[PF]Ultimate Campaign

[PlusSixPelican]

So, what does everyone think of the new book Ultimate Campaign? I've heard varying opinions about the retraining rules, for one.

[Kudaku]

Loving the content, not crazy about the editing. It kind of feels like they skipped some stuff that probably should have gotten a few lines.

The downtime rules in particular were very popular at my table - we're at about level 8 at the moment and while the wizard and the magus are procrastinating as much as possible to finish items and scribbling spells, the rest of the party (ninja, paladin, fighter/rogue, Inquisitor) are basically standing around and rolling awkward Profession rolls to make chump change while they wait.

One quick chapter read later and now they're all clamoring for more downtime so they can finish their new pet projects :smallbiggrin:

[Cirrylius]

One thing I found peculiar is (I think) it's not possible to get a negative income with a business unless you hire a manager whose wage costs more than your daily profits.

Also, I posted this exact subject two days ago; it got one response and is now on page 3 and accelerating:smallannoyed:

Edit: ...aaaaannd that's because somebody made a thread on it three days ago. I should look on page 2 more often.

[PlusSixPelican]

One thing I found peculiar is (I think) it's not possible to get a negative income with a business unless you hire a manager whose wage costs more than your daily profits.

Also, I posted this exact subject two days ago; it got one response and is now on page 3 and accelerating:smallannoyed:

Edit: ...aaaaannd that's because somebody made a thread on it three days ago. I should look on page 2 more often.

Link to it? <3

[Spuddles]

Loving the content, not crazy about the editing. It kind of feels like they skipped some stuff that probably should have gotten a few lines.

The downtime rules in particular were very popular at my table - we're at about level 8 at the moment and while the wizard and the magus are procrastinating as much as possible to finish items and scribbling spells, the rest of the party (ninja, paladin, fighter/rogue, Inquisitor) are basically standing around and rolling awkward Profession rolls to make chump change while they wait.

One quick chapter read later and now they're all clamoring for more downtime so they can finish their new pet projects :smallbiggrin:

Wow, my table would do REALLY well if we had codifies rules for the mundanes to use their down time on.

[137beth]

Wow, my table would do REALLY well if we had codifies rules for the mundanes to use their down time on.

Me too...
Is that stuff gonna get added to the pfsrd or would I have to buy the book?!?

[PlusSixPelican]

Me too...
Is that stuff gonna get added to the pfsrd or would I have to buy the book?!?

It's a really good book, so you might want to. ^^

[StreamOfTheSky]

Thus far all I know of the book is this:


If there is a trend of all Core Rulebook items of a particular type using a particular slot (such as items that grant physical ability score bonuses being belts or items that grant movement bonuses being boots), GMs should be hesitant to allow you to move those abilities to other slots; otherwise, they ignore these deliberate restrictions by cheaply spreading out these items over unused slots.

:smallfurious:

And that apparently they finally decided to address how unfair rolling for something that sticks with you permanently like hp rolls is. ...Not by advocating for high fixed HD, but by making you pay a tax for being unlucky in time and gp. :smallannoyed:
And it's per point of hp, not by % of your HD or max possible hp, so instead of Barbarian with the same statistical roll results as a wizard paying an equal amount to max his possible hp as a wizard, he has to pay 2x as much. :smalleek:


...So, unless every other page of the book is pure radiant gilded brilliance...

I don't see me liking this book very much.

[Raven777]

People rocking a Hat of Strength was a little bit silly:smallbiggrin:

[Ravens_cry]

Retraining such things was previously something you couldn't do at all, and I know a few DM's who hesitate to move around item slots. Actually, I generally think it's good advice, with exceptions.
Helps avoid the Christmas tree effect to a degree.
It's not rules so much as advice, you don't have to follow it for your game.

[PlusSixPelican]

People rocking a Hat of Strength was a little bit silly:smallbiggrin:

Hesitant doesn't mean never. A Hat of strength is a little silly, BUT, like, Bracers of Strength? Those is in Zelda. Tha's good stuff.

[137beth]

Thus far all I know of the book is this:



:smallfurious:

And that apparently they finally decided to address how unfair rolling for something that sticks with you permanently like hp rolls is. ...Not by advocating for high fixed HD, but by making you pay a tax for being unlucky in time and gp. :smallannoyed:
And it's per point of hp, not by % of your HD or max possible hp, so instead of Barbarian with the same statistical roll results as a wizard paying an equal amount to max his possible hp as a wizard, he has to pay 2x as much. :smalleek:


...So, unless every other page of the book is pure radiant gilded brilliance...

I don't see me liking this book very much.
So, you think the entire book is terrible, on account of two extraordinarily easy-to-reverse things:smallconfused: From the sound of it, they spent a lot of time developing new and interesting mechanics. On the other hand, the hit-die "problem" you're complaining about takes like two seconds to correct on your own. The change to magic item guidelines (not even RAW! It's a guideline!) takes even less time to reverse. On the flip side, I'd have to work pretty hard to develop complex downtime mechanics on my own.
I mean, I guess if you both want to stick slavishly to RAW and you want to treat each sorcebook as an all-or-nothing deal, then yea, maybe you wouldn't like Ultimate Campaigns...but at that point, I can't imagine how you could possibly like any of 3.5, either, given how every single book had something bad in it.

[Axinian]

As usual with Paizo, I am impressed with the amount of care and dedication put into the book, especially since these are mechanics most groups will never even touch.

The main problem with the book is that its main purpose is to provide mechanical benefits for fluffy things, but the benefits aren't worth the investment. Most of the story feats are better left unused, as there is no reason to sacrifice a feat slot for something you can have anyway (and can probably get a better upside from).

Of course, when I saw the relationship rules, I had flashbacks to those halcyon days of leveling up social links in Persona.

[Ravens_cry]

Official barter rules is always something I've wanted in the game. Sure, using it for every purchase just slows down the game, so, don't, but it helps enable one of my favourite fairy tale archetypes, the merchant prince seeking his fortune by slaying monsters and shrewd dealings.

[Cirrylius]

I didn't really see the point behind the Investment rules; in exchange for a sum of money, you get an excruciatingly small interest income per year, and can only sell off the investment down the road at a 50% loss. Compared to starting a handful of businesses, the Investment rules are ludicrous.


Most of the story feats are better left unused, as there is no reason to sacrifice a feat slot for something you can have anyway (and can probably get a better upside from).

Oh. I thought those were free. Ew.:smallannoyed:

[Raven777]

Yeah, the story feats are definitely nothing to write home about.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Yeah the story feats all look pretty useless/waste of a slot. Except for the one that is a metamagic reducer (because of course there is another one of those).

[Raven777]

Yeah the story feats all look pretty useless/waste of a slot. Except for the one that is a metamagic reducer (because of course there is another one of those).

Isn't it only for spells you invent yourself though? As far as my own experience goes, player made spells are about as common as roses in winter.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Isn't it only for spells you invent yourself though? As far as my own experience goes, player made spells are about as common as roses in winter.The prereq for the feat is having created a spell already. So if you have it, they're already in the game.

If I remember correctly, Words of Power kind of lets you create spells. I'm not very familiar with the system, but that may be a way to talk to your DM about allowing it.

[Psyren]

Thus far all I know of the book is this:


:smallfurious:

As I pointed out in the other PF thread, this is really no different than the sidebar in the DMG.



I don't see me liking this book very much.

You don't say. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shockingGrasp.htm) :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

People rocking a Hat of Strength was a little bit silly:smallbiggrin:

Because a belt magically making your stronger somehow isn't? :smalltongue: Even gloves doing it is silly. And things on a person's hands/arms have more room for technobabble & other BS than a bloody belt.

[Psyren]

The DMG is just as firmly against this sort of thing. The 50% markup is there to punish it in both games, and the DMG goes on to say that "absurd combinations" should not be permitted at any price.

