|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Ahahahaha... XD Yeah, thinking back, Jordan probably could have cooled off on the Men vs Women dynamic a bit. I mean, I'm totally fine with the "no weak women" thing going on, but there's a difference between having confident characters and ones that are deliberately ungrateful when they get help.
Bridgette did smack some sense into them over that.
"so he broke you out of the most impregnable fortress on the planet while it was being attacked by black veiled Aiel??!?!?!?!
"Well its not like he knew about the forsaken
"Right. And we TOTALLY had the black Ajah covered...
"...you...thank .. him.. NOW...
Lord Snow wrote:
She was great when her arrogance was at least somewhat justified. She tracked a warder (twice), kept herself and a spoiled princess hidden in the middle of an occupied seanchan city WHILE succesfully gathering enough intel on the a'dam and the seanchan to plan break out, and topped it off by defeating Mohegidan herself with a kick between the legs.
Lord snow wrote:
Nuh-ah. Women can detect male channelers, and vice-versa.
There is a weave and some ter angreal for women to detect men channelING but not channelERS. The reds kept is a secret, and it wasn't likely developed until the breaking or later. I mean otherwise you'd just see a cup floating by and say "Bob, are you weaving air in the house again?"
a major problem being that Egwene is actually the second-most-important character but this doesn't become apparent until a good 6 books in, during which time her development is secondary to the likes of Mat and Perrin, who was less important in the endgame.
Damn caster martial disparity...
Although "Its only a weave..." Is easily the best line in the book.
Lord Snow wrote:
..by another male channeler. Who themselves is going to get lynched. So that doesn't work at all. It was a pretty intensive 5 minute procces that took the focus of the guy being tested.
I think it's just tradition. Why can only Aiel males be clan chiefs, and only Andoran women be the leaders of the aristocracy? Well, because.
Because Aiel tend to pick the best fighter and put him in charge if her survives rhidean? Also Women are represented in the Wise ones
Lord snow: The skew towards female rulership comes from a few things. Most prominent among them is male channelers going crazy. So if you know that there's a very real possibility of half the population going nuts, you might want to put the other half of the population in charge. Sure, 2,000 years after the breaking and channeling getting culled from the population rather heavily its not that common, but right after the breaking it was probably a pretty common event.
Tar Valon getting along better with female rules probably didn't hurt either.
Objective: You would not have a readied attack vs a charge so brace does not apply. You MIGHT get an attack of opportunity as he passes through your square, but your readied action is not whats letting you attack, so no brace.
Subjective: the rules for what happens when you interrupt someone's complex actions are somewhere between subjective and non existant. He is charging. When you move near him, the dm might say he stops, or even that he lances you and then stops with no AOO. (since you both have reach you only need to go into your threatened square not out of it)
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
You might be able to, it just takes the extra 5.
Was it the full bucket of wings BBQ night? Because my tengu an axebeak and an eagle? companion all died
Jeff Hazuka wrote:
If you need to move up to it , you move up and swing, you're done.
Unless of course you stay in the back and let it full attack someone ELSE while you contemplate your navel.
Its probably going to full attack someone.
The cracked stones are legal they just don't give you resonance if you stick them in a wayfinder.
The cracked stone won't stack with the headband (they're both competence bonuses)
with a 7 charisma you're looking at
= +8 . 2 ranks and you have a +9 which means you wouldn't have to roll to control your companion unless (S)he gets hurt.
We've had oceanic trade for 500 , and while there's been a lot of mixing the groups are still discernibly there.
we only saw a glimpse of the age of legends at its height/end, so no way of telling how long it took to get there. Also if people are living to be 300 years old and society advances one funeral at a time...
Yes, but that isn't the sort of vast amount of movement you'd need to end ethnic groups. For THAT much ease of travel moving away wouldn't be an impediment at all.
Its like saying that there are people from India in michigan to work, so we should be done with ethnic groups by now right?
We don't know how long the age of legends was at its peak. They did use sho carts/ flying cars , and not everyone could gateway around the world. So presumably it was like our world where its theoretically possible to have a mate from anywhere on the planet but you were still far more likely to get one close to home. and then the world ended, and you were back to homogenization.
Except the monk list doesn't include head butts. So... two partially overlapping sets.
Or they're not sets at all. they're descriptions. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender" does not mean "Oops, they hit the forest. Everyone put your guns down!"
Well the protagonist is of course the most beautiful person of all no matter WHERE they go. Just ask Captain Kirk....
