This thread is for everyone to post questions related to how things will work in the game and voice their pathfinder experiences and house rules that have worked, and the best ways to handle gestault and all class combinations being accepted.

I would also like to talk about the tech level of our world, as pathfinder does have steampunk aspects to it but the game was created to be fantasy.

My experience with pathfinder has been very limited, whereas many of you have a lot more experience with pathfinder. While I will make the final decisions I am extremely open and willing to listen to advice and suggestions.

I would like for us all to remember that part of the draw of the game is any class combination is allowed, as well as any character/srd rulebook.

Some questions I have already seen and topics we should discuss-

1. Androids and nanites (magically shrunken steampunk clockwork robots?)

2. 4 armed characters and the monster multi weapon feat

3. The simple fact that all classes are available, and gestault and basically what is the tech level and restrictions and the ever popular issue of are certain combinations considered to be to "Optimally built" I am inclined to say no so that we remain true to the any character idea can be played, and I'll just need to adjust encounter levels. But by doing so we allow the possibility that some rules gurus will know how to build a character that is built in a way to outperform other characters.

http://michaeliantorno.com/feat-taxes-in-pathfinder/

A pretty fascinating link that was submitted to me by Aikio Ebonfeather, I did a quick glance over it and like what I see, any comments or concerns before making this an official house rule?

It essentially gets rid of "feat taxes" that hinder players from taking the feats they want and forcing them to take feats they are not interested in taking.

In reply to League Historian (msg # 1):

A few questions, just to be sure.
First, do we use traits? And does that includes Story traits and Drawbacks?
Second, our starting wealth is the PC wealth on the Character Advancement table, right?
Third, what experience track do we use? Or will you go for a more abstract system?

As for the 'Feat Tax', that looks like an interesting house rule. I'd love to see it in the game.

I am torn on the "Feat Taxes" from PF.  One part of me wants to dig down and be curmudgeonly "Darn it if you want to play 5E then go play 5E."  The other part of me wants to embrace change and at least give it a chance "Stagnation is the bane of all creativity."  However, this seems to be a good medium to test it out.

Despite playing a summoner, I would generally suggest that players avoid going the multi-summoning route.  It's a ton of work for the player (and can also be a ton for the GM) and ends up completely breaking most encounter designs.

I'm looking at tech options and haven't really spotted anything that just screams that it's the right choice.

I don't have a strong opinion on the feat taxes.  My own tweaks when I run tend to be in the adding of skill points for various reasons.

Oh, speaking of skills, I do like this optional rule.
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/background-skills/

I will be keeping track of experience, being more abstract with it and will inform players when to level up. I believe I am going to base this off of quests completed and length of quest, and I'm working on some kind of happy medium for players who can post often(and therefore complete more quests in less time) and players who do not have the ability to post often. I would also like the game to have posts that are engaging and not all one liners simply for the sake of quickly completing a quest to "level up".

You are correct about wealth.

Yes, we are using traits as per the rulebook.

I am good with those skills for now, but I am not making it a house rule, as I intended to make all skills valuable in this game, especially things like profession and those skills taken less often. I do want to incorporate lore and artistry.

Something for everyone to keep in mind, I plan to have you guys unlock world secrets and ancient lore, and I also plan on making a God Pantheon. This will influence magic a bit. Go ahead and feel free to build your characters its just magic will be tailored to the pantheon/lore I'm building.

I really like the Feat Tax option. As for tech level, I've always been a fan of mixing high tech and fantasy, but in an appropriate manner. Nothing like killing a cyborg with a sword, then using your scanner to make sure the radiation from it's power core has dissipated before looting. Oh, and lighting up a stogie with your Zippo before beginning said looting...:-)

I think there is a steampunk supplement for PF?  That would be pretty keen too.

Oh, I was going to bring up the race builder guide.  I personally would love to use it.  If we do I would say to keep races at a point value equal to or lower than Aasimar (or the highest point race being played).
This message was last edited by the player at 18:34, Thu 05 July 2018.

I am also a fan of technology in my fantasy games, and steam punk is a wonderful blend between fantasy and technology. However, I built this game for an individual and therefore I want to make sure they are able to enjoy the game that was created in response to their request.

Here are the things in regards to technology I, as GM, would like to include-

1) Ships. Now, whether these are simply sailing ships and we have a world of Islands and therefore plenty of sailing, or these are ships that use rotors to fly(not a fan of balloons), I'm good. Of course I'm good if we don't, as I'm really quite agreeable, but I love the idea of each crew having a small ship they travel in, upgrade, and live in. But, that may get to "SciFi"ish for some.

2) Guns. Guns are cool. Guns are fun. They can also quickly become an issue because who and why would you use a bow or crossbow long term if you can use a gun? Sure,we could say they are expensive but I anticipate the majority of players being able to afford firearms. Stick to black powder weapons?

3) Where do we stop? In reality if we have steam punk robots, ships, and guns, do we have steampunk mech suits? With magic we open even more things, teleporters? shields? food replicators? The ability to compact weapons(think assassins creed). I am open to much of this, but as a community we have to decide what direction we all want this game to go in, what we want out world to look like, and how it works.


Speaking of being a community, I am a strong supporter of us gamers being there for each other. I encourage everyone to speak their mind respectfully, ask for help, offer help, and just be there for each other. Though we are online, a lot of us struggle with depression and starved social outlets, and rpol is our only outlet. Let's build this game into a community everyone.

Don't forget the awesome Technology Guide.

Hmmm, Deadly Aim and Power Attack as options rather than feats. Same thing with Pirahna Strike?

What about the leadership feat? Can I have my own little thieves guild on the side or do we want to stay clear of such things?

There has been at least one (Thunderscape), but the bigger question is whether it's on the SRD (generally, no).


Pathfinder, mechanically, doesn't function well with advanced firearms.  I'd be in favor of sticking with the early guns, instead.  As for the "why", the answer could simply be that chemistry is different in the game world and one of the components of gunpowder is expensive.  Even if you don't go that way, maybe they've only learned to make gunpowder using an ingredient that is expensive without realizing there's a cheap substitute, instead?  Technological development can be weird that way.

Gunslingers in PF are really very focused alchemists more than they're "guy that uses a gun".


Wherever you want it to go, really.  Magitech can explain pretty much anything while keeping magic important.

I am not opposed to players running factions, but it should be noted that by doing so one runs the risk of being discovered by The League for having an external faction they support, which indirectly violates or threatens said Pathfinders ability to uphold the articles. It's not an automatic disqualification, but it is a delicate game. Similar to Trump being president of the United States and owning/running several businesses for personal profit.

No comment yet about piranha strike, as I am currently working on the religion of the world and haven't checked it out. But with me, you can pretty much guarantee I'm good with it, and if we find it breaks the game unfairly then we will all work together to balance it out.

Those are great points Tora, and I agree. When it comes down to where do we stop, I'll leave that point to worked among us all, and what we think is to far. I feel as though we should stick to black powder weapons, for the simple fact they have only been recently developed, and most people see no reason to use firearms when they can cast a spell. Hence, though the possibility and reality that weapons could become incredibly powerful and dangerous is real, few have explored that route, and hence firearms are still relatively primitive compared to other technology.

Did I find the correct chart for character wealth? Maybe we should just post it somewhere.

I think it says that for level 8 we start with 33,000 gp. That is what we can use to purchase gear, right?

Thanks for the help.

Personally, I'm looking at 4 MW Aldori Dueling swords, and 3 sets of Effortless lace.....

The exotic weapon proficiency seems like a waste when weapon finesse is a "feat tax" and will probably not be a feat you have to take.

Dude....

Style is worth a feat in itself.

I read the sword incorrectly, the feat would be required to use the weapon finesse on the attack, lol.  But why 4?

Style...

That's a good suggestion Rood, I'll get onto that.

Style? Sword? Hm? I'm lost, lemme check that out.

The argument about why take bow or crossbow when guns are around. Why would modern man still us them???

Not trying to get the group to upgrade to a slightly downgraded semi-automatic but mayb just better then muzzle loader.

