CaveToad's Monster Mashup - Home Brew (Gestalt, Monster races, Bonus Goodies)


Recruitment

601 to 650 of 2,219 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>

I just wanted to let you know that I am very interested in this game, and I have spent spare moments over the last week trying to figure out what character to play in the face of a bewildering amount of possibilities. I might as well roll up some ability scores to start.

5d6 ⇒ (6, 4, 1, 2, 6) = 19 - 16
5d6 ⇒ (1, 2, 5, 1, 5) = 14 - 12
5d6 ⇒ (5, 6, 6, 1, 6) = 24 - 18
5d6 ⇒ (2, 4, 6, 1, 6) = 19 - 16
5d6 ⇒ (4, 2, 5, 3, 2) = 16 - 12
5d6 ⇒ (6, 3, 1, 3, 5) = 18 - 14
5d6 ⇒ (4, 6, 2, 3, 1) = 16 - 13

18 + 0 = 18
16 + 2 = 18
16 + 2 = 18
14 + 4 = 18
13 + 1 = 14
12 + 1 = 13


Choant wrote:
Slyness wrote:

Two more questions:

Can Lizardfolk up their bite attack by spending an extra RP in Bite?

Is there a chance you could be talked into allowing Wyvaran to buy Natural Armor (and thereby Improved Natural Armor)? They are of the dragon type but have no natural armor even though both kobolds and wyvern have it. It's cool if not, just figured I'd ask.

Thanks again!

I think it said in the original post that natural armor is fine for all, and the lizardman specifically says it can upgrade its bite.

Unless you start with natural armor, you cannot upgrade it. It is also not an option to purchase.

Bite can be upgraded assuming it has already not been upgraded. ( to answer Hotaru's question )


Xanya Zellor wrote:

I now have a backstory :). Is there anything more missing before I am complete?

@CaveToad: Do you want a plan for advancement?

Advancement plans do help. It allows me to tailor and plan for things to help your character grow.


Anon A Mouse wrote:
Yokaiboy wrote:
@CaveToad: How so you handle tiny size and flanking?

The normal answer to that is that creatures with 0ft reach can't flank. Tiny creatures normally have 0ft reach.

Just thought I'd mention so CaveToad doesn't have to look up stuff manually before deciding. Although based on that previous post up thread with about 12 questions, except where already mentioned, CaveToad seems to be going with the rules as written rather than house ruling things and dealing with unintended consequences, so I wouldn't be surprised if the GM sticks with the "tiny creatures don't flank". Unless I suppose for whatever reason the tiny creature has at least 5ft reach.

Correct, Tiny creatures don't threaten normally, due to their reach and thus cannot flank. If they have appropriate equipment, feats or abilities, this could change.


Andrian Timeswift wrote:
I admit that I've heard good things about Path of War, but I haven't really been interested in learning it. I know that's like fighting with a hand tied behind my back, but for me, the thought of adding a bunch of classes and feats to my knowledge of the game, but keeping it separate so I don't accidentally mix it with my pure PF knowledge is rather daunting. You guys are right that I gave up raw damage potential for defense, but it's also true that my damage will be steadily increasing over time.

Path of War is... controversial, in the same way that Bo9S was back in 3.5. I'd say feel free to leave it untouched. Dreamscarred did a great job converting psionics in a way that was balanced and in line with PF conversions, but when it came to PoW they left a lot of untyped bonuses, unclear-economy actions, and broken feats that provided the benefits of several core feats (but were only available to characters with initiator levels) lying around. Path of War characters also don't really fight as much as cast spells with weapons, so if you're into memorizing and preparing spells but want to stab things with them it works much better than if you're actually just a fan of martial characters.


thunderbeard wrote:
Andrian Timeswift wrote:
I admit that I've heard good things about Path of War, but I haven't really been interested in learning it. I know that's like fighting with a hand tied behind my back, but for me, the thought of adding a bunch of classes and feats to my knowledge of the game, but keeping it separate so I don't accidentally mix it with my pure PF knowledge is rather daunting. You guys are right that I gave up raw damage potential for defense, but it's also true that my damage will be steadily increasing over time.
Path of War is... controversial, in the same way that Bo9S was back in 3.5. I'd say feel free to leave it untouched. Dreamscarred did a great job converting psionics in a way that was balanced and in line with PF conversions, but when it came to PoW they left a lot of untyped bonuses, unclear-economy actions, and broken feats that provided the benefits of several core feats (but were only available to characters with initiator levels) lying around. Path of War characters also don't really fight as much as cast spells with weapons, so if you're into memorizing and preparing spells but want to stab things with them it works much better than if you're actually just a fan of martial characters.

