>>97161838
God help me.
Previous thread: >>97095080
Paizo thread: >>97099515

>>97161838
What's the point of the merge again? I kinda lost the plot with that one.

>>97161838
hama imagine her getting raped by orcs

>>97161838
I'm kinda vibing with the classic D&D art. No idea why.

>>97161838
is this still Goldmoon from Dragonlance, or some other character now?

I've not gotten to play any adventure paths. The closest I've come to was listening to the Glass Cannon Podcast doing the one about giants - than all the podcasters doing live play started switching to 2e.

I still cannot fathom how my favorite 3.x system has so little online presence. To me it coincides with an explosion in popularity because I remember walking into a library and seeing rows of shelves of books that were either DnD or direct homage, and so many games on this system came out in late 90s early 2000s and this was the first edition to go online

how the fuck can this all end up with Ad&d in 2025 having more online fans that 3.x?

And the second thing I don't get I how come no one who is fed up with 5e, ever jumps back to 3e even though when they talk about the reasons that they've grown to dislike 5e, 3rd edition addresses ALL of them. Yet everyone goes from 5e to OSR or PF2e instead.

>>97162596
>I still cannot fathom how my favorite 3.x system has so little online presence.
It has dndtools, realmshelp, a shitton of class guides in GitP and pfsrd. It's not bad, definitely one of the top 15 most popular systems to this day.
>And the second thing I don't get I how come no one who is fed up with 5e, ever jumps back to 3e even though when they talk about the reasons that they've grown to dislike 5e, 3rd edition addresses ALL of them. Yet everyone goes from 5e to OSR or PF2e instead
Faggots have gaslit new people that 3.5 is some rollmaster-tier unplayable complex mess that is also socially problematic. And new players are more likely yo retvrn to PF1e than dnd 3.5 because they think new=better.

is there any way by which a level 9 cleric gets to cast Explosive Runes?

>>97162619
Alternative spell, but I would just go with magic items at that point.

>>97162619
Also anyspell, but I dont know how viable it is for your intended goal.

>>97162612
On youtube, PF1e has 0 channels, 3.5 has one. and also PF1e died on 4 chan by itself.
> dndtools, realmshelp, a shitton of class guides in GitP and pfsrd
yes but those sites are like the remnants of an old empire. Gitp still has a dozen people posting on that forum, but that's about it.
Statistically there should be some people wanting to talk about the game they enjoyed as teens. I mean even if you are just a youtube looking to hook in viewes - huge content niche that's sitting there untapped and no one wants to touch? 200 youtubers jump on 5e degradation and not one of them thinks 'maybe I should cover this thing no one is covering'

One thing I attribute to 3.x era were the skits and shorts that followed up movies like The Gamers and Dorkness Rising. But than all those creators just disappeared from online presence.

>>97162630
>>97162641
thanks.

I am just reviewing campaign notes from 8 months ago and there is an inventory note about how the party put 9 wooden signs enchanted with Explosives Runes CL9, along with a bunch of other stuff into a stash they were leaving behind for their alt. characters. I am pretty sure I glanced at that and approved it at the time, but now for the life of me I can't remember out how that came about when they only had a cleric in the party at the time.

>>97162642
Dnd 3.5 was deader than dead here until me and some anons started creating these threads and anons joined in. And PF1e is growing for sure. It was after a decade of constant decline, but still. And theres plenty of people who cover 3.5 and PF1e lore content, just not gameplay.
>Statistically there should be some people wanting to talk about the game they enjoyed as teens.
I dont think this happens with TTRPGs. Oldfags just think that all that could be talked about it has already been said and historically there havent been a ton of nostalgia waves for older systems. Most people playing OSR and 2e now never touched it back in the day or werent even live when it was current. And no one gives a damn about MERP or other games that were huge when in the 80s and 90s. The 2000s era of TTRPGs seem to have the longest longevity of them all so far, 3.5 and VtM 3e out of the top of my mind.

Working on rebuilding NPCs from Savage Tide to be more deadly. In particular many of the beatsticks suck at their jobs.

>>97162692
Anecdote but 3.5 was the edition of d&d my dad taught me to play with. My parents are both tabletop nerds so I have fond memories of flipping through the old MM and such. I remember how disappointed I was with 5e even on release because I loved the look and vibes of the 3.5 books much more

>>97162692
>plenty of people who cover 3.5 and PF1e lore content
can you recall any of them? I've only seen it mentioned by people who trace a creature's lore back through all editions or something

For a while, I thought it was because all the 3.x era players were edgelords unpalatable for youtube and podcast platforms.

>>97162719
what age did yours get you started?

>>97162737
I'm a 97 zoomer so I guess like 7 or 8 years old. I remember engaging in such epic battles as our encounter with Big Foog and Sir Gloog, or watching our well meaning steppe-warrior escaped slave "The Hun" getting eaten by a giant snake. I love me dad

>>97162737
>can you recall any of them?
Mythkeeper, Lorefinder, AJ Pickett, Esper the Bard. But they do mix it up with other editions like you said.
>For a while, I thought it was because all the 3.x era players were edgelords unpalatable for youtube and podcast platforms.
I dont think that's the case at all. They are more normal than 5e/pf2e players, but there's rarely controversial topics in my games. Well, there was that one time where the GM had a druid shape into a gorilla and rape a female PC, but that's it.

pf1 printed 2 Ioun stones that at the cost of 24,000 give +2 enhancement bonus to Int or Con and stack with each other up to +6 bonus
but only those 2 stats.
3 of those are 72k, exactly twice that of a +6 Headband. I am wondering if there was some balancing reason why they only did this for Int and Con, and wouldn't print something like that for other 4 stats.
You guys see any issue with letting a player sink 72k into a +6 Enhancement bonus to Str/Dex/Wis/Cha?

>>97162759
>1st session question:
>where is the slave market?
>youngest girls sold? how much?
>can we rent them to nearest temple of sex/lust goddess for erotic ceremonies when we are not in town?
>session 3
>do you think our teenage whores might someday level up into clerics or at least acolytes to become proper healsluts and buffbots?

File: 6c08c898026ab347b54935441(...).jpg (464 KB, 858x1416)

464 KB JPG

I have been checking in on the hyper-bloated subsystem that is Spheres again.

I go to the Spheres wiki, and the first thing I see is:

http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/
>Latest Updates: Diamond Classes: Kingking has been added in-part to the wiki (12/6)

As expected.

File: c722d1fa47754012110ea390c(...).jpg (4.59 MB, 1608x3277)

4.59 MB JPG

>>97163513

The whole Spheres, akasha, etc. ecosystem is impenetrable to me because it is ~99% focused on peddling cool new PC options to give buildcrafters more toys to work with.