[Coidzor]

The DMG is just as firmly against this sort of thing. The 50% markup is there to punish it in both games, and the DMG goes on to say that "absurd combinations" should not be permitted at any price.

And I have the same reaction to being told what I should find absurd whether it's you or Sean K Reynolds. :smallwink:

[Spuddles]

Yeah the story feats all look pretty useless/waste of a slot. Except for the one that is a metamagic reducer (because of course there is another one of those).

If I end up with a copy, I'm just going to rule the feats as bonus feats after the character completes whatever.

Basically a bigger version of 3.5's Otyugh Hole.

[PlusSixPelican]

Because a belt magically making your stronger somehow isn't? :smalltongue: Even gloves doing it is silly. And things on a person's hands/arms have more room for technobabble & other BS than a bloody belt.

Well, they're not technologically based, it's magic. Magic doesn't necessarily take up that much space.

[Coidzor]

If I end up with a copy, I'm just going to rule the feats as bonus feats after the character completes whatever.

Basically a bigger version of 3.5's Otyugh Hole.

Hmm, there's an idea. I suppose you could even tie in the help with feat chains angle by giving the option of having the ones with skill tie-ins counting as skill focus for prerequisites.

I had an idea for some homebrew based off of those by divvying up the game into three rough segments akin to the way 4e does it, with various feats for each tier and allowing one freebie story feat per tier based upon backstory or events in-game. Sort of reflecting the change in the scope of the character's ability to influence the world over the course of a full 1-20 game.


Official barter rules is always something I've wanted in the game. Sure, using it for every purchase just slows down the game, so, don't, but it helps enable one of my favourite fairy tale archetypes, the merchant prince seeking his fortune by slaying monsters and shrewd dealings.

Barter rules do sound like they could be interesting, I must admit.

[Yora]

Loving the content, not crazy about the editing. It kind of feels like they skipped some stuff that probably should have gotten a few lines.
That's basically the review I wrote in a lot fewer words.

I'll probably using Downtime rules for PC strongholds and as a template for NPC lairs a lot, and can see myself getting out the Army rules frequently any time I need to resolve a fight in which the PCs are not participating themselves, even if it's relatively small units of 10 to 20 men. The Honor system also suits me for my campaign and the kingdom rules might also come in handy from time to time if the players intend to extend their influence beyond their own stronghold. I actually once took over as GM for a group, in which the kingdom rules would have been useful.

But the editing is relatively poor. Way too many questions are left unanswered and to the GM to decide, or a in places in the book, where they are rather hard to find.

[Carth]

One of the things that I heard were going to be in the book were a revamp of Kingmaker's kingdom building rules. How do they compare to the original?

[Yora]

There are more buildings, edicts, and more leadership positions. Some buildings also provide Fame, which I think is a new optional system from chapter 3. Others affect the settlement stats that are described in the Gamemastery Guide, like Crime and so on. But overall it's the same system.

[Psyren]

I'm not crazy about the book, though I can see how the downtime stuff is gold for a sandboxy campaign. I do like the Young PC and retraining rules.


And I have the same reaction to being told what I should find absurd whether it's you or Sean K Reynolds. :smallwink:

I'm not telling you you should do anything. I'm just pointing out that this concept was in 3.5 long before Ultimate Campaign existed. Treating it like it's something brand new, as SotS is doing, is disingenuous.


If I end up with a copy, I'm just going to rule the feats as bonus feats after the character completes whatever.

Basically a bigger version of 3.5's Otyugh Hole.

Yeah, this is what I'd do too. Free feats for completing the prerequisites along with adequate roleplay.

[Anderlith]

Because a belt magically making your stronger somehow isn't? :smalltongue: Even gloves doing it is silly. And things on a person's hands/arms have more room for technobabble & other BS than a bloody belt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megingj%C3%B6r%C3%B0

Yes magic belts of strength are sooo unheard of...

[Coidzor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megingj%C3%B6r%C3%B0

Yes magic belts of strength are sooo unheard of...

If that was actually my point you might actually have something there. :smalltongue:

The existence of magical belts of strength in no way negates the fact that you're talking about bleeding magic items being worn on parts of the body that aren't even being used in the feats of strength said magical items are supposed to be allowing in the first place.


I'm not telling you you should do anything. I'm just pointing out that this concept was in 3.5 long before Ultimate Campaign existed. Treating it like it's something brand new, as SotS is doing, is disingenuous.

It's not new, but Pathfinder seems to take pains to directly address the reader to tell them that they're nobadwrongfun, which is kind of grating to say the least.

Maybe I just always missed the places where WOTC did that? :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

Maybe it's just me, but I just don't see a reason to equate "be careful with this" with "NO! BAD PLAYER!" Advising caution isn't forbidding, if indeed they could even forbid anyone to begin with.

("NO houserules! Core ONLY! Final Destination.")

[Yora]

It could have been a bit better worded as "moving effect to inappropriate body parts" instead of just "move to other slots", but it really is a minor thing.

And also, it's from a book of optional rules-systems. It's not a CRB errata.

[Kudaku]

Personally I kind of like the limitations on where you can put what enhancements because it makes the ability tax items less prevalent and it makes the niche magical items more viable.

In 3.5 a fighter might wear gloves of strength +4, boots of dexterity +4, and belt of constitution +4. 48 000 GP spent and he gets a +2 to pretty much everything he cares about. But it's kind of dull, isn't it? It doesn't feel very magical.

In PF the same fighter (and with roughly the same budget) might wear gloves of dueling (tons of flavor, potentially useful bonuses, and roughly the same bonus as the gloves of strength), boots of speed/winged boots for added offense and mobility/flying, and a belt of constitution +4 (because you can't have everything). He could also switch up the belt to give him more strength, sacrificing durability for extra offense.

@Stream
I kind of feel like this was the first crack in the wall on hit points. Yes, retraining HP is costly and it takes quite a while. On the flip side, it's the first time PF has acknowledged that playing a character who consistently gets screwed when rolling(!) for one of the most important ability pools in the game is frustrating, and offered rules to help solve that problem.
I read a post by (I believe) SKR where he stated that originally the retraining allowed you to reroll your HP die and keep it if it was higher than the original roll. In the end they decided to go in another direction since you should always get a benefit from retraining.

There's still nothing keeping you from using your old house rules to solve the issue (for instance I play with a rule called "sunny side of average", where you have the option to take the average roll of your HD+1), or changing how retraining HP works. Personally I'm considering altering the amount of HP you get per retraining session based on the size of your original HD. A d6 gets 1, a d8 gets 2, a d10 gets 3, a d12 gets 4 for instance.

Finally, have you seen the retraining rules for feats? You can retrain feats to whatever you qualify for at the time of the retraining. There's nothing stopping you from taking Dodge at level 1 and retraining it to Improved Critical at level 8.

[StreamOfTheSky]

The DMG is just as firmly against this sort of thing. The 50% markup is there to punish it in both games, and the DMG goes on to say that "absurd combinations" should not be permitted at any price.

The 50% markup is RAW. You're allowed to do it. That's completely different than saying stacking things is *not* RAW and shouldn't be done.

And MIC largely removed these penalties anyway. But PF can only be compared to core 3E, because they can't compy or mimic rules or changes in 3E splat books due to not being OGL, right? That's why they add in 3E splat stuff with different names, like Barbarian's Come and Get Me (ie, Robilar's Gambit) all the time. Because their hands are completely tied.


Treating it like it's something brand new, as SotS is doing, is disingenuous.

You're calling me (or anyone) disingenuous? :smallbiggrin:

Man, is that rich! I nearly spit out my drink laughing!

[Lord Vukodlak]

I only paged though the book at the store but some parts seem interesting and some seem just plain stupid. Such as Young Characters restricting them to NPC's classes is fine if they're NPC's but not for players. If a PC can go from level one to twenty in only a few years of game time. A twelve year-old starting at level one in a PC class isn't out of the question. To me the rules are laid out to discourage PC's from playing young characters rather then help them along.