I am probably not going to get any initiator levels before 4 (I am thinking to just do the cheesedips as warlord), but I am curious what feats you are referring to as I haven't really spotted such feats while looking over the part of PoW that are on pfsrd.


Xanya Zellor wrote:
I am probably not going to get any initiator levels before 4 (I am thinking to just do the cheesedips as warlord), but I am curious what feats you are referring to as I haven't really spotted such feats while looking over the part of PoW that are on pfsrd.

Well, for one... they didn't even bother to change the name of "maneuvers," making things confusing.

POW's craziest feats:

1. Deadly Agility. Less out of line now with the Unchained Rogue, but for a while it was a very, very easy way to get dex-to-damage on a TWFing character (the equivalent of what would otherwise require Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, and Fencing Grace combined, or two Agile Weapons); with the way point-buy works, this means that in PoW a dex-to-damage anything but barbarian will always do more damage on a full attack than a str-to-damage version of the same character.

2. Defensive Expertise. Takes the capstone of a fighter archetype and turns it into a single feat; at higher levels it's a much better Lightning Reflexes that massively boosts your touch AC. Would make more sense as a feat chain.

3. Discipline Focus. Holy cow is this overpowered. Spell Focus + Greater Spell Focus + Weapon Specialization with a whole GROUP of wepaons, despite having none of the requirements of Weapon Specialization—clearly breaking established feat balance.

4. Discipline Mastery. Since this isn't limited to a certain number of disciplines per feat, it's essentially as good as an Advanced Rogue Talent.


I definitely agree the PoW slides the scale up for combat craziness, but I do want to give a whirl and see how it flies. I believe they are planning an errata soon to address some of the completely over the top stuff.


I'm reading through the PoW now, would the stances from there interfere with unchained barbarian rage stances?


By RAW, a creature with 0 ft reach generally gains nothing by using a reach weapon-- zero times two is still zero.


Wilder goes so well with the theme of my character. I haven't actually studied the mechanics of the various psionic classes, I hope that it fits better mechanically than the psion as well.

I hope I don't regret not picking Warlord as one of my baseclasses and delaying it until the cheesedip instead.

I can't wait to get this started, is there anything we can do while we wait for things to start? Background free-style RP the things that happened while we were in Goodwin's plane maybe?


Since you have a lot of interest already, and plan on running multiple tables, do you have any inclination to making a first table selection at this time?

If not, any inclination to open the discussion thread and kick off an initial scene for in character activity? This would provide an opportunity for you to see the various writing styles. In addition, you might find some characters coalescing into groups that may make it easier for you to make selections from.


I like his idea. ^


All right... Here is my initial submission. I'm sure ill be fixing small things in the future.

Grobly the Goblin:

Grobly the Goblin
Class: Alchemist / Unchained Barbarian / Druid
Alchemist (Firebomber) 1
Unchained Barbarian (Feral Gnasher)
Druid
Favored Class: Unchained Barbarian

Alignment: Chaotic Neutral. Grobly is much closer to Chaotic Good than expected; Grobly is a feral, dangerous beast by nature, much of it due to his

ravenous metabolism and short attention span but the Goblin does try to live up to his mentors aspirations. Grobly understands what it means to be good, but

in the heat of the moment his more intuitive nature will begin to take over.

