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.