[137beth]

The 50% markup is RAW. You're allowed to do it. That's completely different than saying stacking things is *not* RAW and shouldn't be done.
Um, that sentence you quoted in UCamp is quite clearly a guideline, not RAW. And even if it were RAW, it would be really, really easy to reverse unless you are a hyper-rules-lawyer.

[Yora]

Hush! Leave your common sense out of this RAW debate. It has no business here when it comes to RAW. :smallbiggrin:

[RFLS]

So, you think the entire book is terrible, on account of two extraordinarily easy-to-reverse things:smallconfused: From the sound of it, they spent a lot of time developing new and interesting mechanics. On the other hand, the hit-die "problem" you're complaining about takes like two seconds to correct on your own. The change to magic item guidelines (not even RAW! It's a guideline!) takes even less time to reverse. On the flip side, I'd have to work pretty hard to develop complex downtime mechanics on my own.
I mean, I guess if you both want to stick slavishly to RAW and you want to treat each sorcebook as an all-or-nothing deal, then yea, maybe you wouldn't like Ultimate Campaigns...but at that point, I can't imagine how you could possibly like any of 3.5, either, given how every single book had something bad in it.

I think this was addressed already, but he was saying that, if those things are an indicator of the quality of the rest of the book, he will not be a fan. I don't think he was trying to say that, based on those two things, he is not a fan.

[Kudaku]

I think this was addressed already, but he was saying that, if those things are an indicator of the quality of the rest of the book, he will not be a fan. I don't think he was trying to say that, based on those two things, he is not a fan.

That seems like a rather generous reading of Stream's post. Personally I read it as "I disagree so strongly with these two rulings that the rest of the book better be the literary equivalent of blowjob and steak-day for the rest of my life or else I'll hate it forevers".

Which is fine, people have different opinions and people enjoy different things. Personally I think it would be a shame if Stream ignores Ucamp since I think it's overall a great book with a few issues, but he's perfectly entitled to do so.

[137beth]

That seems like a rather generous reading of Stream's post. Personally I read it as "I disagree so strongly with these two rulings that the rest of the book better be the literary equivalent of blowjob and steak-day for the rest of my life or else I'll hate it forevers".

Which is fine, people have different opinions and people enjoy different things. Personally I think it would be a shame if Stream ignores Ucamp since I think it's overall a great book with a few issues, but he's perfectly entitled to do so.

These are pretty much my thoughts--
some parts of UC are a lot more mutable than others. The entire downtime mechanic is very nice, and it would be hard to come up with something like that on your own. On the other hand, the stuff people are complaining about are really easy to adjust, so I don't really see why they matter.

[Arbane]

The DMG is just as firmly against this sort of thing. The 50% markup is there to punish it in both games, and the DMG goes on to say that "absurd combinations" should not be permitted at any price.

how about a floating rock orbiting your head that magically makes you stronger? How 'absurd' is that? :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

Personally I kind of like the limitations on where you can put what enhancements because it makes the ability tax items less prevalent and it makes the niche magical items more viable.

There's still nothing keeping you from using your old house rules to solve the issue (for instance I play with a rule called "sunny side of average", where you have the option to take the average roll of your HD+1), or changing how retraining HP works. Personally I'm considering altering the amount of HP you get per retraining session based on the size of your original HD. A d6 gets 1, a d8 gets 2, a d10 gets 3, a d12 gets 4 for instance.

Finally, have you seen the retraining rules for feats? You can retrain feats to whatever you qualify for at the time of the retraining. There's nothing stopping you from taking Dodge at level 1 and retraining it to Improved Critical at level 8.

My understanding is that they worked to prevent having the "expected" ability boosters for martial characters but didn't alter the paradigm of combat enough to eliminate the expectation for that progression.

I'd agree with you there. Most of what I've seen so far seems more like good points from which to homebrew if one hasn't already homebrewed a solution up from scratch, and even then...

Feat-retraining is something I can always get behind, especially if you're not required to waste half of them on irrelevant feats that aren't even pre-requisites because they're too low-level to be of any real use.


I only paged though the book at the store but some parts seem interesting and some seem just plain stupid. Such as Young Characters restricting them to NPC's classes is fine if they're NPC's but not for players. If a PC can go from level one to twenty in only a few years of game time. A twelve year-old starting at level one in a PC class isn't out of the question. To me the rules are laid out to discourage PC's from playing young characters rather then help them along.

Yeah, I always dislike it when I run into that philosophy of rules creation.

[RFLS]

That seems like a rather generous reading of Stream's post. Personally I read it as "I disagree so strongly with these two rulings that the rest of the book better be the literary equivalent of blowjob and steak-day for the rest of my life or else I'll hate it forevers".

Which is fine, people have different opinions and people enjoy different things. Personally I think it would be a shame if Stream ignores Ucamp since I think it's overall a great book with a few issues, but he's perfectly entitled to do so.

*shrug* He'll come tell us if he drops in again, I suppose. I can't say I'm overly fussed about it either way. I do agree that if your interpretation is correct, it'd be a shame. I've been hearing good things about this book, and I'm hoping it's made available on the pfsrd.

[Coidzor]

*shrug* He'll come tell us if he drops in again, I suppose. I can't say I'm overly fussed about it either way. I do agree that if your interpretation is correct, it'd be a shame. I've been hearing good things about this book, and I'm hoping it's made available on the pfsrd.

Some (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/story-feats)of it seems (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/retraining)to be?

[Carth]

There are more buildings, edicts, and more leadership positions. Some buildings also provide Fame, which I think is a new optional system from chapter 3. Others affect the settlement stats that are described in the Gamemastery Guide, like Crime and so on. But overall it's the same system.

Is the 'magic item economy' intact? That's what I found very narratively unsatisfying about the initial system, that magic items alone easily dwarfed the entire rest of a nation's economy. Each moderate item was equivalent to +40 to economy checks, and each major item is equivalent to +75. Getting commensurate bonuses through building is comparatively an ordeal, and it was disappointing that the initial system very strongly rewarded metagamers who went straight for magic items.

I also didn't like how the leadership positions rewarded min/maxing, as it was optimal to have a very high single stat, rather than spreading out ability scores. It doesn't matter how smart or wise a ruler is, for instance, as long as they're charismatic. I'd have much preferred if rulers had been given multiple stats like the other positions, and probably for each position to have 3 possible key stats, and you added half your ability mod from each stat to the score. Or something more like that.

Edit: also, does it still allow you to crush WBL? This is more curiosity, it honestly doesn't bother me, because by the time you can do this, well, in those character circumstances you should be filthy rich if you want.

[Yora]

I am not familiar with the situation in particular, as I tend to run almost item-less games and therefore never really looked at any of the paragraphs mentioning them, but on the paizo board there seems to be a lot of feedback mentioning how the issue with selling magic items to improve your kingdom had been "fixed".

[Coidzor]

I also didn't like how the leadership positions rewarded min/maxing, as it was optimal to have a very high single stat, rather than spreading out ability scores. It doesn't matter how smart or wise a ruler is, for instance, as long as they're charismatic. I'd have much preferred if rulers had been given multiple stats like the other positions, and probably for each position to have 3 possible key stats, and you added half your ability mod from each stat to the score. Or something more like that.

That's just part of the default assumption of the game, that most characters are going to have a single ability score they focus on. It's most explicit with casters, sure, but it's there for everyone, which is why being MAD is such a disadvantage, because it's easy to get where you need to go with a lower array when you're SAD.

It'd be interesting, sure to have a multi-stat arrangement for leadership, but it's already a gross simplification to make things more straight-forwardly run... and you'd have to muck about with stat generation and the magic item progression of said ability scores. And... the devs hate the idea of characters having more than one physical ability score and one mental ability score getting magic loving, so... yeah...