Race: Goblin
Purchased Race Powers:
-Cave Crawler (1RP): Gain Climb Speed 10'. +8 bonus to climb.
-Hard Head, Big Teeth(2RP): +bite (See Savage Rage)
-Eat Anything (3RP): +4 to survival to forage for food. +4 racial bonus on saves vs nauseated or sickened condition.
-Advanced Constitution (4RP)
-Advanced Strength (4RP)
-Bite (1RP): +bite (See Savage Rage)
-Darkvision 120' (1RP)
-Pyromaniac (3RP): Members of this race are treated as +1 level higher when casting spells with the fire descriptor, using granted powers of the Fire

domain, using bloodline powers of the fire elemental bloodline, using the revelations of the oracle's flame mystery, and determining the damage of alchemist

bombs that deal fire damage.
-Toxic (1 RP): Members of this race gain the following extraordinary ability: A number of times per day equal to its Constitution modifier (5/day), a

member of this race can envenom a weapon that it wields with its toxic saliva or blood (using blood requires the creature to be injured when it uses this

ability). Applying venom in this way is a swift action.
--Weakening Venom: Injury; save Fort DC 16 = 10 + 1/2 the user's Hit Dice + the user's Constitution modifier; frequency 1/round for 6 rounds; effect

1d2 Str; cure 1 save.

Theme: Grobly hates Hobgoblins and everything they represent. He believes they are the reason Goblins are evil to begin with (He turned out alright

with Goodwins help after all). Because of this, Grobly has developed a deep hatred for Hobgoblins and other Lawful Evil characters and a heavy disrespect for

Law as an alignment in general. Personally, he is the epitome of hunger, focusing on themes of Hunger, Grappling, and Chaos.

Size: Small
Reach: 5'

Initiative: +7 = 3(DEX) + 4(Improved Initiative)

Senses: Darkvision (120 feet)

---------------
Stats:
---------------

STR: 18(+4)
DEX: 16(+3)
CON: 20(+5)
INT: 16(+3)
WIS: 16(+3)
CHA: 8(-1)

---------------
Defenses:
---------------

Armor Class: 14 = 10 + 3(DEX) + 1(Size)
Touch: 14 = 10 + 3(DEX) + 1(Size)
Flat-Footed: 11 = 10 + 1(Size)

CMB: +3 = +1(BAB) + 3(STR) - 1(Size)
CMD: 16 = 10 +1(BAB) + 3(STR) + 3(DEX) - 1(Size)
Grapple: +5 = +1(BAB) + 3(STR) - 1(Size) + 2(Untyped, Improved Grapple)
Grapple: 18 = 10 +1(BAB) + 3(STR) + 3(DEX) - 1(Size) + 2(Untyped, Improved Grapple)

Hit points: 21 = 12(HD) + 5(CON) + 3(Toughness) + 1(Favored Class)
-Hit Die: d12

Saves:
Fortitude: +7 = 2(BASE) + 5(CON)
Reflex: +5 = 2(BASE) + 3(DEX)
Will: +5 = 2(BASE) + 3(WIS)
+4 vs Nauseated & Sickened

---------------
Offenses:
---------------

BAB: +1
Move: 30' / Climb 10'

Bite: +7 = 1(BAB) + 4(STR) + 1(size) + 1(Weapon Focus)
1d8 + 4(STR)

Firebomb: +6 = 1(BAB) + 3(DEX) + 1(size) + 1(untyped, throw anything)
1d6 + 3(INT) fire, splash

Unarmed Strike: +6 = 1(BAB) + 4(STR) + 1(size)
1d2+4(STR)

Improvised Ranged Weapon: +7 = 1(BAB) + 3(DEX) + 1(Size) + 2(Surprise Weapon)

Improvised Weapon: +2 = 1(BAB) + 4(STR) + 1(Size) - 4(Improvised Weapon)

Combat Modifiers:

+1 Caster level with fire spells/bombs
+1 to Melee Attack against Larger opponents if not next to ally.
Rage: +2 tHP / +2 Attack, Damage, Will
Mutagen: +4STR / -2INT

---------------
Feats:
---------------

-Free
Toughness
-Class
Armor Proficiency (Light)
Armor Proficiency (Medium)
Brew Potion
Druid Weapon proficiencies
Shield Proficiency
Simple Weapon Proficiency- All
Throw Anything
-By Lvl
1. Improved Grapple
1. Improved Initiative
1. Improved Unarmed Strike
1. Point Blank Shot
1. Weapon Focus (bite)

