|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
My counter argument would be that there exist feats and similar that require the "Channel Positive Energy" or "Channel Negative Energy" class feature. Reading the list of cleric class features reveals that no such named features exist--though a class feature named "Channel Energy" does. Does this mean that no cleric can select the Command Undead or Turn Undead feats?
Which would be a poor argument. You know exactly what "Channel positive energy" means: You have the channel energy class feature and you channel positve energy.
The rules are meant to be easy to read and flow for a reader. They are not, and cannot be designed to hold up to deliberate attempts to twist them for mechanical advantages. There's a reason no sane person reads law books for fun.
First: As I said, I have GMed several times, but my account only identifies me as a PFS PLAYER, not a PFS GM. Do I have to run a certain amount of scenarios before being dubbed an "Official" GM, or a certain amount over time?
Heyo, welcome to the assylum, and thanks for stepping up.
I'm not sure what on your account is Iding you as a player or a dm.
When you report 10 games you'll get a Star next to your name on the PFS boards. Those tell people that you've run games. Other than that if you click on The PFS logo, go to my pfs, and then click GM/Event Coordinator you should see the games you've reported under sessions.
It's been quite a while since I've done any kind of recorded PFS play, so is that a factor?
Unless its a convention you're usually responsible for your own reporting.
Second thing: I showed up for PFS a couple weeks ago to play. I didn't finish the scenario, but while I was there, I was told by one of the GMs that if I had GM status that means I have access to all the PFS scenarios for free. Is this true?
That's one of the perks of being a venture officer, which is different than being a gm. Yes, you are supposed to buy them. The pdfs don't cost that much (less thana night at the movies)
Delirium's Tangle: This was the first scenario I ever ran. It was E-mailed to me as a PDF by another GM, so it has his name watermarked on it as per the usual. I printed it myself. I still have the PDF copy of the scenario and the printed copy.
*wince* you're not supposed to do that.
Sanos Abduction: This one was printed and given to me. I still have it in my possession. It was given to me by the same GM, so his name is watermarked on that one as well.
Not sure if you're supposed to do that. I THINK you're allowed to print one for personal use, but you're not supposed to distrubute it.
This would be slightly easier if paizo could fix the Gift card thing, so you could hand someone a code for 20 bucks and tell em "get the scenarios as you go" .
Jeff Merola wrote:
Which is what people expect from every cleric or anyone that can cast healing spells, at all.
Which may be why people seem to avoid those classes...
Hell, people expect my druids to be able to heal them up , and even the less combative one only keeps a CLW and bears endurance on hand for in combat emergencies.
Your plan is predicated on the ogres ability to read. :)
What does it change really?
The problem here is that ability bonuses are listed as ability modifiers. A bonus is just a positive modifier.
You apply your character's [Strength modifier] to:
This is no different than [strength bonus] or [wisdom bonus] because a bonus is just a positive modifier. The difference is that it has to say modifier because more than anything else ability modifiers can be NEGATIVE.
When a strength modifier is positive its a [Strength Bonus]
GM Lamplighter wrote:
What he's referring to is the fact that, with the rules in the technology guide which have been reaffirmed by campaign leadership, your ideal well rounded pathfinder is just as useless at discovering anything as Mongo McSmashysmash. Worse, because Mongo actually can open the locked door.
Horn of Valhalla. Seriously, Fifty THOUSAND gold for a couple of second level barbarians? You have to be Twelfth level to afford it.. twelth. What on earth are you going to do with a second level barbarian at that level? Something farts and it dies. You could give it out for free and it wouldn't be worth the standard action.
1) I can understand the net possibly not being made out of special material since it is not mainly metal and there is the Force Net available from Blood of the Night.
There is, but thats still going to be silver and force
2) Consider the ruling from Ultimate Equipment on page 16 which states:"Thrown Weapons: Daggers, darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, and nets are examples of thrown weapons. The wielder applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons (except for splash weapons)". Even though a net does not have a Damage die, the ruling above would imply that the net still does damage off strength.
to damage dealt. Nets don't deal damage.
