|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Not content with being allowed to ignore laws they disagree with, now the claim is that a church organization isn't even required to defend against legal action if they disagree.
I wouldn't worry about it. If there's one thing that the courts are united on its about the power and importance of the courts.
The only way thats remotely anvil like is if you're fighting Giles Corey
Christopher Dudley wrote:
Underpowered to me is a combination of what you've listed and its comparison to other comparable options, not that i can think of a better option (someone can always tweak a few more points out of something)
I do not believe that the crossbowman is going to keep up with the party for long, nor do I believe that pointing out a few good rounds of combat and lucky dice is a substitute for looking under the hood at the underlying mechanics.
By comparable i mean things that do the same job. A bow and a crossbow are comparable because they do the same job. A bow and a greatsword or a bow and a wand of cure light wounds are not because they don't.
The crossbow fighter is keeping well ahead of the power curve.
It gets quadratic pretty soon.
Wait, characters have background? Ow ow ow ow.. kidding.
Azhi Dahaka: Paladin collecting dust. Was made without knowing what the society is really.
Doyle Taghaur: Roguey druid. Pathfinder chronicles were his window to the world outside of hermea.
Shamus Woodgear: cleric of the lantern king. Saw a bunch of adventurers standing around and got in line. Oddly enough no one questioned this. Latter thought the lantern lodge was his cult and spent years refering to Amara Li as "high preiestss"
Corvus Cailean: Joined the andoran cause for freedom, that happens to come with the pathfinder society membership. He's mostly in it for the Alibis. Funny thing about being a tengu: you always wear a big floppy hat. You put a big floppy hat on any other tengu and put him at your spot behind the bar and everyone thinks its you. Mammals.
Fabrizio de Chevalier: Well, he's already rich, talented in the Arcane and incredibly good looking, may as well go for famous too. Seeks Publicity for his escapades. Like a charm spell, can sometimes work too well..
Reynard de' Bonaire: The oldest (by a few minutes) of seven kitsune brothers. Was exiled from oppara for "wolfing out" in the middle of a drunken joust to win a bet. After getting too friendly with some folks on the qadirian border they decided he needed to be sent away somewhere further, like absolom.
Pyrite Felsic. Fight for you. Kill aspis? Good. The tanky druid has had it with the aspis consortium deprivations in mawangi.
Flutter: Wild empathy focused druid. Not so much a member of the society as a guide that that will minimize the pathfinders impact on the diverse and wonderful creatures that they come across: including animals, magical beasts, giant vermin, and oozes.
Joey Jirra: Kangaroo Pouch rider from not australia: where everyone that leaves the land loses their memories. The society found him, and they're probably his best chance of going home.
Argentum of Hermea: Recruiter for hermea. Figures anyone that can survive in the society has some pretty good genes that would do more benefit to future generations than feeding the local monsters.
Goliath of Osirion: Frozen in stone for a thousand years guarding the pharaoh's s tomb, the monstrous lore warden fighter/alchemist was found and restored by scarab sages.
Yngvar, beauty school dropout: He needed some more schooling. He's good with a hammer. the society does one and needs the other.
Fuligin: Access to knowledge, items of great historical signifigance, and some very loose morality clauses? Sign the impish little tiefling occultist up.
Christopher Dudley wrote:
That is whoefully underpowered. Two crits and a hit for 100 is ~ 4th level raging barbarian damage. Even using the horribly underpriced bracers of falcons aim you've merely min maxed a crossbowman to be.. meh.
Its Golarion specific.
In Golarion Paladins are powered by deities.
A few ways to do the intros:
A GI Joe style Dossier with the venture captains talking over who they're going to send on the mission and why.
An oceans 11 style show off your character in action with what they do
what is your character doing at 4:30 am when Drendle drang wakes them up. (Think Kirk waking up with the space babes)
in medias res, make up a combat and let people do their schtick cinematically without expending any resources- better for high combat scenarios
Well, it takes time. Thats only been a problem for 50 years or so which isn't enough time to make an impact on a religion or start a new one. Also something that only kills people past their reproductive prime isn't going to have nearly the same impact as something killing young people.
Lazy Shaman Hypothesis: Most cultural tabboos arise because they're a good idea. Trying to explain, rationally, why something is a good idea doesn't work nearly as well as explaining irrationally why something isn't a good idea. So instead of "Yeah, look, we're trying to cook pork on a camel dung fire and people keep getting sick. They also keep slowing the caravan down and we'd really like to get to the next water source" isn't going to get someone to give up bacon. "BECAUSE GOD SAID SO!" seems to work a mite better.
It can. If someone tells me they're playing a monk for example, I know my druid has to prepare the spell list with two animal companions in mind. If I know you're a gun slinger I'll take out the lightly armored mook and leave the heavier one to you, if you're an archer I'll hit the heavier one and be a lot more worried about the +4 Cover bonus from my keister. If I know someone is a rogue I can walk around with a wand of vanish out.
Absolutely not. You advocated the lack of a report of theft as evidence that there was no theft.
