appreciated.

Is it a house rule for the game you're in that you have to choose an NPC class?

Yes

after reading and rereading Rattling and scroll activation many more times it hit me.  CL would be 0, it is a familiar not supposed to be a game changer and the DC on the scrolls CL check is only scroll CL + 1 so with a D20 roll hitting a 6/7 (Cleric/sorcerer spell of 3rd lvl base CHA is 13) should not be difficult.

is this right or am I barking up the wrong tree?

A Ratling is considered CL 6.



And on the Ratling stat block:




As for ability scores, that would depend on the class it is emulating, imo. If it's casting a pure cleric spell then Wisdom, if a Bard spell then Charisma, if a Wizard spell then Intelligence.

It's the same thing if you're a multi-class character. If you're a Wizard 2 / Cleric 2 you don't get to use your wisdom when casting arcane spells.

The ability doesn't specify anything else so that is the cleanest ruling I could think of. Basically it can cast any scroll spell of 3rd level or lower no problem and has to make an appropriate CL check for higher level spells which feels appropriate.
This message was last edited by the player at 07:55, Sun 17 Dec 2017.

Grab + Constrict



Now that I read this again, it is quite clearly stated... But, still. Do you guys play it this way? A monster, say a crab, attacks the PC. Hits with the claw, deals big damage cuz high strength. Hits with grab. PC does not succeed on getting away. Next round, roll that CMB with +5 due to already grappling. After this roll, the crab deals BOTH Claw damage AND Constrict damage (which generally is claw damage).

With some creatures, grabbing is penalizing since they then get minus to hit with their other two-three attacks... But for some creatures it's not like that. I'm preparing a creature that will attack with one (1) tentacle. The tentacle will thus, on maintaining grapple, not only hold the enemy but also deal damage as from two attacks! With a couple of these monsters, it could very well be TPK - even though it's paizo material I'm running.

Thoughts, experiences on Grab + Constrict?

Isn't grapple a separate action?

Nope, that’s what grab does for you ;)

So a grapple is basically like a special form of attack.

Roll "to-hit" (in this case a CMB vs. CMD instead of AB vs. AC) and then if it hits, do damage.

It is an ability that in theory is "easier" to hit so it's on par with things like touch attacks that also bypass "normal" AC.

Constrict is used as a way to simulate things like anaconda's where it's not just grabbing you but it is solely designed to crush you.




Anyway, from my experience Grab/Constrict monsters are "Save or Suck" encounters. On the one hand if the party is smart and uses ways to avoid being grappled and constricted (coat everyone in oil!) then the monsters are cake walks. If they don't and get a bad roll it can crush and kill someone ASAP. I have had grapple monsters be completely shut down because we Enlarged our raging barbarian and he put the anaconda in a head lock. I have been in on a TPK to a giant praying mantis that crushed our tank in the first round due to a crazy max crit... 30 pts of damage to a 2nd level character...yeesh.

My advice is to treat it like a trap and give them plenty of warning about what they're going to be facing. Giant snake skins or animal bones that look like they've been crushed etc. From my experience these types of monsters tend to REALLY penalize poor party tactics (like if the wizard gets grappled) but tend to be easy street for tightly run parties because they are effectively "gimmick" monsters that can be shut down and don't have a lot of other options to produce tons of damage.

Awesome! I estimate this is an encounter with about a 10-15% chance of being 2-3-4&cohort-killed, 85% chance of it being a pretty cool and spooky thing but not particularly challenging; now that I've read it all through properly... With some crushed humanoids that can be found by anyone investigating the strange areas, I can relieve my conscience :D

There's a special stealth mechanic, too... The less stealthy they are, without knowing that they have to be stealthy at least to begin with, the worse the encounter gets. I'll have to think of how to hint at that, without giving them the system. "Your arrow flies past the foe, hitting a pile of rocks - all of which fly away, landing some feet away. The noise echoes through the cave..."

Yup. I read a lot of blogs and the consensus around "traps" and "environment" stuff is this:

1) You shouldn't expect your players to ALWAYS be stealthy and ALWAYS perceive their environment unless that is something stated up front. In general all this does is just bog down the game as everyone just sits around until they roll a '20' on perception or stealth checks and then they move on.

2) Room descriptions are important but keep them fairly brief. Just a couple of sentences to give flavor for the mind's eye but you don't want to bog them down with too many unnecessary details as some might seize on every single thing and again slow the game down and waste time.

3) That being said, when you do take a bit of time to describe stuff that is out of the ordinary (the large number of crushed ribs and skulls) then that is where it is up to the players to start using their skills and heads to figure out what clues you are providing them for the future.

4) For a more "surprise" style, a great piece of advice for something like a trap is giving them time for a split second reaction. "You step forward and feel the tile move and hear a loud 'CLICK'...what do you guys do!?" and if they respond in a way that would reasonably help them given the unknown nature of the trap it can provide a situational +4 to their AC or saving throw.

5) Stealth is always a tricky situation because there's usually only 1 or 2 people in a party who CAN stealth and everyone else is trotting around with -4's due to ACP. I usually just handle these in the background and just assume everyone is being as stealthy as they can. I like your idea of giving them clues that there is an echoing effect in the caves, that I think is also a fair measure.

I've been considering creating a PF game here on RPOL for a while now but wanted some opinions.  I ran a freeform X-men game for quite a while but while I've been playing DnD or PF for around 15 years, I've only dm'd a couple sessions.  I figure dming on RPOL would be good practice since it would essentially give me time to prep as things tend to move slower.  I have a real life game I've just started to run but we only meet 3 or 4 times a year so it hardly counts.

What I wanted opinions on was an adventure path that might be good to run.  I was thinking specifically something in Varisia.  Part of my reason for wanting to run an AP is that it gives me some direction to start and get my footing to build up my confidence in gming PF.

Anyways, are there any PF adventure paths that you figure might be good for someone dming their first PF game? (doesn't have to be Varisia, that's just preferable)

Welcome. Are you planning on running this for Pathfinder Society (PFS) credit? If so, I would suggest that you might want to look into running some of the scenarios first. There are some that are available at no cost, like the Goblin adventures (We be goblins, We be Goblins too, etc) and some of the Evergreen ones. It is a lot tougher to run a game here since it might take a week or two just to do one round of combat.

As for Adventure Paths, Shattered Star is set in Varisia so that might be something to look into. However, I would suggest that you start off with Scenarios-->Modules-->Adventure Path to build up your own GM XP first.

I've only glanced at PFS stuff once or twice and the hoops you have to jump through seemed about as clear as mud.  It also seemed super restrictive.

I was more thinking of APs because it would build my confidence as a gm.  Not sure if scenarios are basically that but shorter term?  My in person group has always done homebrew stuff so I'm fairly inexperienced with the terminology of Adventure paths, modules, scenarios, etc.

Scenarios are short adventures that can be run in about 4 hours or so (face to face). Modules take longer, and Adventure paths are about 6 modules.

In general a PFS scenario is indeed designed for a single session (~4 hours or a couple of months RPoL time).

A module is a slightly larger adventure, probably good for about 3 in game sessions or about 6 months rPoL

An Adventure Path is a book that combines with 5 others to create a metaplot. Each book is good for 1-2 years.

If you're looking for Adventure Paths, you can look at them here:
https://pathfinderwiki.com/wik...inder_Adventure_Path

If you're looking for modules you can find them here:

https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Pathfinder_Modules

AP's that start in Varisia include:

• Rise of the Ruin Lords
• Curse of the Crimson Throne
• Second Darkness
• Jade Regent
• Shattered Star

Added Summoning (Abyssal Bloodline Power) + [UM] Superior Summoning feat

I was going threw the forums and stumbled across this, as a frequent Summoner, has this been answered officially?  Of course I read it as the added Summoning would proc the superior Summoning giving you three at the highest level instead of one.

Relevant text:

Abyssal Bloodline:


Superior Summoning:


There is no official consensus so ultimately it is up to a DM. My opinion is this:

• Summoning spells can either summon (1) at level monster or (1d3) lower level monsters.
• "At-level" summoning could also be called "single summoning"
• lower level summoning could be called "group summoning" even if you roll a one.
• Added Summoning is intended to be applied when you single summon an at-level monster
• Superior Summoning is intended to be applied when you group summon lower level monsters (again even if you roll a '1').

Given the above I would say that they do not stack. D&D 3.5 / Pathfinder doesn't have the concept of "order of operations" for simultaneous effects. Instead there is a "trigger" and then an "effect".