Presumably the women look beautiful to humans, but since the purpose of beauty is to say "Look at the DNA i'm packing over here!" the men probably look handsome to the women of their species.
No, it defines punches kicks and headbutts as unarmed strikes. They're examples, not a limit.
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
The monk is not an addition to this, look
"A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet",
Those overlap. A punch is a fist. A kick is a foot. They're just saying the same thing two different ways.
They are not, and you did not. A-->B does not mean that not A--->Not B
It's also stated in at least 2 places that "actions" provoke, including one that specifically states that an enemy must take an action in order to provoke an attack of opportunity.
It does not say that. It says that actions provoke. That does not mean that only actions provoke.
Thats IF you ignore movement being defined as an action. There are non move action movements *(charge), and there are move action non movements (sheathing a weapon).
It honestly takes a very loose reading, and a bit of convoluted logic, to force the rules to say otherwise.
You are leaving a square. You are not taking preventative measures to keep your guard up. You get whacked. Reading the rules tea leaves deeper than that gets some weird results, depending on how you look at things which leads to...
It's so bad that you've ever assigning some of your weird logic to me (such as falling being a non-action, non-actions being actions, etc).
You cannot say that falling at the ground is not distracting and then tell someone else they have weird logic.
But I can see you're quite entrenched at this point.
I am not entrenched on the conclusion. I am entrenched on the position that your argument is bad because of the above. You cannot just look at the rules minutia one way, reach a conclussion, and then not afford other rules minutia the same courtesy.
Non voluntary movement TENDS not to provoke. Falling is non voluntary movement so it probably doesn't provoke. " is a reasonable rules interpretation drawing from available evidence.
While I grant that the posed questions are leading, it's with good intentions.
Its not. Its with the intention of tricking someone into accepting your premise, which is questionable.
It's stated in multiple places that actions can provoke attacks of opportunities. Things that are not actions simply don't provoke, unless there's some special rules involved.
To start with there are many unfounded assumptions there. That falling is a non action, that non actions aren't actions, and that non actions don't provoke. You don't have rules for any of that. That the three not an actions we know of don't provoke does not set a rule for all of them.
There's nothing rules lawyery about it. AoOs are generated by creatures performing activities that distract them from defending themselves. If you're not performing an activity, your defenses are not distracted.
You just said that hurtling through the air towards the ground is not distracting and thats not a rules lawyering statement.
While I grant that being moved by an external force may be distracting in real life, the rules don't consider this to be a situation where you're lowering your guard.
Entirely circular. The rules don't consider it a situation where you're distracted because the rules don't consider this a situation where you're distracted
Only actions you perform do.
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
You could easily say that moving out of a threatened square is thus defined as an action, an action that falling can make you take.
You moved out of a square. Did you 5 foot step? No. Did you withdraw? No. Does any rule say that your movement does not provoke? If not you get whacked.
Which of these action types are you claiming falling is?
I'm not claiming its one of your action types. This action or non action thing is rules lawyering nonsense, and asking a leading question to place my answer in a framework that I'm questioning in the firstplace is nonsensical.
There is a good case to be made that there's a trend that involuntary movement tend not to provoke, so falling doesn't provoke, but its far from concrete. The action/non action thing smacks of rules lawyering chicanery.
attack come defe...this is what i get for counting on paws.
You would want to do purpose training if
-one of the tricks is a higher dc than the training (i dont know if thats the case with anything)
Its a pretty limited circumstance. The purpose training makese sense in a time campaign, but not the at the speed of plot downtime between pfs scenarios.
Can you give me any rules that the action type or non type matters at all?
Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.
Notice here that moving is entirely separate from any sort of action being performed.
Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.
This is moving, as in a physical body going from one place to another. It doesn't specify that it has to be a move action a standard action or any kind of action at all. Movement is movement.
its not a matter of what catagory its in. The fact is that he is moving out of a threatened square. That will provoke. The idea that its not an action to move out of a threatened square so it won't provoke is... pretty tenuous to start with as an argument. Why does it matter why he's moving out of the square?
That is far from simple.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
So even non actions are a type of action.
Thanks flutter for that write up. Of course now I have another dilemma, I never bothered with handle animal (gms never mentioned it.) So now I need to somehow get it trained. I already used my 2 traits and unable to swap out and freeways are tight. Only option would be to train out boon companion for extra traits
Just get max ranks in it as soon as possible : you don't need the traned skill bonus but it really helps. One of the posts is how to handle animal if you're a charisma 5 dwarf , which would apply if you're missing the 3 from it being a trained skill as well.