Bolt/breech loaded firearms a happy medium?

I like that, wild-west era. Bullets but having to manually cycle the weapon would be perfect.

Bows and crossbows dont make a sound... so there is that.

Bolt action still loses a lot of the complications of early firearms, making it much simpler to get it to a free action reload.  The only real drawbacks to firearms at that point are cost and noise.

---

How are we doing HP for characters and for pets?

Well, that's a fair argument Tora, so what can we do to help work things out?

Cpl Hicks, what is your biggest complaint about blackpowder? Is it a mechanics effect or flavor effect?

Tora, everyone else, what are your concerns with firearms that are not blackpowder?

HP is max first level, then rolled every level after, or you can take the average.

Starblade and I have been talking about racial points, and I'm looking at either 16 points or 18 points, leaning towards 18 but 16 is a good balance between what starblade found to be a happy medium(14-18), thoughts?
This message was last edited by the GM at 23:39, Thu 05 July 2018.

I have no problem with firearms at all. If it we're up to me, the occasional laser pistol or zero G rifle would show up. I'm probably not a good candidate to ask, however, as I mingle fantasy high tech in my own Hebrew world.

Ah, I don't have any actual problem with it, I'm just pointing out the obvious thing you have to balance against.

Well, the above and the fact that advanced firearms hit touch attacks at almost all ranges - not that musketeers didn't effectively do that anyway.

So everyone is okay with bolt action and breech loaded firearms?

I'm good with them...:-)

I have no issue with mechanics/chemical/physics of how it works. To be honest the same sort of weapon could be created through pure magic. In a past game I played a character that developed wands that would fire magic missile and mordi.’s force missile. They were the equivalent of modern firearms, so anything is possible.

What I am getting to, at Tora picked up on. I want to be able to fire like an archer or at least some where in that speed. I want the weapon to be able to fire at the rate of speed of a crossbow.

Sounds like Starblade’s player has done a bit of spelljamming back in the day.

Round about; bolt, breech, lever an/or pump are all fantastic ways to have firearms and not make them semi and full automatics.

I have flown through the phlogiston...from time to time...:-D

The only real difference is that you have to spend one feat on them (and no auto or burst fire).

Would you be happy with being able to have your rate, but then downside being a reload that's not a free action once said ammunition is discharged?

So,  it takes a full round to reload, but if you take the rapid reload it's only a move action?

Personally, I don't have a problem with the free action reload.  Rapid shot is bow-only, so there's still a reason to use bows.  You also don't get to add your strength mod to guns (though you can get your dex mod if you go far enough in gunslinger).

The best reason why guns aren't everywhere is that advanced firearms bullets cost 15g each.  Even if you do the feat thing that reduces it to 1.5g, you're still crazy expensive compared to the 5cp arrow.

You can use Rapid Shot with a firearm. It just says ranged weapon in the description of the feat.

This is why I should look things up... Manyshot is the one you can't use with a gun.  I knew there was a one attack difference somewhere.

You can use clustered shots with both, which is probably more important.

Um, was there a ruling on the race guide?

Well, Kass has a race I let them take  (Kasatha(?)) And it is 20rp, I just asked them if they Could take away 2-4 racial traits to get the cost down to 16 or 18, since I've heard that seems to be the general consensus is that 16 is the best, 18 is pushing it but cool.

Otherwise I'm allowing all races, we just need to establish race point limit. Or does it matter?

Oh, there definitely needs to be a limit since if there is none then everyone should be drow nobles...:-p

I'm playing an android, which is 16RP (sorta - it's honestly kind of overrated if you don't do one of the two or three completely OP things with it) so 16-18 seems fair.  To keep things from getting too wild, you might want to put some restrictions on how far things can vary.  Or not.  However.

Well, by keeping the point total below 20 you nip a lot of the craziness in the butt. Staying in the advanced category and not spilling over into the monstrous category is in and of itself a very good limiting factor.

So let's just give it a range of 16-20? Or stop at 18? I'm not experienced with pathfinder(clearly) so that's why I'm leaving it up to you guys so much, I want the most we can get without going overboard.

I'd say stop at 20. You stay in the advanced range and it lets your other player keep the race he/she wants without lowering some of their abilities.

I was planning on just making a basic human...

Side note: But could I use some of those extra RP and customize the genetic heritage a little???
This message was last edited by the player at 03:23, Fri 06 July 2018.

19 or lower makes them "advanced races" which makes it so you can't give your race "Monstrous" traits (and those are the real rough ones).

if you want to use the points I would suggest just making an entire new race and giving them the human traits you want.  At least I would prefer that X = Human.  You can even say they are an offshoot or mutated human?
This message was last edited by the player at 03:43, Fri 06 July 2018.

I'm down to make those extra race points available to players who choose "cheaper" races.

Are you sure it is 19 and lower? When I choose the option in Hero Lab, it is 10-20 and it won't let me pick the monstrous abilities.

SRD says 11-20 is advanced, but also says 20+ is monstrous.  I would lean to them meaning >20 is Monstrous.
This message was last edited by the player at 03:49, Fri 06 July 2018.

Table 4–1: Racial Points and Trait
Maximums by Power Level


I guess the chart is a bit confusing....

Hmmm, a custom race would put my cursed character concept back on the table.

I am also starting to wonder how crazy a firaerms character we're going to see if we just allow everything in a gestalt campaign. Something with full BAB, dex to damage, maybe sneak attack added in, rapid shot or something for more attacks, haste.. all attacks of firearms go for touch AC after all so missing won't be an issue anyhow.

Which is good, it means I won't have to do any fighting.

Looking over the creating a new race shows the basic human is 9 RP, and we are setting the cap at 16-18.
Can I get confirmation on this please and thank you.

That's confirmed.

I don't think the exact number has been confirmed by the GM yet?

True.

I just offered to drop my RP by 2 to 18.

Are we using that feat tax thing?

Firearms: Lots of concerns with this, so I'm going to spend considerable time researching this today and inform you all of my decision.

Race Points: 18 points. If I told you 20 was okay, please accept my apologies for I did not consider the fact that humans and other species were low in race points.

Feat Tax: Yea, we will be using it. I'm going to try and upload a formal ruling thread today so that every thing is out and clear.

How does racial points differ from 3.5 Level Adjustment? I am playing a human with no additional racial points... compare my no additional racial point human to one with 18... we are both 8th level characters?  Is this a fair and equal comparison? Doesn't sound like it... perhaps there should be an LA comparison made and either reduce their starting level appropriately or allow those not suping up their characters with RP an extra level or two so the playing field is fair.

It's not really the same.  There is a chart that's similar, but you have to get very high on the race points for it to matter at level 8.

The RP is used in the race builder system ( http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG...ide/raceBuilder.html ) to create new races.  It's mostly intended for use by a GM to make new races, though at the lower points and with GM permission it might be suitable for players to tweak their own race.


Kind of a lot?  2RP would give you a second stat of your choice with a +2 bonus.  2RP gets you darkvision.  7RP makes you a Large creature.


Level adjustment is a terrible mechanic and I vote against using it for anything.  I'm in favor of buffing the lower RP races, though the RP you can pick is worth much, much more than the RP picked for you by the "normal" high RP races.  They tend to get overcharged for stuff or have a lot of RP dumped into strange places.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:02, Fri 06 July 2018.

The abilities can vary a lot. For example: 1 RP can get you a +2 against disease and ingested poison, a +2 Acrobatics on narrow ledges... or the option to learn any languages when creating your character.
On the up side, it means even if you want a normal human as a character, you could grab some minor abilities that someone 'could' train.

Courynna Talaudrym:

How does racial points differ from 3.5 Level Adjustment? I am playing a human with no additional racial points... compare my no additional racial point human to one with 18... we are both 8th level characters?  Is this a fair and equal comparison? Doesn't sound like it... perhaps there should be an LA comparison made and either reduce their starting level appropriately or allow those not suping up their characters with RP an extra level or two so the playing field is fair.

A) this isn't 3.5, it is pathfinder....:)  However racial templates cost level adjustment still

League Historian:

I'm down to make those extra race points available to players who choose "cheaper" races.