There is still hardly any GM-facing material for Spheres, akasha, etc., so actually assembling a campaign is rough. (Particularly with the expectation that each NPC has to be built like a full-fledged Spheres, akasha, etc. PC. These subsystems can get really rather complex.)

>14 encounters to reach level 2
Just gimme the xp bro

>>97163580
I'm surprised no one has made a digital character creator system to track all of this like Shadowrun has.
Extra points if they keep the jank RAW interactions.

>>97163513
question did you use to post touhou images and give build advice with dnd 4e

>>97161909
I'm imagining me being raped by goblins that are 55% boob by weight.

File: star_wizard_egg.jpg (307 KB, 500x593)

307 KB JPG

Is it reasonable for a class to expect ANY downtime in a campaign?

I've made an alchemist class that, at level 1, is capable of creating 8 alchemist fire flasks in 1 day of work, assuming a decent Intelligence. Is that a good benchmark? Is it reasonable to make a class that relies on downtime?

You also only have to pay 1gp for materials for each flask of alchemist fire, instead of ~6 gp like normal. So you could leave 15 gp set aside, same price as a spellbook, as a level 1 alchemist and have supplies (I have "alchemical supplies" as an item that weighs 1 lb per 10 gp worth) enough to make 15 alchemical fire flasks, which should be enough to get you through a few encounters, then make more. And honestly at level 1 you'd be shooting a crossbow or throwing daggers when you didn't want to use an alchemical fire.

Would this be viable? I compare it to Pathfinder's alchemist, where there are bombs that are just a per-day ability, but I didn't want that. I don't know if brewing is something alchemists should be able to do during an 8 hour rest, or if they should be able to do an 8 hour shift of crafting before sleeping (because you're not gonna be actually dungeon crawling for 8 hours then going right to sleep).

But I know a lot of campaigns, such as one I am playing in right now, have no downtime at all. So a wizard might be able to rest and get his spells back, but even one day off for an alchemist to craft all the bombs he needs for his next adventure, might not work. And he would need either (A) an option to craft by the hour, or (B) the ability to do a day's crafting during an 8 hour rest that the rest of the party is doing anyway. I don't know which option is better. Because "your craft progress per day is in gold pieces instead of copper pieces" is already a pretty insane ability, in a lot of ways.

>>97164183
>Because "your craft progress per day is in gold pieces instead of copper pieces" is already a pretty insane ability, in a lot of ways

Limit it to alchemicals

Pazio alchemists can make bombs in 8 hours because they dont last

>>97162884
>I am wondering if there was some balancing reason why they only did this for Int and Con
Likely just never got to it. It is a ioun stone version of the different items that give a bonus to 2 stats at once.
As for the pricing, ioun stones always had a markup because of the slotless premium.

Building a Monk/Cleric Sacred Fist. Any feats (other than divine metamagic) and magical items I should know about?

>>97164074
Yeah, it's touhoufag, put some 'speck on his name.
He used to post crazy shit when it came to the maths.
>>97164183
While 'downtime' may not be a thing, most campaigns generally do not push the pcs constantly forward. Perhaps not months, buy a week or 2 of sitting tight.

>>97165180
You could go dragonborn for the stats if you do not have a specific race in mind.
Intuitive Attack, while iffy, takes away some of the MAD. Martial Study/Stance can give you some much enjoyed bonuses and tactics, as well as Superior Unarmed Combat and Snap Kick.
It really depends on how you are going to approach monk combat; with cleric buffs, you could conceivably look at combat maneuvers as something viable.
Unfortunately, bracers of armor is almost a requirement.
Are you going Text >Table for spell advancement?
Rather than divine metamagic, due to your sparse feats, you may want to look at the 'spend turn attempts for bonuses' feats in complete champion/divine.

>>97165212
>Rather than divine metamagic, due to your sparse feats, you may want to look at the 'spend turn attempts for bonuses' feats in complete champion/divine.

Oh I'll be looking those up. And yes Intuitive Attack does sound like itll make things a bit easier, thanks

I would like some ideas from the crowd.
A player wants me to make a weapon of legacy for him (im super easy with them, fuck the penalties), and he is making a lightning based swordsage (refluffing some maneuvers to deal electricity damage). I'm basically taking the example sword from ToB out of hand, changing up a few things.
What I would like advice on is the tasks needed to advance it.
He is styling the pc as a follower of Anhur, the Mulhorandi god of storms and war, and I want to use some creative ideas of what he needs to do to advance the weapon that isn't 'hurr fight this guy!'.
The only one I have locked in is that he must observe a thunderstorm from the highest point in the area with blade held high, risking being struck by lighting, and survive the experience.
Other than that, uuhhhh?

>>97165231
How about instead of getting hit, he must dodge/deflect every lightning bolt that might strike him? Feels like a better way to showcase he has overcome the storm and made it his own

Is taking skill focus: Concentration a good option for a gish/frontline cleric? Or not really necessary? It would give you +11 to casting on the defensive at first level which would mean your spells would go off 3/4 times

>>97165458
>Is taking skill focus
No, unless you get it for free.
+2 for a feat is absurd.
Just take a masterwork tool.
>>97165243
>flashbacks to FFX
I like the cut of your jib, man.

>>97165517
Its +3 which is pretty in line with similar feats. There is not a tool for concentration

>>97165556
You can, by the rules, make a masterwork tool for any skill, so long as you pay the cost.

>>97161897
Fucking with my filters apparently.

>>97165600
You can make a masterwork tool for any skill that uses tools, yes.

>>97165618
>Tool, Masterwork: This well-made item is the perfect tool for the job. It grants a +2 circumstance bonus on a related skill check (if any).
According to what? It is deliberately left open to interpretation, on purpose in my opinion.

>>97165633
Even for the sake of argument if you could have a tool that aids in concentration checks, you wouldn't even be able to use it in combat. Unless you tie it to your helmet and have it dangling in front of your face like a donkey's carrot. But that's besides the point.

>>97165663
The point is that you justify the tool as it is used.
A monocle for spot checks, a notebook for knowledge checks, all on your person.

File: Big Hat.jpg (51 KB, 396x347)

51 KB JPG

>here's your masterwork concentration tool bro

>>97165761
id allow it

>>97165765
I'm honestly not an insane rawfag who hates good faith interpretations to do interesting or creative things, but I don't think its possible to come up with a combat capable tool for concentration that would not also confer some hefty penalty. Blinding/deafening yourself with sensory deprivation tools would obviously be a retarded thing to do in combat. Maybe you have a focus of some sort like a smooth stone that you hold in your hand to boost concentration. Okay, but now you can't cast anything with a somatic component.

