|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
i think that one got sped up because there was ambiguity about how it was supposed to work for a while, the author said it used the insane interpretation of versatile performance on...whatever steroids take when they want to up their game , so it needed to go.
Notice he doesn't fight like that.
Someone being functionally invisible in combat is way too powerful for a second level spell. (especially if you let people 5 foot and stealth)
There's still shadowdander hips + hellcat stealth
You're assuming that people don't vote against their own best interests.
People vote against their own best interests.
A college degree drops the support for trump a bit among men, and absolutely tanks it for women.
Derek Dalton wrote:
The issue I have with Unchained is they made a book when it really wasn't needed. I've read how the classes are supposed to step up in power because they need to.
i think they picked three classes deliberately.
The summoner was too strong
They wanted to see what they could do to the classes.
The summoner got a much needed nerf bat and mixed reviews
So it looks like they can fix stuff thats wrong but not vastly improve things that work.
I think you've altered the scenario a bit.
It's been a storm on a ship that is in danger of sinking from the getgo. That's kinda what happens to ships in storms but..
Initially there was no imminent danger that the ship was going to sink, just that you had a sailor climbing the rigging in a storm.
even then the storm would probably qualify as a distraction, because you're on a ship and getting tossed around. The thing you're trying to climb bucking around underneath you while lightning cracks by your head is definitely distracting.
It sounds like now you wouldn't require a climb check for that?
If you can't fall and there's no hurry go ahead and take 10. Victory is assured here. There is no drama. Move along.
Immediate danger of sinking. Distraction of being tossed around like the small kid in the bouncehouse. Presumably if I'm asking for rolls he needs to climb the rigging now and nautical term the thingamajigger all the way up there or the boats going to be in danger of sinking. Otherwise it would just be "You've arrived and the city of Harborsville and finally manage to stop puking..."
Anonymous Warrior wrote:
A move action is hardly slipping, thats a lot of shake and wriggle.
the shield doesn't just pivot on you because you're holding the handle with your hand, and the entire weight of friction accross your forearm, and more importantly bracing the thing somewhere on your body. Its an entirely different direction of force than dropping the thing, which would be out, or if something were to pick you up by your shield and try to shake you out of it, in which case you're holding onto the handle.
As soon as you're not holding onto the handle anymore slipping out seems easy.
Displacement won't work. Its like concealment, not actually concealment.
Even blur (which is concealment) doesn't work.
Cover and Concealment for Stealth: The reason a
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
"Give them an inch, they'll ...
Sharpen it into a point, use it to shiv the guard, gnaw off the guards legs, sharpen the femur into a point , use that to stab the other guard and take his weapon, poison that with his offal, kill the warden, free the prisoners, and use the prison as a base of operations to begin the extermination of the entire goblinoid race.
witch: save or die was toned down in pathfinder for a reason, it's boring. The witch cranks it up to 11 after they DID just make 10 louder.
Swashbuckler a mobile fighter with... no actual mobility. Is supposed to be a charismatic dexterous cutting figure but works better with a strength build a charsima of 7. everyone martial seems to dip the class for the parry/riposte extra attack.
vigilante I don't hate the class, i just don t like that you have to keep pumping features into the dual identity to get it to work, it should expand automatically as you level up like most of its features. It seems to be the rogue done right.
summoner It's a 9th level pre optimized god wizard masquerading as a 6th level caster that comes with build a bear that's better than most character classes on it's own.
Gunslinger Touch attacks are completely overpowered. AC barely scales with attack. Touch ac doesn't scale at all.
magus coookie cuuter
Chess Pwn wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough it seems. When in an actual campaign doing actual hero/adventure stuff like most sessions are, would you be able to and want to take 10 on stealth?
Some of those are from PFS scenarios.
Or is your view that if you're doing plot stuff, aka actual hero/adventure stuff, it's going to be non-take 10 able?
Actual hero stuff with the stealth skill taking 10 is and should be rare. If you're hiding from it you're probably hiding because it's dangerous.
And as to your last point, "sneak past a low level challenge you don't feel like killing." who determines if they are low level and how would your character know? Aka I have my master tracker assassin pretend to be a normal looking guard. So a lv20 pretending to be a lv2NPC class.