So what would happen is if you had both, at the time of the spell you would choose to single summon or group summon. At the time of that choice, either Added Summoning or Superior Summoning would apply. It doesn't matter how many are actually summoned so long as the trigger is satisfied which has to be done before the die roll.

Here is a relevant thread that asks if Superior Summoning applies if you roll a '1' on your group summon:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2n...r-Summoning-Question

The general consensus (of like 3 people..) is that Superior Summoning just translates the "1d3 lower" into "1d3+1 lower" and is much easier to interpret from that point of view.
This message was last edited by the player at 03:22, Mon 09 July 2018.

Hmm I have always gone with the actual number, so if I rolled a 1 only summoned 1 on the 1d3.  I read that as the spell must summon more than one not have the ability to summon more than one.

As far as I can tell there has been no official ruling however I feel the spirit of the abilities are both very clear and not intended to be stackable however I also wouldn't argue with a DM that ruled the other way.

I interpret Superior Summoning to instead mean "instead of 1dX, it's 1dX+1" so it would apply on a '1' for a lower summon but wouldn't stack with added summoning.

On the one hand getting 3 spells for the price of one seems a bit powerful for a combination of class ability and a single feat but then again it's 15th level and by then you're at the end game so whatever makes the game the most fun for everyone is ultimately the way to go.

I have an interesting question I like your thoughts on.

I have Changelings who has following

Paternal Heritage : The influence of the changeling’s
father is particularly strong. The changeling counts as her
father’s race for any effect related to race and inherits one
of the following racial traits according to her father’s race.
This racial trait replaces hag racial trait.

I have chosen elf.

Now would that mean she would use the height, weight and age tables for an elf as these are race based or would she stick to normal Changelings ones?

Your thoughts:-
This message was last edited by the player at 11:30, Mon 13 Aug 2018.

I would say use the Changling one but you might compare it to the Elf table to modify it up or down depending on the difference.

I got asked this question which has stumped me as I can't find anything specific to answering it online.

Q: Regarding my feat, this line has me a bit confused:

"A quickened spell uses up a spell slot four levels higher than the spell’s actual level."

Does that mean it is not usable at this time because I cannot cast a level 4 spell?


My answer and my take on it after reading it is that you'd have to have a 5th level spell slot available to quicken a 1st level spell and it will use up that slot. So, the answer is he cannot use it yet since he can't even cast 4th level spells at his level which is 3rd.


Any clarification is welcome. Thanks in advance!
This message was last edited by the player at 11:58, Mon 20 Aug 2018.

What feat are you referring to?

But yes, a quickened spell takes up a slot at X+4, so a quickened Magic Missile takes up a 5th level slot. If you don't have a 5th level slot then you cannot cast it with that metamagic component.

There is a trait that reduce that, Magical Lineage. Basically you pick a spell and metamagic feats applied to it reduce that by 1 so if you pick Magic Missile as your target spell then a Quickened Magic Missile only take up a 4th level slot instead of a 5th level.

This kind of build is common to Magus builds (they typically picking shocking grasp as it is a Core spell that scales to level) and there is also Magic Missile builds that take it to pick up things like Dazing and Toppling to do stupid things. A Dazing Toppling Magic Missile would be a 2nd level spell slot thanks to Magical Lineage and then would potentially knock targets over and stun them so they can't get back up...

Anyway I digress. Taking Quicken Spell is kind of a waste of a slot before 9th level because while you have it, you can't really use it. It's also why Quicken Metamagic Rods are both really expensive and probably the best damn things you could get your hands on :P

It was the Quicken Spell feat. Appreciate the confirmation of what I was thinking.

This just came up in one of my games and thought I'd post it here as the answer is buried pretty deep:

Classes that have delayed spellcasting (i.e. rangers and paladins) do NOT count as spellcasters until they get their first spell slot. A first level paladin is not CL 0 or CL -3 or whatever for the purposes of casting scrolls.

As per the director of game design:


From this thread:
https://paizo.com/community/bl...-Time-Forgot#discuss

Also has fun things like if you cast a ranged spell while in a threatened square you get hit with 2 AOOs, one for the spell and one for the ranged attack :D

In reply to praguepride (msg # 178):

The other thing to remember on this topic is that both Paladins and Rangers have Cure Light Wounds on their spell lists, even though they do not get to cast spells until level 4, so they can use Wands with that spell (and other spells that are on their lists) starting at level 1.

Not according to RAW and FAQs. Until they can cast spells they do not have a spell list. 1st level paladin/rangers cannot use wands except through UMD.

Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Touche, that was my mistake. I even went back to the core rules to ensure that the definition of spell trigger was correct and it is.

Leave it up to Paizo to have wands and scrolls be activated in different ways /face palm.

So to recap for anyone confused:

A 1st level Paladin can use a wand of [spell on paladin spell list] just fine HOWEVER the same 1st level Paladin cannot use a scroll of that same spell without succeeding at a UMD check.

I love Paizo but sometimes they make things just needlessly complicated.

Oh, Paizo didn't make this complicated; WotC did.  Paizo just kept it.  I checked my 3.5 DMG and the wording's very similar, just trimmed a little.  I don't want to dig out my 3.0 books at this time, but I suspect they're the root.

This has been your dose of useless trivia for the day.  I must go and try to remember why I had so many bookmarks in here.

I been struggling with this for a long time, searching the forums and discussing with various people. Someone please explain to me how the secondary effect on poisons work?

Okay so there are two types of Poison stat blocks:

Normal poison just has an effect. Every time the player fails a save the effect just happens.


The ones with multiple effects have two components:

1) An initial effect

2) Secondary effects

When the player FIRST fails the poison save the initial effect happens. Every subsequent time they fail the save the secondary effect happens.

So for example:

Hag Spit


When the player FIRST fails the save, they go blind. The next round when they fail the save they take 1d4 WIS damage. The next round another 1d4 WIS damage etc. etc.


edit: This is a hold over from 3.5:


This message was last edited by the player at 16:33, Wed 19 June 2019.

That makes sense. It seems that in several cases rules did not make it over from 3.5 to Pathfinder, but are implied.

What if a poison does not have a secondary effect? Does that mean the target continues to take primary damage?

Also, if the person, having failed the first save, or even first and second save, gets injected again? Does he continue taking secondary damage, or takes primary damage again and then secondary.
This message was last edited by the player at 18:04, Wed 19 June 2019.

Multiple doses:



Increased Duration: Increase the duration of the poison by 1/2 the amount listed in its frequency entry.

Increased DC: Increase the poison’s DC by +2.

If you look at the poison profiles it either just lists Effect or Initial/Secondary. If it is just an Effect then that happens every round. I don't believe there are any poisons that only have an initial effect but don't quote me on that.



As PCO mentioned the DC and duration are increased but he still only takes secondary damage if it has an initial/secondary effect.

Yes, I am aware of the increased DC and duration of additional doses and there are a lot of poisons listed without secondary effects.

But let a consider this:

Let's say the character fails 2 saves and took DEX damage the second round. In round three another dose is injected. So, the new save is vs DC 14 and duration is increased by 2, but he will not take any acid damage from the second dose. Kind off counterintuitive.

It's already in his system and Pathfinder doesn't track poisons separately. You're free to houserule it if you want.

Next question:

Are all animal primary attacks considered light weapons for the purpose of Weapon Finesse feat?

Not just Primary; all of them.
This message was last edited by the player at 07:22, Sun 23 June 2019.

Not a question but probably an important bit of information:

Active supernatural abilities count as spells for the purposes of Detect Magic. This is from a conversation about the party facing disguised dopplegangers and casting detect magic on them:

How much would a skin of a Magical creature be worth? Lets say Tatzlwyrm or Wyvern?

Please refresh my memory.   If a character has a skill that isn't a class skill but then multi-classes so that it becomes a class skill, does the class skill bonus apply or do they have to take another rank before said bonus applies?
This message was last edited by the player at 03:36, Fri 20 Sept 2019.

Bonus applies.

Rules for this were introduced in Ultimate Wilderness:

1) Identifying a "trophy" is  a Knowledge DC 15+CR of monster check

2) Harvesting is either a Survival (for external features like horns, hides, teeth etc.) or Heal (for internal organs or sweat or blood) at DC 15+CR

3) To turn a component into a trophy is an appropriate Craft check, DC 15+CR

4) Selling it is based on CR:

Thanks, after you posted I looked and found it on d20PFSRD https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Gamem...ophies_and_Treasures

How would I go about getting an imp familiar a class level?