>>97165887
Sure, that hat's brim would probably make it hard to see

>>97161897
Some schizo forced it and now we have to live with it, apparently. Despite the Paizo thread existing.

>>97162884
That's literally just a regular stat item crafted to be slotless, that's what's doubling the price

>>97165458
If you want maximum bonus for one feat, you need Con 13 for Shape Soulmeld: Vitality Belt. It gives +4 morale to Concentrate as well as any other Con based skill check (note skill, so a normal Fort save is out) and if you have a lasting source of Essentia also gives you hitpoints equal to your meldshaper level per point of Essentia invested. For the feat, that's half your character level.

>>97162934
There’s the sacred prostitute PrC for that.

>>97164197
>Limit it to alchemicals
Oh it is definitely limited to alchemicals. Still, it means the alchemist can essentially earn like 400 gp per day.
>Pazio alchemists can make bombs in 8 hours because they dont last
True. And I don't want to create a "bombs" mechanic. Nor do I want this "uhh only the alchemist can use them, because... he just can, okay!" because it all just feels so contrived.

Also, comparing "upgraded" alchemist's fires (dealing 2d6, 3d6, etc) to items like beads of force and necklaces of fireballs that can create similar effects (admittedly as AoEs but still) to try to scale prices, is very disheartening. I don't want these items to cost thousands of gold pieces. How do I make them cost less without breaking the game?

>>97165188
>While 'downtime' may not be a thing, most campaigns generally do not push the pcs constantly forward. Perhaps not months, buy a week or 2 of sitting tight.
So that not being much of a thing in my campaign I'm a player in, is unusual? We're level 14 and have barely had a day off since level 1. I'm thinking about this class in that context and it seems like it'd be annoying to run.

With that in mind, is the Artificer class viable?

>>97167349
While you lose a lot of power, you still have things like Spell Storing Infusion and the Weapon and Armor Enhancment Infusions, and Action Points. The first one has a little Exp cost, but the bigger issue is being able to regularly hit the UMD roll at low levels, but on the other hand it lets you turn a lower level spell slot into any spell from levels 1-4. Eventually. For the Weapon and Armor enchancements, you're going to need to either choose generically useful options and hold the charge or get used to an Action Point tax. So you can be plenty viable, just weaker than if you could actually have a day or two to make stuff.

>>97167943
Sounds like an alchemist class would really struggle without some per-day abilities then. Problem is, even a "MacGyver" type of ability like 1/day you can make an alchemical item in 10 minutes, isn't gonna work out too well, and it's gonna risk turning the class into "spellcaster, except it's actually alchemy" instead of an actual mechanically-alchemical class.

>>97162692
>VtM 3e
Technically, revised was supposed to be an expansion/rerelease of 2e, making it the VTM version of 2.5e
Unfortunately, the current writers are retarded and have no experience with cwod, so they have no idea how the editions work.

>>97165231
Convince a powerful lightning elemental to bind itself to the blade of its own free will.

>>97166171
>>97165173
yeah I get the reason behind the price. I just wanted to know if there are some balance issues with a +6 Stat for any of those 4 that they didn't make any such examples.

>>97165940
not since 5efugees from the OGL fallout flooded the general with 2e shit lmao

>>97168420
Assuming that they are worded like the 3.X Ioun stones, they don't have the text about not affecting your skill points.

>>97162759
I just remembered GamersDenLoremaster - he does PF1 videos, so I guess I was wrong there being no pf1 channels.

>>97164183
>Is it reasonable for a class to expect ANY downtime in a campaign?
I would say its mandatory for verisimilitude because without downtime, you are going to be hitting high teen levels within a few months of constant adventuring and such a character would not fit into any world.

is there a way to drink potions as a move action or faster?
like go into battle with a potion bottle in your mouth, uncork it with your tongue while swing at the enemy?

>>97169495
Some of the alternatives to them have specifics of activation that can be "gamed", like breaking a Skull Talisman with an AoE or probably-miss-an-actual-enemy attack, while if there's a Psionic source of the effect you can use the 3.0 web article's option to wire a tattoo into a Contingency.

For potions proper, I have no idea.

>>97169495
Technically Delay Potion. You had to do the drinking at normal speed, but getting the effect is a swift action as long as you activate it before the time limit (con mod hours, min 1) is up.

>>97169520
>>97169586
thanks.
don't think that's a feat anyone will take, but I guess it would be neat to put it on a magic item.
I found a table in Arms and Equipment Guide that suggests that adding some feats to an intelligent item should raise its price by 10k.
Not sure if that price should be the same for 3.5.
+5k crafting cost for a feat seems a bit too cheap. Are there any other sources for something like that?

Is there a premade PF2e archetype or background or something that would more easily facilite a Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde type character? I know mechanically it could just be a dual class setup or dual character sheets where certain things get restricted depending on who's "in control", but if Pathfinder can streamline things that would be nice.

>>97169684
It's pretty good for a frontliner if you get a wand (eternal wand optional) of Quick Potion and one of the spell slot restoring items for your team's caster type/types. You can get a potion of any legal spell they know, drink it, and then you have a swift action buff on tap for a few hours and it's cheaper than the equivalent amount of potions.

>>97169697
>PF2e
Paizo general.

looking at recent results of our randomly generated loot horde, a Potion of Sanctuary has got to be one of the worst ideas ever.
Imaging even trying to sell that to someone - >25g for 6 seconds of very dubious safety from some attackers.

aside from donating it to a city as a public privy, are there any other 'good' uses for a bag of devouring?
Last time I asked a few threads back, was suggested disposal of bodies.
3.5 version mentions making it is 17th CL
and Pf1 pegs it's cost at 120,000.
I am wondering if there is any type of outsider that would be willing to accept it in trade for service via Planar Binding / Planar Ally line of spells.

>>97170166
If all else fails, you can still use it as an astral grenade

Legitimate question: in Pathfinder 1e, how optimal is the Thassilonian Magic "archetype" for Wizards?

To refresh memories, a Thassilonian Mage takes the Focused School of Magic mechanic (specifically Abjuration, Conjuration, Enchantment, Evocation, Illusion, Necromancy, Transmutation) with the following tweaks:
>Still gets all level-based class abilities tied to their chosen Focus School.
>Gets +2 spell slots per spell level.
>Those bonus spell slots can ONLY be used to memorize 2 copies of the same spell, which MUST be from your Focus School.
>You absolutely CANNOT learn any spells from two schools based on your chosen Focus School, just like an old-school Specialist Wizard.
>Even trying to use magic items tied to your forbidden schools is impossible unless you pass a Use Magic Device check first.