Well then i suppose you're rolling and the DM will have to rely on you not metagaming for figuring out why you can't take 10 to get past the peasant.
"but i'm not in immediate danger!"
*Clatter of dice*
"A bright white smile and glowing red eyes appear in the darkness next to you. A moment later Roger's head vanishes in a fountain of gore..."
Because if I can take 10 because I "think" it's a low level because of how it looks then it's not the actual situation but the character's choice on if he feels a take 10 is good enough.
You cannot. The clause is when you ARE in danger, which is something only the DM knows. Not when you feel you are in danger.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Big question for you is, When would take 10 stealth work according to you? When would you be able to and want to take 10 on stealth?
sneak into a bar where the bouncer is just going to throw you out
dine and dash (assuming the habachi chef isn't a halfling thrower that likes to dip his knives in the pufferfish first...)
not be noticed around town when you wouldn't want to be seen.
sneak out of the wait staffs room the morning after
sneak in after a late night out (assuming you haven't had enough alchohol to be a distraction)
sneak past a low level challenge you don't feel like killing.
Chess Pwn wrote:
What danger is the sleeping dragon? He stays asleep and nothing happens to me. He can't be the danger stopping me. As he's not dangerous while asleep. It can't be that he may wake up natural regardless of my stealth because you should be able to take 10 trying to stealth against an awake dragon.
You cannot use your conclusion as a premise. I like chasing my own tail and that's still circular by comparison.
Complain about the inadequacies of the system? certainly (i think i have made more than a few rants on that in the lamplighter threads, about the uselessness of being a bowling ball)
DO anything about it? No. Because the rules are pretty rock solid on what aiding another does.
But there are both rules and rational arguments for stumpy grumpy and stabby's aid another diplomacy checks of -1 for tossing in a penalty.
Chess Pwn wrote:
By that argument no roll when you're not just going to die no matter what is ever in danger, because if you make the check you avoid the consequences.
So, yeah. no. You ARE in immediate danger. Break out the dice and pray to the polyhedral gods.
hmmm... The dragon is the same as the pit of lava while it is asleep, at least as far as danger goes. Your fine... Just don't fail. Well unless it has a fear aura, in that case danger or not the fear aura would be very distracting.
1) It's more like bubbling lava in a volcano that's shaking : it could blow/wake up at any moment. You can't just sit there all day.
2) I no longer buy SKR's post and the convoluted logic that you are not in immediate danger while jumping over lava. Even the not an FAQ post superseded that.
If you want a 100% rate then yes, you have to invest that much.
Settle for a less than 100% success rate.
(mind you, i did not follow this advice on flutter. I made sure she could wild empathy critters on a 1)
You don't fall if you miss a climb check by 5. you just have to stop for a second. With a +5 you can't fall on rigging. With a -2 you only fall 5% of the time, which in a d20 system is as low as your odds can get and still be real- which is why the experienced sailor should be the one up there when the storms blowing.
Also remember pathfinder is a dramatic adventure simulator, not a reality simulator. If there's a storm on an adventure you know a redshirts going overboard just to show how dangerous this is.
It's not nearly enough difference.
80% of +2 is 1.6
7 points of diplomacy should translate into more than a .7 bonus to the roll.
Bill Dunn wrote:
Thematics wise: because a routine job of sneaking past a dragon is supposed to be an oxymoron. Its not supposed to be a routine job its supposed to be an adventure filled with danger and excitement. If your adventure is "routine" something has gone horribly wrong.
Rules wise: You are standing next to a flippin dragon that could wake up at any moment. You're in immediate danger.
Balance wise: Either I set the DC so low that your take 10 makes the check or i set it so high that you're probably going to fail. Neither of those is a good option. If the dragon's perception is high enough that take 10 won't make it, then rolling probably won't make it either and I do not like setting dc's that high.
Taking 10 in that situation is an ADVANCED rogue talent: something you need to be level 10 and burn a very powerful option to be able to do. It's not something to be handed out lightly.