Edit: also, does it still allow you to crush WBL? This is more curiosity, it honestly doesn't bother me, because by the time you can do this, well, in those character circumstances you should be filthy rich if you want.

Hard to imagine a system where it didn't muck about with WBL assumptions.

[Yora]

I think the downtime, kingdom, and army rules were all written so they could be easly introduced into an already running game if at any point the players spontaneously get the idea to stake out their own claim on the land they are passing through.
That's the reason the rules are all kept rather simple, or even superficial. By using only a single stat for leadership roles, any existing PC can pick up a position he likes. If you make it more complicated, you actually have to design builds for the characters so they make a good General, Marshal, or Diplomat.

[Carth]

If you make it more complicated, you actually have to design builds for the characters so they make a good General, Marshal, or Diplomat.

I think that's a fine tradeoff, personally. The positions are varied enough that the probability of being unfit for any leadership position would be remote. If one wants a specific leadership position, I'm fine with someone needing to somewhat tailor their build to it. If one were in doubt, they could just play a synthesist summoner and be good at everything. :smallbiggrin:

[Coidzor]

I think that's a fine tradeoff, personally. The positions are varied enough that the probability of being unfit for any leadership position would be remote. If one wants a specific leadership position, I'm fine with someone needing to somewhat tailor their build to it. If one were in doubt, they could just play a synthesist summoner and be good at everything. :smallbiggrin:

You complain about people metagaming in their character creation and kingdom building by favoring optimal choices and then you voice support for increasing the necessity of doing so? :smallconfused:

[Renegade Paladin]

I didn't really see the point behind the Investment rules; in exchange for a sum of money, you get an excruciatingly small interest income per year, and can only sell off the investment down the road at a 50% loss. Compared to starting a handful of businesses, the Investment rules are ludicrous.


Oh. I thought those were free. Ew.:smallannoyed:
I only read parts of it in the game store, so I hadn't seen the investment rules. But you mean Alain the cavalier was right when he accused the alchemist of basically stealing their money and not even getting anything good with it when the alchemist said he invested it in the chapter opening blurb? :smallamused:

[Coidzor]

I only read parts of it in the game store, so I hadn't seen the investment rules. But you mean Alain the cavalier was right when he accused the alchemist of basically stealing their money and not even getting anything good with it when the alchemist said he invested it in the chapter opening blurb? :smallamused:

That would be pretty brilliant. It might also be one of those, secretly only for NPCs outside of really-long-running campaigns options, depending upon how long it takes to turn a profit on an investment.

[Farastu]

If I end up with a copy, I'm just going to rule the feats as bonus feats after the character completes whatever.

Basically a bigger version of 3.5's Otyugh Hole.

I actually like this idea a lot. Those feats don't seem like feats you should have to actually use a slot for, they seem more to me like they could be great rewards for things characters do during gameplay.

Anyhow, overall I think this book is great. Sure, there's a few things that I dislike and will toss out, but there's a lot of rules that I will use as guidelines for how I handle things, even if I don't use them strictly.

I especially like that the stuff from Kingmaker has been refined and compiled into one book. Plus members of my group all ready want to do things like build new buildings and fix up existing buildings, and setup rooms and businesses (seriously my game has the potential to become something akin to Pathfinder meets Civilization), and I've been letting them do so, but this will really help me handle them doing these kind of things better.

[137beth]

Retraining is really good--
I just started a new PBP PF game on the Paizo forums, and for the first time in a looooong time, we are starting at level 1. If we do get to high levels, some of the feats/spells I picked for my level 1 sorcerer will be really poor (heck, I'm going out of my way to get extra skill points for skills that are made redundant by mid-level spells). So if the game gets high enough, retraining will be a huge asset.

[Chained Birds]

Retraining is really good--
I just started a new PBP PF game on the Paizo forums, and for the first time in a looooong time, we are starting at level 1. If we do get to high levels, some of the feats/spells I picked for my level 1 sorcerer will be really poor (heck, I'm going out of my way to get extra skill points for skills that are made redundant by mid-level spells). So if the game gets high enough, retraining will be a huge asset.

Spontaneous Casters get a bit better with retraining. Though it is more of a nicety as it allows a Sorcerer to invest in some of the more party helping spells, at least until the higher levels where he retrains and goes solo. :smallwink:

[Crustypeanut]

I just got the book myself, and so far I'm very impressed by it.

Back a few years ago when I DM'd my first campaign (a homebrew one), my players wanted to turn the old run down and formerly haunted orphanage they found the deed to into a shop of some sort - back then, I didn't have a clue on how I'd do that. Now that I have this book, I can recreate the campaign a bit with that in mind.

In fact, with these rules and a little houseruling, you could make an entire campaign around building, running, expanding, and protecting a business - or even one business per player, if they didn't want to work on the same business. This kind of campaign could link the players to their settlement in a way only a few campaigns have done so in the past. They could even move their business to a larger city eventually (Like from Sandpoint to Magnimar to Absalom, if they were on Golarion).

Such a campaign certainly wouldn't be for everyone, though considering my players, I think they'd love it.

This book is awesome, even if there are numerous typos I've spotted so far. The art is awesome, too!

[Starbuck_II]

If I end up with a copy, I'm just going to rule the feats as bonus feats after the character completes whatever.

Basically a bigger version of 3.5's Otyugh Hole.

Currently you can take one instead of two traits also.
But I like your idea.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Currently you can take one instead of two traits also.
But I like your idea.

Personally, most of the story feats or so weak I'd just give one to each PC as a bonus feat at level 1. I like the flavor behind a lot of them.

Also, call me crazy but this line reminded me of something:


You can’t simply treat your marriage like a familiar, remembering it only when it’s convenient and stuffing it in a metaphorical backpack when not.

(Pg. 179, Spouses)

[Carth]

You complain about people metagaming in their character creation and kingdom building by favoring optimal choices and then you voice support for increasing the necessity of doing so? :smallconfused:

In terms of character creation, I fail to see how metagaming would become more necessary. The biggest way metagaming affects character decisions is that if you want a specific role, you narrow the list of class choices down for yourself. That's the case now, and likely will be in any system. For instance, currently if you want to be an optimal ruler (probably the most fought over position), you're basically forced to play a charisma based class, which limits you to sorcerer, summoner, bard, and oracle, I think. Paladin and cleric get thrown in as secondary choices where you could afford a 16, or maybe 18 after a racial bump, I think those are the only classes that have charisma as a secondary stat. Maybe rogue in niche cases. Mysterious stranger gunslingers fit in there somewhere, I've never played a gunslinger at all though, so I don't know what stat buys for them look like. Anyway, other classes basically need not apply, without considerable sacrifices, at least. Whereas if you distribute that bonus over multiple stats, you open up the role to more classes. You make hitting the top end bonuses harder because you need the right combination of stats, but that's okay, better to allow more people to be good at it than a few people excellent at it.

Further, for all roles what you have under the current system is the pressure to buy an 18 and use all your level up bonuses on one thing, and that hurts MAD classes. For instance, if I were playing a MAD class, I'd rather buy 16/16/14/12/12/7 (or some other permutation) than figure out some way to buy an 18 to be an optimal leader. I'd also rather not have that weigh on my 4th level ability bump decisions, if I know I'll be going to at least 8th level, I might intentionally buy 2 odd stats with the intention of evening them out and 4th and 8th level. Or if I know I'm going to at least 12th, I might buy 16/16/15/10/10/8 intending to hit 18/16/16/10/10/8, or 16/16/17/10/7/7, with the intention of hitting 18/16/18/10/7/7. Whereas if the leadership bonus were spread out over multiple stats, the debate about with sacrificing other abilities is diminished. SAD classes wouldn't be affected much I don't think, anyone that was buying 18/16/16/7/7/7 or 18/14/14/10/10/8 before is probably still just as happy. If anything, I see my alternative as making you less likely to metagame, as I feel that it'd lend itself to more natural stat distributions. As before, the difference in kingdom checks is marginal, if non-existent, but it's much more flavorful for rules to be benefiting from multiple stats - or be penalized for neglecting key stats. You wouldn't want a king with an int and wis of 7, but the rules create no penalty for doing so, and if this type of scenario can be eliminated without impacting the game significantly, that's a good thing.