The short answer is: you don’t. Familiars are specifically references as unmodified so they can’t have pre-existing levels and they level up based on their owners HD, they gain no XP for themselves.

That being said a generous GM can do whatever they want. If you can convince your GM to give your familiar a class level then there is nothing stopping you however you both should be aware that this is breaking the rules heavily in favor of the player and represents power creep. No “companion” gains class levels. Druid/Ranger companions, Summoner Eidolons etc. none of them gain class levels. Their abilities are reflected by the growth and development of their PC and their abilities levels are (usually) carefully aligned to maintain an overall power curve.

That being said many animal companions push the power boundaries or even break them already. Horses are infamous at 1st level so far as to be humorously described as Sherman Tanks. Regular summoners allowed curve breaking abilities at higher levels prompting a correction in the form of the Unchained Summoner creating some restrictions on which enhancements can be taken together.

Familiars are already quite powerful so adding a class levels represents a big powershift.

I think the better question is 'how can I arrange for my imp to be able to _____?'

The answer to a lot of those questions are 'if it's a skill, put ranks in it.'  There might be a magic item you can give to a familiar, particularly an imp, that lets it mimic such and such class feature (I'm looking at you, Monk Belt).

If an eidolen can buy such an ability for one evaluation point, a feat can get that for a familiar.

Otherwise, more info would be helpful.

The answer seems to be YWWV (your world will vary).

There is no question that it's possible, but there is no in game mechanic for it.

Bottom line is according to RAW it isn’t allowed. If your GM makes exceptions then you are already breaking the rules so do whatever you want,

Next questions.

Demons (CE aligned) usually have some sort of DR */ good. Does that mean mean that Lawfully aligned weapon are pretty much nerfed against them?

Does weapon with an Align Weapon spell counts as magical when used to attack a incorporeal creature?

Lawful weapons don’t bypass Good, Evil, or Chaotic DR.

Align Weapon doesn’t count as Magical, so using an Aligned weapon against incorporeal is the same as using a non-magical weapon.

There are monsters that are DR X/lawful but those are few and far between. Most "normal" extraplanars are going to be good or evil DR until you start going to some weird places as illustrated in this Order of the Stick:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0068.html

I always get damage reduction mixed up.    Is DR 10/Slashing mean only -10 damage to slashing weapons or -10 damage to non-slashing ones?

For DR, whatever is after the slash is how to completely bypass the DR.
So Slashing weapons would ignore X/Slashing DR.

Correct.



Also important to note this is only on "physical" attacks, i.e. ranged or melee weapons.



Also keep in mind that high levels of magical enchantment bypass DR.

+3 weapons bypass Cold Iron/Silver DR
+4 weapons bypass Adamantine DR
+5 weapons bypass Alignment DR (like the kinds you find on Outsiders like Angels and Demons)

How much would warehouse cost in a large city? Something like this:

Forgive me as I won't be diving into the math but a warehouse is just storage rooms repeated over and over again.

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamem...s-and-teams/#Storage

At its maximum you get 8 squares of empty space for 120gp. 8 squares, say 4x2 = 20'x10' space.

The map you show looks to be about 40'x30' so doing some quick maths that would be about 3 storage rooms of space on the first floor so 360gp. Two stories makes that 720gp. An office adds another 120gp

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamem...ms-and-teams/#Office

And as for the "watchpost" I would just call it a shack: a chair, a table and a window they can look out of: 100gp

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamem...oms-and-teams/#Shack

So to build the final price tag is 940gp. It is up to you if you want to add markup to buy it based on location or other perks but warehouses don't tend to be in high value districts so I would add 10% if it's particularly nice or just round it to a nice even 1000gp and maybe knock off 10-20% if you want it to be run down and make them pay to fix it back up, patch holes in the walls/roof etc.


edit: Because I was curious it's about $300 to 1gp so that's 300,000 for an empty warehouse. A 7k sqft warehousue by me is going for about $1.9mil so dividing that down by 7 is about $270,000 so yeah 1000gp seems to be right around the ballpark for a space that size.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:27, Sat 02 May 2020.

Thanks. I was thinking 10,000 gp, but definitely overpriced based on your calculations. Need to think some more.

I'm curious where you get this value.  It seems high to me.

A normal longsword is 15gp, so you're saying that one would cost $4500?  That's way too high.  I would find that about right for a masterwork sword, which is 315gp.

At 940gp to build a two-story building (assuming you already own the land), you're saying that it is the same cost as three masterwork longswords.  I assume that the skill to make stairs and an upper floor that you don't fall through is similar to that needed to make masterwork weapons, so I think you need to increase the cost beyond just a calculation of what storage space costs.  I like your 1000gp figure for a one-story building that provides that much storage (with a dirt floor and a reasonably functional roof), but the upper floor space should cost quite a bit more.

Consider the time it takes to make:  On the show Forged in Fire, they make a bladed weapon in 5 days, I think, and they are not masters doing it.  I'm going to guess that a master weaponsmith can make his 15th mastercraft longsword in a week, with one apprentice.  I don't think that a master builder with 1 apprentice could make that building in 3 weeks.

To godlearner, remember that a lot of a cost of every building is the land it is on.  As plaguepride, said, that was the cost to build it.  If it is in a location profitable for a warehouse, such as right near the docks, then that could as much as double it.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:04, Sat 02 May 2020.

Lets say a pound of gold is about $15k and there are 50 coins to a pound. So its about $300 per 1 gp as praguepride said.

Ahh.  Well, that makes some sense, but pre-electronics, the price of gold is based purely on it's perceived value as a source of beauty, compared to its rarity.  So evaluating simply by weight assumes that the perceived value and rarity are consistent.  I think it makes more sense to compare based on purchasing power of things we can relate to as having a similar value in that world as in ours.

I recall a player of mine prices 1gp = 50$US, based on the price of food or chickens or such items.

There are a lot of ways to estimate gold prices to modern dollars. The point isn't to be 100% accurate but to get yourself in the right ballpark.

$300k for a small warehouse sounds about right.

$4,500 for a masterwork sword sounds...about right.

Keep in mind that modern swords that you can buy for a couple hundred bucks mail order are not real swords. You can't really even purchase real swords anymore, too many fakes or mass produced crap.


https://www.sword-buyers-guide...al-katana-price.html

According to this



So yeah, about what you estimated.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:26, Sat 02 May 2020.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 217):

Actually, the rules state that one silver piece is the wage of an unskilled laborer for a day.   Let's assume a minimum wage of $5 and an 8 hour day.    So... 1sp=$40.

Actually, that number sounds about right.   Remember that we've only been able to mass produce steel, and refine aluminum, for about 200 years.   Pre-industrial revolution, metallurgy and other crafts were done by hand.  And from what I've been told, it really does take weeks to make a sword by hand; which explains the cost.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:39, Sat 02 May 2020.

The part where that falls apart is that with one rank in Profession (a level 1 commoner), the averaged expected annual salary is around $375,000.

Ummm, there's something about medieval unskilled laborer economy you don't understand.  Unless your world is considerably more enlightened than mine, the wages paid to unskilled laborers are more equivalent to the way people were paid in the late 1800's or early 1900's, basically, economic slavery: required to work 80+ hours per week just to stay on the verge of starving all the time, and child labor laws were non-existent.


I agree, though I'd go a little less for the warehouse.  But your numbers make the warehouse cost 21,000 gold.
This message was last edited by the player at 21:47, Sat 02 May 2020.

I can't promise any of my maths but the rules for building a building are laid out. You can adjust them as you see fit but I know if I was a player looking for a small warehouse I would be upset if the GM suggested it costs over 20,000gp.

You can possibly afford 1,000gp at 3-4th level but 20,000gp isn't something you can really afford until double that. In original D&D around 7th level was when you built a castle and attracted an army so I would stick to the 1,000gp.

In reply to Zag24 (msg # 220):

I know that we're getting a bit off track, but...


I didn't pick the number, Pathfinder did.   So, $40/day = $200/week.

A day in medieval society doesn't mean 8 hours of work, it is probably closer to "sun up to sun down" so as many as 14 hours a day. Also they didn't have the concept of "weekends"


BUUUUTTT I don't like to go too deep into "historical accuracy" when talking about D&D. Who knows how magic and monsters would alter society.

But that was also balanced by many Holy days during the year.