B) The gm kinda covered that.

C) by your reasoning if I were to choose to play an ifrit (5 RP) I could stop everyone from playing any race with more points than that.

In reply to Celice (msg # 64):

Welp, time to become full Omniglot then! Come here Gifted Linguist.

Were we doing the background skills? I mean, I use it in another game I'm in and it's a pretty good system.

Yes, we are.

Awesome!
This message was last edited by the player at 17:00, Fri 06 July 2018.

So how are traits working?  I assume that campaign traits are not available (since we aren't doing any specific campaign), what about the regional traits.

Well, I had intended to only go with character traits but after thinking about it regional traits work as well. You guys are open to have some input into the world as I haven't established or come up with anything yet.

On the RP question, is it "Everyone can build up to 18RP" or is it something else?

Everyone can build up to 18rp, if you don't want to you certainly don't have to.

So... languages.  Are there just racial languages, or are there other important ones floating around?

Also, what are the languages most associated with technology and magic?

Well, traditionally Draconic is often associated with arcane magic.

Just the racial languages, though common was originally dropped I'm changing it up a bit.

Common can be used to communicate in a rudimentary form, however, it cannot be used to persuade, intimidate, or make any other kind of social roll because of its "rudimentary" nature.

Technology wise, Draconic can work? Though I was thinking of having it be race related.
This message was last edited by the GM at 14:50, Sat 07 July 2018.

Wouldn’t that make it really difficult to be a Face, as you’d be required to speak the native language of your target, and you could never use any Face skills with humans? Am I misunderstanding something? I thought Common was the human language in addition to being spoken by every PC race.

In reply to Aikio Ebonfeather (msg # 76):

I think he means that 'humans' have their own language, and that 'common' is now a trade language, like pidgins.

Makes that Linguistics skill look more attractive, don't it?

In reply to Kass (msg # 78):

It sure was for me! :)

It makes Linguistics the #1 most vital skill to anyone who wants to negotiate. You’ll need max ranks every level just to be able to use your skills, and even then half the time you probably won’t be able to use them. I mean, there are a LOT of languages.

There is always magic. Voluminous Vocabulary, Tongues, etc.

In reply to Tora (msg # 81):

And if you want something more exotic, the feat Xenoglossy can let you speak with any one person for a minute with a dc 25 Linguistic check. Not always easy, but if you succeed, repeated use are at +2, and the requirement are just 3 ranks of Linguistic and Int 13.

While there are indeed a lot of languages, you have to assume that most individuals with whom you would even want to negotiate would be fluent in some of the more basic ones like elven, dwarven, human, or whatnot. I think it is a non-issue. Besides, the tongues spells exist for a reason. Also, it would make it more interesting if you couldn't negotiate with someone due to language. You would have to come at such situations more tactfully. For example, the Dennis Quaid movie Enemy Mine comes to mind as a ringing example. I also believe there is an Enterprise episode, Season 2 Episode 13, Dawn, that mimics the same movie.

Oh, I will have Tongues prepared daily for that reason. :D

I was under the impression that humans were going to get to speak Human and Common wouldn't exist.

I like the idea of Common as a trade language conceptually, but I would like to point something out from real life; the modern 'Common' is English, not Esperanto.  It's not even the second most commonly spoken native language globally, and yet 20% of the world speaks it.  The degree of the language at that point depends on who is speaking - someone who grew up speaking English will likely have a much more elaborate command of the language than someone who learned tourist phrases.  Going back in History, there were a few other linguae francae based on empire; Roman, for example, had anyone who was anyone speaking Latin and/or Greek.

To carry that over, the main 'trade' language should be the language of whoever is most influential.  The general assumption in fantasy games is that humans are the single strongest driving force, as well as probably the most influential.  On the other hand, Elves are the France of fantasy, and how many people think of French as the modern language of culture and sophistication?

As a foreigner what are these Elves you speak of?

Good Discussion, here is what I'm looking for..

So common is great, but my issue with it is EVERYONE speaks it, so in my experience it negates the need to really ever use another language. And we have that cool language feature on here that scrambles speech if you don't speak it. I love that, and think it would enhance the game greatly.

I understand the issues it causes face characters, but here are some of my thoughts-

1) What everyone else has said about magic, feats, etc
2) Common languages like Elven, Dwarfish, etc are commonly spoken, and most people speak more than one language.
3) Common works to communicate with people, it's just rudimentary and I would rather people not use it for persuasive actions and all, it's like trying to use basic sign language in real life to persuade someone to vote for you, it's not really going to work. But, if you speak their language it's different.
4) Humans would get the "Human" language, we would just add it.
5) Everyone in your general area of operations probably speaks the same couple of languages. I don't really plan on you guys running into every single race and every single different language consistently, to the point that you guys can never communicate with anyone unless you take every possible language you could. But, if you're a "Face" character, than yes you're characters buildshould be entirely focused on communication.

Now I recognize this might take away more than it would add, so we can keep things the way they are i just personally want to see languages really be an important thing in the game.

I also plan on making every character apply to different quests. You're a healer? Okay cool, there will be plenty of healer focused quests for you take. This game isn't going to be your typical DnD adventuring game where you face all sorts of challenges and need a "balanced" build. In real life soldiers aren't consistently having to perform surgery, businessmen don't enter combat ever, and doctors rarely negotiate business trade deals. Everyone has a career and a niche, and they perform work that requires those skills.

Suggestion: Everyone still gets common for free, but it's truly a mish-mash trade-tongue as implied.  To represent this, speaking common is done with single syllable English words.  So "I buy six" is fine.  "Swap", "buy", "sell", "go", "near", "far" are all fine.

"Good day, my friend, I wish to inquire as to the availability of lodging in your establishment." is not.  You'd need to go with something like "I buy one room one night".

Human still becomes its own language.



Suggestion: Give us areas of expertise and benchmarks.

For instance, if you want to be qualified as a diplomat, you'd need Diplomacy, Sense Motive, and Bluff/Intimidate.  Your lowest check in the required skills could be your qualification with Competent (+10), Expert (+15), and Adept (+20) being ratings.  (Or Apprentice, Journeyman, Master, or some other ranking system, even -, +, ++, and +++).

You'd also need combat and magic benchmarks (probably around some total attack bonus or damage ability and based on how many levels of spells you have access to).

So someone's profile might come out as:

Melee combatant: Expert
Ranged combat: Competent
Healer: Competent
Diplomat: Adept
Covert Ops: N/A
Lore: Competent (Religion)
Arcane Magic: N/A
Divine Magic: Competent

Fantastic suggestions Tora, that's what we'll do in regards to Languages.

As for the area's of expertise, that sounds great! However, I am NOT the one to set up for several reasons-

I'm still quite inexperienced with Pathfinder, I'm doing my best to catch up but there is a LOT to take in. My own fault for allowing everything, and I'm by no means complaining, but that does not negate the fact that I'm not a good person to put that together.

Also, I have a lot on my plate as is.

So, League Manager? Is that something you think you can handle? Anyone else think they can put together a way for it to work and submit it? I'll give you public credit and my thanks(I know, not much).

My two coppers on languages as a long time gamer on and off line.

There is a fine line between adding richness and adding unneeded complexity.

Secret on team communication because everyone speaks Orckish?  That is nifty.

The party’s road trip takes them through three connected countries and you can’t talk to farmers in all three countries because they all speak unique languages?  To me that is overly complex.

Most characters aren’t smart enough to know 5 languages never mind five human tongues and then elven, dwarven, etc

Again just an opinion, just me nerding out.  And dealing with a nine Int

Rather not bother with benchmarks, or anything requiring me to look at my character sheet, tbh.

Could we have some information on our locale? The city we're in, the politics, factions etc?

Agreed Rood, and I what I'm hoping to do is find a happy medium where it's fun and languages matter, but its not needless complexity and takes away from the fun of the game.

I agree with that game designer who said "Does it make the game more fun? Or does it force the player to have to keep track of something they would rather not have to?"