---------------
Skills: 7/7 skill points
---------------

Trained Class Skills
Acrobatics +7 = 1(ranks) + 3(class skill) + 3(DEX)
Appraise +3 = 3(INT)
Climb +11 = 3(STR) + 8(Racial, Cave Crawler)
Craft (Alchemy) +7 = 1(ranks) + 3(class skill) + 3(INT)
Disable Device -
Fly +5 = 3(DEX) + 2(Small)
Handle Animal +3 = 1(ranks) + 3(class skill) - 1(CHA)
Heal +3 = 3(WIS)
Intimidate -1 = -1(CHA)
Knowledge (Arcana) -
Knowledge (Geography) -
Knowledge (Nature) -
Perception +7 = 1(ranks)+3(class skill) + 3(WIS)
Profession (Cook) +7 = 1(ranks)+3(class skill) + 3(WIS)
Ride 1(ranks) +11 = 1(ranks) + 3(class skill) + 3(DEX) + 4(Racial)
Sleight of Hand -
Spellcraft -
Stealth +11 = 3(DEX) + 4(Small) + 4(Racial)
Survival +9 = 1(ranks) + 3(class skill) + 3(WIS) + 2(Untyped, Nature Sense)
+4 to forage for food
Swim +3 = +3(STR)
Use Magic Device -

Cross-Class Skills:
Bluff -1 = -1(CHA)
Diplomacy -1 = -1(CHA)
Disguise -1 = -1(CHA)
Escape Artist +3 = 3(DEX)
Linguistics -
Sense Motive +3 = 3(WIS)

---------------
Special Abilities:
---------------

Alchemist
-Alchemy (SU):When using Craft (alchemy) to create an alchemical item, an alchemist gains a competence bonus equal to his class level on the Craft

(alchemy) check. In addition, an alchemist can use Craft (alchemy) to identify potions as if using detect magic. He must hold the potion for 1 round to make

such a check.
-Bomb(su): 1d6. Lvl(1) + Int(3)=4/day. 10 + 1(.5lvl) + 3(INT)= DC 14 Reflex for half if splash.
-Bonus Feat: Brew Potion
-Fire Bombardier(su): +1 Splash damage to all fire bombs. INT only added to fire bombs (not others).
-Mutagen(su): 1 hour to make. +4 to one physical Ability, -2 to corresponding mental Ability. Lasts 10 mins/lvl when imbibed.
-Bonus Feat: Throw Anything

Barbarian
-Unchained Rage(ex): 4+5(CON)=9/day. +2Temporary Hitpoints=+2temphp/lvl. +2 to Attack, Damage & Will saves.
-Savage Bite(ex): Gain bite (1d8 w/ Bite & Hard Head, Big Teeth)

Druid
-Animal Companion Link(ex): Link with Animal Companion
-Nature Bond (Animal Companion)(ex): You start the game with an Animal Companion
-Nature Sense(ex): +2 to Knowledge (nature) & Survival checks.
-Share Spells with Companion(ex): Targets of self may be cast on Animal Companion.
-Spontaneous casting: Convert Druid spells into Summon Natures Ally spells of the same level.
-Wild Empathy(ex) +0: As Diplomacy, except with wild animals.

Traits:
Goblin Foolhardiness (Racial): +1 vs Larger opponents as long as not adjacent to an ally
Surprise Weapon (Combat): +2 to attack with improvised Weapons
Unstable Mutagen (Magic): 1/day = d6 for special effects on a mutagen.

Languages: Common, Draconic, Druidic, Goblin, Orc

Equipment: Ring (Special item), Loincloth

Loads:
light < 57
medium < 114.75
heavy < 172.5

Spells:

Alchemist Extracts per Day:
1- 2

Known Alchemist Extracts
1- Enlarge Person
1- Firebelly (DC 14)
1- True Strike
1- Expeditious Retreat
1- Shield

Druid Spells per day
0- 3
1- 2

Appearance:
Grobly is a rather Top-heavy individual, with jaws befitting a predator five times his weight. He keeps his course, black hair cut short with certain parts

bald. He has no fashion sense, a creature of practicality, Grobly was taught over many months by Goodwin about dress, grooming and other aspects of

civilized life, but few stuck. Grobly has the typical Goblin stature and roughen scars. He keeps his feet bare, along with his hands- both of which are

covered by thick callouses and scars. His eyes are wide orbs of green, that catch a reddish hue at night.

history:
Like all Goblins, Grobly grew up amongst his fratricidal kin. Killing his brothers and sisters, just to survive, Grobly was the most vicious, dangerous,

angry Goblin of his tribes generation. Throwing himself into combat as recklessly as possible had worked so far, and so Grobly believed it was the only way.