3) I would consider damaging with a Net with the Sacred Weapon ability a ranged weapon version of a Tangleburn Bag. Which is treated as a Tanglefoot bag but deals fire damage when directly hitting a target.
Well here's the problem. You're never going to be the one to make that decision when you're playing this character. Someone else is. What you have is a IMHO, pretty bad and very rules lawyery argument that you should be allowed to use a corner case to target foes touch ac , do real damage, AND entangle them. That is not going to go over well being presented to a bunch of different Dms, possibly leading you to need to play another character. You'll need to have this convo EVERY time, eating up a good chunk of timein an already time crunched situation.
Its a cool idea, but you've bunjee jumped past where the rules go and into some pretty deep areas of "Dm may i?" which is a bad strategy for a character in organized play.
Living in large, exotic cities has put you in touch with many diverse civilizations, cultures, and races.
Benefit: You can speak and read two additional languages of your choice. In addition, choose two Intelligence-, Wisdom-, or Charisma-based skills. Those skills always count as class skills for you.
Do they have to be the same score or can you just pick say intimidate and knowledge nature.
If you want to be hyper literal, and if you are treating stat bonuses as a type you are being hyper literal
Not in the least. If this ad hom is the best counter argument you have your position is unsupported.
then everything that is not a spell stacks because the only place that mentions stacking is in the spell section.
....absolutely not. This is inane. There is no other word for it. It has nothing to do with what section its in. The spell section covers it because you have a lot of different spells with a lot of different bonus types.
Then it is an attribute bonus. Either way solves the problem.
This is literally up to the developers and they can easily rule it either way. Until it is FAQ'ed there is no DEFINITIVE answer. There is only conjecture.
While this is true, (ie, the spell like ability ruling) there are degrees between conjecture and definitive. In this case we have what I believe is overwhelming evidence for them not stacking. Ignoring that because it gives someone a mechanical advantage and doing it anyway is munchkning.
I'm still of the belief they aren't typed because it's not called out that they are typed.
Why would it not be an attribute bonus then?
PIXIE DUST wrote:
This is incorrect.
Ability Score Bonuses
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores. Ability score increases with a duration of 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.
Just because they didn't take this and then spell out "strength score bonus" "Dexterity score bonus" etc doesn't mean that its not a wisdom bonus.
The wisdom bonus (or the score if you prefer)
The number on your character sheet in the little box next to the score.
Dragon ferocity works just fine under the stat is the source interpretation. You get strength and a half with your fist just as if you were swinging a baseball bat. The sky is not falling.
The differences between the sexes.
We are a sexually dimorphic species. The differences go well beyond which way the plumbing goes. Even our brains are different. This isn't an accident. While we are both the products of the game of evolution we don't play by the same rules. Having one gender act by the optimal strategy for the other is far less than optimal.
The most prolific mother known managed to produce is 69, largely from having multiple multiple births. In our evolutionary history, getting 10 to 12 before dying in child birth would be an anomaly. Contrast that with a possible 860 children for the record holder, nearly 10 times as many.
Even discounting the potential legendary nature of the outlier, the list makes plain what History of the world part I viewers already knew: Its good to be the king! For a male, rising to a position of power and getting two (or more) mates can literally double your reproductive output. While a female getting multiple mates will increase their offsprings chances of surviving a larger number of threats, males gain the same benefit AND a strait out multiplication of fitness.
Taking a risk to climb the ladder, show off, or kill off the neighboring tribe to take their women and their stuff just doesn't have the same payoff as killing the neighboring tribe to take their men and their stuff. On top of that, men that went off with one last hurrah can show up in the next generation, while women loose not only any future chances of reproduction, but likely any offspring up to 2.
I don't think that its any accident that aggression and risk taking are so heavily tied to testosterone that they're synonymous with the* body part that produces it.