Neva I am working on that currently and I hope to have it posted within the hour :D

*Rubs hands* Eeeexcellent.

RE:languages I'll look at. I think the best thing to do is to keep it simplified as possible, especially regarding common. Can try to set up the languages so they do that gibberish trick if a player doesn't speak it, it'll just take a while until all the players are in and sorted.

While we're all here, what's everyone's thoughts on PVP? Thinking of having a separate thread just for that to keep it out of game threads.

PVP bad.

Very bad.

I feel the same, Neva.

On another note, with the feat tax removing certain feats, can classes that get those removed feats take a different, but similar in theme feat?

I think those classes gave them because they recognised those feats for what they were. Feat Tax. :)

*looks at unchained rogue*

Yup.

Good grief, go out for a night and the threads blow up....lol.

Languages, I like the concept, there is always a way to communicate if you can't speak the same language.

PVP, not a fan at all.  Although sometimes a person "just needs killing".  Lol.

I don't think I understand this comment.  Benchmarks might not be the best word.  Qualifications might be a better word.  You have to look at your character sheet sometimes as it represents what you're capable of.  The society won't just take your word that you're qualified for covert operations - they'll ask you to prove it.

Having benchmarks to translate "proving it" to mechanics would be helpful for players, I'd think.  I know that if I signed up for a mission that "absolutely must be done with perfect stealth" and your character turned out to have a stealth total of -2 but talked his way on to the team anyway, I'd be a bit annoyed.  Or if a mission required "absolutely everyone mind their manners" and you managed to get your character with a -5 diplomacy and a load of bad habits involved...

So, qualifications.  First rule is that you don't have to get a qualification.  Second rule is that typical bonuses from gear, etc., apply.  Scrolls probably don't rate a qualification, but wants would for basic levels.

Here are some rough ideas:








For combat, the base stats for a CR8 combatant monster are AC23 (touch 13) and 110 HP.  If you can hit that at least 50% of the time, call it basic.  If you can hit that at least 50% of the time and deal at least 11 points of damage on an average hit, call it Advanced.

I really like that concept, but there are two things that stand out to me.

For Coverts, you have left out traps and locks.

For Combat, I would like to add the amendum 'that you can keep up all combat.'  A fourth level wizard can hit 95% of the time and average over 11 points of damage, but that uses two spells.

Also, movement and tactical mobility; basic is 30', advanced is flight, 50', or teleportation.

Let's start putting that breakdown (with the correct numbers in a PM to GM) in our personnel files.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:45, Sat 07 July 2018.

Yeah. No. Not interested. Sorry. It's just adding more and more to the convoluted mess of bookkeeping that Pathfinder already is. And deciding what missions I can or cannot take is a rp decision, nothing else. Where in your system is trust? Where is deceit? Where is the white lie? Where is the favor called in, the blackmail, the intrigue? Where is the help called in or the alternate route to a solution to accomplish a quest? A numeric system is static, bland and doesn't allow for inventiveness. And what if someone takes a mission they are not qualified for? Isn't that what the review board is for? Isn't that what RP is for? If someone lied their way on the team and fumbles on a mission, well, then the Pathfinders that had to deal with it will bar said individual from coming with them on the next one with them. If it was a fumble because of said individual, the senior pathfinders will deal with the culprit. Problem solved either way. Through RP, as it should be.

Not a fan of this rating thing.  Besides how will some one play Gilderoy Lockhart if we do that?  lol

I think it's a good system in theory, and that the society should have that info on hand, but I think maybe our characters should have a chance to lie their way into different missions if they want to. I'm not sure how, but there has to be some way for the groups to be determined on whether or not they would even be contacted to go on a mission.

There are around twenty-five PCs in this game.  Based on the in-game details, that makes six or seven parties.  Our current descriptions feature a lot of 'no one really knows a lot about me' and a lot less 'I've been on these kinds of missions.'

What I see Tora's system representing is a more detailed way for our characters to look at the dossiers of each other and and finding compatibility in common goals, be they past or present.  I also plan on posting lies regarding those metrics.  (Master of covert operations?  Moi?)

Given that we are relatively high level (at least if E6 is to believed), the alternative I propose if this system is not desired is to describe 3-5 missions everyone would know you had been on.

In reply to Annon Slyd (msg # 104):

That's a good point. At the very least, listing our Expert fields would help team selection.

But I'd also love to see a 'stat graph' in the style of the old Transformer toys or the Jojo stands.

If you want to write up your "dossier" like the system below, go for it!

However, in the event that you don't want to add that complication why don't you just put up what your character is good at and focused on?

I will allow anyone to join any mission, but in the event that you prove that you are not suited to a mission, The League and your fellow Pathfinders could have an issue with it. Hell, you could be a rogue and royally botch a mission and end up having the "stigma" of being terrible at being a rogue despite the fact that you have rogue abilities and are stealth focused.

It's going to be a really good idea to have a general agreed upon format, whether it's something simple as listing classes or more esoteric as to defining about what we can do.

And hello.  *flutters wings and waves*

I was getting at something along those lines. The current dossiers are kind of useless for determining what someone can actually do. Classes can also be a poor metric for that.

As for the lying about qualifications, I deal with too much of that in real life to want to add it to my gaming.
This message was last edited by the player at 22:20, Sat 07 July 2018.

I updated the firearm ruling in the thread. Thoughts?

Basically I gave it the range and touch capabilities of early firearms, but the reload rate of advanced firearms, which was the primary reason people wanted firearms to be advanced.

If you have any issues with this, speak up now ad because it is currently "In stone".



Dossiers. ALright. Here's what I'm going to do. I am going to make a Pathfinder "Dossier" form that everyone will complete. It will almost be like a "resume". I will do my best to keep it simple and easy to fill out. In a way, I think this will add to the game because then everyone will know more about each other, and it will help everyone flesh their characters out.

I'm literally working on world stuff right now(My baby sister asked me to with her on a walk, so we did and that up some time, which is why it's not already done). That will also help everyone get a better feel for things.

Early firearms, and by that I mean anything not both breech-loading and with cartridge ammunition, should pretty much be identical to crossbows.

Also, I'm guessing we're using Golarion dieties?   A girl has to know who buys her clothes, after all.

Nope, Deities came up, second post in the World Information thread.

I hadn't dug into the lore yet, I'll read through those before eating any more shoe leather.

Well, there have been requests  for firearms that fire faster than muskets, and so bolt action/breech loading was good, but then there were concerns about touch attacks and all that. So I put early and advanced firearm stuff together to try and balance the two. Faster reload, but not the better touch attack range.

I knew there was one other question: how are we doing hit points above first level?  Roll, take average, or something else?

In reply to League Historian (msg # 106):

Well, since my character is pretty open about his skills, I tried to make his 'stats graph'.



What do you think?

You can either roll, or take the average after first level, where you takemax.

That's a cool graph Arthur!

In reply to Arthur Spellseeker (msg # 115):

I left out traps in my listing of capabilities. ;)

I'd wager that there is at least one other major area I am still forgetting.

In reply to Tora (msg # 117):

I slipped it in with Covert, along with perception. Now that I think about it, Alchemy could be considered in the Healing department, since it offers antitoxin and antiplague. It could also be used as a plot skill to find the cure for a mystery illness.

Under Feat tax, it says this about the elimination of Point-Blank shot:

 The loss of Point-Blank Shot can easily be compensated for by Weapon Focus or Weapon Specialization


Does this mean that weapon Specialization now is available to anyone, not just Fighters?

In reply to Kass (msg # 119):

No; it means that if you want +1 extra to hit and damage you need to take different feats to get there and can't feat pick to get a special bonus no melee weilder can match. (weapon focus + point blank shot).

On the other hand, I don't need to burn two of my very few, very precious feats to avoid the risk of hitting you when I sneak attack the bad guy with a table improvised as a ranged weapon.

In reply to League Historian (msg # 116):

I have a new language question. Is reading lips considered a language? The Pathfinder Society works that way, but the Zone of Silence spell says it's just a Linguistics check dc 20. How do you want to play it?