He soon found out how wrong he was when a hobgoblin came by and began subverting the local tribes to his will. Grobly fought back. Just before his

inevitable death in combat, He was whisked away, to Goodwins side.

Goals:
Grobly hopes to found a mighty goblin empire based around goodwins teachings. He knows goblins are chaotic creatures, but he believes they do not need to be

evil. More short term, Grobly is dead set on finding out what happened to Goodwin, not matter the cost.

personality:
Grobly is hungry. He is always hungry, and much of his motivation is dictated by such. When he doesn't have food, he is looking for it. When he has it, he is

trying to make it taste better. Grobly is fearless, but his recklessness has been tempered by some of his mentors teachings. He holds no love for law of any

sort, with a righteous hatred of Lawful Evildoers (such as hobgoblins)

---------------
Animal Companion
---------------

Bazzt
Dire Bat

STR 9 (-1)
DEX 17 (+3)
CON 9 (-1)
INT 2 (-4)
WIS 14 (+2)
CHA 6 (-2)

HP: 14
AC: 14

F:+2
R:+6
W:+2

Initiative: +3

Speed: 20'

+1 BAB

+0 CMB
14 CMD

Acrobatics +3, Fly +11, Perception +6, Stealth +7

+4 Perception for Blindsense, Attack Any Target, Blindsense (40 feet), Combat Riding, Flight (40, Good), Low-Light Vision

Dodge

Attack, Attack Any Target, Combat Riding, Come, Defend, Down, Guard, Heel

---------------
Bookkeeping
---------------

---------------
Prepared Spells
---------------
Alchemist Extracts
1x Firebelly
1x Expiditious Retreat

Druid Spells
0-
2x Create Water
1x Detect Magic
1-
1x Cure Light Wounds
1x Magic Fang

---------------
Money
---------------

Gold:
Silver:
Copper:


fnord72 wrote:

Since you have a lot of interest already, and plan on running multiple tables, do you have any inclination to making a first table selection at this time?

If not, any inclination to open the discussion thread and kick off an initial scene for in character activity? This would provide an opportunity for you to see the various writing styles. In addition, you might find some characters coalescing into groups that may make it easier for you to make selections from.

I have been debating this lately since we have so many submissions. It seems like based on my survey there may be a few people submitting yet, but I will move things a long a smidge, while still keeping recruitment open. I probably will open gameplay and or discussion as one giant table initially, and as mentioned let people coalesce somewhat. Once trial period ends, we may tweak the groups somewhat. I am still looking at characters, but the threads would be strictly for RP. I have a few things I want to iron out before then so give me a day or so.


Grobly wrote:

All right... Here is my initial submission. I'm sure ill be fixing small things in the future.

** spoiler omitted **...

Sweet, goblin firebomber. Unless I missed something, you don't qualify to take the toxic RP ability.

I added you to the list.


Newbonomicon wrote:
By RAW, a creature with 0 ft reach generally gains nothing by using a reach weapon-- zero times two is still zero.

This is RAW, as noted under the weapons rules, but likely written with small/medium/large PCs in mind. Creative Director James Jacobs had a forum post explaining that tiny creatures using reach weapons have a 5' reach. You can see it here.

Frankly it makes logical sense to me.

Things get a little trickier with whip, which specifically spells out a 15' reach. Applying some logic here as well, we can assume 10' for Tiny, and 20' for Large, extrapolating up and down the scale.


CaveToad wrote:
Grobly wrote:

All right... Here is my initial submission. I'm sure ill be fixing small things in the future.

** spoiler omitted **...

Sweet, goblin firebomber. Unless I missed something, you don't qualify to take the toxic RP ability.

I added you to the list.