In terms of kingdom building, I think we can all agree it's good they axed the magic item economy, that's where the most dubious metagaming occurred. Completely axing it was not necessarily the best solution, but it's better than before.

[PlusSixPelican]

I only paged though the book at the store but some parts seem interesting and some seem just plain stupid. Such as Young Characters restricting them to NPC's classes is fine if they're NPC's but not for players. If a PC can go from level one to twenty in only a few years of game time. A twelve year-old starting at level one in a PC class isn't out of the question. To me the rules are laid out to discourage PC's from playing young characters rather then help them along.

Yeah, the NPC thing was kind of stupid. "Hey, kids, we think you SUCK too much for PC classes." Bluhh. They could have just listed a list of recommended (hint, recommended but not necessary) classes for children by flavor. Which would probably be Bard, Barbarian, Oracle, Rogue, and Sorcerer.

[Crustypeanut]

Actually I don't mind the young stuff myself. If you play a campaign that is long-term (in-game years), your players could start off as young commoners or whatnot, and retrain into PC classes.

Its not for everyone, of course, but someone could certainly use it.

[Psyren]

The 50% markup is RAW. You're allowed to do it.

It's every bit as RAW in Pathfinder :smalltongue: (Look mom, I can use typography too!) Both systems allow it (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html#_adding-new-abilities), and both systems include a guideline advising DMs to avoid it - a guideline that can be freely ignored in either case without breaking the rules.



You're calling me (or anyone) disingenuous? :smallbiggrin:

Man, is that rich! I nearly spit out my drink laughing!

I know right? It's almost like I'm reading your posts or something :smallwink:

[Craft (Cheese)]

Yeah, the NPC thing was kind of stupid. "Hey, kids, we think you SUCK too much for PC classes." Bluhh. They could have just listed a list of recommended (hint, recommended but not necessary) classes for children by flavor. Which would probably be Bard, Barbarian, Oracle, Rogue, and Sorcerer.

I wanna be generous and say these rules were intended for folks who are interested in playing the helpless, vulnerable albatross around the party's neck, but IME most people who want to play as a kid are kids themselves who want to play someone their own age that they can identify with better. So yeah, for them, this sucks.

So guys, how about that art? I read pathfinder books just for the art half the time, and the offerings here are pretty good. My favorite is Seoni in that tacky dress (that's at least less ridiculous and stupid looking than her normal outfit).

[Scowling Dragon]

Yeah that paragraph was a load of crap. If I can have a high INT score, and my powers where granted not through my own personal training but by gift or by blood why can't I have it?

I once wanted to play a Kid who found a doll that granted him power playing as a Wich with that undead archetype.

But whatever. That paragraph is ignorable.

[Axinian]

So guys, how about that art? I read pathfinder books just for the art half the time, and the offerings here are pretty good. My favorite is Seoni in that tacky dress (that's at least less ridiculous and stupid looking than her normal outfit).

I actually found this one to be more hit-or-miss than usual. There's a lot of good stuff, the pieces between chapters especially, but there's a lot of weird looking character portraits. There's one early in the book that I think is supposed to be Valeros, but his face is distorted and flattened to the point that I can't look at it.

[Craft (Cheese)]

I actually found this one to be more hit-or-miss than usual. There's a lot of good stuff, the pieces between chapters especially, but there's a lot of weird looking character portraits. There's one early in the book that I think is supposed to be Valeros, but his face is distorted and flattened to the point that I can't look at it.

There are indeed some very silly looking faces: My favorite is on page 48 with Seelah's epic vader face. That half-orc inquisitor chick (what was her name again) and her "Oh ****, I farted" face. EVERYTHING that's going on on page 13. Though I don't think anything compares to what's in the Pathfinder comic books... *shudder*

[The Random NPC]

Personally I kind of like the limitations on where you can put what enhancements because it makes the ability tax items less prevalent and it makes the niche magical items more viable.

In 3.5 a fighter might wear gloves of strength +4, boots of dexterity +4, and belt of constitution +4. 48 000 GP spent and he gets a +2 to pretty much everything he cares about. But it's kind of dull, isn't it? It doesn't feel very magical.

In PF the same fighter (and with roughly the same budget) might wear gloves of dueling (tons of flavor, potentially useful bonuses, and roughly the same bonus as the gloves of strength), boots of speed/winged boots for added offense and mobility/flying, and a belt of constitution +4 (because you can't have everything). He could also switch up the belt to give him more strength, sacrificing durability for extra offense.

@Stream
I kind of feel like this was the first crack in the wall on hit points. Yes, retraining HP is costly and it takes quite a while. On the flip side, it's the first time PF has acknowledged that playing a character who consistently gets screwed when rolling(!) for one of the most important ability pools in the game is frustrating, and offered rules to help solve that problem.
I read a post by (I believe) SKR where he stated that originally the retraining allowed you to reroll your HP die and keep it if it was higher than the original roll. In the end they decided to go in another direction since you should always get a benefit from retraining.

There's still nothing keeping you from using your old house rules to solve the issue (for instance I play with a rule called "sunny side of average", where you have the option to take the average roll of your HD+1), or changing how retraining HP works. Personally I'm considering altering the amount of HP you get per retraining session based on the size of your original HD. A d6 gets 1, a d8 gets 2, a d10 gets 3, a d12 gets 4 for instance.

Finally, have you seen the retraining rules for feats? You can retrain feats to whatever you qualify for at the time of the retraining. There's nothing stopping you from taking Dodge at level 1 and retraining it to Improved Critical at level 8.

Wait... why isn't the PF Fighter getting a Belt of Physical Might +4 (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/a-b/belt-of-physical-might) instead? I would think that is a better comparison.

[Kudaku]

Wait... why isn't the PF Fighter getting a Belt of Physical Might +4 (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/a-b/belt-of-physical-might) instead? I would think that is a better comparison.

He certainly can, but then he's spending way more money for less bang than the 3.5 fighter - it's a worse investment than the other options I outlined. To reiterate, the PF limitations on enhancement slots encourages people to consider more varied items instead of going for the default +x ability item. The pricing on physical might/physical perfection is a part of that limitation.


EVERYTHING that's going on on page 13.
I still haven't quite figured out what happened in that scene. Is the elf meant to be laughing or clutching his knee in pain? ...Or both?

[Giarc]

One thing I like about UC is that under the downtime "Research a Spell" activity, spontaneous casters can add spells to their list of spells known just for some GP or magic/goods and time.

[Alleran]

There are indeed some very silly looking faces: My favorite is on page 48 with Seelah's epic vader face. That half-orc inquisitor chick (what was her name again) and her "Oh ****, I farted" face. EVERYTHING that's going on on page 13. Though I don't think anything compares to what's in the Pathfinder comic books... *shudder*
There's also one with Amiri sitting down, but her arm is hilariously oversized. I can't find it right now, but I did a bit of a double-take when I noticed it. Might be the same artist as the smushed-face Valeros. Although by the same token, there's one where Amiri is trying to read some scrolls that looks very well done. And the Seoni pictures are as per the norm.

Paizo usually have pretty good art, so I'm not sure what happened in those pictures.

[MukkTB]

Hey wait. Does that mean given adequate downtime the spontaneous casters can break the Tier 1 barrier?

[Giarc]

Possibly. They just need the GP, a sufficient modifier to spellcraft and the appropriate knowledge skill and anywhere from one week to two months and one week to learn the spell.

[Yora]

There's also one with Amiri sitting down, but her arm is hilariously oversized. I can't find it right now, but I did a bit of a double-take when I noticed it. Might be the same artist as the smushed-face Valeros. Although by the same token, there's one where Amiri is trying to read some scrolls that looks very well done. And the Seoni pictures are as per the norm.