I might make it a language if Historian wants it to be, but I think a linguistics check will be fine.

Speaking of (heh) does everyone have their languages selected and on their sheets? I'll be working on that for most of today. If you still need a character sheet I'll PM one to youor if you prefer using myth-weavers just make sure you have a link.

In reply to League Manager (msg # 122):

My languages are on my myth weavers sheet.

In reply to League Manager (msg # 122):

I have a few languages left to decide. It mostly depends on how many 'ancient' languages there are. For the rest... I speak all the languages.
...Half joking. I went through the whole list of the Core rulebook, and I can't speak secret languages like Druidic.

That's alotta languages!

Historian and I have talked it over and Common is going to be as it is in Pathfinder/D&D and it'll be the universal default it always is.

I don't know if I have all the Pathfinder languages added yet so if you think we're missing a language you should be able to speak, let me know and I'll get on it.

In reply to League Manager (msg # 125):

So human isn't a language?

Most likely not.

The idea had merit but at the end of the day common just keeps things simplified and given PF can be an absolute mess to keep track of anything that stays simple is helps immensely.

You'll most likely be able to swap human for something else appropriate to you and I'll make the adjustments once I know what the boss thinks. While we're waiting can everyone check their list of languages? If you have fairy on your list I have't added it *yet* as I have not many slots left and for the time being Sylvan will count as all fairy/fae language.

I have both Human and Sphinx on my list. Replace Human with some other language? What are the most common ones?

It seems to me that Fairy should be much like Basic in Star Wars.   You can understand it just fine but can't really speak it.   As I understand it, it only sounds like bells to everyone who isn't a Fairy.

Please advise if you're going to change Human, I'll have to swap the language then.

@Kass - Any of the core races are good choices, as is draconic. Most things on the SRD will work.

@Sienna - I haven't gotten an answer on Human or Fairy yet, but everyone will know as soon as its sorted.

Anything else anybody needs help with?

I'm honestly not expecting an answer before Monday.   I know about how long it takes to approve a single character.   Doing that by thirty is going to be a serious crunch on time.

Well we managed to get the Human language slot sorted, so if you picked Human you may swap it for something else that you can learn and I'll re-go over everyone's lists tonight, so no rush.

I'll be finalizing the list of languages this afternoon and if it fits anyone with Fairy will have it added to their language list.

I'd kinda prefer it stay Sylvan.  There aren't that many things that speak Sylvan that aren't fey to begin with.

Here's the race build....
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ru0b?Frost-Fairy

Okay, based on that, wouldn't they be closer to the size of a cat? A six inch fairy would be considered diminutive, but that has them as tiny.

In reply to Sienna Frost (msg # 134):

Hmm... it may have been a misunderstanding by the creator of the race. If you look at the Black Flame Studio fairy, they use Sylvan as their starting language, something the Core book agrees with.

In reply to Arthur Spellseeker (msg # 136):

I suspect that the creator had a fairy like Tinkerbell in mind, given that the linked image takes you to the Disney Fairies wiki.

I just realized I was making some assumptions...

Technology seems (from past discussions) to be a little more common than the default. Is tech of the Technology Guide a thing, and is it gated behind the Technologist feat?

I was kind of assuming a small degree of it was around and that it was not feat gated, but I'd rather in now before the game starts.

I get the impression we're at the steampunk level, but I could be wrong?

Technology is relatively common. It's expensive. Yes, there are flying ships with rotors and some armies may have advanced constructs but the majority of the setting is still pretty normal fantasy.

Sounds like emerging Steampunk then. :)

Edit: What does a flying ship cost? Asking for a friend... ^^
This message was last edited by the player at 20:31, Sun 08 July 2018.

I'm still at a loss why this warrants use of a language beyond Sylvan.

...Is a ship that flies thanks to a hot air balloon considered 'weightless?'  Also asking for a friend.

In reply to Annon Slyd (msg # 142):

Not to be argumentative or anything; but then why have different languages for Goblins, Orcs, Gnolls, and Orges?  Why not just make a singular monster language?

Y'all have nosey friends.

Kidding aside, I'm curious to see if we can get airships implemented. Has anybody used the naval combat rules before?

In reply to League Manager (msg # 144):

I did. It's not something I'd use often, given the chance. It's usually simpler to just board and take out the opposing captain.

As for Airship cost, Ultimate Combat says 50k gold, weapons not included. If you're looking for the Elemental ships of Eberron, it's probably going to cost double that or more.


For the Fairy language, the best explanation I can think of is that the fey are more united then the various monster races.

I have an Animal Companion with 3 Intelligence, which makes her sentient. Do I still need to define Tricks, or can I get ideas across to her via Handle Animal and Wild Empathy?

I'm hard pressed to think of significant races that speak Sylvan that wouldn't rightly speak Fairy. Which is fine if you're just renaming Sylvan, but kind of makes having them as two languages needlessly complicated.

Languages are fine and all, but there is a point where it doesn't add anything to the game.

In reply to Kass (msg # 146):

The best ruling I can find on animal companion is that you still need to use handle animal to command it, but you could teach it a language for clearer orders.
Also, someone compiled links to the most important answer you may seek.
http://paizo.com/threads/gbim1...og-Animal-companions

Oh, I'm perfectly willing to make any changes that the GMs want.   After all, it's their world and not mine.    That being said, the way the game has been presented struck me as the perfect place for an esoteric character concept.   How many games allow gestalt...never mind custom races?

can you roll, and if lower than average, then opt to take average? :)

Sigh.

Why not.

Sometimes I really think I should be more strict.

No but seriously of course you can! What kind of question is that ;-; ;D

Question regarding the Feat Tax rules as they apply to Unchained Rogue: with Weapon Finesse being a baseline option for finesse weapons and Weapon Focus applying to groups as opposed to a single weapon, is the Finesse Training element that lets you add Dexterity instead of Strength to damage rolls still limited to only a single specific weapon type until adding a second at 11th level and a third at 19th? Or is it applicable to all Finesse weapons (or perhaps just the ones in a Weapon Focus group)?

If I understand it correctly, the Weapon Finesse portion would apply to all weapons (which is it course moot with the HR), and the Dex to Damage portion is limited to the designated weapon until additional weapons are chosen at higher levels.

That's how I saw it.

I figured that would be the RAW of the rule, but I suppose I was more curious if that would be a fair modification of the existing feature, as otherwise both the free Weapon Finesse and the expansion of Weapon Focus doesn't do anything for a class that already gets it free and is necessarily locked into a single specific weapon to take advantage of one of their primary class features.

In reply to Elara Wildheart (msg # 155):

I think it’s technially a weapon group, like Weapon Focus.

So perhaps the Dex-to-damage feature applies to, say, heavy blades group (those weapons that are finesseable, that is)? Heavy blades include Dueling blade and Elven Curve Blade, both of which can be used with Weapon Finesse.

I'll differ to what others think best in regards to this, my experience with pathfinder being so limited.

I kinda like some of how 5e handles it; if you attack with a dex weapon, you add dex to damage. If you're an int caster and you attack with a spell that requires an attack roll, you use int for attack and damage. Doesn't necessarily mesh well power-wise with other editions.

In reply to League Historian (msg # 158):

Quick note about the feat tax post: they made an updated document that includes changes to the Unchained Rogue.
http://michaeliantorno.com/wp-...es-in-Pathfinder.pdf

At work right now but ill look this evening and see if pre-errata slashing grace will help ease some of the feat tax issue.

A simple change to let the URogue give dex to damage for weapon groups instead if individual weapons sounds fair to me. At most, it's a point or two of damage per round.

I don't think they necessarily need another feat to replace Finesse because the whole ability is to remove the feat tax in the first place.

In reply to Arthur Spellseeker (msg # 160):

Excellent, this solves my problem nicely, and also saves me 12,000 gold on an upgraded Amulet of Mighty Fists just so I can use all my natural attacks.

Elara, as someone using Amulet of Mighty Fists, you may want one anyhow. You can use it to put weapon special abilities on your natural attacks if you so desired, even without putting a traditional +1 on the amulet. Yes I know, gamer cheese, but not much of it.