1's are not automatic fails on skill checks. 1 missed check does not mean that your ship flounders and crashes. if i was making it as a challenge this is how i would set it up.
Survival to see the storm coming in advance: +2 to your first roll as you batten down the hatches with extra time.
Best of three skill challenge at dc 18. If you make a 23 you get a +2 to your next roll as you keep the ship extra steady. 13 or worse and you get a -2 to your next roll as you take on water or get too close to the rocks or something.
Something like this is usually how i see those kinds of checks set up in adventures.
Something tells me when the PCs encounter an NPC pirate ship, 25% of the pirate crew do not have broken bones from falling injuries.
D&D pirates have access to healing magic. RL counterparts not so much. It took a while for lime technology to be developed.
Mortality rate on sailing ships was upwards of 50%...
Tell that to bilbo.
He's not batman. He doesn't take 30 minutes to get dressed and become dangerous. He wakes up, you fry. That's immediate.
From a rules sense perspective, you can't take 10 when your adrenaline is pumping and your heart is racing, which is the sensation you should be getting trying to sneak past a dragon. (of course if you're a 20th level adventurer and the dragons still got a bit of egg behind the ears that wouldn't apply)
spastic puma wrote:
From Kimmel's perspective, white males address this lie they've been sold with impotent rage and lash out at minorities who stole "their" jobs, threaten "their" freedom, and feel like they are drowning under the rising tide of equality around them.
Well, they didn't get to that conclusion on their own or at random.
Donald trump is more than the republican candidate, he's the ontological manifestation of the republican party itself: a corporate billionaire CEO that undercuts American workers, makes shady deals, bribes politicians to get what he wants, and uses the legal system to avoid paying their bills and then diverts attention away from their own behavior that is actually the cause of the problem with racist rhetoric towards those who are not.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken in June found Clinton leading Trump among college-educated whites 50 percent to 42 percent."
But the gap is smaller among college educated white males than non college grads so.. either college is working or its just that people with college degrees are younger.
One of the reasons i hate take 10 is that it doesn't really leave an option for lower DCs to be meaningful. Someone inveting in skill focus should be increasing their chances of success by about 15%*, not auto succeeding OR running the red queens race because the DC's get jacked up.
So you have an issue with the rules then, because sneaking past a dragon is as in immediate danger as it gets.
And with the design team, because thats the exact sort of thing they called out as grounds for the DM to require rolling.
And people that listen to one or the other.
I don't think arbitrary means what you think it does.
so... the actual difference we are looking at is what? about a +1 per extra player? so the difference between a 4 player table and a 6 player table is about +2... or am I missing something here?
+2 and increased odds of having a dedicated diplomancer, assuming you don't pick up a few people that are reasonably good at diplomacy.
Spastic Puma wrote:
I really hate the word entitled. It doesn't fit.
believing oneself to be inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.
If you go to school, work hard, bust your rump, then getting a decent paying job isn't supposed to be a privilege (unearned benefit) or special treatment, it's SUPPOSED to be what happens to anyone.
That has of course, not been true for a long time (if ever), and certain segments of the population have known that that wasn't true for a long time. But people are looking for and expecting some sort of fairness from the system because that's what the system used to be to them: fair. You did the hard work, you got the pay. It was earned, not given. If that's not happening anymore then someone is cheating. Calling people that literally broke their backs to do their job privledged or entitled is not true, not fair, and most of all not helpful.
Someone IS cheating. Huge corporations can invest in robots or move their factories overseas where chinese workers work harder under worse conditions and loser environmental standards. They can then buy our government to promote their interests. There is no way some mythical "american spirit" is going to make up for that, and it's hard to tell people their religion is wrong. American manufacturing has increased while the jobs have increased. Logging jobs are down but timber production is up. Paul Bunyan had to compete against a steam powered chainsaw, todays logger has to compete against a [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YXivsxDj-c[/url] with two whirling arms of death that can toss trees around like match sticks.
..and this problem is about to kick into overdrive. White collar workers looking down on blue collar workers for not maintaining valuable skills are in for a kick to the gut when AI starts doing to their jobs what robots did to manufacturing in the 70s. They're already picking stocks.