I have a question about the druid's Wild Empathy ability.  https://www.d20pfsrd.com/class...#TOC-Wild-Empathy-Ex-

The rules say that it is just d20 + druid level + charisma bonus, applied as if it were a diplomacy roll.  This seems ridiculously inadequate to me.  A druid who has maxed out Animal Handling will have that skill 3 points higher than that roll, possibly more if he has applied any traits or feats to the ability.  So a 9th level druid with an 8 charisma has only a 50% chance of influencing a normal black bear (CR 3) that he comes across in the woods.  (The bear defaults to unfriendly, which means that DC to affect it is 20 + its Cha modifier, which is -2)  This seems way too low to me:  By 9th level, this roll should be automatic.

The ability also doesn't even mention any possible modifications to roll, such as if the druid has cast a Speak with Animals, if he is offering something tasty, etc.  I could see that the Speak with Animals doesn't affect the roll, only the degree of communication if it succeeds.  (That is, I could see such an interpretation, but I wouldn't agree with it.)  I supposed that the assumption built into its being a Diplomacy-like roll is that it will be modified by circumstances, but a little guideline for the obvious actions might have been helpful.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this ability?  Am I misinterpreting something there?  Of course, I have no problem just throwing the rules out the window and making up my own, but I don't like to do it lightly and I want to make sure I understand a rule fully before I discard it.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:16, Sat 09 May 2020.

Depending on how you look at it it's either a free cross-classed skill, or it's yet another skill you can replace as often as you would need to with a level 1 spell.  Once upon a time, it WASN'T a free skill.

On the other hand, there are a lot of issues surrounding the simple fact that Diplomacy doesn't really have any possible level-related defense; it's easier to influence that bear as doing the same to a squirrel would be.

I look at it this way, all skills are pretty useless above level 6 or so. Why is this one any different? Diplomacy can't be used in combat. The only thing Wild Empathy is good for is making friends with animals so you can train them later with Handle Animal skill.

It says to treat it like a diplomacy rule so why couldn't you use modifiers? As a GM I would definitely give a bonus if they made an offering or used a spell. Just because there isn't an explicit checklist to work off of doesn't mean that you cannot apply conditional bonuses.

It is harder than a typical skill roll because you don't get the free +3 from class skills right off the bat nor can you easily get magical items to boost it however I would argue that the Wild Empathy is a free side perk and not a core feature of the class.

Are druids underpowered? Absolutely not. Would they be underpowered if this was removed? No.

You're right that it feels a little incomplete but honestly, it is. It's a legacy from older D&D that they changed when they upgraded to PF 2e.

The problem with it being a "free perk" is that if it didn't exist, I'd be inclined just to use Animal Handling, which the druid probably has at a higher level than it works out to being.  And applying it against Diplomacy rules is tough, because those are intended to be adjudicating against 20 Charisma bards with Diplomacy maxed out and 2 or 3 extra points added to it for this reason or that.

Anyway, I agree that the Diplomacy rules also allow for a lot of leeway for circumstances, which I will apply at need.

Thanks, all, for the input.

Just remember you are free to pick and choose the rules you want to use. Your game? Scrap it. In general though I have not found very many underdeveloped areas of PF. Experienced designers with a lot of play testing. Could be an oversight, could also be that going the way you described broke the game in other ways.

I wrote up stats for Pink and Blue Horrors of Tzeench. Would this be a good place to post them for a critique?

Sure!

Ok, let me have it.

Pink Horror of Tzeentch
CE Medium outsider (chaotic, demon, evil, extraplanar)
Init +8; Senses darkvision 60 ft., see invisibility; Perception +11

DEFENSE
AC 18, touch 14, flat-footed 14 (+4 Dex, +4 natural)
hp 56 (7d10 + 21)
Fort +2, Ref +9, Will +8
Defensive Abilities; DR 10/cold iron or magic; Immune electricity, poison; Resist acid 10, cold 10, fire 10; SR 17

OFFENSE
Speed 40 ft.
Melee  : 3 claws +10 (1d4+3), bite +10 (1d8+3)
Ranged : Hurl Flame +7 (3d10 fire; range 60 ft.)
Space 5 ft.; Reach 5 ft.

Spell-Like Abilities (CL 7th)
Constant—see invisibility
At will: Vicious Mockery, Misty Step
1/day: Fireball (7d6 DC14)

STATISTICS
STR 16, DEX 18, CON 14, INT 12, WIS 12, CHA 18
Base Atk +7; CMB +10; CMD 24
Feats: Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Toughness, Multiattack,
Skills Knowledge Arcana +11, Intimidation +11, Perception +11, Sense Motive +11, Spellcraft +11, Knowledge (planes) +11, Stealth +14
Languages Abyssal, Common

SPECIAL ABILITIES
Division(Su)
When the demon is reduced to 0 hit points, it divides into a pair of blue horrors. These blue horrors are Small size and have half the Pink demon's HD. Their skills are similar, but are based on their smaller HDs.

If a blue horror is not destroyed, it transforms into a pink horror in 9 days and regains all its HD.

The pink horror and the blue horrors that it divides into are counted as a single creature for the purpose of awarding experience points.

Blue Horror of Tzeentch
CE Small outsider (chaotic, demon, evil, extraplanar)
Init +9; Senses darkvision 60 ft., see invisibility; Perception +8

DEFENSE
AC 20, touch 16, flat-footed 15 (+5 Dex, +4 natural, +1 size)
hp 30 (4d10 + 8)
Fort +1, Ref +4, Will +4
Defensive Abilities; DR 5/cold iron or magic; Immune electricity, poison; Resist acid 5, cold 5, fire 5; SR 14

OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft.
Melee  : 3 claws +7 (1d3+2), bite +7 (1d6+2)
Ranged : Hurl Flame +5 (3d6 fire; range 60 ft.)
Space 5 ft.; Reach 5 ft.

Spell-Like Abilities (CL 4th)
Constant—see invisibility
At will: Vicious Mockery, Misty Step

STATISTICS
STR 14, DEX 20, CON 14, INT 12, WIS 12, CHA 18
Base Atk +4; CMB +6; CMD 21
Feats: Improved Initiative, Iron Will
Skills Knowledge Arcana +8, Intimidation +8, Perception +8, Sense Motive +8, Spellcraft +8, Knowledge (planes) +8, Stealth +12
Languages Abyssal, Common

Vicious Mockery
Casting Time: Standard action
Range: 60 feet
You unleash a string of insults laced with subtle enchantments at a creature you can see within range. If the target can hear you (though it need not understand you), it must succeed on a DC 11 Will saving throw or take 1d4 psychic damage and have a -2 penalty on the next attack roll it makes before the end of its next turn.

Misty Step
Casting Time: Swift action
Range: Self
Briefly surrounded by silvery mist, you teleport up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space that you can see.

Sorry, I don't know anything about Tzeentch, so I have no comments there.

I wanted to ask about movement rules.  I don't see anything that prevents this, but it seems like cheating to me.

Standing at a T in a hallway, where halls are only wide enough for one person.  Villain steps back from the T enough that only one PC could reach him at a time.  PC 1 takes his attack, then makes a 5-foot step back and to our right, then PC 2 makes a ranged attack which is not through an occupied square,  finally PC 3 makes a 5-foot step and takes his attack.  Since they are only 5-foot steps, there's no AoO, but they are getting three attacks per round.

==================
        23
======+ 1 +=======
      | V |
      |   |

This seems to conform to the movement rules, to me, but it feels wrong.  What am I missing?

In reply to Zag24 (msg # 234):

Need a bit better map. Is it like this?



I would say you cannot make a 5 foot step on a diagonal past a corner.

That is what I was trying to indicate, but this is actually natural cave and not constructed, so the corners are rounded.

If its like this



Then what they did is legal. I would even let them occupy B2 and D2

Yeah, that's closer to the case I was thinking of.

You would?  OK, thanks.  My compromise was that two of them could stand in the restricted space of B2, C2, D2, and the archer could stand behind but was still shooting through an occupied space and therefore at -4.

In reply to Zag24 (msg # 238):

Pathfinder combat is not simultaneous. The archer should not have had a penalty since there was nobody in front of him. You can certainly call row 2 as having 2 squares there, but then Line of Sight gets a bit tricky.

Another rules question:

A player has a barbarian with Rage power Animal Fury https://www.d20pfsrd.com/class...owers/animal-fury-ex

First, what does the "(Ex)" in its name signify?  I looked all around on the Rage Powers page; a lot of them have the designation but I couldn't find where it was defined.