The idea behind the Thassilonian Mage is that you sacrifice versatility to become more powerful in your focused school of magic, but does it actually work? What do you think, anons?

>>97170296
Just choose an overpowered school and you'll get all the benefits of a specialist plus some extra. You can even get around the only annoying limitation with Use Magic Device, so it's not even a problem.

>>97170296
Only as optimal as the school.
So evocation is buns, conujuration is balling.

File: DnD 35 GM Log Sheet.jpg (1007 KB, 2550x3300)

1007 KB JPG

Since coming across Maximum Mike's advice in the Cyberpunk 2020 core book to roll Awareness/Notice checks before the session starts and make a table from the results, I've taken it into all of my games moving forward. Now I find myself staring down the barrel of a 3.5 campaign, having never run or played that shit before, and I see the 3.0 DMG has similar advice on page 17.
I've made myself a very simple "DM's Log Sheet" that includes a basic combat tracker on the bottom and a pre-session skill check table at the top. Am I missing anything else that could be helpful on a sheet like this? I've also got a very basic NPC character sheet that I made myself which allows me to track their motivations and attitudes.

>>97170296
You just take Conjuration of Transmutation and fuck everyone in the ass. You can do the same shit in 3.5 with Master Specialist into Red Wizard.

>>97171129
You mean pre rolling enemy tests? Sure, but it’s such a quick thing with group rolls I usually don’t bother.

>>97165887
Have the Artificer attach a fidget spinner to the inside of your shield.

File: Beer Cap.png (631 KB, 768x768)

631 KB PNG

>>97169495

File: Screenshot_20251213_07520(...).jpg (186 KB, 1080x936)

186 KB JPG

>>97171992
You know I'm a fair man, I thought about it for a good while after that conversation and came up with the idea for something like this and then found this image on Google. Maybe as a DM I'd allow something like this. I still feel like thats pushing it tho

>>97161941
Is it the gigantic water balloons barely restrained by that scant shower curtain?

>>97162612
PF1e is better than 3.5 because it's literally just 3.5 that's had its flaws fixed.
PF1e is 15 years old, by the way. It's not popular because it's new, because it isn't new at all. It's popular because it's better.
You're the problem. You. Specifically.

>>97172147
If by "had its flaws fixed" you mean pandered really hard to fags and trannies while furthering the divide between martials and casters then yes it is much superior. Its literally just 3.5 but marketed to literal children instead of college students

>>97172186
>taking the bait this hard

shameful display

>>97172203
The thread is slow and I would never pass up an opportunity to shit talk pathfinder.

>>97172186
>homophobia
Go back to /pol/ or /v/
>dividing
Oh, you're baiting.
Buffing martials, and neutering the biggest issues in casting is furthering divides because they gave cantrips all day!!! or wizards have features? (3+intmod a day mage hand)

No it didnt fix everything, but at least be right assertion

>>97172216
Homophobia is the neutral position. The fact that you think hating trannies is something that only exists in chud echo chambers just shows how sheltered you are from reality

>>97172228
By engaging with only the call out on the post you revealed your neither neutral nor relevant for a tg chat

>>97172233
Pathfinder is not relevant to the 3.5 thread either so really responding to you at all was not on topic, for which I apologize.

>>97172239
>.5g/ /3eg/ /pf1eg/ /d20g/ Dungeons and Dragons Third/3rd Edition/Pathfinder 1e/D20 General
Retard

>>97171779
No. I mean I have the players roll a handful of Awareness tests before the session begins and I write the results down in order. During play, when I would normally ask them to make that test, instead I consult the first set of results, and then the second set for a second test, and so on. This way, the players never even know that s potential failed test happened - which itself by its very existence alerts them to the fact that something is going on that they can't see. There are times of course when you do want that suspenseful feeling, but this method makes sure the players never know more than they should.

>>97172147
As someone whose only exposure to Pathfinder is Kingmaker (the video game), what exactly has it fixed that makes it the superior experience? It's just a re-flavored 3.5e to me, not strictly 'better'.
At a first glance, it has consolidated a few skills together and has grouped up all the various combat maneuvers into a unified system. That's about the only thing I would consider a hard 'fix'.
I also noticed a variety of 'new' classes that were just a bunch of gishes and alt-spellcasters, which are also a thing in 3.5e so... I'm quite curious to know.
As far as I am aware, it still suffers from severe feat bloat, pure martials still can't do jack shit without spellcasters hand-holding them, and high-level play is still a chaotic mess.

>>97172251
I vote we move back to not advertising PF/D20 next thread. We can keep the trove as a brewing resource but nobody here actually wants to talk about pathfinder. Its a shit game with shit fans.

>>97172251
Literally nobody asked for the merge.
Pathfinder still has its own seperate thread, so can you please fuck off back there?

>>97172275
Im right.
What Im not right?
Those people dont count!

>>97172281
There's nothing right about hijacking the thread on purpose to talk about a game nobody else wants to talk about. That just makes you a retard who should be shunned from polite society.

>>97172284
You are voted to not participate in the thread if your tism cant handle the two d20 systems that are 98% similar being merged

>>97172274
Some good some bad.
Fixes include the skill system which is needlessly convoluted in 3.5 streamlined
Second is the nerfed spells
And buffing of martial classes.
They made it so you dont need to be a Wizard (Crossbow) main until lv 3

So-so
They dropped the Prestige bent of 3.5
Instead they went with archetypes which I personally feel is good but I also feel that Prestige classes were good for niche things.

IMO calling it reflavoring over fixes is just fussing over verbage.

>>97172286
If they are so similar then why do people have a desire to talk about 3.x but not your shitty pet games that are completely dead and have 0 following? The logic isn't making sense here big guy. Its like insisting that everybody who likes to eat oranges also has to like grapefruit because they're basically the same. Its fucking retarded. Just like you are.

>>97172286
I would have no grounds to argue with you, if there wasn't a general dedicated specifically for Paizo Games.
The 3.5e audience has no real interest in discussing Pathfinder, and you hijacking the general doesn't change that.

