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.