Second, this player also has the two-weapon fighting feat and is using a double weapon.  If he takes a full-round action, does he get all three attacks, but two from the double weapon at -2, and the bite at -5?  Right now he (a half-orc) is fighting a goblin (who is a 4th level fighter, so it's not over in one round) so I have a hard time picturing how he'd get a bite in.

Page 554 of the Core Rule Book.

The following special abilities include rules commonly used by a number of creatures, spells, and traps.

Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical. They are, however, not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training. Effects or areas that suppress or negate magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities.

Spell-Like Abilities (Sp): Spell-like abilities, as the name implies, are magical abilities that are very much like spells. Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). Spell-like abilities can be dispelled but they cannot be counterspelled or used to counterspell.

Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.

Hope that helps.

Assuming a BAB under +6, yes;

1. One at full attack bonus -2 that adds full Strength mod to damage
   
2. One with the other wise of the double weapon, also at full attack bonus -2, but only adds half the strength mod to damage
   
3. One bite at full attack bonus -5, that only adds half the strength mod to damage

The mechanics of how you bite the goblin are less important to the mechanics of the game.  A combat round is supposed to be 6 seconds; there are plenty of other issues with real world physics when you consider that the right Feat selection might give your barbarian more than half a dozen attacks at high level, and if you somehow get Pounce they might come after a 90' sprint.

Easy peasy.

Stab normal. Stab dropping to your knee, Bite it in the face.

Got a question on Wild Empathy, Handle Animals and Charm Animals.

Here is the situation, a Druid wishes to make friends and train a wild Gar he came across. He casts a Charm Animal spell which works. This allows him to maintain a friendly attitude with the creature to use the Wild Empathy (which works like a Diplomacy), but how can he influence the attitude of a creature if it is already charmed so he can use Handle Animals on it?

How would you put all of this together?

Please note, the creature's attidude hasn't changed, it is mearly being treated as friendly for the duration of the spell.

Thus, to improve its attitude (which is treated as friendly), you roll diplomacy (/diplo stand in skill).

Success improves its actual attitude for 1d4 hours, but it is still treated as friendly for the duration of the spell. (Thus casting charm person on a Helpful creature would actually drop it to treating you as friendly for the duration of the spell.)

Basic run down:
Unfriendly creature gets charmed.
Unfriendly Creature is treated as Friendly
PC succeeds at diplomacy(needing only to beat DC 10, rolls a 20, improving attitude the max of twice) to improved the unfriendly creature's actual attitude to friendly. It is still treated as friendly for the duration of the spell.  Once the spell wears off, the creature's diplomacy attitude of friendly continues out until it wears off and the creature returns to its original unfriendly attitude.

Thus:
Creature is Unfriendly, gets treated as friendly while under the spell, character improves the unfriendly actual attitude with diplomacy, the spell ends, the creature operates under the improved diplomacy attitude up to the rolled duration, then returns to its actual attitude of unfriendly.

Yes, I can see what you are saying. I would give a Circumstance bonus to the Wild Empathy attempts after the Charm spell wares of (if the creature was not forced to do something against its nature). Anywhere from +1 to +5 seems right.

Without the Charm Animal spell, the way to do it would be to try an Handle Animal Push Down trick (DC25 check), and then if it works you can try the Wild Empathy to change its attitude.

Tough, but doable. Had a Ratfolk Druid get some Dire rats as pets this way and then take some weeks to train them.

How do you handle identification of magic items?  It seems unnecessarily easy for a relatively easy Spellcraft roll (especially if you're getting the +10 from Identify) to tell you everything about a magic item.  This came up because we have some potions to identify.  In my old-school games way back, Identify cost 100gp to cast, so one never bothered to use it on potions.  You just took a sip, hoped it didn't kill you, and tried to figure it out from what it did to you.  It was fun in the short term, but did get old after a while.

Identify says:

Curiously, neither Detect Magic nor Spellcraft say anything about command words.

Detect Magic says:

All that Spellcraft says is

Which doesn't seem like it is saying that you learn any more than Auras and potency, leaving you still to guess, perhaps to take a sip. (The specific question came up re a potion.)  Does the term "properties" refer to any more than that?

How do you do it?  Does anyone know what the rules really intended?
This message was last edited by the player at 01:01, Sat 27 June 2020.

Generally?  That the command word is a function of the general properties.  I have also never run or played a Pathfinder game where the whole check was skipped; pretty much any arcane caster, if not any caster, is all but guaranteed to make the check.  Casters without spellbooks might have a little more trouble, but inevitably the only cost is under half a minute.  Assuming taking Spellcraft, a week's worth of downtime should all but guarantee success especially if splurging on Identify (2 silver per casting in Pathfinder, and functionally good for one item per caster level).

Yeah, that was pretty much the attitude the mage in my game was taking.  She expected that, with just a little downtime, she'd know everything about them.  It seems to take some of the fun out of it, for me, but I can't exactly express why.

The lawyer in me (no, not a lawyer), wants to point out that the phrase "to identify the properties and command words" that appear in the Identify spell's description implies that command words are NOT properties.  But I guess I'm swimming against the flow, here.

It might also depend on the item they are looking at. You might require the caster to do some research (see a sage) to get some information that will help them determine it. A wand maker that always used the same command word might be easier to determine.

So, I found something for the lawyer in you in the 'Using Magic Items' section.



In terms of rolling to identify, here's some math to consider;

The DC is 15+the item's caster level.  Assuming 1) an elf wizard with an intelligence bonus of +4 identifying 2) an item of the same caster level who 3) didn't skimp on Spellcraft; that's +4 for Int, +3 for class skill, +2 for the racial bonus, and then Spellcraft to cancel out the level variable.  The check succeeds on a roll of 6 if using Detect Magic, which doesn't cost anything and can be repeated every day.  Given that rules as written do not present automatic failure on skill checks on a roll of 1, success is automatic if the PC spends 2 silver to cast identify so long as the item caster level is no lore than 5 higher than the PC.  Six or higher is 5% of failure, and a retry requires the next day and another 2 silver.  That gap starts widening once the wizard's intelligence starts going up or dependent on half a dozen possible items.

In reply to Buck.Davidson (msg # 251):



Assuming that the GM allows you to take 20, you can pretty much be guaranteed to succeed.  That means it takes a total of 6 minutes to complete the examination.

But until the mage is 6th level, the Detect Magic will not last that long.  If you have to cast it again, do you have to reset your 6 minutes of taking a 20?
This message was last edited by the player at 19:21, Sat 27 June 2020.

In reply to Zag24 (msg # 253):

Identify lasts 3 rounds per caster level, so there's your trade off.   Personally, I wouldn't expect to do much in the way of magic item identification below 6th level.

Identifying magic items can only be tried once per item per day, so caster level is a moot point.

Again, it is a GM call to force the roll or not, but I personally find it an unnecessary mechanic.

For most standard items, I agree with Buck.Davidson.

Potions can be can be sampled to determine the nature of the liquid inside with a Perception check. The DC of this check is equal to 15 + the spell level of the potion

Scrolls can be deciphered with successful Spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level)

Stuff like +1 items, wands and other low level magic PCs should be able to id pretty easily with a Detect Magic and a Spellcraft.

When things get higher level, if the part has a Wizard it should not be much more difficult either.

Not knowing what a magical artifact does or how to use it is part of the fun and is a big sexy adventure hook in and of itself.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 257):

It can be, but it can also be very frustrating. Know your players.

Flanking rules.

Two PCs are on opposite sides of an enemy, so they would both get the +2 flanking bonus.  HOWEVER, one of the PCs is invisible (and really quiet, on his big, bare, hairy feet) and the enemy has no idea that he is there.  As far as the enemy is concerned, there is only one PC he is fighting.  So does it make sense for the PC in front of the enemy to get the flanking bonus?

It turns out not to matter, in this case, because the two-weapon-fighting rogue with double sneak attacks killed the guy in one round, but I was curious for if it comes up again.

Whenever I have GM'd in a situation such as this I've not allowed the flanking bonus for the visible PC until the invisible one has struck and thus made himself known.

Here are the key phrases when judging this:



When you look at Threatened or Stealth or Concealment (all other relevant sections) there are no provisions that would block a hidden character from threatening a square.

RAW is the opponent is threatened even if they aren't aware of the other attacker. You could rule this by saying that they just have this "feeling" that something is there. Air movement, sound, a flicker of the light, anything that would distract them.