>>97172302
I see, if you had read the thread

>>97164183
>>97169697
>>97170296

You would see there is a following, and more people who import between the systems
But your just here to whine

>>97172303
Im not even the merger, I just import

>>97172307
I'm one of the 2 or 3 most active posters ITT. Less than 5% of the posts here are related to systems other than 3.x because we dont actually care about them. You might as well be posting about your cringe homebrew system. Its deeply off topic

>>97172334
Being a top percent poster when you post bitching and complaining isnt a good number

We should keep a list of all the memorable personalities that have graced the general.
Out of the top of my head, in no particular chronological order.
>Anon that caused a shitshow about turtle shields, or something.
>4e Anon that vehemently hates ToB with a passion. Something about martials not being allowed to touch magic beyond items with a 10-foot pole.
>Some Anon who insisted a Fighter should not be able to take on the city guards by himself (something like forty level 1-2 warriors), regardless of Level, and that the only thing that saves him is his magical gear. He insisted we make a Build that does so, Level 10 Max if I remember correctly, no magic items allowed, but then went on to literally ban EVERY SINGLE FEAT that remotely allows the Fighter to do anything.
>The Pathfinder Merger schizo.
>That one Anon who insists every single person that critiques him is same-fagging.

>>97172301
Except they also downgraded combat maneuvers, like not being able to push people into dangerous terrain or off cliffs without specific feats, fucked up their CMD/CMB scaling to the point you can't use maneuvers later down the line and split combat feats into 2-3 parts each. When consensus in 3.5 was that most combat (and not only combat) feats need to be merged with others of the same theme or needed scaling with level.

PF1 is at best a side grade, there are very few things that are actually better without caveats that add new problems where there was none.

>>97172385
Its telling that you only find insufferable crashouts memorable. There are plenty of regular friendly faces as well :)

>>97170296
Take Conjuration, your 2 copies of same spell is Summon Monster, pure win
>>97172147
>>97169697
>>97172275
this is obvious bait

yet on a slightly relevant note of comparing 3.5 and PF1
party recently looted Boots of Elvenkind from one encounter and a day later, Cloak of Elvenkind from another
in PF1 I look at these items
> +5 Stealth from Cloak, +5 Acrobatics from boots
>this is strange
>what the hell does Acrobatics have to do with elves?

Look it up in 3.5, or now it makes sense. Cloak is +5 hide because it camouflages you and Boots are +5 Move Silently because they muffle your steps.

Neat, sensible in theme, perfection. This is why even as I started out playing PF1 modules, I end up going with 3.5 like 90% of the time on everything.

>>97172334
>Im one of the most spergy autists
lol

>>97172404
You could have named a few to prove your point.
The only two that come to mind are Three Five Archive and the anon who asks when the next episode will be available, or which class will be featured, but I can't exactly call that 'memorable' in contrast to some unique specimens here.
Friendly people do not usually leave a 'name', or have a specific event tied to them, hence not really memorable.

>>97172439
This but unironically. I will not apologize for being passionate about my hobbies. You are a sad, cold, empty little man.

>>97169428
>I would say its mandatory for verisimilitude because without downtime, you are going to be hitting high teen levels within a few months of constant adventuring and such a character would not fit into any world.
I agree. So a class that requires at least one day of downtime between adventures wouldn't be a problem? Or should there be a mechanic that lets them do everything they need to do to recover in an 8 hour rest like everyone else in the party?

>>97172441
Archive anon, crafting anon, notepad screenshot anon, there's a few regular e6 fanboys who I think fondly of.

>>97172466
I'd personally add the Cultivation crowd that dedicated several threads on how to implement it in 3.5e on the list.

>>97172451
being passionate wouldnt be bad if you werent passionately wrong

>>97172387
>fucked up their CMD/CMB scaling to the point you can't use maneuvers later down the line
I hear this, but having played the game, this seems like one of those 'the medium sized level 20 pc can not reliably grapple the colossal CR22 BBEG' arguments.
>>97172406
>what the hell does Acrobatics have to do with elves?
>doesn't know elves are stereotypically known for the nimbleness, which is covered by Acrobatics

>>97172664
>I hear this, but having played the game, this seems like one of those 'the medium sized level 20 pc can not reliably grapple the colossal CR22 BBEG' arguments.
No, the problem is that CMB is STR based and CMD is STR+DEX based AND you add a lot of bonuses applicable to Touch AC on top of that. It may look okay at first until you remember that you are using d20 and with more or less the same HD you have 1 to 10 points to play with. Size bonuses are just the cherry on top of the shit sundae.

>>97172706
You are also ignoring the many ways you get bonuses to your CMB and that you are generally adding 11+ to the number, compared to a static bonus number whose only real set of bonuses are size bonuses.
This sounds like whiteroom talk mixed with 'I want to hate it' mentality.
You can prove this by comparing medium sized creatures of equal level/CR to each other. Does what you speak of still apply?

>>97172458
as with all cases, you should be talking to the DM about such things. Pacing of a campaign is a one of the big things to discuss in session 0. Ideally for sensible progression of an average campaign, you should be looking at not days, but weeks and months of downtime several times through out. The crafting times in 3.5 assume you get those kinds of breaks.
>Or should there be a mechanic that lets them do everything they need to do to recover in an 8 hour rest like everyone else in the party?
no, that's 5e mindset that will ruin your game in the long run

>>97172664
>>doesn't know elves are stereotypically known for the nimbleness
they are known for being sluts that secretly love being gangraped by orcs and goblins
>nimbleness
isn't that just Legolas? I don't know of other 'nimble' elves

>>97172773
Fap before posting retard

>>97172750
Yes, it holds.
Average difference in CMB/CMD grows from 11 to ~14 at CR 10 to 17-19 at CR 20. Many of CR 20 monsters literally have over 20 points difference between CMB and CMD as in they literally can't succeed at combat maneuvers against themselves. Pure brutes aren't as bad since they do not have any DEX to speak of, but anything besides that is basically fucked.

You have shit like +34 vs 62 and the like.

>>97172819
>Many of CR 20 monsters
Please post a medium sized CR20 creature.

would you allow a PC who has no Martial weapon proficiency to wield a +1 guisarme treating it exactly like a +1 longspear instead?

>>97172887
Kyton, Eremite +30(+34 grapple) vs 49
Grim Reaper +34 vs 62
Rakshasa, Maharaja +28 vs 52

>>97172887
NTA but according to my searching there are exactly 4 CR 20 Medium sized creatures, that being the Euryale (CMB +30, CMD 62, can't be tripped), the Eremite (CMB +30, +34 Grapple, CMD 49), the Izflitar (CMB +34, CMD 58, can't be tripped), and the Rakshasa Maharaja (CMB +28, CMD 52).

I'm a big Pathfinder fan but I acknowledge how inflated the stats can get as a baseline.

>>97172887
>Please post a medium sized CR20 creature.
So basically your argument is "well, PCs SHOULDN'T be allowed to use combat maneuvers against high level enemies?"

>>97172918
Personally I don't see a problem with that as long as you apply -4 lacking proficiency penalty on trip attempts with it. Maybe downgrade the damage to 1d6 since guisarme is a slashing weapon.