Paizo usually have pretty good art, so I'm not sure what happened in those pictures.
I went through the whole book and couldn't find any of those things you mentioned, except the one with the barbarian going through some scrolls. Which also happens to be the only one in which I think the perspective seems off.

[Alleran]

I went through the whole book and couldn't find any of those things you mentioned, except the one with the barbarian going through some scrolls. Which also happens to be the only one in which I think the perspective seems off.
Smushed face Valeros = page 31.
Amiri reading = page 80.
Amiri seated with odd-looking arms = page 200.

It might be my perceptions of her armour throwing my perspective off, but her limbs look out of sorts.

[3WhiteFox3]

I have to say, some of what I've seen from the book looks good. But some things really bug me. Like the young character rules for example; young heroes are iconic in many different myths, folk-lore, stories, etc... Not to mention the many modern stories focused on younger characters. Forcing them to play sub-par characters is pretty awful, and only works for the annoying brat that's coming along with you because plot.

[Crustypeanut]

Thats why I'd give the young brat a few flasks of oil and something to light it with. Then all of a sudden, he's a bit dangerous, and a worthwhile member of the group!

So long as you don't mind a potentially uncontrolled fire on your hands, that is. Who says adventuring with a child is safe?

I just take it as, the child has yet to learn his trade. A child who's a warrior has yet to master the art of a fighter or paladin, but has basic combat skills. An expert might be training to be a rogue or an alchemist, an aristocrat could be training to be a wizard or cavalier, etc.

In fact, this is exactly how it describes it, and it makes perfect sense. Famous wizards don't start out as wizards when they're children - Sure they may know a spell or two if they're particularly skilled, but they're still learning. An Expert can be just as sneaky as a rogue, but has yet to completely master his skills (less skill points) and has yet to master trapfinding or sneak attacks.

If they're going to play a young character, they should be expecting to play a sub-par character. In fact I'd be angry if it was the other way around.

Even Harry Potter was sub-par early in his wizard years. By no means was he even a level 1 wizard until he grew up. Sure he was lucky, heroic, and crafty, but his mastery of basic magic was still limited. I'd say he got by on hero points more than a few times.

[MukkTB]

There was a 10 year old girl my mom looked after a few times. Her favorite pastime was to find some matches, hide somewhere, and light our carpet on fire. I do not know how the building did not burn down. All I can say is - That carpet did not want to catch fire.

[Chained Birds]

Hey guys, what if you geas/quest a character to force them to retrain all of their everything to something else? That would suck...

[Crustypeanut]

Hey guys, what if you geas/quest a character to force them to retrain all of their everything to something else? That would suck...

Only the most evil of DM's would pull that on his/her players.. but technically it isn't against the rules that I know of. I'd just as rather sick Tucker's Kobolds on 'em to be merciful, though..

[Lord Vukodlak]

Only the most evil of DM's would pull that on his/her players.. but technically it isn't against the rules that I know of. I'd just as rather sick Tucker's Kobolds on 'em to be merciful, though..

Only time I ever used Geas on a player was when he got arrested. He took nobody attempts escapes from the Kata mines as a challenge. After his arrest he learned that government used the Geas spell to compel the more able bodied prisoners to insure everyone services out there sentience. So he was even forced to fight the party when they came to rescue him.

[Crustypeanut]

Only time I ever used Geas on a player was when he got arrested. He took nobody attempts escapes from the Kata mines as a challenge. After his arrest he learned that government used the Geas spell to compel the more able bodied prisoners to insure everyone services out there sentience. So he was even forced to fight the party when they came to rescue him.

Makes sense haha. I could see some LE governments using Geas to make prisoners retrain their abilities.. a 'reeducation' program into something more useful, along with mental coersion and potential magical domination. Get a rogue prisoner, 'reeducate' him into something more useful towards society. Or even taking criminals, 'reeducating' them into soldiers and sending them out to war to die!

...isn't that what they do with Terrans in the Starcraft universe?

[Lord Vukodlak]

Makes sense haha. I could see some LE governments using Geas to make prisoners retrain their abilities.. a 'reeducation' program into something more useful, along with mental coersion and potential magical domination. Get a rogue prisoner, 'reeducate' him into something more useful towards society. Or even taking criminals, 'reeducating' them into soldiers and sending them out to war to die!

...isn't that what they do with Terrans in the Starcraft universe?

There was no retraining the rogue was simply sentience to work in the mines and the geas not only prevented him from trying to escape but forced him to act as a supplement prison guard.

[Coidzor]

Hey guys, what if you geas/quest a character to force them to retrain all of their everything to something else? That would suck...

Yeah, you'd probably have a really cheesed off player on your hands, since that's more annoying than just killing the character or turning it into an NPC, you're hijacking it, gimping it, and then forcing them to continue playing it.

I don't see that working out too well for very many GMs. On the other hand, I can't see very many GMs worth their salt doing it.


Only time I ever used Geas on a player was when he got arrested. He took nobody attempts escapes from the Kata mines as a challenge.

Well, yeah, what else was he supposed to do? You apparently didn't tell him to re-roll.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Well, yeah, what else was he supposed to do? You apparently didn't tell him to re-roll. Well he could have researched the prison before intentionally getting himself thrown in there.

[137beth]

Hey guys, what if you geas/quest a character to force them to retrain all of their everything to something else? That would suck...

Hmm, what if you geas/quest a BBEG into retraining all there levels to commoner? It would take longer for them to reverse than if you just killed them:smallbiggrin:

[togapika]

I also dislike having to be an NPC class as a kid, but mostly because it ruins my dream of a human child druid with an awakened tiger animal companion...

[PlusSixPelican]

I also dislike having to be an NPC class as a kid, but mostly because it ruins my dream of a human child druid with an awakened tiger animal companion...

I think you just won an internet.

[Crustypeanut]

I also dislike having to be an NPC class as a kid, but mostly because it ruins my dream of a human child druid with an awakened tiger animal companion...

If its been Awakened, it can no longer serve as an animal companion. The kid you're talking about is a human commoner with an awakened tiger friend. The kid has no knowledge of druidic spells, the language, or how to commune with nature. He's still just a commoner.

[Coidzor]

If its been Awakened, it can no longer serve as an animal companion. The kid you're talking about is a human commoner with an awakened tiger friend. The kid has no knowledge of druidic spells, the language, or how to commune with nature. He's still just a commoner.

I suppose next you'll tell us that his parents finally put him on anti-ADHD medication and he stopped hallucinating as a result.

[togapika]

If its been Awakened, it can no longer serve as an animal companion. The kid you're talking about is a human commoner with an awakened tiger friend. The kid has no knowledge of druidic spells, the language, or how to commune with nature. He's still just a commoner.

And what about all the snow sculptures he made that wouldn't be possible without it falling to pieces? Or all the times he was in nature doing things that should have killed him?

[Ravens_cry]

And what about all the snow sculptures he made that wouldn't be possible without it falling to pieces? Or all the times he was in nature doing things that should have killed him?
I don't know, I've seen people recreate the former in real life. It takes artistic skill and talent, but it's not impossible. As for the latter, really, really great Con score.

[Crustypeanut]

I suppose next you'll tell us that his parents finally put him on anti-ADHD medication and he stopped hallucinating as a result.

Well, the OTHER option, is that the tiger could've very well been an Eidolon working on growing it's relationship with the boy so it can fully come to the real world and eat his parents.

Which would make him a Commoner retraining to become a Summoner. But, due to him not having another Summoner one level higher than he is assisting him, and the fact he's not spending any money on the process, it means he's taking his sweet time becoming a full on Summoner - he'll finish by the time he's an adult, likely.

And then he can unleash his Eidolon on the unsuspecting world, starting with his parents.