Another thing to keep in mind is you can flank mindless creatures so "awareness" is only part of the process.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 261):

 In theory the invisible character gets the defender Flat-footed and the other visible one is s.o.l. The defenders attention should be split to get flanking. It's why this works. And why I put my melee fighters with one of two things.

 Back to the wall
 Back to back with another melee character.

  Literally only have to worry about a 180 arc then and that means no flanking bonuses.

This is pretty much why I run it like I do. Both the person in front, and the defender have to perceive the invisible person. The prickly hair feeling means the person passed a perception check to notice them, in theory, otherwise there would be no reason for the hairs on the back of their necks to be rising.

I understand your logic but the RAW as well as comments made by the game designers say otherwise.

Let me flip it around. Have you ever heard a noise or swore you had the feeling of being watched or tripped over something but when you turn and look there's nothing?

That is what I would interpret it as. Just as Person A is striking at Person B, Invisible C blows on their neck or wooshes a dagger close to their ear or just puts their foot out so when Person B dodges they stumble a little bit.

Person B might turn around thinking there is a threat behind him but they see nothing and have to quickly turn back to focus on Person A again.

Invisible C has created an opening for precision striking without breaking their enchantment through direct attack & damage.

Granted this is a REALLY niche ruling and I think it is barely even a house rule to say otherwise.

I will say that to the best of my ability that this is preserved in 2e as well. You can be undetected to an enemy and still cause them to be flanked HOWEVER I believe that the act of flanking might break the invisibility spell. Flanking specifies that you cannot be under any effect that prevents you from attacking and invisibility is broken when you attack so...

It's a good question. I would right now rule that in 2e at least that if you are invisible and undetected you can trigger a flanking situation but that counts as a hostile action and it breaks the invisibility spell.

So, what do you think would be a fair ransom for a Minor Lord (Human Paladin 4 / Aristocrat 1)?

That's depends. Even a minor lord can be worth a pretty penny depend on how rich and popular he actually is. If you study medieval Europe there were a few mayors and Baron's that were worth just as much in ransom as any King.

In reply to godlearner (msg # 265):

Not to be flippant, but the "right" answer is probably along the lines of: Whatever they think they can get for him.

The correct answer really depends on local economy and as mentioned what you can get away with.

HOWEVER if you want a baseline here goes.

In the world today the average "kidnapping-for-ransom" ransom request is $1 million dollars. Often a negotiator comes into play and the average actual payout drops down to about $350,000.

According to Game Room Creations, 1gp = $10 so the "average" payout would be something like 35,000gp but that is assuming the noble family is a wealthy one.

One wouldn't kidnap a peasant and expect to get thousands of gold for it.



So on that exchange it would be worth something like 8,200gp so I think we're narrowing down our range here.

Depending on how minor a noble and how prestigious the family I would guesstimate anywhere from 1,000gp to 50,000gp depending on what they think they can get away with.

Well, the PCs grabbed him as a result of a random encounter, so I really did not have a background written up for the fellow. They do not have a Know Nobility to find out much about his family. I am thinking of basing the ransom amount equal to the starting cash for a NPC of his level which would be around 2,500 gp.

It also depends if the family wants him back, big difference if he is the 1st son or the 6th.
The family might also be out for blood for capturing him. Maybe some NPC'S might try to free him if the family has connections or offered a sizable bounty on the party. Could also be a Ransom of Red Chief tale.

You may want to fine tune the family as they could end up being a key part of the campaign. If you have something like Central Casting, Heroes of Legend, that might help.

This sounds like a potential plot hook now.
It could also be that he's not worth all that much but perhaps the family knows adventurers of their own that they will ask to retrieve him.

It possible. What happened was that a party of level 4 Skaven (Ratfolk) consisting of a Barbarian, Druid, Slayer/Rogue, an Alchemist and a NPC Rat Ogre were moving from their home base to a dungeon area they were exploring. On the way a random encounter roll resulted them coming upon a broken down stage coach (2x stage coachman Warriors lvl 2, an Elven Ranger lvl3, Aristocrat lvl 3 and her bodyguard lvl 4 and the Paladin/Noble 4/1).

The PCs attacked with surprise and took down the coachman in the first round, however the Paladin managed to hold off the Rat Ogre long enough for the noblewoman to be dragged away by her bodyguard. He actually managed to take down the Rat Ogre, that Smite Evil and Lay on Hands as swift action really caused a lot of pain, but the Slayer and Barbarian proved too much as they were able to flank him. Once the paladin went down the elf fled as well.

Surprisingly the Skaven have decided not to kill the Paladin outright, which I thought they were going to do initially and they do have contacts with the thieves guild in the near by city, so ransom is a likely possibility. Of course they are also planning to keep all of his equipment. Pretty cool fight altogether

A rescue attempt is unlikely, but the Paladin will surely swear an oath to hunt them and their kin down.

I would imagine people are ransomed for far more than the gear they have on them. Probably an order of magnitude more.

Just a thought, what if they ransom him for 25,000gp. Or even 100,000gp. And the family pays up. Congrats, you have a fat sack of gold stamped with the noble's seal and every bard across the land letting everyone know you kidnapped and ransomed a noble who turns out was actually a bit of a celebrity. Now comes the adventure of getting that gold out of that nation so they can actually spend it without the guard and knights and bounty hunters being called in on them :D

You can make the PCs earn it...retroactively. Or you can always do what the Order of the Stick did...

My game just folded abruptly today. Is anyone needing a player?

For 1e or 2e?

In reply to praguepride (msg # 275):

I'm can play either version. I played both versions at GenCon, so I'm pretty familiar with the differences. I like to play Investigators, and rogues types, but I can play whatever is needed.

I'm going to create a monster, an end boss. A boss for an added-on storyline to an adventure path I'm playing with some friends irl. I've never designed anything so big, and I don't have any experience of combat at levels above 13, this boss will be for level 18 or so. Do you all have any recommendations for where to read about how to do this well? Guidelines?
Do you know of any base creatures or abilities that I could adapt into my boss?

The creature in question will be a highly intelligent Div, a being "spawned from corrupted genies.
The being will have awesome divination powers to be able to tell the future and cause misfortune in the most planned and evil ways. It will have great ice-powers. One of the characters in the party is spawned from the blood of this being, and is being used as a pawn by it. The being strives to become a god, and if it succeeds it probably will surpass and replace Zyphus as the god of accidental deaths... Perhaps I can even involve attempts from Zyphus to get in on this battle in some way...

Any ideas, tips, inspiration or brainstorm you have to share with me is much appreciated!

Here are my thoughts

1) Re-skin an existing monster. Find something that is CR 18 that is kind of sort of along the lines of what you're looking for and build using that.

2) Get ready to either number crunch or fudge on the fly. Proper enemy design would involve studying the capabilities of your party, finding out the expected damage output vs. how many rounds you want the fight to last to determine HP but you can also fudge the math and just say "the boss has as many HP as I say it does". The goal is to have a fight that pushes the party and has some cool dramatic moments but also doesn't drag on too long either. Nobody wants to sit for 20 turns just hacking away at a boring HP sponge...

3) Give them some cool cinematic powers. Something unique and flashy. Make sure they survive to do their super cool schtick combo at least once. It is also important that it has cool flashy powers to make combat more exciting so it isn't just "I swing my sword, you swing your sword" for twenty rounds.

4) Consider taking a page from video games and have a layered boss battle. Stage 1 has the players face off against the boss for a few rounds and either at X number of rounds or when the boss reaches 50% health an EXPLOSION happens and the party is separated from the boss and now a bunch of minions rush in. It gives the players a bit of a breather to rebuff/heal but also keeps the pressure and momentum going (and also allows you to have the boss buff and heal as well so when they face off again it is full one-winged angel!)

5) Keep your party, its members and abilities in front of your mind at all times. Whatever you pick as your boss make sure you think about how the PCs would actually conquer it based on their players and play styles. It is probably going to be very disappointing if you make a complex puzzle boss fight but have a group of very straight forward "kick the door, stab the monster" style players.

6) High level gameplay is wildly broken so don't worry if you play more by feel than by the rules. If you prowl the forums you will see infamous level 20 builds that can take on the entire monster manual without ever taking a scratch. At lvl 18 especially you will be facing the "linear fighter, quadratic wizard" problem head on where it is very easy to just completely negate the abilities of half the classes if they are not equipped properly. Kind of going to #5 things like "can the fighter get into range? can the wizard shut everything down turn 1? is the rogue just going to jump on it, pop the portable hole into the bag of holding and blow everything up/suck everything into the astral plane?