In reply to Rood (msg # 164):

Yes, I still have one, but needing to use Agile as one of the properties seemed wasteful. Instead I just have Cruel. As a full BAB class, I don't really need much more accuracy, so I reinvested the 12k (difference between a +1 and a +2) in other magic items to shore up skills and defenses.

Only question I have regards Weapon Proficiency. As Ranger, I can use almost all the weapons in the Heavy Blades group. Only the Dueling Sword and Elven Curve Blade were 'exotic'. Does this still mean I need the Weapon Proficiency frat to use the Agile feature of the Dueling blade?

For the moment, yes you'll still need the feat, otherwise it just counts as a longsword.

Ah, but it will also allow me to wield 2 Elven Curve blades at the same time. Acceptable.

Isn't the curve blade a two handed weapon?

Kass has four arms, so can dual wield two two-handers. I think. Maybe.

You can totally wield two two-handed weapons if you have four arms...:-)

If Kass has four arms then it sounds doable. You'll still need EWP to wield them however.

And TWF...unless you don't care about penalties...:-)

Weapon Proficiency will handle xwp needs. And I have multi-weapon fighting. Greater as well. I know primary pair of arms does 1.5 Str damage. Does secondary pair do half that, or just Str damage?

I'm going to say just Str damage but I'll double check it just to be safe.

With multiple limbs and Multiweapon Fighting, you have one "primary" hand and the rest are all "off" hands.  There isn't a clear ruling anywhere on how it works, so it's up to the GM how to combine everything.

At least in theory, it would be x1 STR for the "offhand" twohander.  (The normal multiplication rules are that you take the individually added amounts from multipliers and back calculate - so +0.5 from using the weapon in two hands -0.5 leaves you with +0.0 or just the base STR.  It's why x3 and x4 gives you x6.)

Can we ban teleport like literally all forms of it, including those on monsters?

Hi wizard here (I think the only one, theres a sorcerer too though!). I would really prefer to play in a world where a lot of things aren't /solve at least in the case of teleport (its just too easy). Story wise it could just be a world effect rather then it not existing on other planes (if things ever go off plane teleportation can be entirely necessary on distant planes to get around).

I don't think I need to give examples (but I can if need be), and really its more an issue of it being on any classes spell list. (I could just not take it, but then NPC casters having teleport make my character look like an idiot.)

Tree stride, blink and other relatively short range teleportation are not really the same as going 500 miles away. So a list of things banned if the game goes this route is also helpful if a more balanced approach is considered.

I don't like that idea. As of now, we're not high enough level to cast it anyway, but if we're having to do missions 1000 miles away, we're going to be spending a lot of time traveling. Not to mention, you have to have actually been there to be able to teleport anyway, so it's not like the first time a person can cast teleport, they'll be able to go clear across the globe.

Why do you have a problem with teleport? No one in game can cast it yet. It is a very useful tool for both player and GM alike. A wizard who can't escape from a sticky situation, especially a higher level one, is not a very good wizard in my opinion. I personally see no problem with teleport or its various iterations. My word is not the final say, however, and I will defer to League Historian in this case. I'll just close with I've never seen teleport be an issue by the time it was available in game and I've been gaming for nearly thirty years. Just my two cents...:-)

My character can dimension door as a Supernatural ability so I am all for keeping it.

I too have been playing for 30+ years and have never seen it abused but to the contrary it has been more than useful to the entire party.

In reply to Zaira Zatara (msg # 177):

So you don't want say...one of these?


Transport Card
Aura strong conjuration; CL 13th
Slot none; Price 4,550 gp; Weight -
Description: A finely wrought card that appears to be made out of metal and engraved with a swirl pattern on the back.  This item is consumed upon use.
Functions as a one-use Greater Teleport.
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, greater teleport

In reply to League Justicar (msg # 179):

O_O. Wow, the people have spoken. I'll happily keep it.

As to not wanting it, I guess I'm one of those rare people who've seen it abused to drop bombs, and tear apart plots. No point in storming that tower if you can start at the top. And then every baddy becomes a powerful wizard or has one nearby just to handle stopping teleportation in... which leads to more spellbooks in loot XD, and wizard gear, or is simply fodder. Then again thinking about it every campaign I've been in that went that high level has been the first high level campaign the person running its played; a lot of problems and nature of the world things could be avoided.. (and a common theme of "magic is incredibly rare"), on second runs at least..


~ as to transport card. yes I would love to sell that item. Do you have a deck of them?
This message was last edited by the player at 00:15, Tue 10 July 2018.

In reply to Zaira Zatara (msg # 182):

That sounds like a screwup on the GM's part. Teleport requires you to have seen the location you are teleporting to, making it impossible to teleport into the top of a tower. Not to mention, there's still a miss chance (been there done that). If you do have greater teleport, odds are good that whatever big bad is actually dangerous enough to warrant your attention is probably powerful enough to have a block on teleporting into his tower.

Lialda pretty much nailed it - you have to know where you're going, you can't just skip to the boss fight/dungeon end/ect just because you can.

I'm assuming by the time any of y'all can cast teleport our respective BBEG's will have safeguards.

In reply to Lialda Nomake (msg # 183):

Scrying, reading memories, etc. It never came up as anything hard, with some minor prep.


3.5 version:
Familiarity

“Very familiar” is a place where you have been very often and where you feel at home. “Studied carefully” is a place you know well, either because you can currently see it, you’ve been there often, or you have used other means (such as scrying) to study the place for at least one hour. “Seen casually” is a place that you have seen more than once but with which you are not very familiar. “Viewed once” is a place that you have seen once, possibly using magic.


XD Again though, I'm fine with it as is; especially since everyone is on board the teleport express.. arriving
NOW.

There's more than a few items that make sense from a character perspective but are considered absolutely broken from a player/GM one.    My favorite example of this would be a command-word activated (infinite use) CLW wonderous item.   From a cleric's perspective, it'd be great as it'd free up spell slots for spells other than curatives.   From a player/GM one, it's broken because it eliminates one of the constraining elements: limited spell usage.

The teleport express is not arriving anytime soon...or at least not till next level for most characters...:-)

In that case, there's also probably a block on scrying (Mage's Private Sanctum for example), or at the very least, a will save allowed. Yes it is possible, but at the same time, if they succeed, then they deserve it. And even then, with "very familiar" or "studied carefully" you risk missing still, even if it is by a small margin. Don't get me wrong, it can be abused, but in my opinion, it adds more than it takes away. When you're spending three weeks in game trekking towards what will take less than a day to complete, that teleport becomes a lot more worth it.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:32, Tue 10 July 2018.

In reply to League Justicar (msg # 187):

You've got me wondering if I'm the only one who didn't go level 8 lol...

If my only available companions are higher level does the XP earned compensate for the level difference so I'll eventually even out, or should I just go for level 8 now?

In reply to Zaira Zatara (msg # 189):

I'm level 8 (I'm the sorcerer), but I took Dragon Disciple so my CL in sorcerer is only a 7 right now. And magus (my other class) is a 6 level of spells class so it advances slower. It'll be a while before I get 5th level spells.

Edit: I misunderstood.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:51, Tue 10 July 2018.

Honestly, I get the concern and restrictions that can stop "scry and die" from being a thing aren't a bad idea.

In reply to Lialda Nomake (msg # 190):

I think I'm the only one who didn't... I'll see how XP is handled but I may well go for another 3 levels just to even out... or maybe go for solo adventures. I can post a lot so if our three DMs are about that might be better lol...

If it's a single day job and the client doesn't want to wait three weeks for the party to get there, then they can cough up for the teleport spell.   It's not like a 5th level spell costs that much, after all.

In reply to Sienna Frost (msg # 193):

Not if teleport is banned in all forms (it doesn't exist).

My vote is no to banning teleport. What say you League Historian and League Manager?

I'd rather see major places linked with teleportation circles and the more "on the fly"  spells reduced in effectiveness or removed, to be honest.  Or just reduced to working best when targeting a teleportation circle so they're still useful but, again, no scry and die.