I'm willing to bet $100 that there's a camera pointed at that register. Seriously.
What you believe is poor evidence for what you believe.
Of course, the video is in the possession of the police. If the video shows Mr. Brown not giving money, it would actually strengthen their claim that he robbed the store. On the other hand, if it shows money changing hands it would be in their interest to not show the video.
You're alleging that a video exists of a camera you allege exists and that allegation is enough to say that everyone that disagrees with you is wrong...
No. No one can trust your judgement at all if you're going to do things THAT badly.
Bringing up Mr. Browns "thuggish" behavior is purely an attempt to paint him as some sort of 'criminal element' who deserved to be shot and therefore justify his shooting.
As false as it seems to be, shooting a guy i thought had just robbed a store works a lot better than "I shot someone fow not respecting my authoritai"
Also, shooting someone that had just robbed a store is, in most peoples heads, the same thing.
To imply that Brown deserved to be shot for having stolen $5 of cigars stinks of racism.
Which I'm very much not doing. But if he's on video stealing 5 dollars then arguing that he isn't plays into the argument that he deserved to be shot for it. If someone has a bad argument with a premise based in reality their argument is going to sound better than someone with a good argument based on the denial of reality.
Also note, if the spell creates something with a duration less than Permanent, you are only going to get the use of it during the scenario, and, if you try to sell it, you will get at least a write-up on your chronicle, along with the GM checking all your chronicles, to see if it is a chronic thing, in which case it moves up from just a write-up to potential loss of PC due to alignment change.
Selling fools safron is hardly the most evil thing you'll do as a pathfinder.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
or This evolves and takes over australia. And as we all know, once you have australia you'll rule the world once everyone else dukes it out.
It's possible that after not indicting Wilson, they'll release the evidence presented to the grand jury and we'll see some clear indication that there he shouldn't even be tried
I don't think that such an indication is possible at this point, comming from that department the more innocent it makes them look the more it looks like a cover up.
So they had a camera in a different spot than you think it should go and the report... didn't need to state the obvious. This is nitpicking of every day events and random details. Its not nearly enough to call someone racist for looking at a security tape that looks very much like a robbery and concluding that there was a very petty robbery.
Five bucks gets me 4
Two! You only two!
Takes 4 leaves money.
Its probably irrelevant to the shooting. When white girl on cell phone called it in , and then talked to dispatch, and then dispatch went on the radio it probably sounded like a robbery on the other end. The question is if that happened fast enough to put the cop in "stopping a robber mode" rather than "harassing a jaywalker" mode.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Oh come on. The owner doesn't want to get any flack from this. Thats his primary motivation. I can't find anything to substantiate the idea that it wasn't Brown or that it wasn't the same day. If you can link me in.
I do like that Brown wasn't charged or convicted with stealing the cigars but it's fine to call him a thief: but, the police officer, who admits to shooting the kid, is given the benefit of the doubt.
Take a look up thread. I've hardly been supportive of the cop.Its entirely possible that the theft makes this more of a muddy area than something as crystal clear as completely innocent person gunned down. I'm ok with that. But if you need to change the facts to fit your conclusions you're just making your own argument look bad.
Of course he wasn't charged with the theft. Kind of a moot point. Do we even have provisions for charging the dead with a crime? You're trying to substitute He wasn't charged with for he didn't do it, and thats not genuine.
Ok, now hold on Irontruth.
That is brown in the convenience store video isn't it?
He asks for cigars, apparently either pays for some or just leans on the counter for a while, the clerk gets in his face, he shoves the clerk. I can see NO reason why the clerk would be getting angry at someone 3 times his size if he wasn't stealing them. That the store didn't report the theft does not mean that a theft didn't occur: stores don't report things all the time.
Benjamin Falk wrote:
No. Thats far enough outside of anythings thats written to be a house rule. The Evil Necromancer is not stopped from taking action against the fighter just because he can't see the rogue.
Ok. IT is most definitely not in the rules. The change ya'll are quoting has NOTHING to do with IT. Since it seems to have gotten lost in the conversation
..if a party of 6 is sneaking up on the monsters and the rules for stealth are fullfilled (some form of cover, concealment, winning at stealth vs perception, ending moves in sufficient cover or concealment*) and 1 or several members of the party don´t win their check and are detected, the undetected ones would still get a surprise round. After that combat initiative starts normaly and everyone can act.
Nothing in the quoted faq says or even hints that they get a surprise round.
joe kirner wrote:
Just bluff your lowest init fighter into charging the door so they buy the act. Should be about +2 to the dc each time they smack into it right? :)
I'm fine with a narrow situational solution spell being an answer to higher level threats.
But this is a narrow situational solution spell that replaces the other narrow situational solution spell to higher level spell threats.
Democrat?!?!? The party who's new animal will be the possum the second truth in advertising laws apply to political campaigns?
What is your support for this sentiment? Look at the voting record. Republicans will act in lock step: every. single. one of them. to block legislation. The democrats always have more than a few blue dogs voting the other way.