You might also give the monster levels on a character class based on their primary ability.

Don't know what kind of clerics you might have but if the gods are directly involved I have always thought a cleric's list not coming up as he or she asked.
Can be considered a WARNING about what divine or semi-divine trouble they might be facing.

In reply to praguepride (msg # 278):

Thanks all for your input, and I think I will especially pay attention to the point about designing the story & encounter rather than the opponent (damn, I'll make sure to do that several other times with pre-written enemies aswell...). Many times the beauty of this game is how the rules can make the story cool, so I'll have to find a balance between fudging it to create story and having designed the enemy beforehand. I never played rpg with figures and maps before pathfinder, and wouldn't play it with these accessories if not for the fact that by evening out the control over the environment (being able to measure, knowing where the enemy is relative to oneself and not just how the DM describes it) I allow the players to create strategy and design their method of attack in an engaging, exciting and fun way where not just dice and DM fiat decide the outcome. So, now to create enough rules that its a proper pathfinder encounter, but also create the cinematics of the encounter.

@Toddy, I have no clerics in the party, but there is a druid. I'm planning on putting his master into the story, passing by occasionally, and as someone divining the fate of the land and the fate of the individuals in it, making the ley-line archetype his specialization - following the woven strands of fate. Perhaps I can make the druid player start following these strands aswell, only to have them twist and knot up wildly as they approach the encounter with this being which has plotted and twisted its own fate since generations back...

In reply to Kegdrainer (msg # 279):

I will for sure give the monster class levels. An issue I have is that the monster is the progeny of a sorcerer in my group, an elemental bloodline sorcerer. Now, how to make their power matching interesting, when by pathfinder logic (and actual class abilities) they're probably both immune to their main elemental damage output at this point..? :P

Think of the boss encounters you've faced before in video games and translate those mechanics.

For example, say it has a shifting immunity. Perhaps it is always immune to the last energy type it is hit with, so yeah you can hit him for ice but not two times in a row...

What are the rules for a human ridding a mule?

Not normally possible as per rules. People IRL do use mules but as per online the weight limit is pretty low, only 220lbs according to a grand canyon tour and that is really only a couple days of "light" riding. They basically only go at a slow walk.

I would rule as follows:

- If you can be carried by a mule (i.e. your total weight is less than its carry score) then congrats, you're "riding" a mule but in actuality you're being carried like the world's worst backpack.

- Anything that refers to specifically being mounted (e.g. mounted combat, lance charges etc.) don't apply because you aren't "mounted", you're being "carried".

- Use encumbrance rules to check if movement is reduced.

I have a question about the rogue talent 'Lethal Acrobatics': https://www.d20pfsrd.com/class...ts/lethal-acrobatics

The effect is leaving the opponent flat-footed, which means they don't get their dex bonus to AC.  This implies that the rogue can make a sneak attack against them.  Right?  That seems a little overpowered to me, compared to some of the other talents.

Unless they can get an additional Move Action, they can only make one attack which makes it fairly balanced.

To clarify there is a lot going on:

1) It takes a move action to use acrobatics in this way so right off the bat the rogue cannot make a full-round attack and thus is typically limited to only a single attack.

2) Moving through an opponents square is difficult. Not impossible if you focus on pumping acrobatics but it is a consideration in leveling that keeps the rogue from focusing on other areas.

3) It specifically says "next attack" so even if the rogue is somehow able to make multiple attacks, only the next one is subject to the sneak attack.

It would pair well with Vital Strike.

For clarity, how does two weapon fighting work when you're not making a full attack? I would assume you only make a single offhand attack.

Would you consider a darkwood shield to be light for an offhand weapon when used to shield bash with twf?

When not making a full-attack you make a single attack with your primary hand.

A light shield is considered a light weapon. A heavy shield is not. Even though it specifies that darkwood is lighter than regular wood it isn't just weight that makes a weapon "light" but also how easy it is to wield. Spears can be quite light but their large size makes them unwieldly to use.

Looking at actual pictures of shields, a buckler is about the size of a large dinner plate, a "light" shield (aka a small round) would be able to cover about hand to shoulder, a "heavy" shield (aka kite or heater) covers chest to knees and a tower covers chin to feet.

I never understood bucklers and small shields. Aside from just looking stupid they provided little to no actual value besides getting your arm broken. :p

In reality a buckler or small shield is ideal for deflecting attacks. You wouldn't want to block a melee attack, just push it to the side to create an opening.

Deflecting attacks...That involves sticking your arm in the way of something determined to cut, smash, puncture, bash, or stab you. It doesn't deflect any better than a larger, heavier shield and blocks even less. :P

So I, uh, would have to disagree that it is ideal. I would say it's only (kinda) useful for deflecting weak attacks.

You could say the same and more about a parrying dagger. But without specifying what you're defending against and the situation you expect to do it in, optimal solutions will vary. And the technology and resources available! Pretty sure it wasn't just the in thing to get shot by an arrow. :)
This message was last edited by the player at 22:34, Tue 02 Mar 2021.

Touche!

I was over simplifying when I said deflecting. It not only allows you to deflect but also allows you to control your opponents attack options while at the same time concealing your intent. If you hold an 18" plate out in front of you, you can conceal the setup for your next strike as your opponent cannot see you hand position.
Again holding that plate in front of you, limits your attackers options in that if you hold it to one side then they know that you are going to bat an attack coming from that angle away so they will need to attack from a different angle.
not to mention an edge-on swipe with a metal buckle can break a forearm.

There are lots of reasons to use specific pieces of equipment. Would I want a buckler if I were facing a line of mounted cavalry? Not likely. Against a nimble single opponent? Sure!

I'd pay to see that!

I'd pay to not be in that line

No opinion on the shield issue.  A new question:

I have this trait.  Blessed Touch:  You heal 1 additional point of damage when using lay on hands, channeling energy, or casting a cure spell.

I also have the Brew Potion feat, with which I fully plan to brew some Cure Light Wounds and Cure Moderate Wounds potions.  I know that you have to cast the spell to create the potion -- it quite specifically says that you have to have the spell memorized, and it is used up as part of the brewing process, which, to me, essentially means you are casting it.  So, does my trait apply to the spell contained in the potion?

I would say no, because you're not actually healing anything. You're crafting a magic item with Brew Potion. It doesn't say you do additional damage to undead, either, so the part that matters is using your hand on another living creature and applying a heal.

I've seen a lot of GMs houserule that mithril weapons are also treated as a category lighter in the same way as mithril armor (one-handed becomes light, and so on) which on the house-rules level can be added/adjusted easily enough for special shields.

Regarding item creation, RAW no - you never actually cast the spell; you expend it, as you would any other reagent, but it never actually is treated as cast: Emphasis mine.

On the other hand, the person who uses a potion is treated as the caster......so theoretically you would get the extra point of healing if you used your own potion, or any other healing potion you drank.

They're treated as both caster and target pertaining to effects of the spell, possibly including dismissing, directing, or suppressing the spell effects when the spell allows, but not for effects decided at casting.

However, crafting an item is not casting a spell so would not benefit from the trait. Unless there is a feat I am unaware of, the only thing you can control when crafting a CLW potion is adding metamagic or increasing caster level above minimum to a maximum of your own caster level.

I would say ultimately this is a fair DM call. I think based on the wording a GM could reasonably argue the following

1) It does not apply because the spell isn't being cast, it is being expended as part of item creation.

2) The spell is treated as if being cast so it does count in all instances.

3) When you drink a potion it applies to yourself because the potion treats you as the caster.


I personally would rule on the second option (does not apply) because when I look at the flavor text around the trait:



The part I bolded is the critical part of fluff as to why your heals are slightly better. As a GM I would not rule that this divine channel can be "stored" in a potion or item. It is intrinsically related to the character and that moment of channeling the divine.

So not really an "ask" but a "tell" for GMs running 2e games. This took me way too long to figure out.

To award XP first identify what kind of encounter it is going to be (trivial, low, moderate, severe extreme). You get an XP budget ranging from 40 (trivial) to 160 (extreme) and then make adjustments based on party size above/below the standard 4 (10xp per xtra/missing PC on trivial up to 40xp per PC on extreme)

That is encounter building but when you reward XP at the end, you ignore adjustments for party size. So if you had a party of 2 and did a moderate encounter your starting XP budget is 80 but you would -40 for the missing party members so your end result is 40xp for traps/monsters but at the end of the encounter, each PC is awarded 80xp.