Not even with Hard Head, Big Teeth? But yeah, that's an easy change. I know you mentioned wizards will start with their spellbooks, but what about Alchemists? can they 'bring along' the tools of their trade too? bottles and ingredients etc.


Grobly wrote:
CaveToad wrote:
Grobly wrote:

All right... Here is my initial submission. I'm sure ill be fixing small things in the future.

** spoiler omitted **...

Sweet, goblin firebomber. Unless I missed something, you don't qualify to take the toxic RP ability.

I added you to the list.

Not even with Hard Head, Big Teeth? But yeah, that's an easy change. I know you mentioned wizards will start with their spellbooks, but what about Alchemists? can they 'bring along' the tools of their trade too? bottles and ingredients etc.

As with wizards, you start with your formulae book, and your basic mundane stuff to make bombs, mutagens and extracts. You don't have an alchemy lab though, and you don't have stuff to make other alchemical items until you get somewhere to outfit yourselves a little. To some extent you may be able to gather raw materials in the wild.

Also all casters that need components will have enough to last a reasonable amount of time, maybe say a week or two, before needing to replenish. components that are costly will need to be kept track of and replaced as normal.


I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?


Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?

No, since technically alchemists aren't spellcasters. I wouldn't worry about it terribly.


Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?

That sounds incredibly silly. You're making alchemical concoctions with no ingredients?


CaveToad wrote:
Newbonomicon wrote:
By RAW, a creature with 0 ft reach generally gains nothing by using a reach weapon-- zero times two is still zero.

This is RAW, as noted under the weapons rules, but likely written with small/medium/large PCs in mind. Creative Director James Jacobs had a forum post explaining that tiny creatures using reach weapons have a 5' reach. You can see it here.

Frankly it makes logical sense to me.

Things get a little trickier with whip, which specifically spells out a 15' reach. Applying some logic here as well, we can assume 10' for Tiny, and 20' for Large, extrapolating up and down the scale.

To me this is comforting, I was hoping to create a spiderling whip user. Crunch is still being crafted. Thank you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Newbonomicon wrote:
Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?
That sounds incredibly silly. You're making alchemical concoctions with no ingredients?

In a world of dragons and magic and demons, the fact that conservation of mass is not adhered to seems a very silly thing to focus on.


CaveToad wrote:
Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?
No, since technically alchemists aren't spellcasters. I wouldn't worry about it terribly.

I saw the rules for Spontaneous Alchemy and had to ask and it can be found here.

CTRL+F and search for Spontaneous Alchemy.


Newbonomicon wrote:
Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?
That sounds incredibly silly. You're making alchemical concoctions with no ingredients?

Just like Sorcerers casting spells with no spell components ... :-)


Sorcerers are casting spells, though. Alchemists are physically mixing a formula that does a magical thing when imbibed. There's a difference.


Err, this is also not alchemist formulae (those don't take any reagents). What Anderlorn is asking about afaict is things like tanglefoot bags and smokesticks.

* * *

@GM: Starting a discussion thread may also be a good way to siphon off players from what is otherwise becoming a very cluttered recruitment thread.


No worries I am done, GM stated not to worry about it.


I believe *does a magical thing* are the key words here.

Never start an argument when the answer can always justifiably be MAGIC!

Although I agree with thunderbeard that we should probably stop to avoid derailing.


Actually the movement rules are what I find fairly inaccurate. A barbarian with 8 Con and the Run feat, wearing light armor can run a quarter mile faster than the current world record.

Yet on the other end, no one can run faster than a 10 minute pace for more than an hour which is ridiculous, and on local scale no one can run more than a minute to a minute and a half without having to make con checks which is completely silly as well. Both of these scenarios are are jokes for anyone who has done a 5k all the way through a half or full marathon.

I guess everyone is a world class sprinter, but no one is an endurance runner in PF.


Ah, I am a math nerd myself.

Fear us, for we are overpowered!


CampinCarl9127 wrote:

Ah, I am a math nerd myself.

Fear us, for we are overpowered!

Lol, I have looked at that feat before, and as much shenanigans as I am allowing, I am pretty sure that feat will be banned here, heh.


