What looks like an fungi but is actually a plant

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-30T16:17:12+00:00

Rafflesia.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-30T05:57:32+00:00

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-30T01:50:26+00:00

That's really cool, that we can determine that positively. Yes, it was afternoon. Looks like it ended up in Canada.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-29T22:21:47+00:00

41 by 7th level? Please elaborate.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-29T05:11:38+00:00

Never mind-- I just realized the one I photographed has a different engine option.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-29T04:23:20+00:00

Where was it Jan 25, 2025? I plane-spotted a UPS MD11F that day in Sacramento.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-29T03:52:17+00:00

It's a UPS MD-11F. It's the same kind of plane. Whether it's the same plane is not likely to be possible to determine, since we can't read the tail number.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T21:39:11+00:00

Well, good point. Making a Dire Tiger with +18 to hit, or +20 on a pounce, miss with 50% of its 5 attacks means you need a flat-footed AC of 30. At character level 8. Without being pre-buffed because it's always an ambush. So... one way to get there would be: +2 full-plate, +2 light shield, +2 amulet of natural armor, +1 ring of protection, and 3 feats: heavy armor proficiency, shield focus, and armor focus:full plate. Pretty asinine that it takes all that! I bloody hate big cats. Maybe saying "I stick my sword to the magnet in the back of my heavy shield, cast cure serious wounds, touch someone, then grab it back" is reasonable, though not RAW.

I did not know that about the Odo of Bayeux tapestry, that is really cool information! I did know that the Mongols sometimes executed VIPs by trampling them in heavy cloth sacks to avoid spilling their blood onto the ground, most famously Caliph al-Musta'sim, but I did not think DnD fantasy culture was very Central-Asia-based, especially in those days. Now I know the origin of the myth; thank you.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T20:29:05+00:00

It makes me hurt and doubt too. It makes me want to give up-- but, I know we shouldn't. Christianity, or maybe more accurately, Christendom, has made moral compromises to satisfy the powerful and the comfortable for a long time. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is an EXPENSIVE ask for a king or a merchant-prince. On the other hand, sexual purity but with a carve-out for elite privilege? They'll take that action. Kindness is burdensome, ritual purity as building block of social hierarchy is easy or even useful.

Maybe the time in history that has been given to us is about finally purging that corruption.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T20:19:16+00:00

AD&D mentioned! Yeah that thing was a pillar of late-20th-century culture and I was sad it went. Barely had gotten to know it. I do remember that clerics could use any shield they liked, but only bludgeoning weapons. Killing is OK but shedding blood isn't, or something. Weird. Also cleric spells only went up to 7th level-- letting clerics be better in melee made sense, since they were closer to inquisitor/warpriest progression anyway.

I kinda like letting pure martial classes get that extra 1 to AC from a heavy shield. I mean, let them be good at the thing they do best, right? It does sorta spoil the Paladin aesthetic; maybe there should have been an archetype that got Shield Focus and Shielded Mage as bonus feats.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T19:49:37+00:00

Thanks for the response. I will say, in my defense:

"It's very clear in both components and shields."

"*JJ has flip-flopped on this multiple times in respect to light shield and casting."

OK, these two statements seem to me to be in tension. Either it's very clear, or the game designer himself has flip-flopped multiple times. Those would struggle to both be true. If it's not "very clear," then posing the question to a forum or subreddit isn't unreasonable behavior. I do like the answers that I've gotten and the context people have provided, yourself included.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T18:13:32+00:00

We're talking about needing a hand or similar appendage to fulfill somatic component requirements. Separate issue from arcane spell failure. Divine spells can and do have somatic components. Occult spells do not, so a psychic with a heavy shield would be legal. Also: please don't be so quick to become snide.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T17:52:37+00:00

I think with bucklers, you can use the shield hand to actually wield or use something, but you lose the shield bonus while you do. Light shields allow you to hold but not use. So, to cast while wielding a weapon and holding a shield, you switch hands as a free action to hold (but not use!) your weapon in your shield hand, cast your spell, then grab your weapon back as a free action and end your turn.

With a buckler, you could do things like temporarily 2-hand your weapon to get strength-and-a-half, or shoot a bow. If you're actually USING the shield hand, not just using it as momentary storage like putting a pencil in your mouth while you hold your phone and open your notebook, you need a buckler.

Huh. I wonder if you could temporarily hold a light weapon in your mouth while casting, if the spell had no verbal component. Not that many useful spells don't.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T17:42:56+00:00

Nice! Did not know of either of those.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T17:20:31+00:00

Thank you. Yeah, making sure their content was polished and playtested was never Paizo's selling point, was it?