Jeffrey Fox wrote:
by 2, not usually by 4. With 6 players you're both more likely to have a dedicated diplomancer AND 2 people to aid. With unlimited aiding you're looking at least a +6 even if you're snowwhite and the 7 dwarves.
w many PCs or NPCs, upon regaining consciousness from a mortal wound, lie on the ground perfectly still, not looking around and assessing the situation in any way, shape or form? I find it really sus that a creature suddenly decides to act that way - it reeks of metagaming.
Or training. You know. To be an adventurer
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
keep in mind that you don't know WHY someone is just tossing their +2 in there. It could be disinterest, or they could be trying to not be rude and interrupt the actual role playing going on but still want to contribute to the groups success.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
"I want to increase their chances of failing my check."
I can think of a few reasons.
1) lots of people talking at you is, realistically, annoying, not helpful
2) Someone with a +5 diplomacy should be more useful than someone with a -2 in, even in a group with a +8 diplomacy. It encourages skills somewhere in between nose picker and diplomancer
3) Lots of players trying to get in on the face's spotlight time with die rolling get annoying.
Fail- If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character’s attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character’s attitude toward you is decreased by one step.
If you fail the aid another check by 5 anything less than dropping the targets attitude a full step down, (thus probably ensuring that they cannot be moved within the range required by the scenario) is thus against the rules and unacceptable. you MUST play this way or you're cheating!
No more softballing with these -2 penalties. Give them the full attitude drop because that's what the rules say! Actually, drop the full attitiude AND give them the -2 miscellaneous circumstance penalty from page 403...
This is sarcasm of course, but be careful what you wish for when you insist that people play by the rules: because english and the pathfinder rule set are certainly vague enough that the rules can be word WORSE for your players.
With that said, it's an unusual way of doing it and a bit of a curve ball if players aren't used to doing it that way, something you try to avoid a bit with groups changing their dm
In that sense, the entire game is a GM option. That's also ridiculous.
This is objectively not the same thing. Pretending that it is is conceding any pretense of a rational argument.
It's a player option when not in immediate danger or distracted. You probably like them vaguely defined so you can disallow them as often as possible.
It's a perk.
That's fine for you I guess, but there seem to be plenty of people here who would like the terms defined clearly.
Since we're casting aspersions on motives here, it's the ones that want to always take 10.
It's not about tying anyone's hands, it's about consistency. Consistency is fair.
No. Its not.
"Fair" is getting the answer you want. If that answer was never that would be unfair, but consistent.
Also, our quotes seem to conflict. I'm going to have to go with the one in the rule book
I've quoted the rules directly and the player design team's not an faq. If there's a conflict between that and the notes you're wrong, sorry.
But we don't let them make policy.
The right does.
Trickle down economics has more evidence against it than crystal faith healing. Guess which one makes the national stage?
If the character is in immediate danger or distracted.Who determines immediate danger or distracted?
You're confusing the players option to take 10 or not when not in immediate danger with their ability to decide whether to take 10 or not all the time.
No FAQ Required:
The point of the Take 10 option is to allow the GM to control the pacing and tension of the game, avoiding having the game bog down with unnecessary and pointless checks, but still calling for checks when the chance of failure leads to tension or drama, as well as when a series of checks would have a nonsensical result if all outcomes were exactly the Take 10 result. To that end, it would be counterproductive to attempt to make a strict ruling on what counts as “immediate danger and distracted” because that’s going to vary based on the pacing and dramatic needs of the moment. The very soul of the Take 10 rule is in the GM’s discretion of when it applies, and tying the GM’s hands, forcing them to allow Take 10 in some cases and disallow it in others would run counter to the point of the rule’s inclusion in the game. The rule is currently flexible enough to allow this, and it should maintain that flexibility.
I think you're ok. Pathfinder tends to view using a shield as a much more passive thing than it is.
Sometimes i wonder if the devs have ever SEEN their player base... if you put them in a room with a poodle some sulfer charcoal and rotten oak logs half of them are going to try to make the poodle bomb out of it
Keen Senses: Elves receive a +2 racial bonus on Perception checks.
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision)
No SU EX or SP given. It's still explicitly lost.