That feat should just be outright banned. I did a sample test run with 50 randomly generated spells+metamagic, and given enough time I succeeded on every single one. An 100% success rate on a sample size of 50, although I am an engineer, but that's still ridiculous.


People have written programs where you just punch in the dice you need and it gives you the numbers.


CaveToad wrote:
People have written programs where you just punch in the dice you need and it gives you the numbers.

Oh that's just deplorable. If you're going to powergame that hard at least put in the effort.


Ok gang.

Over the next few days, I will be getting back to each of you as I complete character review. I want to move this along a bit to keep enthusiasm high.

Submissions are still being accepted however, I am probably going to shoot for a deadline of Wednesday, June 10th, although I will be lenient if someone is almost done and has given me a heads up. I will make last calls around the 9th and 10th to get an idea of anyone who might have stumbled on the thread later, and is still interested. As an addendum, recruitment will technically never close, but new players who appear after this first deadline may have to sit and be mothballed a bit until enough players are ready to make a new table, or someone drops out from an established table.

As requested, I will probably open the discussion or gameplay thread here after a little more planning. This will start as one big group, but we will get everyone split up at some point, either, before, during or after the trial period depending how I feel about it, and how you all feel about it. If you all want to stay as a huge group for a bit longer to get some RP going that is cool, but I imagine it could be sort of chaotic. Once separated, each table will have its own thread, plot, storyline, etc although they can be interwoven and can impacted each other at times as you will be in the same world. If one group burns down a city, that city will be burnt down for the other group(s).

Opinions about anything (campaign related ;)) are welcome, and feel free to ask questions. I will obviously not reveal secret stuff I have planned, but there may be things I have not covered.


Aww, 8 days is a super long wait for this.

Okay, for my campaign-related questions:

Will all applicants, before the deadline, be accepted?
You mentioned multiple tables, how many tables, and how many players to a table?
Will you allow us to have some input/impact on who we end up with?
(I'd love to team up with the other two lizardfolk, but if you think that kinda thing doesn't work, I'm fine.)
You said this would be a sort of tracking the Big Man down, will not having any planar travel for a while be an issue?


CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Newbonomicon wrote:
Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?
That sounds incredibly silly. You're making alchemical concoctions with no ingredients?
In a world of dragons and magic and demons, the fact that conservation of mass is not adhered to seems a very silly thing to focus on.

Are we forgetting the principal of equivalent exchange?


CaveToad wrote:

Actually the movement rules are what I find fairly inaccurate. A barbarian with 8 Con and the Run feat, wearing light armor can run a quarter mile faster than the current world record.

Yet on the other end, no one can run faster than a 10 minute pace for more than an hour which is ridiculous, and on local scale no one can run more than a minute to a minute and a half without having to make con checks which is completely silly as well. Both of these scenarios are are jokes for anyone who has done a 5k all the way through a half or full marathon.

I guess everyone is a world class sprinter, but no one is an endurance runner in PF.

Heck, in high school I did a 6 minute mile and I have asthma.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CaveToad wrote:

Ok gang.

[lots of other text here]

Depending on how many people with submissions you have that are actually still around once gameplay starts, I'm not a huge fan of having everybody in one huge group, even if it's just for initial role play. With so many people and the not instantaneous nature of PBP and who knows how many different time zones involved, keeping track of everything going on and what happens when is going to be hard. I mean, depending on how people post, you could end up with a ton of branching timelines as people go back and respond to new posts that occurred when they were offline. As such, I vote for splitting as soon as we can.

As for tables, I've been in games with a few of the players here and wouldn't mind joining them (if they should so desire, that is. If not, that's fine). But I also understand if it's easier to just assign us to tables, as I know trying to accommodate the wishes of everybody in this would be really difficult.


Dave Herman wrote:
CampinCarl9127 wrote:
Newbonomicon wrote:
Anderlorn wrote:
I'll probably get Eschew next level if chosen? Can we use eschew for Alchemy as well?
That sounds incredibly silly. You're making alchemical concoctions with no ingredients?
In a world of dragons and magic and demons, the fact that conservation of mass is not adhered to seems a very silly thing to focus on.
Are we forgetting the principal of equivalent exchange?