[Crustypeanut]

And what about all the snow sculptures he made that wouldn't be possible without it falling to pieces? Or all the times he was in nature doing things that should have killed him?

Who says you can't craft Snow Sculptures untrained?

And maybe he has Hero Points. Or just a good fortitude save.. even though he's a young human commoner, he still has 2 feats at his disposal. Bet you he has Great Fortitude and Endurance..

[HylianKnight]

My roommate got the book a few days ago and so far we're loving it. It's very...scattershot I guess (for lack of a better word) in the sense that it doesn't have a basic structure in the same way Ultimate Combat/Magic/Equipment do. That being said, it's only that way to give because it gives you rules and ideas for essentially every adventurer scenario not covered in RAW. Downtime, large army battles, etc. Sure not everything I agree with (a lot of people here already brought up young characters being confined to NPC classes), but it's just huge to be able to have a mechanical starting point and house rule to tweak what you want.

I also was surprised by the first chapter on character creation. It turns out that it's pretty amazing at rolling up interesting characters on short notice or for fun, can otherwise be used as an awesome RP guide, and I love that it's started to incorporate optional rules for disadvantages in exchange for traits (if you like GURPS-esque systems then this is a really cool option).

So yeah, I'm super pleased with it so far. Essentially if your on this forum because you like RPing that much, then you're going to get use out of this at some point.

[Crustypeanut]

I used the random-background-rolling stuff to roll a character.. eventually ended up rolling backgrounds for his entire family (Him and 7 siblings), while randomly rolling for age, gender (1d2), and class (1d20, ignoring results of 20). The family is pretty interesting.

First off, they're all between the ages of 20-27 (No Twins/Triplets), their parents were artisans, and the kids were born into the middle class. Their parents are both dead.

In order from youngest to oldest:


(Youngest)LN Female Human Inquisitor of Abadar - Fell in with a bad crowd, and publically humiliated their town's leader for money, while enjoying it. Attached to her crossbow, and learned to be a chaplain. Her Relative (Uncle) was an important figure in her life. Has had a few significant relationships.
NG Male Human Druid of Gozreh - Was possessed by a fiend, had a meeting with a fey creature, and found out from a young age he had a magical gift. Stole something small from a rival out of hatred, but had sincere regret about it later. Sentimental about the past. Has had a few significant relationships.
N Male Human Alchemist - Has a criminal record, stole something expensive from the leader of his settlement out of amusment, and is in denial about it. Hate's nature for something that happened to a relative. Experienced in relationships, but no major ones. Very prideful.
N Female Human Ex-Paladin - Was kidnapped when young, met an undead creature, Has had more sexual relationships than anyone else in the family, Zealously devoted (to aethism now), attached to her bardic sister (see below), and publicly humiliated the same sister out of hatred, and has no guilt about it.
LG Female Human Paladin of Iomidae - Killed something at a young age, Also zealously devoted to her goddess, Told a lie to a noble for money, but felt sincere regret about it later. Has had only one past major relationship. Naively loyal.
N Male Human Druid of Gozreh - Also Kidnapped, very attached to his dog, performed armed robbery against a child, believing it was for justice, while enjoying it (lol), and has had many significant relationships. The dog always gets between them though.
CG Female Human Bard of Shelyn - Academically trained, uses her music for love and is currently in a relationship. Very hedonistic. Betrayed a humanoid monster due to her religion, and has no guilt about it.
(Oldest) CG Male Human Sorcerer (Undead Bloodline) - Met a fanastic creature, who happened to also be an undead one, learned about his magical ability during an awakened moment. Murdered a tradesperson out of amusement, but regretted it and publically admited so. Has had a few significant relationships, but has a hard time seeing eye to eye to others of other nations.

A very odd family, but an interesting one. XD

[Cirrylius]

Good lord. They didn't include NPC classes for PC family members?

I'm trying to hash together a non-profit organization idea using the UC business rules; in-game details follow.
Basically, the character is buying slaves, including a fair number without meaningful job skills, and acting as a sort of indentured-servitude temp agency. When the slaves have paid their cost off, plus the cost of two replacements, plus minimal room, board, and food, they're freed. If they're very young, or have particular aptitude, they're trained in an appropriate trade, which they also must pay off. If they want to stay slaves, they either continue to work for the agency with an improved standard of living, or they can find a willing buyer who meets their standards, and are re-sold. All monetary and trade goods profits are dumped back into the business.

The closest pre-made business I could think of under this ruleset would be a Bureau; does this sound about right?

[Raven777]

(Oldest) CG Male Human Sorcerer (Undead Bloodline) - Met a fanastic creature, who happened to also be an undead one, learned about his magical ability during an awakened moment. Murdered a tradesperson out of amusement, but regretted it and publically admited so. Has had a few significant relationships, but has a hard time seeing eye to eye to others of other nations.

He's Chaotic Good? For reals?

[Kudaku]

He's Chaotic Good? For reals?

A raging racist that kills people for amusement? Yeah, he's probably chaotic neutral :smallamused:

[Raven777]

Am I the only one finding "killed x for amusement" to be terribly worded, especially in a system that allows other events to push you back to Good on the scale? I mean, "his actions led to the death of x" or just "he killed a x once" is ok in the contect of "... and regretted it", but adding the equivalent of "...for the lulz..." as a justification kinda kills the Good™ eligibility for me. Or do sane individuals on the path of Good routinely wake up one morning with a urge to try out if murder really is all it's cracked up to be?

[Crustypeanut]

He only killed one person. And at the time, he enjoyed it. But he felt so bad afterwards, he atoned for it by publically admitting to his crime.

Could've very well been influenced by the major influencial person in his life.. the undead guy he survived encounters with..

Plus, I could've gone Lawful Evil if I wanted to, but I didn't think a LE guy would try and atone for his crimes.

[Kudaku]

Killing someone gives you 8 conflict points, "for amusement" gives you another 5, but regret and publicly admitting it and paying penance gives you -3, netting us 10 CP. Spending 7 points on the lawful/chaotic scale and 3 on the good/bad scale, that puts us at... Chaotic good!

In all fairness, the phrasing of the Conflict is incredibly basic: "Murder: You killed someone". Which could run the gambit from "good-natured bar fight that accidentally ended badly" to a Hostel-esque torture nightmare.

So the.. Ah, sorcerer in question might be a lively lad who enjoys a good game of rugby and tackled someone who unfortunately landed badly and broke his neck, perishing instantly. He feels bad about it, publicly accepted guilt over the slaying (though it was clearly an accident), and has taken steps to avoid something like it happening again by reigning back on the part of his personality that enjoys a good fight.

Or he might be a sociopathic lunatic who lures people to his basement where he tells them to put the lotion on the skin or else they get the Create Water-wand again. Then he flays them and tattoos arcane symbols on the skin in the vain hope that it'll turn him into a wizard and subsequently join the divine ranks of the Tier 1s, who laughed at him when he was a wee boy.

...Though in the latter case he probably isn't Chaotic Good.

[HylianKnight]

People can always change though. In his youth he could have been Chaotic Neutral up until the point where he (somehow) ended up killing someone, at which point he was confronted with the consequences of his actions and shaped up somewhat.

[Ravens_cry]

This (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/checkfortraps/8878-The-Secret-Art-of-Abduction) is is something this article talks about. Basically, you take the random number generation s and weave them into some kind of whole. One example is coming up with reasons why the random encounter that popped up actually fits in with the rest of the story.
or, in this case, taking the numbers generated and making a convincing character out of them.

[Coidzor]

This (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/checkfortraps/8878-The-Secret-Art-of-Abduction) is is something this article talks about. Basically, you take the random number generation s and weave them into some kind of whole. One example is coming up with reasons why the random encounter that popped up actually fits in with the rest of the story.
or, in this case, taking the numbers generated and making a convincing character out of them.

Sometimes though, you're still going to run into a turd sandwich, given the nature of procedural generation. The key is knowing when to hold them and when to fold them.