>>97172965
An oft forgotten rule is that since combat maneuvers are attack rolls, any bonuses you get on attack rolls you should also be applying to your CMBs, which can boost your bonus to those checks quite a bit more than what the standard progression you'd see on a character sheet would imply. Once Buff-finder starts getting implemented into the mix (a +4 Greater Heroism here, a flanking bonus there) soon enough a high level martial going up against a high level enemy suddenly has the chance to have a much higher odds of hitting that combat maneuver check compared to what you'd expect.

Now you are correct that this doesn't exactly cover the case of a high level monster trying to wrestle itself on anything but a Nat 20, but given how 95+% of the game is going to focus around PvE and not EvE, that's something I'm willing to ignore as a PF player.

>>97173041
Bonuses to AC also apply to CMD, so if enemies apply buffs themselves it shuts you out. The other problem is that when you have those massive bonuses to hit, you're usually going to kill an enemy when you full attack.

nta who started arguing for CMB/CMD but
>>97172938
Looking at these as examples... yeah I am actually fine with the general principle of
>a mortal isn't ever going to trip or disarm a Grim Reaper
>>97172965
so, soft yes to that.
You need to have some exceptional circumstances and magical aid if you want to pull of any of that manhandling bullshit against opponents this powerful. I am also fine that they can't do it to each other. Its on theme that past a certain threat level, you are dealing with near untouchable horrors.
Loki is right - paraphrasing because I can't be arsed to look up the scene
>I am a demi god, I will not be manhandled

>>97173041
Problem is it is emblematic of Pf and Paizo general problems. Starfinder fucked up their star ships even worse, where you literally couldn't use end game ships for anything since skill DCs for anything outside flying in a straight line were literally impossible to make. Shutting out like 90% of non-direct damage options for the fighter, unless you invest 2-3 of your feats AND get magical buffs on top of it is absolutely fucked.

In 3.5 you at least could tackle creatures of your own size off the walls or bull rush them into spikes and so on. And you can reasonable expect a +4-12 bonus over your opponent with only modest investment.

>>97173059
>>97173090
It depends on the type of bonuses, most typed bonuses that go adding to a creature's Flat-Footed usually aren't going to help their CMD, so Armor bonuses, Shield bonuses, and Natural Armor bonuses won't do anything for a creature trying not to get pushed around.

That said, catching a creature off guard by making them Flat-Footed in some way is also a great way to take off a huge chunk of bonuses (Dex, Dodge, etc) to a creature's CMD and make the maneuver that much more likely to hit. Got a party rogue with a high level feinting build that can guarantee a feint that lasts for a full turn and the entire party can benefit from? Now that creature's CMD has dropped by like, an easy 8 or 9 points at a CR 20 creature's level. For a good example, for instance, the Maharaja Rakshasa's CMD starts at a baselline of 52, but making him flat-footed literally removes 10 from that number between losing Dex and Dodge bonuses down to a 42, which at high level should be a trivially easy number to hit for any martial character looking to do a combat maneuver, especially with the buffs I mentioned earlier.

>>97173074
That's fucking stupid because you can hit them just fine.

>>97165761
Now have a dragonlance master make it 5x bigger for that sweet, sweet +10 circumstance bonus.

>>97173232
I mean at that point it's basically the martial equivalent of stuff like the Eryale having Blindsight 60 ft., Darkvision 120 ft., and permanent True Seeing (along with a host of other defensive buff spells) to mitigate if not completely negate any kinds of magical shenanigans revolving around things like going invisible.

Having a really high defense stat is a way for the devs to soft block certain strategies from working, and in my opinion is a much better alternative to just making them immune outright to them. You can still trip or disarm a Grim Reaper, but just like how he has darkvision 60 ft., see invisibility, status sight, and true seeing, you're going to really need to pull out some big gun punches if you want to try to sneak around one. It's not impossible, but that's the "cost" of trying to sneak around the living embodiment of Death, just like how it should be next to impossible to steal his iconic scythe just because you rolled a 15.

>>97173276
Problem with that is it means that all the feats and abilities that work with combat maneuvers are a waste in the long run since they fall off in usefulness with level. It's similar to 3.5 problems, but even worse - you either go all in on a single trick, by putting all the possible feats, spells and abilities to it or you put none and just buff your attack. Add to that regular problems with big monsters, plus the nerfs Paizo did to them, and they get absolutely fucked.

>>97173419
Sure, but just like how high level casters can get completely dicked over with things like SR, status/elemental immunities, and creatures in general having bonkers saving throws to the point where most creatures at base will pass even your highest DC spells on anything but a 1 (this one really screws with players the most in my experience), high level creatures in general are just STRONG, and usually require either equally strong teamwork, powerful builds, or some combination of the two in order to consistently win encounters without having to spend money to resurrect them every other fight.

You might say "oh but passing SR is piss easy, you just have to do X, Y, and Z", but IMO that's not all that different from telling a martial that if they want to wrestle a god at high level they'll need to do similar types of min-maxxing to focus their build on one style of combat instead of spreading it out over a wider swathe of options.

>>97173482
No its not the same. Because wizard can just buy spells that don't give a fuck about those things and cleric/druid can just change their loadout completely without spending anything. Fighter/Barb (and sorcerer if he is dumb about his spell choices) on the other hand is completely pigeonholed into just using his basic attack with PA. As always.
There is a difference between spending ~3-5% of your character resources over 20 levels for caster to deal with a problem and spending 70+% of your resources on doing combat maneuvers and then finding out that you are still fucked.

Compare it to something like M&M where if you invest in strength/trip/grappling you can do shit like throw people through buildings and the like. Can it be dealt with? Yes. But it needs very specific abilities/resources to do it and it doesn't just get easier to no sell as power level goes up.

In this case maneuvers are literally a trap option, and also an insidious one since you can see it only later down the line. Even in 3.5 the main problem is size and that's at least a straightforward one and also doesn't block all the maneuvers unlike the CMB/CMD relationship. For example Jotunbred + 1-2 relevant feats and maybe an item give a solid baseline without overinvesting into it.

>>97173232
and? you are going to have to hit them a lot to make a difference, instead of passing 3 rolls to hog tie one of them.
its fine to demand a combo from PCs if they want to resolve a CR20 encounter that easy.
Lets consider your examples in a group setting assuming your grappler has a balanced party to back him against these monsters:
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/npc-s/npcs-cr-19/scarred-wanderer/
The raging scarred-wanderer with CMB 26, With +1 Bless, +1 Prayer, +5 Imbue iIth spell Ability - Divine Favor, Enlarge Person, +2 Bull's Strength on a +2 charge with +2 flanking bonus, its now CMB 37 and he hasn't even used his strength surge

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/kyton/kyton-eremite/
This guy doesn't have Acrobatics skill. Means he doesn't have 5 ranks in Balance.
Casting Grease under him while he is on the ground, makes him flat footed and he loses his Dex bonus to both AC and CMD, so that's CMD 40 now.