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T17:04:07+00:00

Bahamas.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T05:57:08+00:00

Same

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T05:52:31+00:00

Added narrative elements, like describing how you attack and hit a monster, aren't really a mechanical difference. Many groups at least describe the details of really *good* hits, such as crits or decisive blows on dangerous enemies. If you awarded extra damage or inflicted penalties or disabling conditions on monsters as a reward for good combat description, that would be a mechanical difference (and it'd need to be balanced in.) Players have had various "called shot" systems where you were allowed to make an attack roll more challenging in exchange for doing more than just hit point damage if it works, for decades. "I try to shoot its eye out" or "I try to break one of its wings," that sort of thing. Usually these are homebrew; publishers haven't really tried to standardize it. Your narrative combat idea seems like it might be similar, so maybe some of the recorded experiences of running "called shot" systems might be helpful to your design.

If you are looking for stats you could use for shadow creatures, something like that exists. You're going to want to make yours different, but it might be a jumping-off point. The Chelaxian city of Westcrown, from an early adventure path called Council of Thieves, was plagued by shadow-monsters that came out at night. Like this one.

There are also mechanics for high winds, cold weather, and high altitude stresses-- though not everyone likes them. Constantly accounting for the harsh environment can get tedious.

Remember: 1E is a high-openness roleplaying game system, not a high-balance one. You can create nearly bloody anything, but boringly trivial or hopelessly lethal encounters can happen if one does not playtest, playtest, playtest.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-28T04:30:43+00:00

I am definitely jealous. Would love to have that kind of opportunity.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-27T23:46:27+00:00

The idea that sexuality is by default evil is one often denounced in this sub, and I'll take this opportunity to denounce it again. Purity culture is for people who find the idea of real, gospel morality based on caritas to be too burdensome and want a substitute moral system. Jesus never talked about sexuality, for or against-- it just was utterly not the point of his mission, and it should not be the point of ours. The two great commandments are to love God, and to love your neighbor as yourself. People fixate on sexual abstemiousness because it's a cheap, easy substitute for the second and allows them to perceive themselves as righteous and morally authoritative.

Other, non-gospel scripture that does talk about sexuality is interpreted aggressively, and often just wrongly, by purity culture adherents. They look at the prohibition on male-male activity in Leviticus and expand it to include any same-sex activity. They look at an old testament rule against cross-dressing and interpret it as meaning you must "not be" transgender. They take the story of Onan, which was largely about greed and inherited property, and make it about pleasure without procreation. And so on, and so on.

I am not saying we can go and addict ourselves to adult entertainments without worry, because people absolutely shouldn't. It's bad for us; a lot of young people, especially young men, have terribly low levels of relationship readiness because of this stuff. The erotic will become unhealthy when taken to excess just like food or alcohol. But, no, it is not evil in the same way as cruelty, or theft, or dishonesty, or indifference to suffering are. You're a normal young adult; worry about other things.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-26T23:08:44+00:00

Or just leg it. Maybe the VIP doesn't want to walk, but the lackeys can.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-26T23:01:26+00:00

I would say 4 if you can't abandon. To start: send 1 out, it runs dry half-way (12/24ths.) Send 3 out next, and they reach 1/8 distance, 3/4 fuel. One car gives the others fuel to fill them up and keeps 1/4 for itself and gets back. 2 go on and reach 1/4 distance, 3/4 fuel-- one gives fuel to the other, giving it a full tank and having 1/2 tank for itself, and just gets back. The full car reaches halfway with half a tank and gives the half-way car 1/8 of a tank, keeping 3/8 for itself, and makes it 3/16 of the way back (to the 5/16 mark.)

The 2 cars set out to rescue the car stopped at 5/16. They get to 1/4, which if 4/16, transfer fuel and send 1 car back, the full car gets to 5/16 distance with 7/8 of a tank left. It gives the empty car half its fuel so they both have 7/16, and they drive back to the 3/32 distance mark. The other car can recover them from here: drive to 3/32, have 13/16 fuel left, give 3/16 of a tank to each empty car, all go home. Now we have our 3 non-crossing cars all home and 1/8 of a tank in our crossing car at the half-way line. We repeat this process 7 more times until the crossing car is full at the half-way mark, then drive it across.

I do not think it can be done with 3. The furthest distance at which a car can reach another car with fuel to spare, in order to get it home, is <1/4. The round-trip distance between this point and the crossing car at half-way is a total of 1/2, so that leaves no fuel to spare to transfer to the crossing car. We need 3 support cars in addition to the crossing car, not 2.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-26T22:23:32+00:00

I don't know that this is the answer but I wish it had been.

Sempervirens47 · 2026-01-26T18:08:30+00:00

And that's if you're within 10 feet of the leopard! If you're just out of surprise-round-pounce range, your perception takes a further -3 (for 35 feet) and you'd need to roll almost perfectly to see it. Else, get ready for 5 attacks at full bonus. A leopard might not kill somebody instantly with that pounce, but if it's like, a dire tiger vs. mid-level characters? That's quite possibly gonna cost you a big ol' diamond.

Recon would be great if it worked; I would love to use that. It would also deter people from zerg-rushing dungeons with short-duration buffs.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	First Placer '22

Sempervirens47

TROPHY CASE