Think about it: How many times have you heard the phrases "Let me be clear" and "double-down" in the last six years? Too numerous to count.
I don't know how those phrases, which are overused by both sides, relate to your thesis.
Even when they promise the moon and everyone in the room knows they can't deliver, they promise it that more strongly - AND NO ONE CALLS THEM OUT ON IT!
Right. Just look at the promises to repeal obama care, put god back in schools, repeal obamacare, restore america to the mythical 1950s glory, repeal obama care, stop common core, squeeze the polar bears for oil, repeal obamacare and repeal obamacare.
Promising things you can't deliver is the definition of politician, not democrat.
It works every time. It is amazing how they play the political game. They outfox Republicans before the Republicans have changed out their PJs each day.
The democrats aren't better, they just settle for the lower DC on the bluff check. The republicans disparity between what they say they want and what they do is bigger, and trying to convince people that their policies are for the best are a lot harder.
As for Republicans, one must remember that a large portion of the population who vote Republican are voting against Democrats. They are *not* Republican loyalists. That's why you have the shaky alliance of "big money", "evangelicals", "2nd Ammendment supporters", and other "conservative" causes. Heck, a good chunk of Republican office holders are Republican only because there isn't another, viable choice.
Well, democrats used to have a left wing...
The true Republicans (e.g House leadership, soon-to-be Senate leadership) don't know how to play politics. They put the jerseys on, show up on the court, and the Globetrotters (Democrats) wear them out. I always laugh when a liberal gets upset at a Republican - even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes. Trust me, any consternation a Republican causes a Democrat is a temporary thing.
I suppose the liberal bias of reality catches up with everyone eventually. I just wish it would happen by the faster process of reasonable examination of the evidence rather than people riding on massive misinformation campaigns being removed from the voter rolls by old age.
The recent election probably scared Republicans more than it did the Democrats. The Republicans have the ball and they'll play defense again. When the Democrats have the ball, they play offense - no matter what.
Like.. getting the 1996 republican healthcare plan in 2011?
One talk show host called the Congress that passed the Affordable Care Act the "Kamikaze Congress" and it was an apt description: "push, push, and when in doubt, push some more (but we never doubt because we're Democrats)." Victory, no matter the cost! It's awesome.
Its also wildly inaccurate. Republicans agreed to it: they stopped filibustering, and believe me, it was not because they suddenly questioned the wisdom of the philibuster. Obamacare is a compromise between single payer and the old system. It makes huge corporate profits for big insurance companies, and is a huge tax on the middle class that avoids a smaller tax on the upper class, which is how single payer would have been funded. It is a very republican plan, it barely taxes the rich at all.
If the Republicans played the same way, we'd really have fun theater to watch. As it is now, well, we're suffering under the two-party system our Founding Fathers warned us about.
Said founding fathers are the ones who made the party system the second washington said "Later!". Its the inevitable consequence of a winner take all system.
The only thing that was keeping local parties going was the inability to coordinate that many people accross such vast distances. The telegraph delt them a blow, the radio killed them, but television burried them and poured on the concrete.
With the passing of the Seventeenth Ammendment, the two major political parties pretty much changed our government forever. The states have little true representation
I don't see how that logic follows. If the senators are a direct appointee of a politician (and thus a member of the party), aren't they MORE in the hands of the political machine than the people if they can be appointed? Look what happened Rod Blagojevich had the opportunity to do just that. He put it on ebay. Having that happen every time is what you're talking about as opposed to an election by the people they're supposed to be representing.
Even then I'm really not weeping for the alleged rights of one level of government over the other. If you can show me where PEOPLE are being oppressed because of the 17th amendment I might care.
only the parties are represented in Congress. Democrats and progressives have been systematically changing the discourse in the country towards their points of view for over 100 years.
Yes. Because gosh darn it to heck its a shame the black people can vote.And women. And you can't have an 11 year old working in a tannery. And your water can't have cholera in it. And we can send someone to the moon.
All of these were, at one point, dangerously progressive ideas. How on earth with all the wonderful things that they've done (or horrible things we've stopped doing) did progressive become a perjorative?
In effect, they wanted something, strove endlessly to achieve it, and are practically there. They are monolithic in their resolve to achieve and brush aside opposition. They have no shame, no mercy. They are the ultimate political predators. They are quite simply amazing to behold.
Times change. Do I need to get off your lawn now? :)
Old men are repositories of failed ideas. Then they get replaced by someone that knows something slightly better. That this happens isn't due to any amazing work on the part of the democrats, that it happens so slowly is due to the amazing rhetoric of the republicans. They can completely deny reality by running on nothing but Grarg.
It says magical darkness, but not deeper darkness. I think negating the spell is daylights thing (which has really wonky rules, because the whole whoevers spell level is bigger thing is only in the rules for the darkness spell, not generally, and daylight has a nuke it all! clause, BUT can only negate, not then go on to provide light, and then if mars is in Sagittarius... )