On the flipside if you have a party of 8 and want to give them a moderate challenge then you would again start with 80xp +80 for the extra PCs for a total budget of 160xp but again when the encounter is over you only award the base encounter level (80xp) to each character.

I was very confused at first because I thought the way XP was awarded meant that larger parties would level up much faster than smaller ones but somewhere in the rules it mentions that you ignore party size modifiers when you award XP.

Anyway I hope that clears things up for anyone running 2e Pathfinder.

Why would you use books or a system to dictate how much xp to give? Especially in an online game where things move at a crawl and it could take weeks or months to get a new piece of gear or finish a single encounter. I'm not trying to be snide. I'm serious. one of the ways I retain players and keep them happy is by not being stingy. :D

If you want to speed up growth and rewards for PbP you can use a multiplier, but the formulae help ensure that the growth and rewards match the challenge. Players would likely be disappointed if slaying the dragon got them comparable rewards to that small band of goblins.

It also helps ensure you aren't giving the players a bigger challenge than they can handle or too little challenge to be interesting. If you're confident you can just wing it; great.

But beware resorting to Deus Ex Machina if you throw too much at them. XD It doesn't feel right if the balrog goes down too easily or the wyvern somehow withstands the high-rolled critical hit from the spear-wielding, raging half-orc. An earned loss is better than a fudged win, so long as the encounter wasn't stacked against the players.

I just wing it.

I dont get the Deus Ex Machina reference. It sounds like an anime thing.

In my games, players don't encounter bands of goblins. They don't join my games for that. They can join any haphazard group of low level randoms in a game that might last 3 months for that. I tailor every encounter, puzzle, and item of value to a specific character or purpose. A favorite encounter that the (at the time) entire party enjoyed was a basilisk that was actually the pet of a teenage medusa druid, who in turn guided them (after chastizing them for trying to kill her pet) away from a haunted grove and set them on the correct path. This encounter was neat because nobody had ever seen it before. Yet it made perfect sense and touched on the combat, puzzle, and social itches of the players.

I level and reward players as I see fit. I do have a system in place to self award experience based on quantity and quality of interaction. I've got an alternate "Storybucks" system that allows them to bend the rules and stack encounters in their favor, like rerolling a d20, assigning a debuff to enemy attacks for the encounter, or making sure the next attack is a crit, etc.

Sometimes it IS sweet when you wreck the enemy mage with a single smash from a maul after a charge. Sometimes that wyvern is tough as nails and can take a beating better than others.

I guess what I am getting at is this: Why slow things down at all when inevitably your players like it better when things move faster? It just seems like using a system designed for tabletop purposes to assist (for lack of better words) unimaginitive DMs is counter productive to good DMing on a PbP game.

deus ex machina:


I am very curious about this system you speak of, "to self award experience based on quantity and quality of interaction". Could you expound?
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 05:39, Fri 12 Mar 2021.

Ahh. Deus Ex Machina is the same think as a Cheese, a McGuffin, and a DM Magic Wand, except it's blatantly obvious. In other words, it's stupid bad storytelling. :P

As to the system I use, yeah.

There are so many of you at this point and besides. This thread is overdue. I made this thread editable so you all can keep it updated yourselves. Here is how it works. You get 50exp for every 25 posts in a thread (round down) x4. Then, you rate yourself on a scale of 1-3.  1 being a tagalong who didn't contribute much, your posts were often short, or you missed a large part of what was going on. 3 is that you smacked it out of the park. You paid careful attention to detail, you sold, positives and negatives, your posts all had substance, and nobody was regularly waiting on you to respond.  2 is obviously somewhere in the middle. Whichever this number is, you multiply your experience for the number of posts in a thread by it. That is your total for the thread.  So lets say a Thread had 72 posts in it. (50x2 = 100, 100x4 = 400) 400exp (round down) x2 because you were around and participated, but you were mostly background, too. So 2.  400 x2 = 800 exp for that completed thread.

Cool.

I'm running an exploration sandbox game, and I will be giving out XP for exploring new areas. Really have yet to quantify it yet.

The system is meant to help tie reward to challenge and challenge to character abilities. It can be sped up by simply using a multiplier. That is the answer.

If you don't want such a system, don't use it. But don't assume you are the sole arbiter of what 'good DMing' is or what all players want from a game. Not to judge, because maybe your style is loved by other players, but I have specifically chosen to avoid your games despite thirsting for more RPing. To each their own.

It means "God from the machine" and goes all the way back to ancient Greek tragedies when gods would appear on stage by being lowered from a crane or raised through a trapdoor or some other showy means, so the audience would know they were gods. And then they would do their thing that might help or hinder the hero (and definitely piss off some other god), and depart the same way.

So yes, blatantly obvious. And probably stupid bad storytelling, unless used for their original intent, to set up the adventure, not solve it.

Well I mean, as a player, I would expect more from a DM than to save a pc or npc from certain doom (or cause it) by having random "WTF?!?!" show up out of nowhere. I would think my players expect more out of me too.

Yes, of course, it goes without saying that "out of nowhere" occasionally does happen in legit ways. In my experience it is more common in game like Vampire with 50 cast members and the players were deliverately misdirected by the cast so they don't see what is lurking around the corner waiting to swoop in. But then that is a completely different genre. Part of the game is blindsiding your rivals.

Deus Ex Machina has a lot more nuance and isn't always just a cop out.

THAT BEING SAID....



It has a really interesting history. It was very popular (relatively speaking) during the ancient greeks back when gods were center stage of a lot of their tales. Then it went out of vogue for awhile as an unneeded trope but came back in the early 1900s during early film industry because of the Hayes Codes saying evil villains absolutely cannot win.

I think one of the best examples of a "positive" Deus Ex Machina is from Stranger Than Fiction (2006) where "god" saves the life of the main character after he basically earns her sympathy and respect throughout the movie.

Also this is a frequent source of parody. In Dodgeball, the "chest of gold" that saves the day has Deus Ex Machina engraved on it. Monty Python also employs this quite abruptly. For example the Holy Hand Grenade that comes out of nowhere and resolves an obstacle is more akin to a "Machine from God" :D

As a general warning/reminder this is not the place to debate about general GM styles or the needs of Play-by-post. This is for asking Pathfinder specific questions.

Also Prague gets a bonk for blabbering on about the history of a trope. Just link whatever wiki you found about it and move on.


This message was last edited by the GM at 17:03, Fri 12 Mar 2021.

So I made a mistake. Recently restocked items in the main city in the campaign I’m running. I added a very cool and rather expensive axe to the list, the axe fits the preferences of the Druid in the group very well, he’s now saving up for it. Then I realize, two-three levels down the road, the characters will kill a boss and get access to her weapon - an iconic one, an exotic weapon, also an axe. These two weapons have very similar damage profiles although both are great and interesting. All-in-all the exotic weapon is better than the axe, but the damage output is pretty much the same.

Of course, I want this exotic weapon to make their mouths water. I want someone to use it. Help me think about how to accomplish this.

Party composition: two people fighting in melee, one sorcerer and one gunslinger (so only the first two are relevant).
- one Druid, planning on shapechanging into a giant and such, enlarge self, big attacks. Using a greataxe.
- one magus with a highly planned out, multiclassed character build. The magus is going for bastard swords to be able to use spellstrike sometimes and such, and has made plans to get a large bastard sword in order to stack damage dice with other effects before vital striking.

Exotic weapon: two handed, deals damage as a large greataxe (ie more than a large bastardsword).

Now, to put this in the Druid’s hands, I might not have needed to do anything. With luck, he might’ve just picked up the exotic feat and used the weapon. Now I “gave him” another one, on the market.
To put this in the magus’ hands... he could retrain his exotic proficiency and break even with a new weapon. I could try and make it even more enticing by giving them an ioun stone with the proficiency - essentially giving him a free feat for his progression planning? But, come to think of it, a magus needs a weapon that can be wielded in one hand. So unless I adapt the weapon rules to allow that, it won’t work out for him...

Soooo... my only option is to put the exotic weapon in the hands of the Druid, and I’ve now given the Druid a similar weapon that he might have before finding the exotic one. How do I get out of this? I got a mini-boss on the loose from an earlier encounter, does he make away with the market weapon and attack the PCs later? That would again put the weapon in their hands, however... did I screw up too much?