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/rakshasa/rakshasa-maharaja/
does not have blind-fight. Get your character Blind-Sight, Hit the Rakshasa with a well timed Fog Cloud, Enlarge Person yourself so you can grapple from 10ft away. Now he is blind to your grapple and denied his dex bonus. His CMB is 43 now, you can take his falchion.

>>97172938
>>97173736
and as for Grim Reaper - his CMD isn't adding up
>+24 BAB + 9 STR + 10 DEX + 1 Dodge + 8 Profane = 52
the 62 is likely a misprint. the same combo as with maharaja will work against him.
So idk, looks like a decent system to me

>>97173482
To be much blunter about it than >>97173706, the crucial difference is that the Cleric can cherry-pick a spell that does something with an absolute maximum of 24 hours notice as one of several dozen things to do that day, while a Fighter has to be directed to the retraining rules to choose a fundamentally different and thoroughly set overall approach they WILL be committed to until the next significant chunk of downtime.

>>97173736
>and? you are going to have to hit them a lot to make a difference, instead of passing 3 rolls to hog tie one of them.
Whereas virtually any target has at least half a dozen spells available at EPL=CR that'd completely screw them without need for any external support but broadly-applicable CL and save DC boosts that will cover a decided majority of targets all the way to CR 20.

>its fine to demand a combo from PCs if they want to resolve a CR20 encounter that easy.
...How many spells can you think of who's sole purpose is resolving an encounter in 3 rolls or less?

>assuming your grappler has a balanced party to back him
Why is this the standard for the people who are SUPPOSED to be the low-skill base-load backend to trudge through a long string of petty shit?

>>97173736
made a mistake there, Prayer and Divine Favor wouldn't stack, but I forgot the strength and size bonus from Enlarge person. Replace Prayer with Haste than. CMB climbs to 39
And imo, those buffs are all pretty basic array even by level 12, yet alone 20

>>97172965
You should follow the reply chain.
>>97173808
What you are actually arguing is that magic is too good in relation to other abilities, as it could be selectively applied to screw over ANYONE if the DM decides to hard counter the party.

>>97173808
Almost everything the other anon is pointing out as the buffs for that barbarian are literally all spell level 3 or lower, his potential ceiling goes much higher if he has an allied spellcaster giving him bonuses through other, higher leveled spells. If you've been dealing with an adventure to the point where you're dealing with threats that strong, your party should invariably have some means of either replicating these effects or doing ones even better.

>>97173872
Pathfinder (following in the steps of D&D in general) is a mid-to-high magic setting. The system is not built, generally speaking, with the expectation that people are going to do the impossible, see the invisible, row row fight the power through strategic uses of flexing your muscles really hard. Now there are builds out there that people have made that get very close to this ideal, but I see it as moving the goalposts at best and irrelevant at worst that high level martials require the use of magic to hone their abilities to be successful.

>>97173808
>How many spells can you think of who's sole purpose is resolving an encounter in 3 rolls or less?
relevant how?
do you want your grappler to be relevant in high level play, or do you want him to be equal to a level 20 full caster? You can use the 3.5 grapple system, that's still just not going to happen.

>>assuming your grappler has a balanced party to back him
Why is this the standard for the people who are SUPPOSED to be the low-skill base-load backend to trudge through a long string of petty shit?
because DnD 3.x is a party based game?
because it assumes all challenges presented in the game are being tackled by a diverse group of specialists?
because that's what CR means? CR 20 = an easy encounter for FOUR level 20 pcs, not one?

Also, what are we even arguing here at this point? Are you moving the goal post to
>CMB/CMD system sucks because it don't allow wrestlers to solo high end content
?
you argued above that this system makes combat maneuvers irrelevant, I just gave you the math that with a bit of cooperation they can near guarantee a successful disarm vs. some of the most dangerous NPCs in the game - and the PC character I used in my example isn't even specialized for that.

>>97172477
got any docs?

>>97173894
>Pathfinder (following in the steps of D&D in general) is a mid-to-high magic setting
My point being that magic can hard counter anyone if you happen to have the right spells, and that is something only the DM can do.
I do not find it a compelling argument to use.
>>97173895
NTA, but my original point was that high level, massive creatures are going to be almost proof against combat maneuvers by dint of how 3.5 math works, and better to look at high level, medium sized creatures to see if the math actually doesn't work if there isn't circumstances precluding it.
You proved that outside the size bonuses, CMB/D works as promised.

>>97173823
Six spells per fight is a rather harsh expense compared to the blunt DPR race, and creates a rather silly skill floor for the side that is, again, supposed to be the low-skill base-load to trudge through a long series of petty shit.

>>97173872
>What you are actually arguing is that magic is too good in relation to other abilities, as it could be selectively applied to screw over ANYONE if the DM decides to hard counter the party.
...Not really? The "counters" for spellcasters have plentiful work-arounds of just a single spell, making it rather convoluted and thus obvious for the DM to hard-counter a skilled Wizard/Cleric power-couple compared to all the shit that will accidentally ignore an unsupported or poorly-built Martial.

>>97173894
>Almost everything the other anon is pointing out as the buffs for that barbarian are literally all spell level 3 or lower
Doesn't matter, the Barbarian's BASIC NUMERIC COMPETENCE should not require resources outside their class and Automatic Bonus Progression.

>>97173895
>relevant how?
You explicitly said that "resolving a CR 20 encounter that easy" is "fine to demand a combo from PCs". There is nothing excluding casters from that claim.

>because DnD 3.x is a party based game?
Based on mutually-exclusive niche-filling, not Classic-era WoW party vs. raid vs. enemy effect management.

>because it assumes all challenges presented in the game are being tackled by a diverse group of specialists?
As is the Barbarian's JOB is "beat in the face of giants by being even meaner than them", not one-sided dependency for basic numbers.

>because that's what CR means? CR 20 = an easy encounter for FOUR level 20 pcs, not one?
It's also supposed to be roughly a coin-flip in the CR=ECL case.

>Also, what are we even arguing here at this point? Are you moving the goal post to
>>CMB/CMD system sucks because it don't allow wrestlers to solo high end content
I'm keeping the goalpost at "but casters don't need combos".