No. As long as we don't let it get out of hand - like, say, scrybomb - we'll be fine.

In the same vein, we could just ban scrying and any sort of eavesdropping magic and teleport is no longer a potential problem.

My stance is if you start banning everything because it can be a problem, you miss the point of the game entirely...especially this one as iterated by the League Historian himself...No game is going to be without its hiccups or potentially breakable rules. Good DMs and good players should recognize this and not blatantly abuse such designer issues.

I'm for keeping teleportation unless it's demonstrably abused in this particular game. Many instances of any kind of plot-derailing abuses of abilities in general tend to come from an antagonistic relationship between player and GM, or players acting in bad faith and against the preservation of a good story. As long as we can agree as players not to be TOO cheesy, while the GMs recognize we'll still try to find clever ways around their challenges and are able to take it in stride and improvise, I think we'll work out a collaborative story just fine.

Well said Elara! Every group I've ever played with IRL has always viewed Teleport as either a) a means to get from point a to b and b) get the heck out of dodge. I don't want to downplay any of the player's concerns about teleport, but it seems like the ones who are voicing their discontent are coming from a bad place when it comes to this particular spell. I'm guessing that they've experienced the toxic relationship you've described or have just had players that don't care about the "spirit" of the game and just look at is as "player vs. DM/GM" and not a collaborative effort to weave a story and have oodles of fun...:-)

GMs: How much wiggle room do we have with descriptions of abilities, items, etc. for the sake of flavor? For instance, one of my magic items is described as a robe. Could I have a magic item with identical effects that's a shirt or whole outfit instead? I've also got a number of shapeshifting-oriented abilities and spells that could also have some flavorful wiggle room, like taking the shape of an animal with the exact stat block of an existing creature but a different appearance.

I have no problem with reskinning items to fit flavor. However, they will still use up the slot they originally would use up. At least that's my take on it.

If you want to avoid 'Scry and Fry', you could rule that scry spells aren't clear enough to allow teleportation through them.

Or you could watch the second D&D movie. They took care of that quite well.

I didn't know there was a second one :O

In regards to banning teleport: I won't do that. I understand concerns and I'm willing to even admit it might make the game a hell of a lot better. But. It directly goes against the very backdrop of the game, which is "Be the character you never get to be in other games". Yes, many games would probably work a lot better with groups this big if things were banned, limited, and more strict. I've been incredibly lenient. Probably to lenient. I say yes first and then we face issues down the road because I said yes. But I would rather us have to pause and try and figure out things down the road if we experience issues then ban things off the rip because of the possibility of issues arising. I can handle players using "scry and fry" and teleport and all that.

As for people deliberately being cheesy and abusing it just to because they can, and hurting a good story...well. That. Is. My. Pet. Peeve.

Anyone, and I do mean anyone who gets in the way of a good story WILL experience the wrath of the almighty GM. I'm serious. I am great with everything and anything, I'm relaxed, I'll let you completely derail my plot ideas with a brilliant play on your part, even if it is pulling off a cheesy maneuver, because that's just you the player using what I've given to you to achieve your goals and survive. But if you start abusing the freedom I given you just to ruin a good story and have no intention of building a story, well two people can play that game. Only difference is in this world I'm God, and I can throw everything right back at you. And I can kill you.

Will I? Most likely not. Not unless you really deserve it...and then you really put yourself in that position. I'm patient(just ask the co-GMs, think about how many PM's you've sent, then multiply that by 30 :D).

My IRL group back in HS used to say "You can try and fuck (surgere) and "break" the game, but all that's gonna happen is he's going to use those same rules to break you".

So enough posturing everyone gets the idea, we're here to build a badass awesome great story with characters we never get to play! And I have no fear of people purposefully being cheesy because so far everyone has been the opposite, hesitating and asking permission being honest about how they probably wouldn't allow it if they were DM but its SO FREAKING COOL!

Oh yea, and reflavoring is totally fine. They just keep the same slot use :D

In reply to Mothan Kivner (msg # 204):

They made three. Second one was actually closer to a D&D game (in my opinion), while the third was based on the Book of Vile Darkness. I have no idea what it's like.

Ironically, the movie Curse of the Dragon Slayer is probably closer to D&D than any of the actual franchise movies.
This message was last edited by the player at 03:34, Tue 10 July 2018.

And that's why I applied...I've never seen a game where I could actually play a Fairy.  :)

So, we can change items around a bit.  Could I have an efficient quiver that was actually a sash and holds 100 shuriken instead of the normal contents?

I mean, why not? Still the same cost and all just instead of 100 arrows its 100 shuriken, just remember cost might change if shuriken are more expensive.

Well, it normally holds 60 arrows, 18 javelins, and 6 spears.  I figured 100 shuriken would be a fair number to replace that.

On the whole subject of replacement feats and all, the elephant in the room feat taxes book says precisely this in regards to rogues (since it came up before)



You may want to take a look at the book http://michaeliantorno.com/ite...taxes-in-pathfinder/ if you gained any sort of combat feat outside of it. There's some class changes too, for Druid, Monk, Ranger, Rogue (Unchained), and Sorcerer specifically, so check it if you have one of those.

And this: Weapon Qualities
Agile: You can apply your Dexterity modifier instead
of your Strength modifier to attack rolls when wielding
an agile weapon sized for you, even though it isn’t a
finesse weapon.
Weapons with the Agile Special Feature: Elven curve
blade, rapier, spiked chain, and whip.
This message was last edited by the player at 10:56, Tue 10 July 2018.

Wait. Agile no longer adds dex-to-damage?

The +1 magical weapon property does. This isn't talking about that. Think about the agile weapon quality as nothing more than brace, reach, trip, etc etc

Incidentally:

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic...spells/a/alter-self/

Alter-self says it can let you take the appearance of a humanoid. In pathfinder that has very explicit meaning... IE: You can't take the appearance of a nymph since they are fey, nor can you take the appearance of a succubus as they are outsiders. Can we consider humanoid to mean:

hu·man·oid
ˈ(h)yo͞oməˌnoid/
adjective
adjective: humanoid
    1.
    having an appearance or character resembling that of a human.
noun
noun: humanoid; plural noun: humanoids
    1.
    (especially in science fiction) a being resembling a human in its shape.

And not a creature type... (XD As I have alter self, and got smacked in the face by this in a previous campaign)

I believe Kass is humanoid. Just ignore the 4 arms part. He isn't part insect.....

In reply to Kass (msg # 216):

*FORM OF KASS*
"Now I finally have enough arms! And a mini-t-rex"

No! That opens a horrible can of worms since that also opens windows into those creature's powers and so on. Alter self is a terribly powerful ability if you know how to (ab)use it already.

My initial reaction to that would be no. By allowing that spell to do what you wanted to do, you are taking away from higher level spells that can do what you want to do. In my humble opinion of course. That would be my ruling on it unless overrided by League Historian

In reply to Zaira
Who can see through your illusion. Don't mess with the dino...

In reply to Neva Trevail (msg # 218):

It says APPEARANCE, not actual form. No powers can be conveyed.

(The Dinosaur can see through illusions?! Do you mean scent, - Zaira could always slather herself in Kass first...)
In reply to League Justicar (msg # 219):

XD That's okay. I'm only asking things ahead of time so nothing bites me in the bum later. ^.^;.

(And yes its not meant to be a mechanical ability grab, its a ... "Behold mortal I am a shape changing succubus COWER" and not "Behold mortal - no.. down here.. .. way.. down.. here... I'm a shape changing pixie COWER! Why are you laughing...")

No it doesn't? Are you mixing up alter self with disguise self by any chance?

In reply to Neva Trevail (msg # 223):

When you cast this spell, you can assume the form of any Small or Medium creature of the humanoid type. If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, scent, and swim 30 feet.

Small creature: If the form you take is that of a Small humanoid, you gain a +2 size bonus to your Dexterity.

Medium creature: If the form you take is that of a Medium humanoid, you gain a +2 size bonus to your Strength.


(nymphs have swim, I think succubi have dark vision - so do other creatures though?)