I was talking about an optional rule and it wasn't a homebrew idea but the GM said not to worry, so I am not worried about it or turning it into drama. The only drama I want is what comes from this campaign.


Full Metal Alchemist reference failed.


You mentioned earlier that you were planning up to 7 people per table. I think that is a bit too much, especially without grouped initiative. There will be waiting for each other to respond, during combat or otherwise. With more players the fragmentation of responsibility will be greater which means that each player will feel like they have less impact on key decisions as well more time spent on discussions about what to do. More players is also more taxing to keep track of for everyone else. With gestalt there will also be an overlap in roles which means that some people might feel like there is actually nothing they are "best" at in the group. All these points are things that can lead to players losing or at least decreasing interest in the game and we all want to avoid that. Of course you are the GM and we will follow your decision. I believe 5 is a better number per table, though even 6 will be more manageable. I assume you haven't finished balancing encounters as that will depend on the actual parties anyway.


Yeah... gestalt makes fewer characters very workable—any two to three of these characters could be a competent party on their own, though that's probably pushing it.


I think Group Initiative of some kind might be a smart thing to go for if the groups are larger. I know we're supposed to post more than once per day, but I also know how hard that can be during combat when everyone's waiting their turn.

I'd be happy going for just about any size group, but PbP does flow better with smaller parties, I've found. It's actually better to split the party in PbP sometimes, since it helps things flow more smoothly. Still, I can see how a GM running multiple tables might want to keep the number of tables limited.


I support group init. The way I see it, if the party all goes before the enemy, really, they can just delay to get whatever order they want.

I think CaveToad mentioned something about wanting to reward/make sure high init characters feel the benefits of that. I've played a super high init character before, and all I really cared about was a) patting myself on the back for a +24 init and b) going before the enemies. The main other area I can see it being an issue is for AoE things and buffing/debuffing, in which case I can imagine the party would soon pick up on that and adjust. Although I suppose another issue with gestalt/role overlap and grouped init is that there might be stiff competition about getting close to enemies to attack them if there are lots of melee fighters but few enemies.

Edit: To clarify, by "group init" I mean what CampingCarl is talking about below. Not sure if there's an official difference between "group" and "block," so I thought I'd clarify (Maybe "group" init is where there's only a single roll for all the PCs, so regardless they get lumped together?)


When I DM I prefer to run "blocked" init. All of my PCs get individual init rolls (which I roll myself to save time), then I average the enemy init. It ends up like this.

Init Order
Rogue
Wizard
Enemy
Fighter
Cleric

Once the rogue and wizard take their 1st round actions I have the enemy take their actions, then I immediately reset the init order.

Init Order
Fighter
Cleric
Rogue
Wizard
Enemy

It allows people with high init modifiers to take advantage of them, while keeping people generally blocked off for faster posting. It is a slight nerf to enemies though, although sometimes if I have a particularly dangerous boss I'll have them roll init separately.

Just my 2cp.


Yeah... that's how I've run things as well. Sometimes it even works in IRL games, depending on the situation.


Xanya Zellor wrote:
You mentioned earlier that you were planning up to 7 people per table. I think that is a bit too much, especially without grouped initiative. There will be waiting for each other to respond, during combat or otherwise. With more players the fragmentation of responsibility will be greater which means that each player will feel like they have less impact on key decisions as well more time spent on discussions about what to do. More players is also more taxing to keep track of for everyone else. With gestalt there will also be an overlap in roles which means that some people might feel like there is actually nothing they are "best" at in the group. All these points are things that can lead to players losing or at least decreasing interest in the game and we all want to avoid that. Of course you are the GM and we will follow your decision. I believe 5 is a better number per table, though even 6 will be more manageable. I assume you haven't finished balancing encounters as that will depend on the actual parties anyway.

I agree with this assessment. More people means slower posting overall, or the few with limited posting ability get left behind. Decisions made without their input ect.

With Gestalt there is a lot of overlap, people trying to do the same thing or in contest for the same gear ect. Large parties only compound these issues.

601 to 650 of 2,219 << first < prev | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Online Campaigns / Recruitment / CaveToad's Monster Mashup - Home Brew (Gestalt, Monster races, Bonus Goodies) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.