>>97173990
Casters 1000% need combos, if you just try to pit a single, average caster (even a Level 20 one) against a Grim Reaper, that caster is GOING to die. You can bring up edge case "oh but what if they bring this hyper-specific combination of spells and effects" but literally how is that any different from the Barbarian using his wealth to buy his own buffs or effects to help boost his numbers? Even then, you're making quite a big deal about it being *so* complicated to get those big numbers by... *checks notes* having a few buffs that each add a flat numerical bonus to ALL of his attack rolls.

>>97173736
>Scarred Wanderer
This guy isn't even that strong compared to what he could be, considering that his base Strength before raging is a measly 14. I've seen secondary martials with higher starting strength score than that at level 1, and this guy is level 20. A normally built PC at this level would likely have at least another +4-+5 over this guy's build at this level just as a baseline.

>>97173990
>Six spells per fight is a rather harsh expense compared to the blunt DPR race, and creates a rather silly skill floor for the side that is, again, supposed to be the low-skill base-load to trudge through a long series of petty shit.
first, none of the 3 examples, are 'petty shit'. They are quite the opposite.
neither does DPR directly applies at these CRs - if your DM has these stand still and trade full round attacks against your party, he isn't doing it right.

your melee character won't even be able to pin any of these opponents to a fight without caster support. Its not a grapple system issue, you are basically asking to fight powerful magical creatures without powerful magical backup and again, that's not going to happen regardless of what system you use.

>As is the Barbarian's JOB is "beat in the face of giants by being even meaner than them"
don't know where you are getting that from. sounds like you want your barbarian to solo everything put in front of him. according to you he is supposed to
> trudge through a long series of petty shit.
and also
>beat in the face of giants by being even meaner than them
so I assume also solo the non-petty shit
and
>Barbarian's BASIC NUMERIC COMPETENCE should not require resources outside their class and Automatic Bonus Progression.
so you think a mortal champion should literally be able to outgrow something like a Grim Reaper in melee competence.

Sorry, no, this is just not something I am looking for from my 3.x game. If one dude can reliably crack it, its not a threat worth having an epic tale about. A game where 20 CR monsters get defeated by 'basic numeric competence', would be boring shit.

1/2

>>97173990
2/2
>I'm keeping the goalpost at "but casters don't need combos"
in my experience, they very much do. both within the scope of a single deadly encounter and much more so in the scope of game play leading up to said encounter.
Outside the white room, casters are relatively easy to drain of resources, they have less hit points, they have worse saves overall.

ambushes and hit and run tactics whittle them down pretty reliably
Maybe you are assuming a fully rested caster against one of these, but none of these creatures are meant to be put out solo against a fresh threat. They are leaders meant to have a ton of minions to throw up while they can gauge and exhaust the threat.

Even if you do pit such a caster there - save or suck spells have this problem where the 'save' part actually does come up a lot. and than without backup, the caster dies.

File: file.png (109 KB, 1060x758)

109 KB PNG

Making a custom Runestaff of Paranoia as a GM. Thoughts? Any obvious spells I'm missing, or inclusions you think work better?

>>97172273
You're supposed to write down the players' spot/listen modifiers, and assume that any time they don't specifically mention looking out for something, they're taking 10 on the check; that's literally why the mechanic exists

File: unknown.png (1.68 MB, 1150x1013)

1.68 MB PNG

>>97175466
Ah, so its the precursor of 5e's Passive Perception check. That makes sense, I honestly forgot it existed. I'll change the log sheet to reflect the Take 10 mechanic. What else am I missing here? I suppose I could include a spell slot tracker, but that's really the player's responsibility and players generally don't need any more excuses to not track something.

>>97172664
>this seems like one of those 'the medium sized level 20 pc can not reliably grapple the colossal CR22 BBEG' arguments.
That's exactly what he's doing.
You guyyyyssss why can't my six foot two hundred pound mortal human guys trivially bench press a five hundred trillion tonne planetoid?! YOU GUYYYYYS!!!

>>97172208
You need more practice, because you're just fucking bad at it.

>>97172278
No one had to ask for a merge. Your approval was not sought, and never will be.

>Globe of Invulnerability
does this affect spells the caster casts on himself? like you can't buff yourself inside the sphere
>nor are spells already in effect when the globe is cast.
what if you cast the globe, step out, cast mage armor on yourself and step back in?

>tfw no 3.5e group
Wanted to try a dread necromancer but alas

>>97161909
I don't think orcs in those editions even had cocks.

File: 461370875e364682508acf30b(...).jpg (6.99 MB, 5337x3000)

6.99 MB JPG

>>97163513

http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/kingking#toc58
>AI-Assisted Skillset: Once per day, the kingking may query the machine spirits as a 1-round action. In doing so, the kingking must navigate to an online large language model chat bot, such as ChatGPT, and input the prompt provided below, replacing “insert_here” with a class name, spell descriptor, class feature, or creature type or subtype, or similar descriptive word (see note and example). For every 2 kingking levels possessed, the level listed in the query may be 1 higher (i.e. a level 6 kingking may query for 13th level class features).
>The kingking retains this ability for 24 hours.

>Query: For Pathfinder 1st edition, please generate a single class feature with no more than 4 sentences of text. This class feature should be equivalent to class features gained at 10th level or higher. The theme of this class feature should be insert_here.

>Special: This courtier may be selected multiple times; each time this courtier is selected, the kingking may use ai-assisted skillset 1 additional time per day.

>Example: Examples for the query could be classes (i.e. barbarian, harbinger, incanter, paladin, psion, wizard, etc.), descriptors (i.e. curse, draconic, fire, mind-affecting, etc.), a class feature (i.e. armor training, bonus feats, divine grace, rage, sneak attack, etc.), or creature type and subtype (i.e. animal, elemental, kaiju, qlippoth, etc.). Query complexity may be expanded subject to GM permission, such as multiple keywords listed as “curse” and “barbarian”.

The first time I have ever seen an LLM directly referenced as part of a game mechanic.

How many retries do we get, though?

>>97175843
Why can't he if he can blow them up for 1000 damage trivially?

>>97176905
You can crit a charge while mounted with a lance for more damage far more cheaply, reliably and earlier in level. Your argument is either posed in bad faith or from profound ignorance. You're done here.

>>97177119
This is the kind of faggot who starts smugly shitting up your thread with bad faith gotchas if you don't gatekeep out the PF fags btw.

File: background.remove.png (284 KB, 336x360)

284 KB PNG

>>97177130
The only bad thing is your reading.
Thats one of the drama addicts masquerading as a 3.5 enjoyer
And you replied to a PF fag defender