You also gain the creature's base speed and natural attacks. (Don't ask why, it has something to do with the spell being in the polymorph subschool).

http://www.ontariopathfinders....s-advice-alter-self/

In reply to Neva Trevail (msg # 225):

O_o I did not know that. I wonder if the person who wrote alter self knew all that lol.

Yes, Alter Self is pretty good as is...:-)

In reply to League Justicar (msg # 227):

Well... yes... *stares at tiny pixie then back, suddenly she has a weapon in hand!*.

Careful with your interpretation of Humanoid there. Neither Nymphs nor Succubi are Humanoids. If you want Dark Vision, Orcs. If you want Swim, Lizardfolk. Not to rain on people's parade, but just because it has two legs, two arms, and one head does not make it a humanoid. If we're going to (ab)use the rules, stick with things on the humanoids list.

I've always felt that Alter Self gets a bit weird when you're involving non-humanoid non-small non-medium casters.  The intent of the spell is pretty clearly "don't change much from what you are", but a Tiny Fey or a Huge Dragon turning into a medium humanoid is a pretty big change.

I'm not bothered enough to suggest "fixing" it, though. ;)

I'm with you Tora, I'm not worried about fixing it. The default on spells assumes that you're a Medium creature like a human, racists I know but there it is. There's no intention of using something so minor (2nd level spell) to allow Huge Dragons to walk around looking like people.

In my table top game we have run into this and made a nice house rule about how much it can change your size. Still handy for Large creatures who get tired of never fitting in to someone's house easily.

I think you didn't scroll all the way up XD I was totally coming from the place of "[why can't my fancy illusion that makes me look humanoid, make me look like something that's basically humanoid, and is that in the dictionary]" and the problem with it turns out to be "[because its monstrously broken to do that because you can get silly attacks]" - I didn't even know it gave the creatures attacks. That isn't abuse right? Asking about it before the game even starts... and having things ruled on.

I think originally you were getting disguise self and alter self confused. Disguise self is an illusion spell, while alter self is a transmutation spell from the polymorph subschool.

In reply to League Justicar (msg # 233):

There was a misleading hat involved too.

Never trust hats, they've been known to lead people astray.

In reply to Zaira Zatara (msg # 215):

Alter self allows you make yourself look like a humanoid.   Which, as you pointed out, has very specific limitations.    I've always viewed it as the magical version of a disguise kit.

I believe an apology on my part is in order...

As the Co-GM's and I have been going through everything, we have "gone back" on things I approved earlier in game, which has caused some of you to have to redo things I already approved.

We have such a large cast of players, and along with my inexperience with the system that it means certain things slipped through with some players we denied others or found needed to be denied later on. I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused everyone!

Also, if you are not finished with your character creation, or are struggling to keep up with the post rate do not worry, take all the time you need.

Also, I am working on party stuff now, hopefully we can get some IC threads up shortly for those of you who are ready to play.

I have a couple pms that haven't been replied to if I could get those covered?

One of the c0-GM's will jump on that for you as soon as they get a chance, as I have handed over all mechanics rulings to them.

Esoteric question. Can light (the cantrip) provide light in different colors?

RAW: No
RAI: Still probably no
You are the first person who has ever asked that question in all my 28+ years of gaming. I vote yes! It makes it a much cooler cantrip and really doesn't effect anything mechanically.

If the GM is feeling generous, he could simply dust up the rules on creating original spells and award a colored light cantrip (which being unique would be much more valuable than simply upgrading light) :) .

---

Two questions of my own:
1) I can find nothing that forbids applying a familiar archetype to an improved familiar. However, since improved familiar don't get the 'speak with animals of their kind' ability, any archetype that tries to replace it would be immediately disqualified. Am I correct ? (I so want to apply Valet Familiar to a clockwork familiar, but it looks like it will not be...)

2) Speaking off clockwork familiars, the entry on PFSRD says they can be pretty much any shape the creator wish, so if I take the Improved Familiar feat and select a clockwork familiar I get to choose what it looks like ? Even though I can't have actually created it since I can't possibly meet the requirements for that.

5e Light Cantrip does any color you want, not sure why the PF or 3.5 version couldn't!

Colored lights is perfectly okay!

Wyrzard, I have not looked into this yet, as I have limited time and a lot to go over sheet wise etc (not complaining in the least bit!), so I am going to tentatively say you can to both of your questions. Please be willing to work with me if in the future it becomes an issue and I have to go back on my ruling.

If anyone else has any thoughts or input, go ahead and chip in.

For our new players knowledge, my experience with pathfinder is limited. I understand the mechanics and how the game works, I'm mostly comfortable GMing, but Pathfinder is a vast and complex system without gestalt "everything allowed", so there is a lot for me to still learn and study up on. I am doing my best to keep things balanced while allowing you guys to play the characters you don't normally get to play, and compromising when I have to say no.

How does gestalt and prestige classes go together?

Does it take up one of the two class slots, so instead of being Class A 10 / Class B 10, it would then go to Class A 11 / Class B 10 Prestige 1?

It isn't something that will come up during creation, and may never happen for me, but it's more for a long term possibility?

Yes that is how it works from what I understand.

Officially (in 3.5) it was that you were only allowed to progress one prestige class at a time.  I've seen people run games with a few different options:

1) No prestige classes at all (ie. you're already gestalt, no further specialization allowed)

2) Only one prestige class advanced per level (ie. at least one side must always be a basic class)

3) Both sides can advance a prestige class, but no dual advance prestige classes.

4) Both sides can do prestige classes at the same time, but dual advancing prestige classes take up both sides and have lost progression filled in (ie. the 3.5 ultimate magus would go Sorcerer 3/nada 10| Wizard 3/Ultimate magus 10, but would advance each class's spellcasting at every level)

I personally don't see the point in restricting them.  Gestalt is already pretty powerful.  Prestiege classes in pf aren't all that powerful.

In reply to Celice (msg # 248):

So long as you're not doing a dual-progression spellcasting PrC, probably true.

With Gestalt the issues don't come from doing 2 PrC's at a time... it usually comes when you're doing some combinations of PrC's at the same time. I've seen gestalt games with two PrC progression be ok, and some where it's proved problematic for the GMs. Though I guess that may be more of an issue with 3.5 than PF now that I think about it.

Still, I wouldn't bend on the dual-caster progression PrC's as a DM! No and No! :)

I prestige classed sorcerer/dragon disciple and my second class is Magus. But if I was cleric/wizard prestiging into Mystic Theurge, my second class would have to be something that doesn't effect my prestige. You can't stack abilities, so if your prestige gives you spells +1 level, you can't continue your other class on the opposite side. Did that convoluted mess make sense?

Kinda.

After looking through all the PF accepted PrCs I only found one that I even find vaguely interesting.  Which lead me to a question.

If I have a class ability that acts as dodge (but is actually better than the feat) does that count as having the feat for the purposes of a PrC?

In reply to Celice (msg # 251):

Not unless it specifically says (Though LU could rule differently). Usually it will say "this counts as xxc for purposes of frats and class abilities."

There should be a juggling thrown weapon prestige class....:)

There's a juggler bard archetype :)

I find that Horizon Walker as PrC for rogue is awfully easy to abuse. Imagine having Terrain Mastery of Planar terrains. Void creatures whose habitat is another plane might have someone doing +10 hit and damage no matter their particular subtype.

Have to be 10th level horizon walker for that though.  Which means 16th level in total, they are supposed to be tough....lol

What plane are the Void Spawned from anyway?
This message was last edited by the player at 21:49, Thu 28 Mar 2019.

That's probably for us to find out. :)

So another question (man this is an exciting game so far).

Can we make up a pathfinder badge for the survivors of the Void War?

Suggesting the war is over... ^^

That is to be discovered!

I actually plan to work on the badges, and maybe incorporate medals as well. But I will keep this in mind.

And the game will stay exciting, rpol has way to much attrition for us to get caught up in bland gameplay, even if it means I have to railroad you guys occasionally.

How many points are cohorts built with?

Normally, NPC stats.
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/class...on-player-characters