Keep in mind two things though: This is a numbers game. A trend. Its not absolute (and can't be, with a species as diverse as ours). It doesn't need to be absolute: as long as its in the odds it will still have an effect on evolution.
More importantly, this is an IS. Not an OUGHT. Many cruel, barbaric, and twisted things people can do would enhance their reproductive reproductive fitness. Doesn't make it right.
1) Unless you find a net that's made of metal somewhere you can't buy one thats made out of metal. The only special material i can think of that you could make a net out of would be darkleaf cloth, which just halves the weight.
2) Nets don't deal damage AFAIK, so adding your strength to damage is a moot point. You need to have some damage there that you DO before adding the strength.
3) I'd say bludgeoning. But then you'd be using the net like a rolled up newspaper. I don't think you'd get the warpriest damage and the special entangly stuff.
Citation? I need to see exactly what you're using to reach that conclussion
Windows have stats, and if you share the RAW IS LAW view, then you can't even do that.
Friends don't let friends play at a table that's that bad.
I'd say there is some vague line somewhere between RAW and coming up with grudge monsters, but that's not strictly legal and is theoretically badwrong.
We are allowed, and even encouraged, to let the players use creative solutions. That does not somehow equate to a backdoor ban on anything creative by saying you can't interact with something I don't have stats for.
Talk to the bad guys? Sorry. Don't have a starting attitude.
And to use the rest of RAW, the only creative solutions that can be done are to avoid encounters... not to have new unpublished encounters.
If you're including a door as an encounter it becomes impossible to have creative solutions that won't do this, somehow. No, you can't throw more monsters, different monsters etc at the party, but if they want to climb in the window you can set a climb dc for the wall and a disable device for the lock.
Little things like that are the required secondary powers of creative solutions. Banning them bans creative solutions.
Without any sort of working definition for "based" I can't see how you're splitting that hair.
Circlet of Persuasion modifies social skills, that's it. This excludes using Bluff to feint in combat, as well as any use of Use Magic Device.
And that's ... completely arbitrary. There is nothing to say that use magic device is less a charisma based check than diplomacy, much less that feinting in combat is less charisma based than asking the sheriff to let you off with a warning.
I don't think so. You can still move around when you're dazed (your ac doesn't even drop) you just can't go anywhere because you don't have any actions.
The fact that you can't add any dex to your ac while in it means that with even a moderate dex, breastplate gives you a higher AC, and touch ac is usually handier than other AC. On top of that you have a whopping -7 armor check penalty: even full plate is better (because its better balanced)
There are 4 ways to make an item available
1) Its on the always available list. (bigger deal for fighting types)
2) Prestige point purchases let you get anything from your faction up to a certain point in exchage for Prestige. 2pp= 750. This is probably where you're getting the 750 gp idea from. This circumvents the normal fame mechanic.
3) Chronicle sheet loot, which is kind of irrelevant because of..
4) Fame. (Its gonna live forever)
Yes, there are a lot of low cost items that have no business being on a chronicle sheet. Campaign leadership has noticed and has been putting less irrelevant junk on the sheets to save space for boons in latter seasons.
C Overton wrote:
What I'm hearing is, "A swashbuckler stun locking the bbeg is more powerful, game breaking and fun destorying than the Paladin one shoting him."
Close. The swashbuckler ALWAYS stun locking something is more powerful, game breaking, and fun destroying than the paladin SOMETIMES one shoting something.
Even with a slumber hex happy witch I at least get to roll my giant shiny hematite d 20 once...
C Overton wrote:
Not really. There's no danger being next to someone thats stun locked.
Going over the dms head like that on a fuzzy rule is bad enough.
Going over the Dms head like that in order to take advantage or a rules loophole so bad that even IF it works, you're being informed it will be closed, goes beyond jerk and into language not allowed on the boards.
James Wygle wrote:
You won't, because there isn't.
Page 208 for those with dead trees.