[Craft (Cheese)]

He's Chaotic Good? For reals?

It's because of how the alignment system works in the background generator. Your PC starts at lawful good, then you "advance" down either the Evil or Chaotic tracks depending on the bad things you've done, with your alignment being determined by the final result. The thing is the same acts are used for either track, and the player chooses which track you advance down, unless I'm misinterpreting the rules. So you can take all your "conflict points" and put them into Chaos, and can easily be an unrepentant omnicidal maniac who's still Chaotic Good.

...It's pretty stupid, not only in its mechanics but also in its interpretation of alignment. I just ignore that part of the generator. I'd never seriously use it without a complete rewrite. Fortunately, the rest of the generator isn't too bad: I especially like the possible origin stories for each class.

[Coidzor]

It's because of how the alignment system works in the background generator. Your PC starts at lawful good, then you "advance" down either the Evil or Chaotic tracks depending on the bad things you've done, with your alignment being determined by the final result. The thing is the same acts are used for either track, and the player chooses which track you advance down, unless I'm misinterpreting the rules. So you can take all your "conflict points" and put them into Chaos, and can easily be an unrepentant omnicidal maniac who's still Chaotic Good.

...It's pretty stupid, not only in its mechanics but also in its interpretation of alignment. I just ignore that part of the generator. I'd never seriously use it without a complete rewrite. Fortunately, the rest of the generator isn't too bad: I especially like the possible origin stories for each class.

Well, I suppose it's good to know that someone finally admitted that their tabula rasa and goodest good is LG? :smallconfused:

[Cirrylius]

Well, I suppose it's good to know that someone finally admitted that their tabula rasa and goodest good is LG? :smallconfused:
:smallbiggrin: I was just thinking that.

[Renegade Paladin]

Excellent. :smallamused:

[PlusSixPelican]

Well, I suppose it's good to know that someone finally admitted that their tabula rasa and goodest good is LG? :smallconfused:

I never liked the conflation of good and law, but eh, what do I know? It's not like the other goods allow for nuance and flexibility or anything.

[Yora]

I am working on a campaign which will be low level and relatively low-magic. Since it's basically a tribal society there won't be much stuff to buy. Once you got your masterwork weapons and armor and stocked up on potions, there are not a lot of options to spend any coin on. (Other magic items would be treasures, but not for sale.)

So alternatively, completing quests could be rewarded with Influence and Labor, and loot from defeated enemies could include Goods and Magic. Building yourself a fancy home would certainly be a way to start spending your capital, but I am wondering if there is more you could do with it. As you perform deeds that help the locals and complete assignments for the lord, you gain both prestige and some measure of power through popular support.
Now the question is how to use the capital resources that you accumulate? You could use Goods and Labor to improve the defenses of the town, which in turn nets you more Influence (say at an exchange rate of 2:1 instead of the regular 3:1). Now you can use the optional rule on page 81 of UCam and spend Influence points on Diplomacy and Intimidate checks, but there must be more that you could be doing with it.

Any ideas?

[Scowling Dragon]

Trade. You could trade more labour and such for things they wan't.

It depends on what your characters goals are. Labour and Influence could help them achieve their goals.

[Yora]

The Downtime and Kingdom Building rules are now on d20pfsrd.com. Other than the character traits, which lots of players seem to love, these two are the two primary components of Ultimate Campaign that have the most meat for GMs.
The content is all on a single page as of now, the links at the top merely jump down to each section.

Downtime (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/downtime)

Kingdom Building (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/kingdom-building)

Mass Combat seems to be still in work.

No idea how good to read it is in this form. If there are any questions, feel free to ask them in this thread.

[supermonkeyjoe]

I Picked up the book and am trying to get my head around the downtime system, specifically earning capital.

As is my understanding you can;
1. buy capital with GP, as per the table.
2. earn capital Unskilled, gain 1 capital, I assume you need to pay the earned cost for this
3. earn capital skilled, gain capital equal to your appropriate skill check divided by 10, rounded down, again I'm assuming you need to pay the earned cost for each point?
4.use a class ability, make a special class check instead of a skill check.

Am I right in thinking the only way to earn capital without spending money is by getting it awarded from the DM from a quest of whatever?

I'm definitely implementing this in my next campaign though, that and the contact system will work wonders for a thieves guild based campaign.

[Yora]

Think of it this way. You have a tavern and the tavern makes money. For one day, you send your staff to the castle to do some catering for the lord for free. The lord of the castle is grateful and gives you Influence points. But somebody still has to pay for the drinks and pay the wage of the staff, and that person will be you.
At the same time, the workers could not run the tavern, so you didn't make any money that day.

Or you send the people working in your lumbermill to go to the forest and cut some trees. They return with the trees, which you get as some points of Goods, but they still need to be paid for the day while the lumbermill was closed.

Alternatively, you can just bribe the lord with cash or buy the wood from other woodcuters, but that will be more expensive then closing your business for a day and have your employees do the work.


However, if you don't have employees and only do all the work all by yourself, none of these costs really apply. But the rules explicitly state, that you still have to pay the cost. No idea what that cost is supposed to represent, though.

You can effectively gain capital for free by working a couple of days for money, and then use that money to cover the cost for making capital.

[supermonkeyjoe]

Thanks Yora, I totally get the paying for capital earned through your business, I just wasn't sure about personally going out and earning capital yourself as like you said, I couldn't really figure out where the cost was coming from. Looking at it as a game mechanic though it makes sense.

My next campaign is going to be entirely based in a city (Sharn in Eberron) so I think the ability to put down concrete roots and make connections through a business or organisation is definitely going to add to the setting.

[Coidzor]

Thanks Yora, I totally get the paying for capital earned through your business, I just wasn't sure about personally going out and earning capital yourself as like you said, I couldn't really figure out where the cost was coming from. Looking at it as a game mechanic though it makes sense.

My next campaign is going to be entirely based in a city (Sharn in Eberron) so I think the ability to put down concrete roots and make connections through a business or organisation is definitely going to add to the setting.

Just some framework for forming an organization other than through leadership is neat.

[Yora]

Just wanted to let everyone know that the UCam content is now in the PRD (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/).

If you don't have the book, you can look up all the rules and sub-systems there now.

[Squirrel_Dude]

The first thing that I noticed was all of the traits are there for you to peruse. More traits on the prd, sweet. It's not all of the traits that have ever been published, but it's more than what's available in the advanced player's guide.

[Yora]

You could always go to d20pfsrd.com. They usually have everything. (But the website itself isn't so great.)

[Squirrel_Dude]

You could always go to d20pfsrd.com. They usually have everything. (But the website itself isn't so great.) I'm aware. At the moment, I wish there was some kind of combination of the two websites. I prefer that the only sources on the prd, however I wish there were some of the tables and combinations of information (archetypes, traits, bestiaries espeicially) as they are on the d20pfsrd. This combination on the srd is nice, but it's annoying when mixed in there is a bunch of outdated traits and third party templates.

[137beth]

I'm aware. At the moment, I wish there was some kind of combination of the two websites. I prefer that the only sources on the prd, however I wish there were some of the tables and combinations of information (archetypes, traits, bestiaries espeicially) as they are on the d20pfsrd. This combination on the srd is nice, but it's annoying when mixed in there is a bunch of outdated traits and third party templates.

The pfsrd has a trait filter (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/tools/traits-filter) which allows you to filter by source, and have everything in all the sources you select in one list:smallsmile:

[Yondu]

One Question :
Is it stupid to give to each player a story feat according to the background in a big campaign like Kingmaker or Rise of the Runelord as anyway, they will use the character only for this campaign ?
It'll will add goals to each character in addition to the campaig...

[Kudaku]

This forum has some fairly strict rules on "resurrecting" threads (technically I probably shouldn't post here and bump it) so people might be avoiding posting to break those rules - you might get more traction on this topic if you make a new thread instead.